As I have been writing about for many months the deadline draws near to when the new internet radio royalty rates will be enforced. This is such an act of bulling I can hardly believe it.
Yes bulling. By whom you ask? The large record labels, thats who. Most people don't realize this, but what you hear on the radio is what they are payed to play. Traditional radio listeners are zombies, that hear songs in rotation many times a day, thus becoming popular. MTV is no different kids, they are slaves to the record companies as well.
I began listening to web casts around a year ago, and when ever I listen to my local radio stations I get sick at all the crap they play, and the hours upon hours of commercials they force upon you as a listener.
I was doing some yard work last week and while mowing my lawn, I listened to a local rock station. I counted the songs that were played in the hour and a half it took me. Anyone have a guess? Twelve! Yes twelve songs.
We have established that the lack of programming control is something the record labels can't stand. ( you may actually decide for yourself what you like) Now to another point that the "recording industry" wants to kill net radio.
This is that few very large companies control the music that's put out. Smaller, new companies can't afford the playing time to get their artist's music played. The big companies have that niche controlled. They now have a quickly growing media the net.
How unfair is it to charge web casters more money than large radio stations? Basically it will put everyone out of business. The stations I listen to don't even have commercials!!! There is no income from all the bs advertising you are forced to listen to on FM.
You have a voice people! Let it be heard before they silence a great thing!
Visit http://www.savenetradio.org/
Call your elected officials. Tell them to stop this tragedy. Demand it, they work for you!!
You can find their numbers by filling out the form with your address here.
Friday, June 29, 2007
Sunday, May 13, 2007
State of open source
There has been many articles floating about the internets (thanks Senator Stevens) lately about the sad state of open source. One of which today I feel the need to discuss. Hey this is my blog, and I can do what I want so sit back and listen.
Microsoft's new browser plug-in called Silverlight is supposed to deliver rich media and interactive apps from within web pages. Which for those who don't know is what adobe's flash does. I am not a microsoft fanboy by any measure of the word, but I don't think this is a bad thing.
For years flash has been the web standard for this type of content. We linux users were at the mercy of adobe to write linux versions, and often we were waiting many, many months before it would be released. Now with the cooperation between ms and novell, the development of silverlight for linux is going strong.
I don't like the fact that this is proprietary software any more than any other FOSS advocate. However the fact that we penguins are already stuck with one proprietary web standard makes the argument for healthy competition valid in my opinion. What I hope for is that Adobe will recognize the Linux user base is constantly growing, and they stand to loose those users to Silverlight if they don't put Linux development in a higher priority.
Now if we can just convince everyone that the periodic threats issued by MS via Steve Ballmer are just scare tactics to sway business' from making the move to open source. But that is for another post.....
Microsoft's new browser plug-in called Silverlight is supposed to deliver rich media and interactive apps from within web pages. Which for those who don't know is what adobe's flash does. I am not a microsoft fanboy by any measure of the word, but I don't think this is a bad thing.
For years flash has been the web standard for this type of content. We linux users were at the mercy of adobe to write linux versions, and often we were waiting many, many months before it would be released. Now with the cooperation between ms and novell, the development of silverlight for linux is going strong.
I don't like the fact that this is proprietary software any more than any other FOSS advocate. However the fact that we penguins are already stuck with one proprietary web standard makes the argument for healthy competition valid in my opinion. What I hope for is that Adobe will recognize the Linux user base is constantly growing, and they stand to loose those users to Silverlight if they don't put Linux development in a higher priority.
Now if we can just convince everyone that the periodic threats issued by MS via Steve Ballmer are just scare tactics to sway business' from making the move to open source. But that is for another post.....
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Monday, March 26, 2007
Net Neutrality
What does net neutrality mean and what does it have to do with you? Well there are many big corporate isp's that are trying to make more money from the service they offer without giving anything in return. If they have things their way they can priortize sites, and if they aren't paid by those sites then you will find it hard to access them.
Here is the US we are quickly falling behind many other countries. Did you know that other countries in Europe and Asia have far better service, and our internet speeds are slow compared to their's? It's true, there haven't been any plans to change that either.
Back in the Clinton era many of you may remember his work to bring the internet to the masses. Well instead of spending our tax dollars to put more fiber optic cable in the ground, the current administration choose to put troops in Iraq to get those weapons of mass destruction. Oops I mean to bring democracy to Iraq.
