Re: [DMCA-Activists] RE: [DMCA_Discuss] Ideas for DMCA Exemption Classes of Works

[horrorvacui]

SHOULD such a thing ever come into being, anything else would hardly
matter. Do you really think it necessary to bring up a question that can
belong only to social and scientific science-fiction, in a forum
discussing concrete consequences of the very real situation of today? I
really don't want to be one of the "off-topic"-yelling polemics, but this
is really off-topic in that it's not even discutable. Mandatory
implantations of chips that fullfill an unclearly defined set of
functionalities would represent a violation of your physical integrity,
which is one of the most important human rights. Compared to such a
blatant violation of that gravity, what we're discussing here can only be
peanuts. What we're discussing here however is in which ways a real
legislation violates our (rather widely) agreed-upon human rights and how
to fight it; what you're talking about is a highly theoretical threat
that's quite petty compared to the prerequisites. As if you'd be warning
that when you're to be shot in the head, your speech centrum might be in
danger, while others are trying to make guns illegal.

You're perfectly right to make conjectures about possible future
violations of human rights, but that's science-fiction. If this kind of
science-fiction has no connection with the current situation, it doesn't
belong here. Discussing Orwell's 1984 here would be ok, discussing Borg is
not.

As for the matter with the self-destructing documents: yes, that is a
problem. It's about falsificating history, one of Orwell's main topics
(not only in 1984, read some of his essays from www.orwell.ru), and 1984
shows clearly the dangers of states having the power to falsificate it -
you can imagine how much more dangerous this becomes in the hands of
individuals or organisations. It's a good argument against DMCA/DRM,
provided it gets known widely that this combo could provide a mechanism to
lie and shut up those that shout "liar" - not with some mafia methods, but
through legislation. A legislation that legalises lies is bound to create
an outrage - but only if you can explain that to non-geeks.

Cheers
Horror Vacui


On Mon, 2 Dec 2002 09:32:40 -0500
Michael Richardson <address@hidden> wrote:

> When such a thing comes into being it will not be voluntary for long
> (and you will not have the choice of whether it is open-source or not). 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James McGuigan [mailto:address@hidden
> Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 3:21 AM
> To: address@hidden;
> address@hidden;
> address@hidden; address@hidden;
> address@hidden; address@hidden
> Subject: Re: [DMCA_Discuss] Ideas for DMCA Exemption Classes of Works
> 
> 
> Not sure if anyone has given this much thought or not, but with the
> semi-recent news about bio-chips which get implanted under the skin (for
> ID or other purposes), while it hasn't become an issue yet, I can
> foresee the DMCA being used to prevent people from reading / modifying
> the software that is used in chips implanted in their own skin (assuming
> that the chips become able to be reprogrammed without physical removal).
> 
> Personally I would have a very hard time letting someone put such a chip
> in me unless the software being used was fully open-sourced and I also
> understood exactly what it was doing and how I could edit it and be
> fully in control of what I had in me - though chances are that if these
> things do ever become popular, that a few of these chips might come
> pre-packaged, or updated to do something other than in my best
> interests.
> 
> I can also foresee somewhat similar problems with nanotechnology if it
> ever gets developed to a commercial level, though this I guess is really
> an extension of your first point, which is the use of anti-circumvention
> of software laws to limit the uses/functionality or to enforce controls
> on computer hardware.
> 
> 
> Another potential problem with a DMCA / DRM combo, though not sure how
> best to describe the condition in a general sense, is for instance a
> case where a company/government makes a public statement but using a
> 30-day view DRM so that if they decided to contradict themselves a year
> down the line it would be alot harder or even illegal to dig up the old
> records showing that this was the case. AFAIK this hasn't happened yet,
> but in a big brother scenario - remember those memory holes, every time
> you are finished with a bit of paper you throw it in a memory hole, you
> can always get another copy from the ministry of truth.
>