Drm and digital rights management letter from my senator


G

Greg R

Here is a letter I received from my senator. Please, pardon the long
post.

Greg R

Thank you for sharing with me your insights into the debate over
digital copyrights and digital rights management. I understand your
concern for protecting the freedom and privacy of individual Internet
users.

Despite passage of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998, which
I supported, some difficult questions remain unanswered in the debate
over how to protect the rights of music artists and producers to
protect their intellectual property versus the recognized right of
consumers to make recordings for personal use. This law made it
illegal to circumvent a technological copyright-control measure, such
as encryption circuitry built into CD and DVD players.

In the last session of Congress, several bills were introduced that
would have enhanced protections for copyright owners, while other
bills were introduced to enhance the rights of individuals to fair-use
access to digital media. None of these bills were enacted. As
expected, this debate has re-emerged in the current session of
Congress, most recently with public attention focusing on remarks by
Senator Hatch during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing.

Senator Hatch was widely quoted as saying he would favor development
of technology to disable or damage computers that are repeatedly used
for illegal downloads of copyrighted material. This comment
understandably created a backlash of response from computer owners who
make use of peer-to-peer file sharing technology.

Much public attention is also focusing on legislation introduced by
Senator Wyden to require producers and distributors of copyrighted
digital material to disclose any technical devices or codes that would
prevent a person from copying or transferring the content. This bill,
known as the Consumer Right to Know Act, is under consideration in the
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation.

Article I of the Constitution empowers Congress "to promote the
progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to
authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings
and discoveries." In the age of the Internet and digital
communications, this has become a significant challenge.

There are numerous complex facets to this issue, which I do not expect
to be resolved soon. Fundamentally, we are trying to balance the
intellectual property rights of creators against the economic
imperative to let technological innovation run its course. New
technologies emerge daily providing exciting new ways to share
information. I am supportive of new technologies, but I do not believe
that new technology alone should lead to the abrogation of established
laws.

It may be that the copyright laws ultimately need to be modified in
light of new mechanisms for music distribution and new models of
business, but further study of these issues will be required. I will
continue to follow this carefully, and I appreciate your interest.

Again, thank you for contacting me.
 
Ad

Advertisements

D

David Candy

Well it's a pity the US didn't OBEY Article 1 of your constitution in the 1800s where stolen european patents built your country's current economy.
 
H

hermes

Greg said:
Here is a letter I received from my senator. Please, pardon the long
post.

Greg R

Thank you for sharing with me your insights into the debate over
digital copyrights and digital rights management. I understand your
concern for protecting the freedom and privacy of individual Internet
users.

Despite passage of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998, which
I supported, some difficult questions remain unanswered in the debate
over how to protect the rights of music artists and producers to
protect their intellectual property versus the recognized right of
consumers to make recordings for personal use. This law made it
illegal to circumvent a technological copyright-control measure, such
as encryption circuitry built into CD and DVD players.

In the last session of Congress, several bills were introduced that
would have enhanced protections for copyright owners, while other
bills were introduced to enhance the rights of individuals to fair-use
access to digital media. None of these bills were enacted. As
expected, this debate has re-emerged in the current session of
Congress, most recently with public attention focusing on remarks by
Senator Hatch during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing.

Senator Hatch was widely quoted as saying he would favor development
of technology to disable or damage computers that are repeatedly used
for illegal downloads of copyrighted material. This comment
understandably created a backlash of response from computer owners who
make use of peer-to-peer file sharing technology.

Much public attention is also focusing on legislation introduced by
Senator Wyden to require producers and distributors of copyrighted
digital material to disclose any technical devices or codes that would
prevent a person from copying or transferring the content. This bill,
known as the Consumer Right to Know Act, is under consideration in the
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation.

Article I of the Constitution empowers Congress "to promote the
progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to
authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings
and discoveries." In the age of the Internet and digital
communications, this has become a significant challenge.

There are numerous complex facets to this issue, which I do not expect
to be resolved soon. Fundamentally, we are trying to balance the
intellectual property rights of creators against the economic
imperative to let technological innovation run its course. New
technologies emerge daily providing exciting new ways to share
information. I am supportive of new technologies, but I do not believe
that new technology alone should lead to the abrogation of established
laws.

It may be that the copyright laws ultimately need to be modified in
light of new mechanisms for music distribution and new models of
business, but further study of these issues will be required. I will
continue to follow this carefully, and I appreciate your interest.

Again, thank you for contacting me.
Great post! :) If you wouldn't mind posting it, I would love to see
the letter you sent to your senator to receive this reply. Thanks!

--
hermes
DRM sux! Treacherous Computing kills our virtual civil liberties!
http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/index.html
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html
http://anti-dmca.org/
http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/unintended_consequences.php

Windows XP crashed.
I am the Blue Screen of Death.
No one hears your screams
 
Ad

Advertisements

G

Greg R

Sorry Hermes
Unfortunately, I didn’t keep the email.

However, I been sending email through the http://www.eff.org/ to my
senators. They make the letters constructively. Which I cannot do.
My grammar is not that good.

Another words they make the letter sound like it comming from an adult
instead of a kid. I am an adult.

No, I am not a full member. I cant afford to support them .

However, I agree with most but not all things the eff stand for.

www.eff.org


I removed the senator name out of respect for him. The other senator
was mention in this letter is public knowledge.


Greg R
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top