Connect with us

"Analog hole" legislation introduced

Discussion in 'Electronic Design' started by Winfield Hill, Dec 19, 2005.

Scroll to continue with content
  1. Mark

    Mark Guest

    thats the way I look at it too....

    if you choose to "broadcast" your IP then you have given it away and I
    can copy it as I wish...

  2. Fred Bloggs wrote...
    I'm sorry, after re-reading the above, doesn't that say 90-minutes
    before being rendered unusable? ???
  3. Mark

    Mark Guest

    You are arguing for the right to use somebody else's property in a way
    actually stealing refers to theft real property

    IP violations are theft of IP, there is a legal distinction between
    the two...

    they are both illeagal but they are NOT the same thing in the eyes of
    the law...

  4. Mark

    Mark Guest

    thats the way I look at it too....

    if you choose to "broadcast" your IP then you have given it away and I
    can copy it as I wish...

  5. John Miles

    John Miles Guest

    Damn straight. You're not supposed to be able to tell me how I *use*
    something, only how or if I can distribute copies.

    Copyright law addresses copying. Regulation of utiilty after the sale
    was NEVER intended by the framers of copyright law, and certain other
    rights (such as resale under the First Sale doctrine) are explicitly
    encoded in that law. All of these facts are changing in a way that is
    unilaterally against the interests of consumers.
    No, it's called "copyright infringement." It's an easy distinction to
    make, because if I steal something from you, you don't have it anymore.

    This guy's essay is cogent -- if a bit long-winded -- and well worth
    your time:
    It deserves, and enjoys, reasonable copyright protection, which was
    originally meant to be a bargain struck with content producers by the
    Federal government on behalf of consumers.

    Recently, both signatories to that bargain -- meaning, not just the
    "pirates" -- have been staying up very late at night looking for ways to
    dodge their responsibilities under it. Is that what happens when a law
    is truly in everybody's best interests?

    -- jm
  6. It is called "sharing".

    who loves sharing
  7. Mac

    Mac Guest

    I guess you summed it up. The biggest problem is with devices which could
    conceivably be used for "pirating" media, but which also have substantial
    non-infringing use. For example, a computer with a DVD player.

    My fear is that the big media people will go in so hot and heavy, with so
    little concern for the collateral damage, that they will make laws which
    cripple or interfere with the operation of even those devices which have
    substantial non-infringing uses.

    Think about "trusted computing," which should be called "treacherous
    computing." (Got that from Stallman, I think) Is the future of the PC
    that the BIOS won't boot any OS whose image isn't digitally signed? If
    consumers are allowed to choose, would they choose this?

    Anyway, there are a lot of ways that things could get very screwed-up even
    for those of us who have no interest in "pirating" content.

    And I guess I should be clear that I have no desire to pirate movies or TV
    series. Like you said elsewhere, if it gets too expensive or complicated
    to watch them legally, I'll just stop watching. I don't have any real
    problem with that. But I don't want general purpose hardware getting
    burdened with all kinds of protection schemes for Hollywood's precious IP.

    Then again, if I get too mad, I may just go out there and design and
    publish full specs for a board which can capture the three video inputs
    using three ADC's, and stuff the data into UDP packets. I'm sure someone
    else would be happy to write the code to convert the packets into MPEG.

    I wonder if the URL is taken already. ;-)

  8. David Brown

    David Brown Guest

    If you write GPL'ed software, then copyright should be very important to
    you - it's what protects your work. It is copyright laws that allow you
    to let me freely use your software, modify it and distribute it, while
    ensuring that it remains your property.

    If you meant "**** copyright protection schemes", then most people,
    including most producers of copyrighted materials (writers, musicians,
    programmers, etc.) would fully agree.
  9. David Brown

    David Brown Guest

    Most illegal copies are like that - they are not an alternative to a
    purchase, but an alternative to not having the music/film/program at
    all. Remember how MS used to actively promote "piracy" - better that a
    computer ran a copy of Windows than some other OS.

    However, I don't think there is any need for the media market to shrink
    significantly, as long as the recording industry is willing to face
    reality. They must first reduce prices to something realistic based on
    the cost of manufacturing (it's beginning to happen), and they must stop
    treating customers as criminals (this will be a while coming).

    The only people I can think of who really lose out from the ease of
    downloading and copying are the video rental business.
  10. What is the use??

    The *unstated* goal is to control every bit of information that you access,
    "manage" every communication channel available to you and generally control
    everything you do - all the while making you pay out of your own pocket for
    the "service"!! "HollyWood" provides the excuse.

    The politicians are *gagging* for More Control; They basically covet
    everything that the old STASI only dared dream about and they think that
    technology can provide. I.M.O. they will go with anything in that direction
    no matter how dangerous, downright stupid it is and no matter the collateral
    damage - like creating a brand new market for unrestricted chips that the US
    is not allowed to compete in.


    The ecosystem some people call The Market will simply sense the defects and
    move around them. In the end, the barely-working-but-legal-stuff will be
    solidly undercut by flawless-but-not-so-legal-stuff all the while Hollywood
    and their rented politicians slowly sink in the tar-pit of their own design.
    Then they will respond with much more of
    whatever-did-not-work-in-the-first-place only succeding in *ensuring* that
    the whole "tower of babel" of draconial, obscure legislation and impossible
    technical implementation is doomed to suffer a complexity implosion.

    The Region Code should have been a lesson - every el-cheapo Chineese DVD had
    "bugs" in the implementation that made it worthwhile buying a no-name weirdo
    brand to watch imported DVD's on. Now they Own the market!!