Since the demands on the net are growing greater each day, the person in charge of internet commerce, Mr Ted Stevens believes that you should have less access than you do now. His way of thinking is that sites like YouTube , and others streaming video are the problem. That streaming video is "clogging the tubes". See exactly how idiotic he is, this is the guy in charge of internet commerce. No wonder the richest country in the world is behind.See Hodgeman and Stewart having fun with this topic here.
Also visit this site, as it has the audio from the session were the Daily Show clip was taken. I don't want anyone reading this to be confused or uninformed afterwards.
Eweek's article today shows that the FCC, is dragging their feet, as is the norm for any federal agency.
WASHINGTON—The Federal Communications Commission is launching an inquiry to determine how broadband providers are behaving in terms of providing access to the Internet to subscribers. The Notice of Inquiry, announced at the March 22 commission meeting here, is intended to seek comments on whether providers are restricting access to sites on the Internet, whether they are giving any sites favorable treatment and whether the companies charge extra for that, and how consumers are affected. The inquiry is also designed to determine whether the FCC needs to issue a new principle of nondiscrimination.
According to a statement released by Chairman Kevin Martin, this inquiry will "provide a convenient forum for various providers, including network and content providers, to tell us what is happening in the market and about their concerns." Martin said in the statement that the FCC has a responsibility to promote infrastructure investment and broadband deployment. He also said it's important that consumer access to the Internet be protected.
However, Martin's statement didn't receive universal acclaim from the rest of the Commission. Commissioner Michael Copps, while concurring that the inquiry should be conducted, said action was also needed. In a statement, Copps said, "It is time for us to go beyond the original four principles and commit industry and the FCC unequivocally to a specific principle of enforceable nondiscrimination, one that allows for reasonable network management but makes clear that broadband network providers will not be allowed to shackle the promise of the Internet in its adolescence."
Copps said he thinks adding another study to those already done will simply take too long and may result in nothing actually being accomplished. "We proceed too leisurely here," Copps said. "Rather than strike out and unflinchingly proclaim this agency's commitment to an open and nondiscriminatory Internet, we satisfy ourselves with one tiny, timid step … Let's be frank.
Here is the US we are quickly falling behind many other countries. Did you know that other countries in Europe and Asia have far better service, and our internet speeds are slow compared to their's? It's true, there haven't been any plans to change that either.
Back in the Clinton era many of you may remember his work to bring the internet to the masses. Well instead of spending our tax dollars to put more fiber optic cable in the ground, the current administration choose to put troops in Iraq to get those weapons of mass destruction. Oops I mean to bring democracy to Iraq.
Since the demands on the net are growing greater each day, the person in charge of internet commerce, Mr Ted Stevens believes that you should have less access than you do now. His way of thinking is that sites like YouTube , and others streaming video are the problem. That streaming video is "clogging the tubes". See exactly how idiotic he is, this is the guy in charge of internet commerce. No wonder the richest country in the world is behind.See Hodgeman and Stewart having fun with this topic here.
Also visit this site, as it has the audio from the session were the Daily Show clip was taken. I don't want anyone reading this to be confused or uninformed afterwards.
Eweek's article today shows that the FCC, is dragging their feet, as is the norm for any federal agency.
WASHINGTON—The Federal Communications Commission is launching an inquiry to determine how broadband providers are behaving in terms of providing access to the Internet to subscribers. The Notice of Inquiry, announced at the March 22 commission meeting here, is intended to seek comments on whether providers are restricting access to sites on the Internet, whether they are giving any sites favorable treatment and whether the companies charge extra for that, and how consumers are affected. The inquiry is also designed to determine whether the FCC needs to issue a new principle of nondiscrimination.
According to a statement released by Chairman Kevin Martin, this inquiry will "provide a convenient forum for various providers, including network and content providers, to tell us what is happening in the market and about their concerns." Martin said in the statement that the FCC has a responsibility to promote infrastructure investment and broadband deployment. He also said it's important that consumer access to the Internet be protected.
However, Martin's statement didn't receive universal acclaim from the rest of the Commission. Commissioner Michael Copps, while concurring that the inquiry should be conducted, said action was also needed. In a statement, Copps said, "It is time for us to go beyond the original four principles and commit industry and the FCC unequivocally to a specific principle of enforceable nondiscrimination, one that allows for reasonable network management but makes clear that broadband network providers will not be allowed to shackle the promise of the Internet in its adolescence."
