Wired News: Induce Act Draws Support, Venom

Wired News: Induce Act Draws Support, Venom

Senators Sponsoring this Act:
Mr. ORIN HATCH (R-Utah)
Mr. PATRICK LEAHY (D-Vermont)
Mr. BILL FRIST (R-Tennessee)
Mr. THOMAS DASCHLE (D-South Dakota)
Mr. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-South Carolina)
Mrs. BARBARA BOXER (D-California)

I wrote Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) and Jim Bunning (R-Kentucky) regarding this Act. Mitch McConnell true to form has already responded with a tone that seems to say, "I'll try to be open minded about this Act until the media companies start contributing money to MY campaigns as well." As someone who's spent weeks ripping his 400 CD library to MP3 for use in the iPod and on the home network, I don't like the idea that allowing people to make back ups of their legally purchased media items will be illegal. I'm still looking for a way to rip all of my 200 DVDs to a hard drive and access them from any TV I want without having to risk scratching them.

As it stands today, consumers have no defense against standard wear and tear on digital media. You cannot legally make a back up copy of a DVD in this country thanks to the RIAA and MPAA. SO when a prized DVD gets accidentally scratched or abused... what can you do to fix it? Buy another one of course... no wonder the industry doesn't want you making personal copies. I started ripping my CDs to MP3 and invested in the iPod for the sole reason that a growing stack of old CDs are completely unplayable after much use and abuse on road trips or after sitting in a stack next to the stereo for a few days... or what about that CD case which has mysteriously lost its CD? Well I don't have to worry anymore... I don't ever touch the accursed things. Thanks to some very nice technology from Apple Computer, I can play music from the iPods or via AirTunes anywhere I want... without ever risking damaging my precious hard copy. If I can find a simple way to achieve the same results with my DVDs, I will be on it immediately.

It's in my nature to be suspicious of laws like this. I have this nagging 1984-esque scenario unfolding in the back of my mind lately. The drive to keep the public from having free access to TV broadcasts, music, movies, etc... is probably part of some large scale social engineering strategy. I've never understood the need for region coding on DVDs unless you don't want Americans and Europeans watching the same things... I remember reading about the American release of the first Harry Potter book in which they decided to re-define alchemical terms to make the title more palatable to Americans... hence the Philosopher's Stone (the correct term from Alchemical sources) became the Sorcerer's Stone when published here in the US. It's clear that the media companies in America have a real interest in controling what Americans see and hear. The battles over the broadcast flag for TV broadcasts, encryption for DVDs and CDs, TiVO and the like, are almost certainly about more than protecting copyright content. It's almost as if they don't want us to be able to record anything on our own.

Remember keeping a journal was a crime in Orwell's 1984. In fact Winston Smith's job is to edit the past in that book. He goes back through old newspapers and edits out obsolete words and erases people who have fallen out of favor from positive news articles. Since no one keeps their own copies of the news, the official edited record is all they can base the legitimacy of their memories on. The government can change the past as it sees fit at any particular time and no one can prove that it has. 2+2 has always equalled 5.

So then is the media really interested in protecting their content or in securing control over our memories? When I buy a movie or record a TV show it is usually because I want to be able to remember it later. I have something I can go back to. Something to refresh my memory. In my journals I am often embarrassed by some of my thinking... but it's there on paper in my own handwriting... I have to deal with it. But if keeping that journal was illegal then I'd never be able to see that the change was taking place in my head. If I want to record a news event on TV and look at it 15 years from now, I can see if the future perception has changed from the present one. If that ability is made illegal, who can say (other than the copyright owner) if the record was changed somewhere along the line?

One day they may decide to edit Mark Twain's Huckleberry Finn and remove the word "nigger". Then the only thing left is to round up all the old copies and burn them. The text would be changed forever and no one could prove that it had ever said anything different than "African Jim". But this process involves erasing history, not to mention book burning, which should scare any sane person. No matter how painful or embarrassing, some things must not be forgotten because the memory of that prevents similar events from taking place.

So how do you keep people from hanging on to media? Make it illegal to archive it. Make it illegal to record it. Make it illegal to share it. Make it illegal to use it as a reference. And most certainly make it illegal to invent technology which might help people do any of those things. The Induce Act definitely covers that effectively.

If you think it's important to protect your technology rights, I recommend you write your Senators ASAP and let them know that all the big media money in the world isn't going to get them re-elected if they keep pissing off their constituency by supporting dangerous laws like this one.

The U.S. Senate