[linux-elitists] SSSCA - Analysis (Q&D)
Mon Sep 10 11:51:56 PDT 2001
On 9 Sep 2001, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> | Sec 2. Findings.
> | (TO BE SUPPLIED)
> Note that the justifications for this act have yet to be
> enumerated. "It's good for you, we'll die without it, it
> will bring forth a Grand New Age of Prosperity For All".
Legislate First, Rationalize Later!
>| (b) PERSONAL TIME-SHIFTING COPIES CANNOT BE BLOCKED. --
>| No person may apply a security measure that uses a
>| certified security technology to prevent a lawful
>| recipient from making a personal copy for time-shifting
>| purposes of programming at the time it is lawfully
>| performed on an over-the-air broadcast, non-premium cable
>| channel, or non-premium satellite channel, by a television
>| broadcast station (as defined in section 122(j)(5)(A) of
>| title 17, United States Code), a cable system (as defined
>| in section 111(f) of such title), or a satellite carrier
>| (as defined in section 119(d)(6) of such title).
Indeed. If the motive of time-shift copying is recognized
as pure, why only in the context of television? Why should
it not be equally protected to time-shift copy a weekly net
audio stream? For example: http://www.kdhx.org/schedule.htm
Their "Great American Music" program is very inconveniently
scheduled, but it seems Senator Hollings would sooner uphold
the right to tape softcore porn off late night Cinemax. ;)
>| (3) The National Institute of Standards and Technology
>| has the responsibility for developing standards and
>| guidelines needed to ensure the cost-effective security
>| and privacy of sensitive information in Federal computer
> ...but there are many other means of establishing standards,
> including, as an example, the IETF.
NIST made an agent of legislation that developmentally
disables its own projects: http://math.nist.gov/jazznet/
Hm, wonder if Roldan Pozo would welcome a *Linux Journal*
interview in view of potentially uncomfortable questions.
More information about the linux-elitists