Copps said he thinks adding another study to those already done will simply take too long and may result in nothing actually being accomplished. "We proceed too leisurely here," Copps said. "Rather than strike out and unflinchingly proclaim this agency's commitment to an open and nondiscriminatory Internet, we satisfy ourselves with one tiny, timid step … Let's be frank.
Thursday, March 15, 2007
The death of internet radio.
How many of my readers enjoy listening to internet radio? Well if I am indication of what my readers are like then all of you do. I know that many of you haven't heard anything about this issue, which is why I feel obliged to inform you. Hopefully after reading this you will no longer be oblivious to the facts. What you do with the facts is entirely up to you.
Well it seems the RIAA is hard at work again, I guess they are bored with suing little old ladies and children for downloading mp3s. They have set their sights on our beloved net radio stations in hopes to increase their bottom line. These corporate greedy thugs think that we don't have a voice anymore. Hey, aren't we the reason they make a profit? How long will we let them control what we have a right to? I say we make them listen to us.
One thing I do is never buy any product they have. So no music for me that is DRM'ed, remember we talked about that eariler. That is one way to voice your opinion, and maybe the only voice they care to hear. The cash register. Remember that the next time you are at the music store in the mall on itunes or another mp3 site.
On March 2 2007 the Copyright Royalty Board or CRB, as we will call them, approved new rates that are so ridiculously high that most small radio stations would be in the red simply because of them. In other words their already small profit will quickly become a loss. Here are the new rates in PDF
Now that you know of this new rate increase, and the ramifications of it, what are you willing to do? What can you do? As an American you have elected officials that you can write and demand action. If enough people do then they will have to take action. You can find their contact info here
Protect your right to hear eclectic indepenent radio and discover new artists. Write Washington. They would love to hear from you, after all you are their constituants. They are there to serve the public and protect your rights. Pass the word to anyone you know that loves or makes music, get involved before we loose another choice.
I urge you to visit the following site and complete the petition there.Here is what our friends at http://savenetradio.org/ suggest. Tell your representative:
I do not support The Copyright Royalty Board's (CRB) March 2nd decision to substantially increase royalty rates. Not only will it impact my choices, but the Recording Industry Association of America's (RIAA) manipulation of these rates, and the CRB's indifference will hurt working artists, damage small record labels and force law abiding small webcasters, already paying a large portion of their revenue per month in royalties, out of business. This decision will also damage hundreds of small businesses providing goods and services to working artists, small record labels and small webcasters.
I respectfully ask that you evaluate the CRB decision and do whatever is necessary to establish a reasonable royalty rate for all the parties involved.
A bit from Neptune on the subject:
It was the early seventies, and we listened to something called AM radio. I remember my first AM radio. It was portable, a hand-me-down from a neighbor. It used vacuum tubes, required approximately eighty-five D-cell batteries, and weighed about 175 pounds. But it had a handle, and that made it officially portable. To this day my right arm is a half-inch longer from lugging that beast around. I'd turn it on, watch the tubes slowly start to glow (the service panel had been long lost), fiddle with the tuning till I got a station and listen. For about five minutes. Then the batteries would be dead and I'd have to save up for another eighty-five D-cells.
We were in a small town. On hot, dusty summer nights, we'd gather in the parking lot across from the Sinclair gas station, drink too many sodas, look at each other's cars and listen to the radio. Mostly we listened to KELI, AM 1430, out of the big city. They played the music we liked. But they also broadcast the news that mattered to us. The local school athletic scores. The places and faces that we knew, because we'd been there and seen them. Yes, there was national news, but it was almost an afterthought. Much of the content was local community. KELI for a while would send a staffer to the local drive-ins so that teenagers could request songs from Dan Kelly, one of the DJs there. All of the DJs were named Kelly - Bill Kelly, Dan Kelly, Don Kelly. No, not nepotism, just a gimmick. They never made it to our parking lot, but we listened anyway.
We were listening when Mazeppa and some friends dropped by the KELI studio one night, and things got, uhmmm informal. The DJ was fired the next day. Mazeppa, a local character better known as Gailard Sartain, went on to roles in TV and about fifty movies. His buddy, and cohort in crime, Teddy Jack Eddy, is better known as Gary Busey, of 'Lethal Weapon' fame. KELI was, in every sense, community radio. Our community.
