Got Key?

09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0. Consider this my protest against the DMCA. Or at least the parts of it that strip consumers of their fair use rights under copyright law.

To you people at the MPAA, kiss my green scaly ass!
"It is pointless to resist, my son." -- Darth Vader
"Resistance is futile." -- The Borg
"Mother's coming for me in the dragon ships. I don't like these itchy clothes, but I have to wear them or it frightens the fish." -- Thurindil

Well. I guess that's that then.

« Breaking and Entering
Disgusting Human Beings »

Posted on May 3, 2007 4:42 pm by Samson in: , | 10 comment(s) [Closed]
Um, okay.. So what is 09 F9 11 02...?
Did you do the petition that's going around at yet?

You're so brave. It's a wonder the world hasn't elected you dictator yet.

At a guess, Connor, that's the HD-DVD encryption key thingy that everyone was going bonkers about on digg and such. Waste of time IMO. Get lives and move on.

You can kiss my ass too Whir.

I don't know, Whir. I think the issue is an important one, if only because it allows the government to set precedents about regulation of internet activities, of course, maybe I'm thinking of the whole music industry thing and this is a new one I hadn't heard about while I was out car shopping the last few days. *shrug*

As for electing Samson the world's dictator, we don't currently have a world unified government to host such an election, give it time, I'm sure you'll be the first one in line to vote for him. :P

The problem here is that it's not against copyright laws for companies to protect their products. Fair use laws are one thing, but if you do things by the up and up, you won't have any problems with DRM stuff, see? The people that complain about it are the people that steal it.

I know it's not that cut and dry, and no I don't agree with DRM in the first place, but come on. Most of these little whiny kids are just jumping on a bandwagon and haven't got the faintest idea about how DRM works, let alone the laws surrounding such things. "The internet should be uncensored, free, yay!" Just like adult magazines and cigarettes, right?

You can't change the world. If you're tired of looking at it, change yourself, or be a hermit. All the digg fiasco did was prove that people are lemmings. Uneducated, poorly mannered lemmings at that.

Hmm, adult magazines and cigarettes for free.. ok, I'm up for that. ;)

Lots of individuals have changed the world in the past, what would make you believe that another couldn't do so as well? I know, yuo're asking "Who, for example?", fine, do you honestly think that Albert Einstien didn't change the world? How about Thomas Edison? Or to go to another extreme outside of folks with last names beginning with E, how about Adolf Hitler or Oppenheimer? Perhaps you don't feel that these were ordinary men, but what makes them thus but the fact that they rose above the rest of mankind by making drastic changes in our world? Don't like the extreme examples, how about George Washington Carver? Or, if you don't care for folks who've invented stuff or destroyed things, how about Socretes or Plato or Shakespeare? It's silly to think that one person can't have enough impact on our world to impart global and lasting change, in fact most of the world's lasting changes have been brought about by individuals.

Gimme a break, man. You're talking about a certain kind of people. We're talking about the "DRM is bad, let's all be monkeys and spout the same rhetoric that's already been spouted one hundred times previously" kind. There's a gaping difference in just about everything save physical composition.

There's something of a miss here between people who change our perception of the world, and people who bitch about the way things are.

ell, yeah, I'm talking about people who think/act for themselves, not sheep/lemmings who follow blindly.. the physical composition might be somewhat different for all that I know as well, actually. *shrug*

Granted, those who bitch about things wrong with the world are usually not the ones who are actually willing to do anything about it.

Actually Whir, I'm not convinced at all that DRM can be used as legal justification for stripping me of the right to make a backup copy of something so I can protect the investment I made in purchasing the original. And you know what? Neither was our Copyright law when it was amended to allow for that. I'm also reasonably sure that the media companies are abusing their scope in terms of the licensing by which I'm supposed to be bound to when I try and watch a DVD or listen to a CD. If their actions cause collateral damage to the rest of my computer by installing their DRM rootkits, then by God I'm going to stand up and complain about it.

You're also failing to consider that in some cases, protecting the CD or DVD blocks a legitimately obtained original disc from playing in some machines. Is it within the scope of their rights to insist I spend $500 on a new machine that supports DRM just because they say I have to have it? I would have to say no, it's not. Any more than we can insist people prostrate themselves before us and declare us gods for releasing a codebase onto the world. It's outside the scope of authority granted by copyright.

The only reason none of this has ever been challenged properly in court is because the RIAA and the MPAA are so huge and powerful that they are capable of buying justice from the government in the form of lobbying and outright bribes to get what they want. They don't give a flying shit if it's George Bush or Bill Clinton in office. Or if it's democrats or republicans in control of Congress. They are motivated purely by greed, power, and control. They've made the same arguments in the past. When 8-track replaced vinyl. When cassette replaced the 8-track. When CDs replaced the cassette, and now they're doing it again because digital computer files have replaced the CD.

In the past they've done the same futile things by placing digital copy protection on their works. At no point has it ever stopped the determined pirates from making copies. It only ever punishes the legitimate users. The only thing that's changed this time is they greased the DMCA through Congress and the White House with a money trail so thick you can walk on it. And through their abuse of the DMCA they've driven companies out of business who once created and sold perfectly legal products such as CloneCD and Maverick. These companies are responsible for the creation of the underground digital world.

I'm sorry you can't see where this will eventually lead. I know I'm probably going to sound like some conspiracy nutcase by saying it. But one day they may push this to the point where it becomes illegal to reproduce copies of the Constitution, or to educate our children using books that have information in them they don't want us to have. George Orwell might well have been right, just that he may have been about 50 years off and blamed it on the wrong groups of people.

You really think George Orwell was off by 50 years? It's only been 24 so far, and I think we're a lot closer to it than another 26 years...

<< prev 1 next >>
Comments Closed
Comments for this entry have been closed.

Forgot Password?

 1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31