Cal-Induce Bill Morphs Into Filtering Mandate
From the Freedom to Tinker blog:
"A bill in the California state senate (SB 96), previously dubbed the "Cal-Induce Act," has now morphed via amendment into a requirement that copyright and porn filters be included in many network software programs.
Here's the heart of the bill:
Any person or entity that [sells, advertises, or distributes] peer-to-peer file sharing software that enables its user to electronically disseminate commercial recordings or audiovisual works via the Internet or any other digital network, and who fails to incorporate available filtering technology into that software to prevent use of that software to commit an unlawful act with respect to a commercial recording or audiovisual work, or a violation of [state obscenity or computer intrusion statutes] is punishable ... by a fine not exceeding [$2500], imprisonment ... for a period not to exceed one year, or by both ...
This section shall not apply to the following:
(A) Computer operating system or Internet browser software.
(B) An electronic mail service or Internet service provider.
(C) Transmissions via a [home network] or [LAN]. [Note: The bill uses an odd definition of "LAN" that would exclude almost all of the real LANs I know. -- EF]
As used in this section, "peer to peer file sharing software" means software ... the primary purpose of which ... is to enable the user to connect his or her computer to a network of other computers on which the users of these computers have made available recordings or audiovisual works for electronic dissemination to other users who are connected to the network. When a transaction is complete, the user has an identical copy of the file on his or her computer and may also then disseminate the file to other users connected to the network."
Well, yet another governament legislation made by people who
a) Obviously have no idea of what they are talking about when it comes to the technology they are regulating
b) Obviously have no idea of what intellectual property is and how it has been treated since the founding of america.
This legistlation, like many others, was pushed for by a lobby group consisting of
a) People who do know what IP is, and are maliciously perverting the law so they can make a profit
b) Dont have a clue on how to leverage technology to create a new distrabution paradigm, so instead choose to make all new forms illegal to protect their obsolete business model.
this stuff has happened MANY times before, and each time the corporations have been shot down by the courts. Its only in the last 30 years or so where IP has become synomous (under the law) with physical property. for a full explination of this (and many other related issues, including the importance of the public domain, the purpose of copyright, and why we are heading towards an age where only the rich are allowed to create), read free-culture by professor Larry Lessig. (the book is available as a free pdf download, and is liscenced under the creative commons liscence)
That kind of stuff has been discussed at great length in other places though, and thats not why im laughing so hard right now. There has been a propaganda campeign going on since man discovered how to digitize media, and that is:
Copyright infringement is "Piracy".
What kind of a society do we live in where helping out your fellow man can widely be viewed as the same thing as boarding a ship by force, looting it and anyone on it, killing or enslaving the people on it, then setting it on fire. Thats like saying "Jaywalking is genocide", it just doesnt make any sense no matter how you look at it. I mean, at least if piracy entailed SOME sort of destructive act......
Copyright infringment is theft.
Once again, way off the mark. Theft will result in the loss of property for whoever you are stealing from. There is no loss of anything in digital copying, whether authorized or not. Im not saying copyright infringment is ok, but it sure as hell isnt theft.
Those are the two great lies of the last 20 years or so, that have shaped the view on intellectual property of an entire generation. Here is some of the more recent brainwashing that has caused such massive misconception like what allowed that law to be passed:
Copying is wrong
This seems to only really have a hold in the completely clueless (i.e. the 80 year old white men who tell us how to live our lives). We are standing on the single greatest accomplishment of mankind of (at least) the millenia, and the RIAA have the people making the laws convinced it needs to be tightly regulated. Why? dont think they have thought it through that far, possibilities include things like stemming the free flow of information, clamping down on innovation, and preventing the world from finally working together in the persuit of knowledge. But I really cant say for sure....