But something happened. AM radio died. FM was the rising star on the radio horizon. But FM was more expensive. The broadcast equipment was more expensive. The licensing was more expensive. And FM didn't have the broadcast range, compared to AM, which meant fewer available listeners per station, so they had to adjust their business model accordingly. But it sounded better, and people began to tune in to the big FM stations more and more. There were technical solutions for AM, but there was big business behind FM, and the FCC famously dithered on such things as AM stereo, while the ratings dropped lower and lower.
I can hear you now, "AM's not dead, I've got AM in my car and I can hear AM stations now". Well, I can explain that. I lied. AM is not dead. It's worse. It's the undead. It is the walking corpse of what it used to be. As the margins between the advertising and the relentless pressure of increasingly onerous content fees became thinner and thinner, station after station folded, and were scooped up by big media corporations. It's now a vast soulless, featureless plain dominated by a handful of major media outlets. It's been sterilized and homogenized. You can drive to fifty different cities - and hear the same programming everywhere. Not surprisingly, under similar pressures, FM is little better.
So is this about nostalgia? Nope. I was just sneaking in a history lesson with a little candy. I'd like to fast-forward to the present. The present is the Internet. The bandwidth and technology of streaming media have come of age, and the flexibility of the Internet has redefined our concept of community. There are now a host of virtual communities, defined not by your physical location, but by your preferences, beliefs and interests. And the great news is - community radio is back.
You can't get in the broadcast radio game any more without heavy financial backing. Those days are gone. But the Internet has changed the playing field. It's brought democracy back. With a little bandwidth, and a few servers, it's possible to create your own radio station again. To broadcast to your own community on the Internet.
Yes, community radio is back. But it's got some big guns pointed at it. The RIAA has already been dipping into the pockets of the Internet broadcasters, much like the friendly guy who makes his weekly collections from the small business owners in Brooklyn. "You wouldn't want nuttin' bad should happen to your store, now, would ya?" Of course the RIAA doesn't call this extortion. They call it Royalty Rates. Sounds much friendlier.
So the webcasters have to pay. And currently, it's manageable, a percentage of their profits. But that's not enough for the RIAA. I've been reading some Hunter S. Thompson lately, so perhaps that's why the phrase, "greed-crazed vampire swine", springs to mind. But I won't use it. It's a disservice to greed-crazed vampire swine everywhere. These are the folks who just can't stand it if you're listening to something and they don't get a quarter out of your packet. And they really can't stand it if you're listening to content that they can't lay some dubious claim to - it means you're not eating their dog-food.
But that's OK. That's what bloated parasites do - they cheat the artists and they cheat the consumers, while producing nothing. We call that "value", or in this case, lack there of. And, as long as you've got a choice, they're entitled to operate that way.
Here's what's not OK. When the government rolls over and plays sock-puppet for the RIAA, they've abdicated their duty. And that's exactly what's happening again. The CRB, (Copyright Royalty Board) hos established a fee structure that would absolutely gut the webcast landscape. In short, you lose your choice. Once again, the independents are about to be crushed under corporate greed, backed up by government regulation. Once again, you're about to see your ability to tune in to the community radio of your choosing vanish.
When the government stops protecting our freedom to choose, when it acts solely for the benefit of big corporate interests, it's gone off track. And if we don't remember who our government works for, we've gone off track. It's our government. It's my government. It's your government. But only if you remind them from time to time. Now would be a good time to remind them.
I can't turn back time to the those long summer nights in the early seventies. I wouldn't if I could. But I'd hate to see history repeat itself. I'd hate to see us lose our freedom of choice. It doesn't have to happen. The same Internet that the RIAA wants to own will take you directly to your representatives. Let them know how you feel.
Thanks again Neptune. The extorsionist bit is priceless.
Well it seems the RIAA is hard at work again, I guess they are bored with suing little old ladies and children for downloading mp3s. They have set their sights on our beloved net radio stations in hopes to increase their bottom line. These corporate greedy thugs think that we don't have a voice anymore. Hey, aren't we the reason they make a profit? How long will we let them control what we have a right to? I say we make them listen to us.
One thing I do is never buy any product they have. So no music for me that is DRM'ed, remember we talked about that eariler. That is one way to voice your opinion, and maybe the only voice they care to hear. The cash register. Remember that the next time you are at the music store in the mall on itunes or another mp3 site.
