With the advent of the DMCA, content producers like record companies and movie studios are encroaching on the rights of ordinary citizens. How about us taking some of those rights back? There already is a digital consumer’s bill of rights out there that is reasonable, take a look at digitalconsumer.org’s example. It seems pretty straightforward.
In fact you would think we would not even need something like this, you would think we are already pretty well protected and we have the right to make copies of our own CDs for personal use. Well you would be wrong. Especially if you get a CD that has copy protection embedded somewhere because circumventing that protection is against the law. It does not matter that you bought it, it is not yours to copy, you are just paying rent for the use of the material on the CD or other digital media.
Lets say the particular CD you bought made your computer act funny. Your PC is suddenly slower, it crashes often. Your anti-virus software informs you of a rootkit that has been installed, and it came from a CD you bought. You crack the CD to see what evil virus was put on your machine and how you can get rid of it. Right there, you broke the law. You cannot do that, you cannot legally crack copy protection under the DMCA. Even if your computer has been infected by the Sony rootkit.
It seems time for a reality check, to get back to a bit of respect for consumer’s rights as well as copyright holders. American consumers stand for 2/3rds of the American economy, do corporations really want to alienate them by trampling on their rights?
I agree that a Bill of Rights for users is a good idea, but your example does not apply. Take a look at these exemptions to the DMCA, especially number 6. As for whether corporations want to alienate customers, I think the answer is "no", but I question the causality that trampling consumers' rights will alienate them. The average consumer does not notice their rights being trampled, any more than they notice that the rule of law in their country has been suspended for the last five years.
It is getting to the point where the government is going to have to step in. The first politician to run on a copyright reform platform gets my vote.
Sounds like the moozik industry is trying to follow the same licensing model as the software industry. Let me extend the logic...
If, by buying a cd, I am only buying the rights to listen to the content, then those rights should also apply to my extensive vinyl collection. Since I already "own" the right to listen to the music I have on vinyl, then downloading the same music from BitTorrent should be perfectly legal, since I already paid for the music.
After all, why should I have to pay for the same music over and over, just to get it on a different medium?
William - so because you think the consumer is so stupid they don't deserve protection? Is that to say because I'm not uber educated in medicine I don't deserve proper health care? You just sound like a disgruntled democrat, and no I'm not a republican.
Erm, with a well known Sodtware Company on our necks the title here probably should be read
"Bill's rights on users..."
;-}
hagar, thank you for you input. If you note the first clause of the first sentence of my comment, you will see that I *do* think the consumer deserve's protection. I think the uninformed and apathetic need more protection of their rights, not less - in any context. As for being a "disgruntled democrat", I'm afraid that isn't even a valid option in my country. I am a pro-"rule of law", pro-democracy, anti-corporate idealist with delusions of reality.