Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > DVD Video > Yet another new "copyright enforcement" bill in Congress

Reply
Thread Tools

Yet another new "copyright enforcement" bill in Congress

 
 
Modemac
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-16-2004
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0...w=wn_tophead_2

This one looks like a lumping together of all the previous ones
they've tried to get through: It goes after peer-to-peer networks,
people who bring video cameras to movie theaters, *and* technology
designed to edit out or skip past objectionable scenes in videos and
on TV. (It would allow the development of technology to skip past
explicit scenes - but skipping past *commercials* would be
prohibited.)
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
^^artnada^^
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-16-2004
Modemac wrote:
|| http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0...w=wn_tophead_2
||
|| This one looks like a lumping together of all the previous ones
|| they've tried to get through: It goes after peer-to-peer networks,
|| people who bring video cameras to movie theaters, *and* technology
|| designed to edit out or skip past objectionable scenes in videos and
|| on TV. (It would allow the development of technology to skip past
|| explicit scenes - but skipping past *commercials* would be
|| prohibited.)

lol - what are they going to sue people who make a cup of tea during the ads
next? F*cking assholes.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
RogerM
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-16-2004
^^artnada^^ wrote:
>
> Modemac wrote:
> || http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0...w=wn_tophead_2
> ||
> || This one looks like a lumping together of all the previous ones
> || they've tried to get through: It goes after peer-to-peer networks,
> || people who bring video cameras to movie theaters, *and* technology
> || designed to edit out or skip past objectionable scenes in videos and
> || on TV. (It would allow the development of technology to skip past
> || explicit scenes - but skipping past *commercials* would be
> || prohibited.)
>
> lol - what are they going to sue people who make a cup of tea during the ads
> next? F*cking assholes.


Didn't Ted Turner say that people who don't watch the commercials are
"stealing".

--

America is like a spoiled rock star. It only wants to hear that it is
beautiful and talented.
 
Reply With Quote
 
BOMOON
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-16-2004
Your conservative "small-government" tax dollars at work.


On 16 Nov 2004 11:43:56 -0800, http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) (Modemac) wrote:

>http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0...w=wn_tophead_2
>
>This one looks like a lumping together of all the previous ones
>they've tried to get through: It goes after peer-to-peer networks,
>people who bring video cameras to movie theaters, *and* technology
>designed to edit out or skip past objectionable scenes in videos and
>on TV. (It would allow the development of technology to skip past
>explicit scenes - but skipping past *commercials* would be
>prohibited.)


 
Reply With Quote
 
FAQmeister
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-16-2004
"Modemac" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) om
>

http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0...w=wn_tophead_2

> people who bring video cameras to movie theaters, *


Only 3 years in prison for that? I'm surprised they didn't want public
execution.

> (It would allow the development of technology to skip past
> explicit scenes - but skipping past *commercials* would be
> prohibited.)


Yeah, we can't have that.
--
Buford T. Justice
The alt.video.dvd faq is located at:
http://aww-faq.org/dvdfaq.html


 
Reply With Quote
 
Loco Jones
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-16-2004
"RogerM" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> ^^artnada^^ wrote:
> >
> > Modemac wrote:
> > ||

http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0...w=wn_tophead_2
> > ||
> > || This one looks like a lumping together of all the previous ones
> > || they've tried to get through: It goes after peer-to-peer networks,
> > || people who bring video cameras to movie theaters, *and* technology
> > || designed to edit out or skip past objectionable scenes in videos and
> > || on TV. (It would allow the development of technology to skip past
> > || explicit scenes - but skipping past *commercials* would be
> > || prohibited.)
> >
> > lol - what are they going to sue people who make a cup of tea during
> > the ads next? F*cking assholes.

>
> Didn't Ted Turner say that people who don't watch the commercials
> are "stealing".


Close, but not quite.
http://www.2600.com/news/view/article/1113
- still a stupid statement, regardless of who said it.

It is, however, indicative of the complete and utter disdain this
multi-billion dollar industry has for the consumers responsible for their
very existence. Fair use? There's a concept in danger of being legislated
into oblivion if self-interest trade groups get their way.