On March 2 2007 the Copyright Royalty Board or CRB, as we will call them, approved new rates that are so ridiculously high that most small radio stations would be in the red simply because of them. In other words their already small profit will quickly become a loss. Here are the new rates in PDF
Now that you know of this new rate increase, and the ramifications of it, what are you willing to do? What can you do? As an American you have elected officials that you can write and demand action. If enough people do then they will have to take action. You can find their contact info here
Protect your right to hear eclectic indepenent radio and discover new artists. Write Washington. They would love to hear from you, after all you are their constituants. They are there to serve the public and protect your rights. Pass the word to anyone you know that loves or makes music, get involved before we loose another choice.
I urge you to visit the following site and complete the petition there.Here is what our friends at http://savenetradio.org/ suggest. Tell your representative:
I do not support The Copyright Royalty Board's (CRB) March 2nd decision to substantially increase royalty rates. Not only will it impact my choices, but the Recording Industry Association of America's (RIAA) manipulation of these rates, and the CRB's indifference will hurt working artists, damage small record labels and force law abiding small webcasters, already paying a large portion of their revenue per month in royalties, out of business. This decision will also damage hundreds of small businesses providing goods and services to working artists, small record labels and small webcasters.
I respectfully ask that you evaluate the CRB decision and do whatever is necessary to establish a reasonable royalty rate for all the parties involved.
A bit from Neptune on the subject:
It was the early seventies, and we listened to something called AM radio. I remember my first AM radio. It was portable, a hand-me-down from a neighbor. It used vacuum tubes, required approximately eighty-five D-cell batteries, and weighed about 175 pounds. But it had a handle, and that made it officially portable. To this day my right arm is a half-inch longer from lugging that beast around. I'd turn it on, watch the tubes slowly start to glow (the service panel had been long lost), fiddle with the tuning till I got a station and listen. For about five minutes. Then the batteries would be dead and I'd have to save up for another eighty-five D-cells.
We were in a small town. On hot, dusty summer nights, we'd gather in the parking lot across from the Sinclair gas station, drink too many sodas, look at each other's cars and listen to the radio. Mostly we listened to KELI, AM 1430, out of the big city. They played the music we liked. But they also broadcast the news that mattered to us. The local school athletic scores. The places and faces that we knew, because we'd been there and seen them. Yes, there was national news, but it was almost an afterthought. Much of the content was local community. KELI for a while would send a staffer to the local drive-ins so that teenagers could request songs from Dan Kelly, one of the DJs there. All of the DJs were named Kelly - Bill Kelly, Dan Kelly, Don Kelly. No, not nepotism, just a gimmick. They never made it to our parking lot, but we listened anyway.
We were listening when Mazeppa and some friends dropped by the KELI studio one night, and things got, uhmmm informal. The DJ was fired the next day. Mazeppa, a local character better known as Gailard Sartain, went on to roles in TV and about fifty movies. His buddy, and cohort in crime, Teddy Jack Eddy, is better known as Gary Busey, of 'Lethal Weapon' fame. KELI was, in every sense, community radio. Our community.
But something happened. AM radio died. FM was the rising star on the radio horizon. But FM was more expensive. The broadcast equipment was more expensive. The licensing was more expensive. And FM didn't have the broadcast range, compared to AM, which meant fewer available listeners per station, so they had to adjust their business model accordingly. But it sounded better, and people began to tune in to the big FM stations more and more. There were technical solutions for AM, but there was big business behind FM, and the FCC famously dithered on such things as AM stereo, while the ratings dropped lower and lower.
I can hear you now, "AM's not dead, I've got AM in my car and I can hear AM stations now". Well, I can explain that. I lied. AM is not dead. It's worse. It's the undead. It is the walking corpse of what it used to be. As the margins between the advertising and the relentless pressure of increasingly onerous content fees became thinner and thinner, station after station folded, and were scooped up by big media corporations. It's now a vast soulless, featureless plain dominated by a handful of major media outlets. It's been sterilized and homogenized. You can drive to fifty different cities - and hear the same programming everywhere. Not surprisingly, under similar pressures, FM is little better.
So is this about nostalgia? Nope. I was just sneaking in a history lesson with a little candy. I'd like to fast-forward to the present. The present is the Internet. The bandwidth and technology of streaming media have come of age, and the flexibility of the Internet has redefined our concept of community. There are now a host of virtual communities, defined not by your physical location, but by your preferences, beliefs and interests. And the great news is - community radio is back.
