Re: [dvd-discuss] SSSCA Hearing on Oct. 25

[Noah silva <nsilva(at)atari-source.com>]

It doesn't make sense to me that you can make a LAW to REQUIRE one to do
something with a particular PRIVATE entity.

It's like saying:
Every person must register themselves at wallmart.

I mean already, people question the constitutionality of IRS (you MUST
file under penalty of perjury, but you don't have to bear witness against
yourself?!)

Granted, you can say this is different because I don't _have_ to make any
software or hardware...

But look at restrictions on other trades:
You want to cook, you have to be safe.  Who certifies you are safe? the
government.

You want to be a nurse? you should be certified.  Who certifies you? the
government.

Even private schools:
a.) there are many schools to choose from.
b.) some are gov't owned
c.) the programs usually have to be certified by someone else (usually
eventually government related at some point).

nursing and food are examples of where you could physically hurt or kill
someone providing a public service... that's why there is government
intervention.

Other things: Artistry, authoring, etc. don't require government
certification because.. they aren't dangerous.  

Saying my program has to work _this_way_, and be certified by
_these_people_ at _this_company_ is ridiculous.  A fair analogy might
be: "Mr. Williamson, as a childrens story author, all your stories must
end in this way, and you must have all of your books certified by Simen
and Shusterto comply with this requirement before they may be
published.".  And then the author should PAY for the LISENCE to have his
stories end that way?  Basically, we charge a _private_ TAX to DVD player
manufacturers now to remove features that consumers would find usefull and
take away their rights... and we want to _expand_ that?!  What's
especially frustrating is that I see my tax dollars I am forced to pay to
the government being used for things contrary to my interests.

 -- noah silva 


On Fri, 19 Oct 2001, Tom wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 19, 2001 at 04:55:54PM -0400, Noah silva wrote:
> > You can always include the "security" features in the "free" (and I am
> > assuming Open Source) software.  Just make them conditional defines to
> > it's easy to recompile it without even having to look at the code ;)
> 
> past experience (CSS) and background information (that WIPO workshop)
> show clearly that the "certified" part will almost surely require:
> 
> a) obfuscation
> b) a licensing structure
> c) a central authority to oversee same
> 
> and c) will almost definitely be a "cross-industry non-profit group".
> you know, like DVD CCA, for example.
> 
> 
> -- 
> -- http://web.lemuria.org
> --
>