Broadcast Flag Back in Congress 417
Tyler Too writes "When the broadcast flag was smacked down in court, it was only a matter of time before the MPAA tried to ram it through Congress. The first attempt in June failed, but the EFF reports that they are gearing up for another try. From Ars Technica's write-up: 'This latest attempt involves tacking on an amendment to a budget reconciliation bill. Since reconciliation is about cutting spending--something that always sounds good--such legislation cannot be substantially changed by the Budget Committee once it is presented, nor can it be filibustered.' Looks like it's a good time to call your congressman."
Re:If something gets shot down once... (Score:1, Informative)
"budget reconciliation" != "cut spending" (Score:5, Informative)
Congress has made a law that allows a certain increase in budgetary line items per year without calling it an increase. I'm not sure what that allowed percentage is, but if they allow 7% and only raise an item 6%, they can legally say they LOWERED that item's budget!
Our budget includes Social Security receipts but not complete payments. We've never had a truly balanced budget in decades.
Our budget is allowed emergency appropriations that can include money for any pork project as long as "emergency" is in the bill's title.
108th Congress Analysis [lewrockwell.com] what a scam!
Not Parental Control - Copyright Enforcement (Score:5, Informative)
This has nothing to do with your rights. This has everything with broadcasters trying to sell the same content more than once, and preventing you from keeping what they've broadcast.
Re:Dont see why this is needed. (Score:3, Informative)
read here for more information about the flag. http://www.eff.org/broadcastflag/ [eff.org]
Links to more easily contact your representatives (Score:4, Informative)
link from EFF [eff.org]
Contact your represntative (Score:5, Informative)
Re:If something gets shot down once... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:if not legitimately, then by subterfuge (Score:4, Informative)
There is a limited germaness rule in the Senate. My recollection is that amendments to appropriations bills must be germane.
Not really... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Please explain (Score:3, Informative)
If you properly enforced the Constitution, any power the Federal has created that is not enumerated in the Constitution would have to be removed.
One mention of general welfare allows the Federal to use monies they have collected to pay for things that in the general welfare of the country. The other mention of it, which is in the preamble, states that one of the purposes for the Constitution is to promote the general welfare of the country.
One mention of commerce allows the Federal to regulate commerce that takes places across a State border. The other mention says that the Federal may not regulate commerce in an unequal fashion; if they regulate, they must regulate every party the same.
Marbury vs. Madison (Score:5, Informative)
You guessed it. (Or maybe you already knew that, having remained awake for the first day of your US History class.) The case was Marbury vs. Madison.
Re:why is it... (Score:3, Informative)
You mean 17 USC 106(3)?
They also don't have a legal right to stop me from recording broadcasts.
You mean 17 USC 106(1)?
The Sony case confirms my right to record shows for later viewing.
No it doesn't. It basically says that it's ok sometimes, and it indicates that it's difficult for copyright holders to demonstrate instances where it's not ok.
Re:Marbury vs. Madison (Score:3, Informative)
Re:why is it... (Score:3, Informative)
No, broadcasting is a transmission of a performance or display. Distribution can't be done by broadcast alone.
The industry does not have a right to stop my recording (they are not law enforcement, much as they'd like to be).
First, what's law enforcement got to do with anything? Copyright is more a civil matter than a criminal one. Second, they do have that right; the question is whether you have a defense that allows you to do so anyway.
And if it's hard for them to "demonstrate instances where it's not ok" then why should we put them in charge of making that decision?
They aren't; the courts make the decision.
Personally, I oppose this, but it does no good to misunderstand just how bad the law is right now.
Re:If something gets shot down once... (Score:2, Informative)
It was a Good Thing (tm) in that it put the FCC in it's place and better defined what the FCC can not go out and arbitrarily decide, but the ruling did NOT make a determination on whether or not the Broadcast Flag itself was constitutional.