You can't get in the broadcast radio game any more without heavy financial backing. Those days are gone. But the Internet has changed the playing field. It's brought democracy back. With a little bandwidth, and a few servers, it's possible to create your own radio station again. To broadcast to your own community on the Internet.
Yes, community radio is back. But it's got some big guns pointed at it. The RIAA has already been dipping into the pockets of the Internet broadcasters, much like the friendly guy who makes his weekly collections from the small business owners in Brooklyn. "You wouldn't want nuttin' bad should happen to your store, now, would ya?" Of course the RIAA doesn't call this extortion. They call it Royalty Rates. Sounds much friendlier.
So the webcasters have to pay. And currently, it's manageable, a percentage of their profits. But that's not enough for the RIAA. I've been reading some Hunter S. Thompson lately, so perhaps that's why the phrase, "greed-crazed vampire swine", springs to mind. But I won't use it. It's a disservice to greed-crazed vampire swine everywhere. These are the folks who just can't stand it if you're listening to something and they don't get a quarter out of your packet. And they really can't stand it if you're listening to content that they can't lay some dubious claim to - it means you're not eating their dog-food.
But that's OK. That's what bloated parasites do - they cheat the artists and they cheat the consumers, while producing nothing. We call that "value", or in this case, lack there of. And, as long as you've got a choice, they're entitled to operate that way.
Here's what's not OK. When the government rolls over and plays sock-puppet for the RIAA, they've abdicated their duty. And that's exactly what's happening again. The CRB, (Copyright Royalty Board) hos established a fee structure that would absolutely gut the webcast landscape. In short, you lose your choice. Once again, the independents are about to be crushed under corporate greed, backed up by government regulation. Once again, you're about to see your ability to tune in to the community radio of your choosing vanish.
When the government stops protecting our freedom to choose, when it acts solely for the benefit of big corporate interests, it's gone off track. And if we don't remember who our government works for, we've gone off track. It's our government. It's my government. It's your government. But only if you remind them from time to time. Now would be a good time to remind them.
I can't turn back time to the those long summer nights in the early seventies. I wouldn't if I could. But I'd hate to see history repeat itself. I'd hate to see us lose our freedom of choice. It doesn't have to happen. The same Internet that the RIAA wants to own will take you directly to your representatives. Let them know how you feel.
Thanks again Neptune. The extorsionist bit is priceless.
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
We the people.....
Digital Rights – Government Wrongs
“We the people...” Three simple, innocuous words. Yet those words were so important, so fundamental to all that followed, that the authors of the United States Constitution put them right up front. They set the tone for the entire document. Looking around at the current legislative landscape, one wonders if that document has ever been read by the recent crop of lawmakers. Especially those first three words.
-----
Bits and Pieces:
On April 27, 1998, BIOS manufacturer Phoenix Technologies buys out it's only significant competition in the BIOS market - Award Software. If the CPU, or processor is the "brain" of your computer, the BIOS is it's "heart". Basically, it controls access between the software and the hardware of your machine.
1998 - The DMCA - Digital Millennium Copyright Act is passed. There has been speculation that Microsoft and major media interest groups both lobbied for and provided input to this act.
On March 10, 2000 at the Game Developers Conference in San Jose, Bill Gates, CEO of Microsoft, officially unveils the XBox game console to the world.
June 2002 - Microsoft announces "Palladium" which is part of the strategy of the TCG - Trusted Computing Group. "Trusted Computing" - it sounds so warm and fuzzy, doesn't it? Question is - trusted for whom?
April 2003 - David Rocci is sentenced to prison and fined nearly $30,000 USD for selling so-called XBox mod chips over his website. He is charged and sentenced under the DMCA.
September 2003 - Phoenix Technologies, LLC and Microsoft Corp. announce a joint venture to tie together the Phoenix core BIOS code more closely with Microsoft software. The Phoenix BIOS, thanks to their acquisition of Award Software, is now at the heart of nearly every PC you can currently purchase.
-----
There are more pieces, but these will suffice. Consider, David Rocci did not sell crack cocaine. He did not sell child porn. He sold a chip that let the purchasers of the XBox (remember the concept of "you paid for it - it's yours?") run software not locked down by Microsoft. That's all. In essence, David Rocci sold you a set of high-performance tires for your car - he was jailed under the legal theory that someone, somewhere might rob a bank using a getaway car fitted with those tires.
Microsoft wants to sell you a car. They also want to tell you where you can buy your gas, what streets you can and can't drive on, whose oil you can buy and who you can have in the car with you. They then want to “upgrade” the roads – and sell you the same car all over again.
