Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Savebetamax.org National Call-in Day

Posted by timothy on Sun Sep 12, 2004 07:11 PM
from the they-want-to-save-the-boston-strangler dept.
Rinisari writes "Savebetamax.org, a project of Downhill Battle, has set up a national call-in day for September 14th. They ask that on that day, each person signed up call a specific congressperson about the INDUCE act in an effort to keep a steady stream of calls all day. The "Save Betamax" nomenclature comes from the fact that the INDUCE act could reverse the decision in the 1984 Sony v. Universal case regarding Sony's Betamax VTRs and copying of copyrighted movies."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Finally! (Score:5, Funny)

    by MightyYar (622222) on Sunday September 12 2004, @07:13PM (#10231018)
    A chance to slashdot congress!
    • Re:Finally! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by i love pineapples (742841) on Sunday September 12 2004, @07:18PM (#10231049) Homepage
      A chance to slashdot congress!

      Well, just think... I know not everyone here on /. is an American, but if we can take a server down, we're very likely to get somebody in Congress's attention.
    • Re:Finally! (Score:5, Informative)

      by Jordy (440) * <jordan&snocap,com> on Sunday September 12 2004, @08:24PM (#10231450) Homepage
      What is really annoying is that this Act is supported by Barbara Boxer (California Democrat). For some reason California's Senators are extremely anti-tech industry and yet they keep getting elected. The movie/music industry is big, but it doesn't hold a candle to the tech/consumer electronics industries in CA.

      I just don't get it. I hope we do slashdot them. Heck, you can hit the EFF Action Center [eff.org] and faxslashdot them.
      • Re:Finally! (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) on Sunday September 12 2004, @10:28PM (#10232173)
        The movie/music industry is big, but it doesn't hold a candle to the tech/consumer electronics industries in CA.

        I suspect that part of the problem is that the copyright cartel controls 90+% of the 'official' information flow - television, radio, print even billboards. This puts them in a position to have a huge effect on public and private opinion, something that few other industries are able to do and the copyright cartel gets gets it effectively for free.
  • by chill (34294) on Sunday September 12 2004, @07:14PM (#10231032) Journal
    ...was "damn, are they DECADES to late! These Sony BetaMax nuts are worse than Mac people or Amiga owners -- and that is saying something."

    • by MarkusQ (450076) on Sunday September 12 2004, @08:22PM (#10231437) Journal

      Honestly, could they come up with a worse name? (Well yeah, now that I think about it, I guess they could. But still.)

      The names (downhill battle, save betamax, etc.) almost sound like they're trying to turn people off to their cause--which, by the way, I agree with. Why couldn't they call it "Fair use" or "Save our constitutional rights from corporate greed!" or something.

      Even "File swappers for truth" or "ShareOn.org" (both of which suck) would be better names than what they're using.

      -- MarkusQ

  • by rokzy (687636) on Sunday September 12 2004, @07:15PM (#10231034)
    a conspiracy to affect communications and actions of the country's leaders.

    who the hell do these people think they are anyway deserving the attention of congressmen? they don't even pay the campaign bills.
  • by Silverlancer (786390) on Sunday September 12 2004, @07:17PM (#10231045)
    Considering what the RIAA is doing, music, movie, and other media companies shouldn't be given any privledges at all, nevermind the ability to veto technologies because they don't like them...
    • Have you ever heard of Larry Niven's "ARM"? In his stories they are the technology police of the UN (who run the planet) and are charged with suppressing all new dangerous technology. (Read as any new technology period). They are the most corrupt organization in his stories.
  • Uhhh (Score:5, Funny)

    by Frogbert (589961) <frogbert@@@gmail...com> on Sunday September 12 2004, @07:18PM (#10231050)
    Umm the 80's called... they want their format back.
  • by LostCluster (625375) * on Sunday September 12 2004, @07:18PM (#10231051) Homepage
    We've heard from these Downhill Battle people before. They proposed the a scheme to try to collect Apple/Pepsi winning-cap codes for iTunes downloads [studioqb.com] that neglected the fact that there were limits to how many songs a given person could download, neglected the fact that the rules said non-transferable, and that the group didn't disclose just how they selected the artists they wanted to favor.

    In short, these guys come up with nice ideas that don't work due to real world constraints.
  • Why all in one day? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by A1kmm (218902) on Sunday September 12 2004, @07:18PM (#10231053)
    Wouldn't it be better to spread it out over a long period of time, otherwise they will know it is an organised compaign and will just disregard the calls? Is there any advantage to do this all in one day whatsoever?
    • Wouldn't it be better to spread it out over a long period of time, otherwise they will know it is an organised compaign and will just disregard the calls?

