action.eff.org— At issue is their plan to change copyright so that you're going to need separate licenses for "incidental" copies of digital music: copies in RAM, copies in browser caches, and so on.
Jun 6, 2006View in Crawl 4
@treverrothI believe the Bill already contains eveything necessary. It is not a slippery slope or bad precendent. It is a fully featured legal weapon to bring all new digital technology under Hollywood veto.I refer you to where it says the liscense does not apply if the "streaming or any other service..." "can cause or induce the making of reproductions of musical works".Seems pretty clear cut.What makes you think it is not all that dangeruous ?
That's why I refuse to participate. My hipocracy only goes so far.Not to worry, my rep will take care of bin-ness. He's a formerly adulterous homosexual running for re-election. He knows the power of the People's Mario.
@Phreakout:I get it now, if I am against Pirate Bay and stealing, I am for DCMA??? I've never posted anything pro DCMA anywhere. I am against depriving deserving, contributing members of society of their livelihood. Especially when it is under the phony guise of altruistic or logically inept reasons. "We do it for freedom...." or "I wouldn't buy this, but I'll steal it..." What a self-serving crock! But, that being said, I do not advocate legislating moral issues. This is very clearly an issue of morality and ethics, not law. It is painfully obvious that far too many people are missing a major component in the moral upbringing if they can justify not paying for something with all these lame excuses.
ductionsJun 6, 2006
This is probably a stupid question, but does this apply in the UK? Im really not up on copyright laws here.
phreakoutJun 6, 2006
@treverrothI believe the Bill already contains eveything necessary. It is not a slippery slope or bad precendent. It is a fully featured legal weapon to bring all new digital technology under Hollywood veto.I refer you to where it says the liscense does not apply if the "streaming or any other service..." "can cause or induce the making of reproductions of musical works".Seems pretty clear cut.What makes you think it is not all that dangeruous ?
tylerdurden0Jun 6, 2006
That's why I refuse to participate. My hipocracy only goes so far.Not to worry, my rep will take care of bin-ness. He's a formerly adulterous homosexual running for re-election. He knows the power of the People's Mario.
goaliecaJun 6, 2006
Oh Canada!
twinklyjesusJun 7, 2006
@Phreakout:I get it now, if I am against Pirate Bay and stealing, I am for DCMA??? I've never posted anything pro DCMA anywhere. I am against depriving deserving, contributing members of society of their livelihood. Especially when it is under the phony guise of altruistic or logically inept reasons. "We do it for freedom...." or "I wouldn't buy this, but I'll steal it..." What a self-serving crock! But, that being said, I do not advocate legislating moral issues. This is very clearly an issue of morality and ethics, not law. It is painfully obvious that far too many people are missing a major component in the moral upbringing if they can justify not paying for something with all these lame excuses.