The original XBox was a warmup exercise - unlike every other game console, the original XBox was a fairly standard PC. The question the XBox asked: "Can we sell a PC that is locked down by technology and legislation to run only what we say you can run?" - The answer was a resounding yes.
The technology part of this scheme can be, and has been defeated. But the real hammer, the real threat is the legal side of the equation. You could be sent to prison for doing so.
The original DMCA had several arguments made for it. It was promised to cut into wholesale piracy by criminal organizations. It was even suggested that terrorism was funded by such piracy. But the proof, as they say, is in the pudding. Instead, it has been used primarily by huge business interests to prosecute and intimidate ordinary citizens.
Yet that hasn't stopped the U.S. government from proposing even more draconian legislation. The IPPA, Intellectual Property Protection act would not only make it illegal to fit non-Microsoft tires to your car – it would make owning the jack and wrenches (UK note: spanners, and yes, tyres) illegal. Imprisonable for up to ten years. You would literally be better off walking into a store, stuffing your pockets with software and music then running out. That would likely only net you only probation and community service.
And we heard the same tired arguments trotted out for the IPPA. According to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, the problem is that the money made by infringing businesses is being used "quite frankly, to fund terrorism activities." Mr. Gonzales, pardon me for saying that this smells like the north end of a south-facing bull. We've heard it before and it smelled about the same then.
It's all about DRM - something called Digital Rights Management. Sounds good, it has the word "Rights" in it so it must be good, right? Problem is, it has absolutely nothing to do with rights - at least, not your rights. It has everything to do with the bloated sense of entitlement that the major hardware, software and media outlets call "rights". And what does "Digital" have to do with fair use rights, anyway? It's a noise word, thrown in to confuse the tech-phobic. So it's not about "Digital", it's not about "Rights", that pretty much just leaves "Management" of your use of the goods you paid for.
We live in a world where "fair use" has become a dirty term - equivalent to piracy. This is the perennial squeal of the fattest corporate hogs who think there should be more slop in their trough. The ones who envision a day when every time you listen to a CD, another coin rolls into their purses. A day when their competitor's media will be unusable on their products. And I understand that. Really I do. It's capitalism at work.
What I don't understand, what I can not condone, is the legislative concept that corporate "rights", which are a fiction, somehow trump very real individual rights in the laws of our land. What I don't accept is the “right” to have legislation enacted that props up a flawed business model. I have the right to open a restaurant that serves boiled shoes. I just do not have the right to legislation that forces everyone to eat my boiled shoes.
The stench of corporate entitlement is so thick in our halls of government that you need a chainsaw to cut through it. And there's no sign of improvement. But that may not be the worst of it. Corporate interests aside, I do not know of a government, anywhere, at any period of history that didn't have some attraction to the concept of managing access of the populace to media. Control the media – and you control the people.
Which is why open source is crucial. Which is why open media formats are vital. The day content can be controlled completely is the day you see that control being used to manage the little people. You and I. Open source, more than any other technology phenomenon is one way to combat this trend. I urge you to use and actively support open solutions wherever possible, and to promote them at every opportunity. I ask you to remember a concept that our current governments have forgotten – and would like us to forget...
We the people.
Special thanks to Neptune, PCLinuxOS forum member for this wonderfully written piece.
“We the people...” Three simple, innocuous words. Yet those words were so important, so fundamental to all that followed, that the authors of the United States Constitution put them right up front. They set the tone for the entire document. Looking around at the current legislative landscape, one wonders if that document has ever been read by the recent crop of lawmakers. Especially those first three words.
-----
Bits and Pieces:
On April 27, 1998, BIOS manufacturer Phoenix Technologies buys out it's only significant competition in the BIOS market - Award Software. If the CPU, or processor is the "brain" of your computer, the BIOS is it's "heart". Basically, it controls access between the software and the hardware of your machine.
1998 - The DMCA - Digital Millennium Copyright Act is passed. There has been speculation that Microsoft and major media interest groups both lobbied for and provided input to this act.
On March 10, 2000 at the Game Developers Conference in San Jose, Bill Gates, CEO of Microsoft, officially unveils the XBox game console to the world.
June 2002 - Microsoft announces "Palladium" which is part of the strategy of the TCG - Trusted Computing Group. "Trusted Computing" - it sounds so warm and fuzzy, doesn't it? Question is - trusted for whom?
