[Reader-list] Fw: It's war, folks --- SSSCA formally introduced

[Jeebesh Bagchi]

After the "Domination Millenium Copyright Act" a new act is on the way. 
"Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Act of 2002" (News Corporation and 
Disney are the main lobby for this act. 

This is getting really weird. COPYing is such a threat. Why?

best
Jeebesh
>--- begin forwarded text
 
 >From: ietf at ka9q.net
 >To: ietf at ietf.org
 >Subject: It's war, folks --- SSSCA formally introduced
 >Reply-to: karn at ka9q.net
 >Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 17:33:36 -0800
  >
 >The story just hit Slashdot -- Senators Hollings, Stevens, Inouye,
 >Breaux, Nelson, and Feinstein have introduced the so-called "Consumer
 >Broadband and Digital Television Act of 2002", formerly known to most
 >of us as the SSSCA. The text of Hollings' comments are available here:
 >
 >http://www.politechbot.com/docs/cbdtpa/hollings.cbdtpa.release.032102.html
 >
 >The Slashdot article (with links to other coverage) is here:
 >
 >http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/03/21/2344228&mode=thread&tid=103
 >
 >I cannot overstress the awful implications of this bill if it becomes
 >law. The personal computer, as we know it, will be destroyed. The
 >Internet, as we know it, will be destroyed.
 >
 >Hollings doesn't say that, of course. But all through his statement he
 >claims that there exist technological solutions to the piracy
 >problem. These apparently consist entirely of "do not copy" bits added
 >to copyrighted materials.
 >
 >The fact that any "do-not-copy-bit" can be trivially cleared on any
 >personal computer that can be programmed by its user does not seem to
 >have registered yet with the authors of this bill. And when it does,
 >the logical next step will then become obvious to them: the licensing
 >of programmers and/or the prohibition of open source software as too
 >easily modified by end users. And when *that* fails, a total ban on
 >any personal computer that can be programmed by its user.
 >
 >It's time for the IETF, its members and the IAB to react, and react
 >quickly and forcefully.  We need to say clearly that there is simply
 >no such thing as an "Internet copy prevention technology" that can
 >actually work in a world with programmable personal computers.
 >
 >We need to steer policy makers in a different direction, toward
 >watermarking technologies that do not block copies from being made but
 >allows them to be traced after the fact.  Yes, effective watermarking
 >is technically difficult, and several have already been broken. But at
 >least it's *possible* to build an effective watermarking scheme
 >without utterly destroying both the personal computer and the Internet.
 >
 >Phil
 >
 >--- end forwarded text