[kwlug-disc] are you going to be a criminal?

[unsolicited]

John Van Ostrand wrote, On 06/04/2010 2:46 PM:
> ----- Original Message -----
>> Discussion might help to focus on what the shortcomings of the bill
>> are and - more importantly - what constructive suggestions we can
>> make.
> 
> Let me float these ideas around. Do they make sense?
> 
> Digital lock anti-circumvention laws are bad because:
.
.
.

In some ways, going about things this way is ineffective. (Not that 
I'm suggesting it be stopped.)

I don't disagree with the premises, and certainly full speed ahead, 
but alternatives need to be floated as well.

IIUC, and as far as I can tell, I have two basic problems:
- the cracking of digital locks for purposes legal if the digital lock 
wasn't there.
- giving my buddy the same ability.

I'm paraphrasing 'urban legend' here - something like what is proposed 
  must be passed to honour our 'treaty obligations' and to get the 
industry lobbyists off the politician's back.

So, proposals must include alternatives that accomplish those two 
objectives, or we're doomed.

Problem: The industry is immovable on the digital lock (and its 
provisions).

Solution (unlikely): It is better for the politician to not give in to 
the pressure. I have no idea how you get there. [Or provide the 
industry with another means to accomplish the same thing / what they 
want - chicken and egg there.]

So, it's insufficient to say "It's bad because." without "You can 
accomplish the desired impact via <x> instead, which is more palatable."


Is local reinventing of the wheel (analysis, it's bad because) effort 
better spent in enhancing efforts such as Geist's?


Looking to the future, presuming all content is going to be delivered 
over the internet, presumably via streaming, the desire will be to 
capture that streaming. And, of course, doing so would mean breaking a 
digital lock, and the future looks like where we are already.

The industry wants away from the consumer holding the content. They 
want a continuous revenue stream, via pay per broadcast (no capture). 
The consumer only wants to pay for the content once, and play it as 
many times as they wish. Unstoppable force, immovable rock.

'Urban legend' seems to indicate this bill will ultimately pass. If 
you don't like the bill, you must take the pressure off the 
politician's back and/or provide more pressure from some other 
direction. A negative approach, it's bad because, in and of itself, I 
don't expect to be successful.

Palatable alternatives must also be proposed.