P2P is wrong
The only people who actually are able to take advantage of the internet are those who break the law. These people tend to be where the real innovation comes from anyways, one man or small groups of coders who put together something that is so efficient at content distrobution, it would completely eliminate the need of people like the RIAA or MPAA. What does the american governament do? Listen to those who will be out of a job, because their way of doing business is about as efficient as a pair of tweezers compared to Acme Nuclear Powered Lawncutting Machine that is P2P. A machinegun OS is wrong, and any coder who works on such things is directly responsable for each and every life taken as a result of his work. P2P? one of the greatest inventions of the 20th century.
Now heres the kicker. Based on a lack of knowledge, and an extended disinformation campeign by people who are robbing us of our future to make a buck, you get stuff like this passed. I would like to point out that now,
Microsoft Domain Controllers will need to have a porn filter. Of course, such technology in a domain controller would be beyond retarded, but now its gotta be there. This is really neither here nor there, a domain controller is definately networking and not os software, but its only real purpose or reason for existance is for very low level network support.
Novell iFolder really really needs a porn filter. This would definately fall outside of the os software exception. Just as moronic.
BitTorrent Trackers need a porn filter. Even though companies using it are going to be the ones deciding what gets put on it, and the "pirates" really couldnt care less anyways, AND the level of centralization is not just in one place, and such things would only slow down the single best P2P implementation so far, etc, etc, etc
True P2P networks (like gnutella) need content monitoring. Such a thing would be completely and totally impossible. Gnutella isnt an application, its a specification. There are no central servers whatsoever. There is no way that is even remotely reliable or efficient to implement filters in a true p2p network.
FTP servers now need filters. This is dumb for the same reason as bt filters are dumb. The "legitimate" users control the content anyways, the illegitimate users will just bypass any form of filtering.
Things like rsync now need filters. Even though it is a technology only used for administering large networks, and wouldnt make any sense to use for illegal content distrabution.
See what I mean? In one shot, california screws over any ligitimate usages of p2p, has no effect on illegal content distrabution, with the sole exception of such antiquated networks like Fasttrack (kazaa) or Napster. Not only that, but their definition of a P2P network as basically anything that you can transfer data shows the level of idiocy in the governament. These people are completely incapable of regulating technology.
"A bill in the California state senate (SB 96), previously dubbed the "Cal-Induce Act," has now morphed via amendment into a requirement that copyright and porn filters be included in many network software programs.
Here's the heart of the bill:
Any person or entity that [sells, advertises, or distributes] peer-to-peer file sharing software that enables its user to electronically disseminate commercial recordings or audiovisual works via the Internet or any other digital network, and who fails to incorporate available filtering technology into that software to prevent use of that software to commit an unlawful act with respect to a commercial recording or audiovisual work, or a violation of [state obscenity or computer intrusion statutes] is punishable ... by a fine not exceeding [$2500], imprisonment ... for a period not to exceed one year, or by both ...
This section shall not apply to the following:
(A) Computer operating system or Internet browser software.
(B) An electronic mail service or Internet service provider.
(C) Transmissions via a [home network] or [LAN]. [Note: The bill uses an odd definition of "LAN" that would exclude almost all of the real LANs I know. -- EF]
As used in this section, "peer to peer file sharing software" means software ... the primary purpose of which ... is to enable the user to connect his or her computer to a network of other computers on which the users of these computers have made available recordings or audiovisual works for electronic dissemination to other users who are connected to the network. When a transaction is complete, the user has an identical copy of the file on his or her computer and may also then disseminate the file to other users connected to the network."
Well, yet another governament legislation made by people who
a) Obviously have no idea of what they are talking about when it comes to the technology they are regulating
b) Obviously have no idea of what intellectual property is and how it has been treated since the founding of america.
