Skip to main content

MPAA Lobbying for Home Theater Regulations

A depressing and angering article by the same title: MPAA Lobbying for Home Theater Regulations

I don't have a whole lot to say about this, but it sure did make me angry. It is a little old, but I had filed it away and planned to write about. I feel strongly enough for it that I'll write about it, even if I'm writing about it late.

The basic idea here is that when the MPAA thinks of a home theater, they think in insane terms. If you have a TV over 29", stereo sound, and a couch, they are of the opinion that you owe them money and reporting of the use of your theater, just like the theater at the local mall. That is seriously just fucking crazy.

I use such strong language because this is something to feel very strong about and thus to express strongly.

My favorite quote is "Just because you buy a DVD to watch at home doesn't give you the right to invite friends over to watch it too. That's a violation of copyright and denies us the revenue that would be generated from DVD sales to your friends," said by MPAA head Dan Glickman.

Write your representatives, everyone. Even if you are out of the US, you might have similar things in the legislative pipeline. They like to attack of globally these days.

Comments

Jay said…
From bbspot.com:

Called "the world's greatest tech humour site" by The Register, BBspot creates entertainment for the geekier side of the world. BBspot produces a variety of features like fake news stories satirizing the tech and political worlds, the BBspot Mailbag which pokes fun at the Believers (people who believe our fake news) and much more.

Though they really shouldn't have given the MPAA the idea.
Steve said…
That quote was really great: we are presumably supposed to make sure we buy our own copy of a DVD before we go and watch it at a friend's house? As I wrote some time ago, those Movie Moguls Need Control.

It really doesn't help that most politicians in America, as in most other countires, are seriously technically deficient, and will quite happily accept money from the likes of the RIAA and the MPAA, then support their insane worldview with insane legislation like the DMCA.

Popular posts from this blog

CARDIAC: The Cardboard Computer

I am just so excited about this.


CARDIAC. The Cardboard Computer. How cool is that? This piece of history is amazing and better than that: it is extremely accessible. This fantastic design was built in 1969 by David Hagelbarger at Bell Labs to explain what computers were to those who would otherwise have no exposure to them. Miraculously, the CARDIAC (CARDboard Interactive Aid to Computation) was able to actually function as a slow and rudimentary computer. 
One of the most fascinating aspects of this gem is that at the time of its publication the scope it was able to demonstrate was actually useful in explaining what a computer was. Could you imagine trying to explain computers today with anything close to the CARDIAC?

It had 100 memory locations and only ten instructions. The memory held signed 3-digit numbers (-999 through 999) and instructions could be encoded such that the first digit was the instruction and the second two digits were the address of memory to operate on. The only re…

Interrupting Coders Isn’t So Bad

Here’s a hot take: disrupting coders isn’t all that bad.

Some disruptions are certainly bad but they usually aren’t. The coder community has overblown the impact. A disruption can be a good thing. How harmful disruption might be a symptom of other problems.

There are different kinds of disruptions. They are caused by other coders on your team, managers and other non-coders, or meetings throughout the day.

The easiest example to debunk is a question from a fellow developer. Imagine someone walks over to your desk or they ping you on Slack, because they have “one quick question.” Do you get annoyed at the interruption when you were in the middle of something important? You help out your teammate quickly and get back to work, trying to pick up where you left off. That’s a kind of interruption we complain about frequently, but I’m not convinced this is all that bad.

You are being disrupted but your team, of which you are only one member of the whole unit, is working smoothly. You unstuck …

How To Care If BSD, MIT, or GPL Licenses Are Used

The two recent posts about some individuals' choice of GPL versus others' preference for BSD and MIT style licensing has caused a lot of debate and response. I've seen everything as an interesting combination of very important topics being taken far too seriously and far too personally. All involved need to take a few steps back.

For the uninitiated and as a clarifier for the initiated, we're dealing with (basically) three categories of licensing when someone releases software (and/or its code):
Closed Source. Easiest to explain, because you just get nothing.GPL. If you get the software, you get the source code, you get to change it, and anything you combine it with must be under the same terms.MIT and BSD. If you get the software, you might get the source code, you get to change it, and you have no obligations about anything else you combine it with.The situation gets stickier when we look at those combinations and the transitions between them.

Use GPL code with Closed S…