(no subject)
A new copyright (read: innovation stifling)bill has been proposed in the supposed interest of "protecting children". Does anyone wonder why Sen. Orrin Hatch would keep coming up with these ridiculous pieces of legislation? I wonder what his top two buyers..i mean supporters would have to say when the argument could be made that a great many pharmaceuticals should be illegal under the INDUCE act because they can kill children quite easily. At least, quite a bit more easily than my terrible, property stealing, life wrecking VCR can. That thing eats children, you know. Here's another fine piece of the grand Utah man's work. It's becoming increasingly clear to me that 70 year old men who lack even the most basic understanding of the issues they choose to rail against have no business making laws to govern said issues. In general I am against the suggestion that industry people get involved with governance, since the inevitable conflicts of interest will arise, (Italian Prime Minister Berlusconi anyone?) however I'm starting to wonder if a panel or commmittee of some sort shouldn't be formed. A group of people who understand everything involved (or as much as is humanly possible) and don't need to rely on constant depositions by "experts" to make important decisions. I'm sure someone can point out how i'm wrong and how things are fine just they way they are, but i still think the rift between the governors, and those they are trying to govern is growing increasingly wide.
Considering the proposed law, it presents a twist of truly strange make. If passed, CD Writers would quickly be labeled as device that can induce copyright violation, and as such would subject to all kinds of lawsuits, if not made illegal outright. So..... here's an example case: "Sony Music Inc. vs. Sony Electronics". Biting the hand that feeds you becomes simply gnawing off your own hand. Companies would switch from suing their customers, to suing themselves for providing the mechanism for their customers to steal their property. Is it illegal to violate your own copyright? "In other news, Remington CEO Tommy Millner sues Remington Firearms after being assaulted at gunpoint by an attacker wielding a Remington made handgun. Millner refused comment, citing company policy forbidding discussion of internal lawsuits."
Some have even suggested that this law could be extended to make knowledge of copyright violation inducing devices illegal, thus causing several hundred thousand engineers to quickly fill our penitentiaries to capacity.
I'm done complaining now, so i'll leave you with this quote from a Slashdot post: "Senator, you are a schmuck and a tool."
Considering the proposed law, it presents a twist of truly strange make. If passed, CD Writers would quickly be labeled as device that can induce copyright violation, and as such would subject to all kinds of lawsuits, if not made illegal outright. So..... here's an example case: "Sony Music Inc. vs. Sony Electronics". Biting the hand that feeds you becomes simply gnawing off your own hand. Companies would switch from suing their customers, to suing themselves for providing the mechanism for their customers to steal their property. Is it illegal to violate your own copyright? "In other news, Remington CEO Tommy Millner sues Remington Firearms after being assaulted at gunpoint by an attacker wielding a Remington made handgun. Millner refused comment, citing company policy forbidding discussion of internal lawsuits."
Some have even suggested that this law could be extended to make knowledge of copyright violation inducing devices illegal, thus causing several hundred thousand engineers to quickly fill our penitentiaries to capacity.
I'm done complaining now, so i'll leave you with this quote from a Slashdot post: "Senator, you are a schmuck and a tool."