April 2003 - David Rocci is sentenced to prison and fined nearly $30,000 USD for selling so-called XBox mod chips over his website. He is charged and sentenced under the DMCA.
September 2003 - Phoenix Technologies, LLC and Microsoft Corp. announce a joint venture to tie together the Phoenix core BIOS code more closely with Microsoft software. The Phoenix BIOS, thanks to their acquisition of Award Software, is now at the heart of nearly every PC you can currently purchase.
-----
There are more pieces, but these will suffice. Consider, David Rocci did not sell crack cocaine. He did not sell child porn. He sold a chip that let the purchasers of the XBox (remember the concept of "you paid for it - it's yours?") run software not locked down by Microsoft. That's all. In essence, David Rocci sold you a set of high-performance tires for your car - he was jailed under the legal theory that someone, somewhere might rob a bank using a getaway car fitted with those tires.
Microsoft wants to sell you a car. They also want to tell you where you can buy your gas, what streets you can and can't drive on, whose oil you can buy and who you can have in the car with you. They then want to “upgrade” the roads – and sell you the same car all over again.
The original XBox was a warmup exercise - unlike every other game console, the original XBox was a fairly standard PC. The question the XBox asked: "Can we sell a PC that is locked down by technology and legislation to run only what we say you can run?" - The answer was a resounding yes.
The technology part of this scheme can be, and has been defeated. But the real hammer, the real threat is the legal side of the equation. You could be sent to prison for doing so.
The original DMCA had several arguments made for it. It was promised to cut into wholesale piracy by criminal organizations. It was even suggested that terrorism was funded by such piracy. But the proof, as they say, is in the pudding. Instead, it has been used primarily by huge business interests to prosecute and intimidate ordinary citizens.
Yet that hasn't stopped the U.S. government from proposing even more draconian legislation. The IPPA, Intellectual Property Protection act would not only make it illegal to fit non-Microsoft tires to your car – it would make owning the jack and wrenches (UK note: spanners, and yes, tyres) illegal. Imprisonable for up to ten years. You would literally be better off walking into a store, stuffing your pockets with software and music then running out. That would likely only net you only probation and community service.
And we heard the same tired arguments trotted out for the IPPA. According to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, the problem is that the money made by infringing businesses is being used "quite frankly, to fund terrorism activities." Mr. Gonzales, pardon me for saying that this smells like the north end of a south-facing bull. We've heard it before and it smelled about the same then.
It's all about DRM - something called Digital Rights Management. Sounds good, it has the word "Rights" in it so it must be good, right? Problem is, it has absolutely nothing to do with rights - at least, not your rights. It has everything to do with the bloated sense of entitlement that the major hardware, software and media outlets call "rights". And what does "Digital" have to do with fair use rights, anyway? It's a noise word, thrown in to confuse the tech-phobic. So it's not about "Digital", it's not about "Rights", that pretty much just leaves "Management" of your use of the goods you paid for.
We live in a world where "fair use" has become a dirty term - equivalent to piracy. This is the perennial squeal of the fattest corporate hogs who think there should be more slop in their trough. The ones who envision a day when every time you listen to a CD, another coin rolls into their purses. A day when their competitor's media will be unusable on their products. And I understand that. Really I do. It's capitalism at work.
What I don't understand, what I can not condone, is the legislative concept that corporate "rights", which are a fiction, somehow trump very real individual rights in the laws of our land. What I don't accept is the “right” to have legislation enacted that props up a flawed business model. I have the right to open a restaurant that serves boiled shoes. I just do not have the right to legislation that forces everyone to eat my boiled shoes.
The stench of corporate entitlement is so thick in our halls of government that you need a chainsaw to cut through it. And there's no sign of improvement. But that may not be the worst of it. Corporate interests aside, I do not know of a government, anywhere, at any period of history that didn't have some attraction to the concept of managing access of the populace to media. Control the media – and you control the people.
Which is why open source is crucial. Which is why open media formats are vital. The day content can be controlled completely is the day you see that control being used to manage the little people. You and I. Open source, more than any other technology phenomenon is one way to combat this trend. I urge you to use and actively support open solutions wherever possible, and to promote them at every opportunity. I ask you to remember a concept that our current governments have forgotten – and would like us to forget...
We the people.
Special thanks to Neptune, PCLinuxOS forum member for this wonderfully written piece.
Monday, February 26, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
