271–280 of 509 posts
If the United States’ populace elects its officials, why do the representatives act against the populace’s wishes? Is this typical of all governments with elected representation? Are they solving different organizational problems that most people are not aware of? I am curious how such a system arises, maintains itself, and is resilient to change.
You'll need a huge citation that this against the populace's wishes. I'd wager 99% of Americans still want theft to be illegal.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's still funny money. You can't just take that $4 price tag for streaming a movie through Apple TV or wherever, and multiply it by the number of movies people illegally stream, and get a number that makes any sense. The idea that American households would spend an extra $230/year on average on movie rentals, if only those nasty content pirates would get out of their way, is just absurd. Especially when you consider…
I can't find it right now, but I swear there was a study that showed that people who pirated content also on average spent _more_ on digital entertainment. I remember pirating video games about 10-15 years ago to see if they were worthwhile, since the demo scene had pretty much died down. I'd end up buying the games I played through to completion as well.
Roller coaster tycoon 2 and kotor for example.
This title is misleading: > The Protecting Lawful Streaming Act would apply only to commercial, for-profit streaming piracy services. The law will not sweep in normal practices by online service providers, good faith business disputes, noncommercial activities, or in any way impact individuals who access pirated streams or unwittingly stream unauthorized copies of copyrighted works. Individuals who might use pirate s…
That's what the linked press release[1] says but looking at the wording of the bill[2] I'm not so sure it's that cut and dry: > It shall be unlawful to will-fully, and for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain, offer or provide to the public a digital transmission service that... The term "private financial gain" typically includes an individual receiving anything of value. I agree it doesn't com…
Basically, there aren't any in common use and no non-commercial OSS license was ever approved by OSI as no one could come up with a bullet proof way of defining what is and what is not non-commercial use for free software.
And I'm afraid the same lack of clear definition can get misused here as a result.
I don't see any discussion in the thread - and find that the recent dust up over this type of DRM gray area use is more than correlated with this type of new legislation.
After the obligatory IANAL [1]: the fate of `dl-youtube` would be tied to your ability to construe `dl-youtube` as a digital transmission service based on §2319C.a.2.
To me seems like the the risky clauses of §2319C.a.2 are : `primary purpose` and `publicly performing`; where primary purpose is tough because their is author intent, and then the proportions of real-world usage, and `publicly performing` is actually a pointer not to common usage of the phrase, but to definitions set forth later in the document.
Read the actual law [PDF]: https://www.tillis.senate.gov/services/files/A30B0C08-FB97-4...)
[1] - I Am Not A Lawyer
I don't understand why the US Constitution doesn't have a way to say that you can't hide something that is not remotely related to the subject of a bill into it. We have that in the French Constitution and it's very useful to take down this kind of thing we call a "cavalier législatif" .
That's on the way to my hope that eventually we can create a formal model of the text to allow spotting inconsistencies (or even edge cases), but I don't know if that's even possible
This should be fun for a service like Twitch. What happens when a streamer on their platform starts playing a game with a copywritten song playing on the game's radio or background? Many times the streamers themselves are not aware that this is a crime.
Twitch already has mostly DRM aware content creators - I hear them talking about 'rights' quite a lot in their streams.
- Everyone discussing this law should really read the text The difficulty in doing so is a big part of the problem. As per AOC's comments on twitter yesterday, at 2PM Members of Congress got 5000 pages of bill dropped on their desk with a vote call at 4PM. The whole thing needs to be much more transparent.
We should outlaw bills like these.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even so, why is copyright infraction criminal? This is fighting something that just doesn't need to be fought and ratchets up copyright to levels of importance that it just doesn't deserve. We need to be toning down copyright, not cranking it up.
The vast majority of content creators disagree.