    Apparently a lot more Pavlovian therapy is needed before "the decision
    makers" & society get it.
  11. That's quite a stretch to infer so from me freely distributing a program.
    If there were no such laws, I would still freely give it away.
    I think that we are entering the world of semantics here. I want to be
    able to legally share digital information with my friends, which I am
    not legally allowed to do in many instances, and which the proposed
    law will restrict even further.

  12. Chris Jones wrote...
    Against Intellectual Monopoly, by Michele Boldrin and David K. Levine
    That's a fine book, with the first ten .pdf chapters now online, but
    it lacks a cover page, frontispiece, T.O.C., forward, or index. Do
    you know if the authors have created any of these yet?
  13. David Brown

    David Brown Guest

    You said you had chosen "free under GNU copyright" - I took that to mean
    the GPL, and I assumed you had picked the GPL specifically. That means
    you wanted to make your software freely available, but with specific
    restrictions to ensure that it stays free (in the GPL/free software
    sense). It is copyright laws that make that work. If you had wanted to
    give away the software completely, you would have made it public domain
    and thus free from any copyright.

    So yes, I made an assumption, but I don't think it was a long stretch.
    As would many free and/or open source software writers - but most prefer
    that the copyright protection is there. Basically, it stops others
    taking their work and calling claiming they wrote it. At least, it
    stops them doing it *legally* - only some sort of protection scheme
    could hope to stop someone willing to infringe the copyrights and license.
    Ok, that's your philosophy. I don't agree with it, nor do many other
    people, but I can't argue with personal opinion. For my part, I want to
    be able to legally use digital information in different ways - I want to
    be able to copy a CD onto my computer or mp3 player (if I had one). I
    don't want to be able to give a friend a complete copy of the CD - I
    don't think that is right. But I don't want to have some "protection
    scheme" stopping me, and I *do* want to be able to make a compilation CD
    made from various CDs and give that to a friend. I also want copyright
    protection to run out much faster - like it used to, before Walt Disney
    started buying the Mickey Mouse copyright laws. In fact, I want
    copyright to work like it was originally conceived, which was to give
    customers as much freedom as possible while giving copyright producers
    enough protection that they can afford to create works.
  14. Around here, they are also competing directly with pay-for-view and
    video-on-demand. Why go around the corner to Blockbuster when you can
    sit on your fat butt, click a few keys and watch the same movie (with
    a similar amount added to your cable bill)? And presumably some people
    are more comfortable renting such fetish classics as "Eat my Feet 5"
    without facing store clerks. The video-on-demand virtual VCR is a bit
    sluggish (pause, rewind etc.) but not really that bad, and it's early
    days yet.

    I suspect one of the things keeping Blockbuster et. al. going *is*
    actually copying/piracy. By renting the video people can easily and
    quickly make a copy of the DVD and share it with their friends (or
    watch it again later). Chances are many of those people would not have
    paid to rent it twice, and the friends they share with may never have
    rented at all, so the studios get a reasonable chunk of the money.

    Will anyone here admit to downloading a DVD-quality movie? How long
    does it take? Many hours, or perhaps days, on broadband, I would
    think, given the 4.7G capacity of a DVD.

    Best regards,
    Spehro Pefhany
  15. Tim Shoppa

    Tim Shoppa Guest

    You know Win, I think I was the guy who started that previous thread
    (May 2002) on s.e.d on the "congress to outlaw A/D converters" thread.

    It seems to me that the latest push gets away from that nitty gritty of
    outlawing A/D converters and talks more about consumer-level devices.
    I'm not nearly so frustrated/vocal about that.

    In fact, after NTSC broadcasts are shut down, I won't even have a
    working TV receiver in the house. I have zero plans to buy a digital
    converter. I'll still have many analog radios and will listen to my
    couple of radio stations, of course. And then there's the record player
    and all those LP's. I just can't get worked up about this newfangled
    stuff anymore!

  16. David Brown

    David Brown Guest

    I haven't tried it myself, but with a 2 MBit ADSL line that would be a
    little over 5 hours for 4.7 G. If it's a popular movie, then BitTorrent
    (the most common way to handle such big files) should give you it at
    full speed. Less popular titles like "Eat my Feet 5" would take longer
    unless you get lucky with seeders. I gather that it is also quite
    common for DVDs to be ripped and re-coded with DivX / mpeg4, making it
    about 20% of the size for the same quality.
  17. Boris Mohar

    Boris Mohar Guest

    Japan is even smaller. Antarctica is huge. What is your point?
  18. Mac wrote...
    You can have it.
  19. As continents go, it's not so huge (but bigger than all of Europe):

    #1 Asia - (44,579,000 sq km)
    #2 Africa - (30,065,000 sq km)
    #3 North America - (24,256,000 sq km)
    #4 South America - (17,819,000 sq km)
    #5 Antarctica - (13,209,000 sq km)
    #6 Europe - (9,938,000 sq km)
    #7 Australia/Oceania - (7,687,000 sq km)

    By contrast the US is 9,631,418 sq km (land = 9,161,923 sq km) or a
    bit smaller than *ALL* of Europe.
  20. Fred Bloggs

    Fred Bloggs Guest

    I read it is the "unit" of information can be stored for no more than 90
    minutes. So if you're watching some copyright protected rental DVD and
    then interrupted, I read it is as you can PAUSE the thing and continue
    later with any of the intermediate information already read gone after
    90 minutes, maybe lose a few frames. There is no where in the document
    that I can find anything about a total 90 minute start/stop time. The
    gist of the law is they want to protect the money makers without
    inconveniencing the legitimate users too much. They should have had
    plenty of expert consumer advocacy on their drafting team, it doesn't
    look too bad to me.
Ask a Question
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Electronics Point Logo
Continue to site
Quote of the day