This legistlation, like many others, was pushed for by a lobby group consisting of
a) People who do know what IP is, and are maliciously perverting the law so they can make a profit
b) Dont have a clue on how to leverage technology to create a new distrabution paradigm, so instead choose to make all new forms illegal to protect their obsolete business model.
this stuff has happened MANY times before, and each time the corporations have been shot down by the courts. Its only in the last 30 years or so where IP has become synomous (under the law) with physical property. for a full explination of this (and many other related issues, including the importance of the public domain, the purpose of copyright, and why we are heading towards an age where only the rich are allowed to create), read free-culture by professor Larry Lessig. (the book is available as a free pdf download, and is liscenced under the creative commons liscence)
That kind of stuff has been discussed at great length in other places though, and thats not why im laughing so hard right now. There has been a propaganda campeign going on since man discovered how to digitize media, and that is:
Copyright infringement is "Piracy".
What kind of a society do we live in where helping out your fellow man can widely be viewed as the same thing as boarding a ship by force, looting it and anyone on it, killing or enslaving the people on it, then setting it on fire. Thats like saying "Jaywalking is genocide", it just doesnt make any sense no matter how you look at it. I mean, at least if piracy entailed SOME sort of destructive act......
Copyright infringment is theft.
Once again, way off the mark. Theft will result in the loss of property for whoever you are stealing from. There is no loss of anything in digital copying, whether authorized or not. Im not saying copyright infringment is ok, but it sure as hell isnt theft.
Those are the two great lies of the last 20 years or so, that have shaped the view on intellectual property of an entire generation. Here is some of the more recent brainwashing that has caused such massive misconception like what allowed that law to be passed:
Copying is wrong
This seems to only really have a hold in the completely clueless (i.e. the 80 year old white men who tell us how to live our lives). We are standing on the single greatest accomplishment of mankind of (at least) the millenia, and the RIAA have the people making the laws convinced it needs to be tightly regulated. Why? dont think they have thought it through that far, possibilities include things like stemming the free flow of information, clamping down on innovation, and preventing the world from finally working together in the persuit of knowledge. But I really cant say for sure....
P2P is wrong
The only people who actually are able to take advantage of the internet are those who break the law. These people tend to be where the real innovation comes from anyways, one man or small groups of coders who put together something that is so efficient at content distrobution, it would completely eliminate the need of people like the RIAA or MPAA. What does the american governament do? Listen to those who will be out of a job, because their way of doing business is about as efficient as a pair of tweezers compared to Acme Nuclear Powered Lawncutting Machine that is P2P. A machinegun OS is wrong, and any coder who works on such things is directly responsable for each and every life taken as a result of his work. P2P? one of the greatest inventions of the 20th century.
Now heres the kicker. Based on a lack of knowledge, and an extended disinformation campeign by people who are robbing us of our future to make a buck, you get stuff like this passed. I would like to point out that now,
Microsoft Domain Controllers will need to have a porn filter. Of course, such technology in a domain controller would be beyond retarded, but now its gotta be there. This is really neither here nor there, a domain controller is definately networking and not os software, but its only real purpose or reason for existance is for very low level network support.
Novell iFolder really really needs a porn filter. This would definately fall outside of the os software exception. Just as moronic.
BitTorrent Trackers need a porn filter. Even though companies using it are going to be the ones deciding what gets put on it, and the "pirates" really couldnt care less anyways, AND the level of centralization is not just in one place, and such things would only slow down the single best P2P implementation so far, etc, etc, etc
True P2P networks (like gnutella) need content monitoring. Such a thing would be completely and totally impossible. Gnutella isnt an application, its a specification. There are no central servers whatsoever. There is no way that is even remotely reliable or efficient to implement filters in a true p2p network.
FTP servers now need filters. This is dumb for the same reason as bt filters are dumb. The "legitimate" users control the content anyways, the illegitimate users will just bypass any form of filtering.
Things like rsync now need filters. Even though it is a technology only used for administering large networks, and wouldnt make any sense to use for illegal content distrabution.
See what I mean? In one shot, california screws over any ligitimate usages of p2p, has no effect on illegal content distrabution, with the sole exception of such antiquated networks like Fasttrack (kazaa) or Napster. Not only that, but their definition of a P2P network as basically anything that you can transfer data shows the level of idiocy in the governament. These people are completely incapable of regulating technology.
posted by Google Ninja at 11:51 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home