Follow-up on DMCA panel
Just a few links gathered from this morning's blog readings about yesterday's Congressional panel on the DMCA.
Lessig article on Wired (is it supposed to represent his testimony? I hope not): http://wired.com/wired/archive/12.05/view.html?pg=5
Lessig's article is the same sort of empty rhetoric he always spews. I don't disagree with his positions, but far too many of the things he writes can be summarized as simply 'protectionism is bad' and 'freedom is good' without any specific support or any serious discussion of the other side.
eWeek's article on the panel: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1591579,00.asp
Excerpts: 'The head of the Motion Picture Association of America, Jack Valenti, showed lawmakers a copy of the DVD mystery "Runaway Jury" he said was purchased on the black market in downtown Washington and produced using 321's disputed software.', and 'The chief executive for 321 Studios, Robert Moore, said his company expected to generate $100 million in sales until February's court decision banned its software. He said his company is now "on the brink of annihilation."' You know what? MPAA wins that round any time.
The interesting part of the eWeek article is Allan Swift, a DC lobbyist who routinely extracts a song from his CDs to give to friends, convinced it's allowed in fair use. But Mary Bono jumped up and down on him over that.
Some more information is on beSpacific: http://www.bespacific.com/mt/archives/005694.html
Update: CNET's coverage says that the "consumer protection subcommittee" that convened has no jurisdiction over copyright law. Furthermore, there's no comparable bill to the DMCRA in the Senate. So not all good news, but it's a step, at least. Also, Rep. Joe Barton has committed to supporting the bill.
Lessig article on Wired (is it supposed to represent his testimony? I hope not): http://wired.com/wired/archive/12.05/view.html?pg=5
Lessig's article is the same sort of empty rhetoric he always spews. I don't disagree with his positions, but far too many of the things he writes can be summarized as simply 'protectionism is bad' and 'freedom is good' without any specific support or any serious discussion of the other side.
eWeek's article on the panel: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1591579,00.asp
Excerpts: 'The head of the Motion Picture Association of America, Jack Valenti, showed lawmakers a copy of the DVD mystery "Runaway Jury" he said was purchased on the black market in downtown Washington and produced using 321's disputed software.', and 'The chief executive for 321 Studios, Robert Moore, said his company expected to generate $100 million in sales until February's court decision banned its software. He said his company is now "on the brink of annihilation."' You know what? MPAA wins that round any time.
The interesting part of the eWeek article is Allan Swift, a DC lobbyist who routinely extracts a song from his CDs to give to friends, convinced it's allowed in fair use. But Mary Bono jumped up and down on him over that.
Some more information is on beSpacific: http://www.bespacific.com/mt/archives/005694.html
Update: CNET's coverage says that the "consumer protection subcommittee" that convened has no jurisdiction over copyright law. Furthermore, there's no comparable bill to the DMCRA in the Senate. So not all good news, but it's a step, at least. Also, Rep. Joe Barton has committed to supporting the bill.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home