Re: [DMCA-Activists] MPAA draft state super-DMCA amendment

[David Turner]

You wrote over thirty papers since yesterday's new MPAA draft?  

Everyone knows the DMCA is bad.  But this isn't the DMCA -- it's a
proposed state law.  The new version is much improved, because it
doesn't seem to mandate DRM (see the last paragraph).

I am asking on this list because I want to have the best arguments
against *specific objectionable provisions* of this act.  So, first I
want to identify said provisions. 

The MPAA lobbyist got slammed because she didn't know the specifics of
the proposed law (or current local law).  I don't want to be in that
situation.  

On Fri, 2003-04-04 at 02:39, Ruben Safir wrote:
> See fairuse.nylxs.com and see the journal on NYLXS
> 
> I have over 30 papers written on this already.
> 
> The underlining problem is that DRM is Theft
> 
> Ruben
> 
> On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 06:57:33PM -0500, David Turner wrote:
> > Please be specific -- it's not helpful to simply hear that problems
> > exist.
> > 
> > On Thu, 2003-04-03 at 18:24, Ruben Safir wrote:
> > > There are more problems than that.
> > > 
> > > On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 06:31:43PM -0500, David Turner wrote:
> > > > Hi.  I'm the new listmaster for dmca-activists.  I was at the public
> > > > hearing yesterday for the MA bill 2743, the state super-DMCA.  
> > > > 
> > > > What do people on-list think of the MPAA's new draft bill which is up on
> > > > Freedom To Tinker?  
> > > > 
> > > > The primary change is the addition of "with the intent to defraud a
> > > > communication service provider" to the beginning of the section which
> > > > defines offenses.  This seems to be an improvement, but I feel that
> > > > there are still risks for Free Software.  For instance, there's a
> > > > chilling effect, because there's a private right of action.  Taking
> > > > MythTV as an example, skipping commercials could be considered
> > > > "defrauding" a communication service provider.  General time and space
> > > > shifting might also, if prohibited by some user agreement (probably,
> > > > future pay TV services will come with such agreements).
> > > > 
> > > > Any other comments?
> > 
> > -- 
> > -Dave Turner
> > GPL Compliance Engineer
> > Support my work: http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=novalis&p=FSF
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > DMCA-Activists mailing list
> > address@hidden
> > http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/dmca-activists
> 
> -- 
> __________________________
> Brooklyn Linux Solutions
> __________________________
> DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS http://fairuse.nylxs.com
> 
> http://www.mrbrklyn.com - Consulting
> http://www.inns.net <-- Happy Clients
> http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software
> http://www2.mrbrklyn.com/resources - Unpublished Archive or stories and 
> articles from around the net
> http://www2.mrbrklyn.com/downtown.html - See the New Downtown Brooklyn....
> 
> 1-718-382-0585
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> DMCA-Activists mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/dmca-activists
-- 
-Dave Turner
GPL Compliance Engineer
Support my work: http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=novalis&p=FSF