      I agree; Correct me if I have a fundamental misunderstanding of how calling a politican works, but if 1,000 people call Mr./Ms. Senator in a day, whoever records these types of calls will probably end up becoming annoyed/overloaded/whatever and is likely to dismiss the high volume... If the 1,000 calls are made over, say, a few months' time, wouldn't i
      • Isn't it likely that if the phone calls were spread out over time, they would be more likely to be forgotten and underestimated? If the previous phone call about an issue was a few days ago, you might not really link the two in your mind and figure out the strong support for an issue. If they all come at once, it's relatively easy to notice that there is strong support for an issue - you've been dealing with people who care about it all day.
        • If they all come at once, it's relatively easy to notice that there is strong support for an issue - you've been dealing with people who care about it all day.

          True, if the phone calls are few and far between. If the phones are ringing off the hooks for days, then maybe the congressperson might take notice, but wouldn't a single day of calls be forgotten after weeks of relative silence? I'd think a steady stream of daily calls would be much more memorable, and much less likely leave a negative impression
    • by LostCluster (625375) * on Sunday September 12 2004, @07:27PM (#10231114) Homepage
      If Congress was actually in session, it might cause congresscritters to talk about the fact that their office phone people are getting overloaded.

      Of course, annoying a congresscritter's staff is a good way to NOT get whatever you want. Staff members sometimes have the critical influence over the congresscritter they work for on technical issues they don't understand.
  • by Rageon (522706) on Sunday September 12 2004, @07:19PM (#10231060)
    Call me crazy, but wouldn't it have been usefull to have listed the time zone the assigned time is for? You think that might come in handy for something like this.
  • So, this means (Score:5, Informative)

    by jdreed1024 (443938) on Sunday September 12 2004, @07:22PM (#10231081)
    ... I can watch my old Betamax tapes again? Good, I hate Congress interfering with my video formats. Next thing you know, they'll make DVD+R illegal, and only DVD-R formats will be allowed!

    No, seriously, they could have chosen a better name. "Save Betamax" doesn't mean shit to Joe Consumer (How many people actually remember that decision?). If you phrase it as "They're going to make it illegal to set your VCR to tape a show while you're away on vacation", that'll mean a lot more, although it would be a crappy domain name. But I'll be calling anyway, and you all should too. Write letters to the editors of your local papers,while you're at it.

  • It's hard to fight (Score:4, Insightful)

    by thewldisntenuff (778302) on Sunday September 12 2004, @07:22PM (#10231083) Homepage
    800,000 geeks vs $800,000 (campaign donations?)

    It's be great if it'd work, but it's hard to beat the money of the big corporations....The more I read the news, the more I see the big boys on the hill getting in on this....

    Scary stuff it is...
    • by MrP- (45616) <rob@NospAm.elitemrp.net> on Sunday September 12 2004, @07:26PM (#10231109) Homepage
      800,000 geeks vs $800,000

      Why don't each of us donate $5 or something.. i think $4,000,000 is a little more than $800,000 =P
    • by jeffkjo1 (663413) on Sunday September 12 2004, @07:49PM (#10231258) Homepage
      800,000 geeks vs $800,000 (campaign donations?)

      It'd be great if it'd work, but it's hard to beat the money of the big corporations....The more I read the news, the more I see the big boys on the hill getting in on this....


      Ask any politician which he would prefer: 1000 voters going to the polls, or $10,000 (extra '0'.) You'd be hard pressed to find one that would take the money. Interest groups for corporations hold power, but there aren't 1000 Jack Valenti's in each and every district to vote for Congressman X.
  • Intent of the law (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 12 2004, @07:31PM (#10231139)
    I hear alot of people claiming that the intent of the law is only to go after so called bad actors, and will not be used against VCR makers or computer makers. What those people forget is that in court, the intent of the law doesn't matter, only the actual wording. Anyone using the intent of the law as a defense in court will lose and possibly be laughed out of court. That means this law will be used to sue Apple, Intel, IBM, and Microsoft for making general purpose computing hardware. Even with the new wording, the EFF mock complaint against the ipod is still valid, as apple could have used "reasonable measures" such as only allowing the ipod to play DRM encoded files and have Itunes verify the CD is a pressed CD and not burned before allowing any ripping. The same applies to general purpose computers, which could have been locked down like the Xbox to only run OSes and software that use strong DRM and require checking with central servers before a document or whatever can be transfered (to prevent a user from retyping a copyrighted work like a book by hand). Keep in mind no one intended the DMCA to be used against third party printer cartriges, but it was.
  • by michaelmalak (91262) <malak@acm.org> on Sunday September 12 2004, @07:34PM (#10231159) Homepage
    From the story summary:
    1984 Sony v. Universal case regarding Sony's Betamax VTRs and copying of copyrighted movies
    Not exactly. It covered time-shifting, of which copyrighted movies were a particular example. The Supreme Court was almost at a loss of what to do due to ambiguity of Copyright law and the lack of widespread VCRs in the home when the last major Copyright law was written (1976). They dared to divine the intention of Congress by saying that time-shifting constituted fair-use, and hinted that Congress should follow up with a more specific law in the future. Now Congress is doing the clarification, and it looks like it won't be in the consumer's favor.

