Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:

>   The problem with that is that it's unconstitutional (at least here).
> The government has no right to stop people from sending or receiving legal
> information.

And yet they banned radar detectors, which is just a radio; and "made illegal" a
dish that could receive the unscrambled HBO signal, way back when.

Post a reply to this message

On 2/14/2011 11:07 PM, dickbalaska wrote:
> Warp<war### [at] tagpovrayorg>  wrote:
>
>>    The problem with that is that it's unconstitutional (at least here).
>> The government has no right to stop people from sending or receiving legal
>> information.
>
> And yet they banned radar detectors, which is just a radio; and "made illegal" a
> dish that could receive the unscrambled HBO signal, way back when.
>
Strictly speaking, the former is an attempt to undermine legal 
authority, and the later was reception of content you where *supposed* 
to be paying the company for. Sadly, it never seemed to occur to them 
that the best solution was to encrypt the damn signal in the first 
place, until later. Sort of like if some fool tried sending "secret" 
data, in plain English, over telephone lines, but "encrypted" it as it 
entered the building at its destination, then decrypted it again at the 
telephone. Anyone with an ounce of sense would have gone, "Heh, now.. 
wait a second..."

In any case, one can argue that neither is, technically, "legal 
information".

-- 
void main () {

     if version = "Vista" {
       call slow_by_half();
       call DRM_everything();
     }
     call functional_code();
   }
   else
     call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models, 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message

Patrick Elliott wrote:
> Sadly, it never seemed to occur to them 
> that the best solution was to encrypt the damn signal in the first 
> place, until later.

You mean, until later, when the technology was economically feasible? 
Remember that HBO was around long before even digital cell phones, let alone 
cheap hardware encryption that could keep up with a signal as broad as a 
television broadcast. Remember that HBO started five years before the Apple 
][ and TRS-80 were cutting edge, and before even RSA public key encryption 
was conceived.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
  "How did he die?"   "He got shot in the hand."
     "That was fatal?"
          "He was holding a live grenade at the time."

Post a reply to this message

On 2/15/2011 10:21 AM, Darren New wrote:
> Patrick Elliott wrote:
>> Sadly, it never seemed to occur to them that the best solution was to
>> encrypt the damn signal in the first place, until later.
>
> You mean, until later, when the technology was economically feasible?
> Remember that HBO was around long before even digital cell phones, let
> alone cheap hardware encryption that could keep up with a signal as
> broad as a television broadcast. Remember that HBO started five years
> before the Apple ][ and TRS-80 were cutting edge, and before even RSA
> public key encryption was conceived.
>
Well, that is true. There was a period in which it was probably not 
feasible. But, this is a bit like making a digital player, which only 
supports RAW, then coming back later and adding encryption and DRM. You 
could argue that everything *prior* to the addition of those was fair 
game, more or less, if you could engineer the means to see it, but 
after.. not so much. In a fair world, it should be the copyright owners 
suing the channel for the infringement, not the channel trying to do 
something about the people that just happened to know how to make a 
receiver (or bought one, for legit use).

-- 
void main () {
   If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
     if version = "Vista" {
       call slow_by_half();
       call DRM_everything();
     }
     call functional_code();
   }
   else
     call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models, 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message

Patrick Elliott wrote:
> could argue that everything *prior* to the addition of those was fair 
> game, more or less, if you could engineer the means to see it, 

If it's coming into your house and there aren't laws about it, then sure. 
And indeed, that's generally how it was looked upon. But then the 
politicians passed laws making it illegal to build/use/etc a receiver for 
the frequencies which were reserved for people paying for content.

> something about the people that just happened to know how to make a 
> receiver (or bought one, for legit use).

I don't know where encryption comes into it, then. You could equally say 
"fair game for people who know how to break the encryption", which is 
exactly what the DMCA is addressing.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
  "How did he die?"   "He got shot in the hand."
     "That was fatal?"
          "He was holding a live grenade at the time."

Post a reply to this message

> In a fair world, it should be the copyright owners
> suing the channel for the infringement, not the channel trying to do
> something about the people that just happened to know how to make a
> receiver (or bought one, for legit use).

Just because you know how to do something, have the equipment to do it, 
or it's easy doesn't mean it should be legal.  IIRC the law in the UK 
states that receiving any information over the air that you are not the 
authorised recipient for is illegal.

Post a reply to this message

On 2/16/2011 8:17 PM, Darren New wrote:
> Patrick Elliott wrote:
>> could argue that everything *prior* to the addition of those was fair
>> game, more or less, if you could engineer the means to see it,
>
> If it's coming into your house and there aren't laws about it, then
> sure. And indeed, that's generally how it was looked upon. But then the
> politicians passed laws making it illegal to build/use/etc a receiver
> for the frequencies which were reserved for people paying for content.
>
>> something about the people that just happened to know how to make a
>> receiver (or bought one, for legit use).
>
> I don't know where encryption comes into it, then. You could equally say
> "fair game for people who know how to break the encryption", which is
> exactly what the DMCA is addressing.
>
Except, that is legal to do, for "your" media, but not for broadcast. 
I.e., DVD decoding, where no other option exists. But, if there is 
another option, then it is still illegal. Bloody mess, really.

-- 
void main () {
   If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
     if version = "Vista" {
       call slow_by_half();
       call DRM_everything();
     }
     call functional_code();
   }
   else
     call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models, 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message