- Loco -
(Now Playing: Two Steps Behind - Def Leppard)


 
Reply With Quote
 
Jim
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-16-2004
RogerM <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:(E-Mail Removed):

> ^^artnada^^ wrote:
>>
>> Modemac wrote:
>> || http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0...65704,00.html?

tw=wn_tophe
>> || ad_2
>> ||
>> || This one looks like a lumping together of all the previous ones
>> || they've tried to get through: It goes after peer-to-peer networks,
>> || people who bring video cameras to movie theaters, *and* technology
>> || designed to edit out or skip past objectionable scenes in videos
>> || and on TV. (It would allow the development of technology to skip
>> || past explicit scenes - but skipping past *commercials* would be
>> || prohibited.)
>>
>> lol - what are they going to sue people who make a cup of tea during
>> the ads next? F*cking assholes.

>
> Didn't Ted Turner say that people who don't watch the commercials are
> "stealing".


All advertising costs, including those of television ads, are passed on
to the consumer. Anytime anyone buys any product or service that is
advertised on TV they pay for the commercials (and therefore the
programs they sponsor) whether they watch them or not.

Of course, this fact is irrelevant. Corporate America now gets its way
in Federal Government, and since it owns the media, this side of the
arguement will either not be heard, or will be mocked.
 
Reply With Quote
 
luminos
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-16-2004

"Modemac" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) om...
> http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0...w=wn_tophead_2
>
> This one looks like a lumping together of all the previous ones
> they've tried to get through: It goes after peer-to-peer networks,
> people who bring video cameras to movie theaters, *and* technology
> designed to edit out or skip past objectionable scenes in videos and
> on TV. (It would allow the development of technology to skip past
> explicit scenes - but skipping past *commercials* would be
> prohibited.)


See also:

http://apnews.excite.com/article/200...D86D4ARO1.html




 
Reply With Quote
 
Zapanaz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-16-2004
On 16 Nov 2004 11:43:56 -0800, (E-Mail Removed) (Modemac) wrote:

>http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0...w=wn_tophead_2
>
>This one looks like a lumping together of all the previous ones
>they've tried to get through: It goes after peer-to-peer networks,
>people who bring video cameras to movie theaters, *and* technology
>designed to edit out or skip past objectionable scenes in videos and
>on TV. (It would allow the development of technology to skip past
>explicit scenes - but skipping past *commercials* would be
>prohibited.)


I always said that one day there would be a law against not watching
commercials.

In the 80's people thought I was kidding.


--
Zapanaz
International Satanic Conspiracy
Customer Support Specialist
http://joecosby.com/
"Christianity is a rebellion of everything that crawls on the ground
against that which has height: The evangel of the 'lowly' makes low."
- Nietzsche

 
Reply With Quote
 
Zapanaz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-16-2004
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 19:49:13 GMT, "^^artnada^^" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>Modemac wrote:
>|| http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0...w=wn_tophead_2
>||
>|| This one looks like a lumping together of all the previous ones
>|| they've tried to get through: It goes after peer-to-peer networks,
>|| people who bring video cameras to movie theaters, *and* technology
>|| designed to edit out or skip past objectionable scenes in videos and
>|| on TV. (It would allow the development of technology to skip past
>|| explicit scenes - but skipping past *commercials* would be
>|| prohibited.)
>
>lol - what are they going to sue people who make a cup of tea during the ads
>next? F*cking assholes.
>


Nah, they will just invent a video player with electrodes that give
you an electric shock if you stop paying attention during the
commercials.

I mean you don't HAVE to buy one, after all.


--
Zapanaz
International Satanic Conspiracy
Customer Support Specialist
http://joecosby.com/
The Lesser Key of Solomon crashes my print demon.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Congress readies broad new digital copyright bill Imhotep Computer Security 45 05-29-2006 01:33 AM
USA Congress readies new digital copyright bill that extends DMCA Have A Nice Cup of Tea NZ Computing 6 04-30-2006 11:37 PM
Yet another book recommendation, but for someone who can program and yet does not the terminology well Berehem C Programming 4 04-28-2005 05:25 PM
New TOS - yet another reason to hate AOL Pennywise@DerryMaine.gov Computer Support 14 03-15-2005 06:00 PM
Kill Bill, part 1 - Anyone seen it yet? I have and.... Riffraff DVD Video 21 11-11-2003 10:11 PM



Advertisments