    Shameless plug: this was covered almost a year ago in my blog article U.S. corroborating with WIPO to overturn Betamax decision and also eliminate public domain [underreported.com] (which I've shamelessly plugged here before).

    More trivia: before the Betamax decision, movies would come on HBO before videotape release (prime example: Star Wars -- HBO copies for a time were the only way to get a Star Wars videotape). Due to the assumed illegality of taping off HBO, movie studios considered HBO airing to constitute less ownership than selling videotapes. The Betamax decision reversed this notion, and thusly also the order of release.

  • by danger_boy_13 (775935) <dangerboy13@gmail.com> on Sunday September 12 2004, @07:35PM (#10231166) Homepage
    For those of you who don't want to read the decision or Downhill Battle's site, the Betamax decision is what basically allowed us the technology of DVD/CD burners, tape recorders, and VCR's (along with possibly P2P networks) by saying that, just because some people are using them (VCR's at the time) to participate in illegal activities (copying copyrighted movies or shows), the technology itself is not the culprit. Therefore, the technology is legal. This is a vital decision for the technological world and a good thing to get involved in if you can.
  • by dr_skipper (581180) on Sunday September 12 2004, @07:37PM (#10231181)
    Man, the US... Land of the free.

    I'm not too worried, I live in Canada. It's a little better here.

    Maybe Canada will have to occupy the US soon to liberate it. =P

  • cut it out, guys.. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by peculiarmethod (301094) on Sunday September 12 2004, @07:38PM (#10231192) Journal
    You know.. if we keep up this annoying nonsense of protesting to our elected leaders via the phone, they're gonna include the telephone as a weapon of mass destruction in the newest Patriot Act. _Then_ what are we gonna do? I suppose we could take to the streets.. then that will be made an act against the state. You see my point. We should just forget it all, and go back to our T.V.'s.
    • i don't mind burning a few points.. I think we always need a little reminder that we're at war for our rights. Otherwise it wouldn't make headlines so often. We seriously need to all activate and make the phone calls that we believe in. And _that_ is no joke.
  • sorry for them... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by ezonme (671218) <ez.tabacudos@com@br> on Sunday September 12 2004, @07:50PM (#10231260) Homepage
    Their business model is history... If they win this battle the RIAA/MPAA will know how it feels like to shoot themselves in the foot when they realize that they lost a powerfull distribution/advertising channel like the P2P networks. The indies will always find a way to get their productions to the people, they don't need p2p, just a website.

    What's next?
  • Lost Cause (Score:5, Insightful)

    by nurb432 (527695) on Sunday September 12 2004, @07:50PM (#10231261) Homepage Journal
    While I also support our 'data rights', this is a lost cause at this point. Its over, and we have lost.

    Congress does *not* give a damn about the citizens, they are only concerned about the people that line their pocketbooks ( i.e. the 'media' and other large corporations ).

    The very structure of this country has changed, and the citizens are going to be mowed over.

    Fight it all you want, but id rather pick battles that aren't lost already.

    The 2nd revolution is long over due, before the "American experiment" fails, and its remains fall into hardcore socialism.
    • You're mostly right (Score:5, Interesting)

      by rsilvergun (571051) on Sunday September 12 2004, @08:30PM (#10231480)
      The structure hasn't changed though. Do a bit of digging and you'll find the common man has never had any real power except right after WWII (and only then because there was a shortage of workers thanks to your friend and mine, the Machinegun). _All_ complex societies throughout history have been centered around satisifying the wants of a lucky few. Ours still is, it's just that technology and Globalism has expanded the number of Lucky ones, and the losses of WWII allowed the unlucky ones to make out OK for a while.

