Author Topic: Congress readies new digital copyright bill (Read 849 times)

Debonair · « **Reply #15 on:** April 25, 2006, 12:26:47 AM »

im totaly gonna wiretap the next dude that quotes me

J_A_B · « **Reply #16 on:** April 25, 2006, 12:42:30 AM »

The worst part of that bill is civil forfeiture. If they base it on drug-related forfeiture, it WILL be massively abused as the system is designed with huge loopholes.

It's pathetic how our government is controlled by the corporations to the extent that they don't even try to hide it anymore.

J_A_B

jigsaw · « **Reply #17 on:** April 25, 2006, 12:57:06 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by xrtoronto
"... even if the work was not registered with the U.S. Copyright Office"

That's extreme!

Presently you can't go after damages unless it's been registered with the office. Doesn't affect who owns the copyright.

What I find very amusing about this is how diametrically opposed it is to the Orphan Works bill. What are they gonna do, wiretap the big company who steals the little guys work, then say "Well, they looked for you as the copyright holder?"

All hail the mighty government who's motto is "My pocket first."

Pei · « **Reply #18 on:** April 25, 2006, 06:04:31 AM »

Government of the People, by the Politcal Elite for the Corporations

Mustaine · « **Reply #19 on:** April 25, 2006, 08:44:45 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Debonair
im totaly gonna wiretap the next dude that quotes me

Saintaw · « **Reply #20 on:** April 25, 2006, 09:07:58 AM »

Lamar... like Hedley lamar???

Vudak · « **Reply #21 on:** April 25, 2006, 09:34:07 AM »

Skuzzy, got a form letter I can plagarize real quick? I don't mind sending one off but I'd think you've got more knowledge on this subject then I do...

Rolex · « **Reply #22 on:** April 25, 2006, 09:50:53 AM »

Well, Hedy Lamar ("The Most Beautiful Girl in the World") did invent and patent 'frequency hopping' in 1942. The same technology we use for wi-fi, digital cellphones and other defense systems today.

It was patented as a "Secret Communication System" for topedo guidance using sychronized switching of frequencies matched by paper rolls similar to rolls used in player-pianos.

She never received a penny in royalties. It was commercialized and re-patented just after her patent expired.

indy007 · « **Reply #23 on:** April 25, 2006, 09:58:41 AM »

Except for that first point which should be revised... I don't see what the big deal is.

Skuzzy, if you wrote a game, and boxed versions hit the shelves @ $50 each. Then, I cracked a copy and put it on a torrent for the whole world to grab for free... wouldn't you wan't me punished for theft?

Same thing applies to DVDs, DCMA, and the RIAA in general. Don't like the prices? Their business practices? Okay, so don't pay for the service or product. You are in no way entitled to it. People that use the RIAA as justification for theft is kinda sad. I think my dad was on to something when he told me that two wrongs don't make a right, but 3 lefts do.

Skuzzy · « **Reply #24 on:** April 25, 2006, 10:10:17 AM »

I have no problem with copyright protection. Point 1 is an abuse by the government, and point two allows point 1 to be used without any cause. The whole point of this law is a way to allow invasion of privacy.

Here is another fact. Current copyright laws are only loosely enforced. They do not need to be changed as much as they need to be enforced. Without enforcement, no book laws are going to do any good. The governement has no intention of enforcing the laws, they appear to be looking for legal methods to ease invasion of privacy.

Vudak, I will see what I can do for a boilerplate.

Roscoroo · « **Reply #25 on:** April 25, 2006, 10:59:02 AM »

"enforcement, no book laws are going to do any good. The governement has no intention of enforcing the laws, they appear to be looking for legal methods to ease invasion of privacy."

thats what it looks like to me.......... along with an easy claim to ones properties .
That in itsself is a violation to our constitutional rights .

so here now you record a tv show to watch later ...and in thru the door comes (the copy cat cops)

Saintaw · « **Reply #26 on:** April 25, 2006, 12:10:51 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Rolex
Well, Hedy Lamar...

Raoooooooowrrrrrrrrrrr! (posthumously I guess)

Vulcan · « **Reply #27 on:** April 25, 2006, 03:41:37 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by indy007
Except for that first point which should be revised... I don't see what the big deal is.

Skuzzy, if you wrote a game, and boxed versions hit the shelves @ $50 each. Then, I cracked a copy and put it on a torrent for the whole world to grab for free... wouldn't you wan't me punished for theft?

Same thing applies to DVDs, DCMA, and the RIAA in general. Don't like the prices? Their business practices? Okay, so don't pay for the service or product. You are in no way entitled to it. People that use the RIAA as justification for theft is kinda sad. I think my dad was on to something when he told me that two wrongs don't make a right, but 3 lefts do.

Do you like the right to listen to music on an MP3 player? Do you like the right to listen to your music in your car? The RIAA are trying to take that away... I kid you not.

Sixpence · « **Reply #28 on:** April 25, 2006, 06:17:11 PM »

I blame Clinton

DREDIOCK · « **Reply #29 on:** April 25, 2006, 06:40:43 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mr Big
"the sky is falling"

Don't steal copyrighted material.

Now Skuzzy is one of the most adamant people Ive come across when it comes to being against copyright theft.

If he's against this. there most be something wrong with it.