      Trouble is, just about every single poor and middle class bastard wants to join the oppressors. And every time you add an oppressor, you've got to add some oppressed. This is just the way human economy works. As soon as the masses make some gains, along will come someone to take them away so he can join the ranks of the wealthy and powerful. There is a way to stop this: forced birth control. Either that or War, famine and disease will work just as well. So long as there are too few people to effectively oppress. Capitalism needs lots of cannon fodder.

      Oh, and give me Socialism over capitalism any day. Adam Smith envisioned a world of small time shop keepers and factory owners with a stake in thier communities because they lived there. Globalism breaks all that. What's been keeping your job from going overseas is isolationism broght on by the Cold War. Now that that's over capitalism's busted. Capital will flow where ever labor's cheapest, and that flow will keep standards of living down. You're not gonna feel this too bad, but you're children will. Their lives are gonna suck.
  • by Gentlewhisper (759800) on Sunday September 12 2004, @08:05PM (#10231353)
    Well, let's just say that hollywood only has tunnel vision and can't see any potential for growth beyond their current business models.

    That was why they sued sony back then, they were scared shitless by the prospects of their property being stolen!

    Unfortunately for them, they lost, but even then they still managed to get a new cash cow out of it. Home videos.

    But with the coming of DVDs, they decided, "hey, we needed home videos no more, now that we got these new high tech media like DVDs and CDs that can only be pressed at the factory, why not we make all recording mediums illegal eh"

    And if this law passes, the implications are powerful. With CDRs, DVDRs, videos, cassettes, maybe even video cameras all outlawed? Guess who are the only ones with access to recording equipment?

    Just because they produce some lousy stinking movies doesn't mean they produce ALL the material in the whole wide world. What about people making home videos of little nelly celebrating her first birthday? Or can you imagine needing to procure a license from hollywood in the future just so you can make a video recording of big nelly's wedding?

    No good would come out of this man.. no good at all..
  • No one's listening. (Score:3, Informative)

    by hotspotbloc (767418) on Sunday September 12 2004, @08:16PM (#10231403) Homepage Journal
    I'm sorry and hope I'm wrong but IMO they're not going to listen. They didn't listen to us over the PATRIOT Act, Carnivore, electronic voting or the DMCA. The politicians will pay a little lip service to the media saying they're "still investigating" the bill in question and haven't made up their minds while in reality they've already cast their lot to the highest bidder.

    Let's face it: the politicians stopped listening to their constituents a long time ago.

    If I may quote the great FZ from "The Meek Shall Inherit Nothing":

    You say yer life's a bum deal

    'N yer up against the wall ...
    Well, people, you ain't even got no kinda
    Deal at all
    'Cause what they do
    In Washington
    They just takes care of NUMBER ONE
    An' NUMBER ONE ain't YOU
    You ain't even NUMBER TWO
    • by Adam9 (93947) on Sunday September 12 2004, @08:41PM (#10231542) Journal
      This is the attitude that allows them to think that we don't give a damn. I bet you don't even vote in the general election either.
      • by hotspotbloc (767418) on Sunday September 12 2004, @08:54PM (#10231595) Homepage Journal
        Been registered since I was eighteen and haven't missed a federal election yet. Even in the military I made sure to vote.

        The problem is the facts are the facts. Check out opensecrets.org [opensecrets.org], put in your Rep's name or any of the backers of the DMCA or INDUCE and look where their money comes from. Until real campaign finance reform is passed, like only voters can contribute (No PACs, unions or churches) I feel the system will never be fixed.

        What can I say but "Prove me wrong!" (To quote Seymour Skinner).

  • The Subversives (Score:3, Interesting)

    by DarkOx (621550) on Sunday September 12 2004, @08:51PM (#10231581)
    These people need to excep the subversives will win. The RIAA et all, need to understand that the least damange will be if they just play ball with what people want. If they keep buying bay laws. Then us citizens will stop respecting the laws, its that simple. Bigbussiness/Gov just needs to learn that you give citizens the laws they really want or you get criminals. The other thing is no you can't jail everyone. Look at interstate speed limits. Clearly the majority of general public favors higher speed limits. My evidence most peoplle are doing 5-10 over. Now if everyone is breaking the law(speed limit) then why have the law? Well police pull over people at random and issue tickets the rest of us get away with it. So its partial negative enfocement whic psycologicly casues us to feel we will continue to get away with it, we tend to go even fast the next time. If they just set the speed for passenger cars to 80 I bet most people would comply, which means you could take care of all the violators. People would then respect the speed law and obey even when it inconviences them. So now if you make stuip laws like "though shall not reccord stuffs with a broadcast flag set" if I want to reccord it I sure as hell with find away as will most people. Just like most people don't reall pay to have the city inspector out if they remodle the basement. They know is dumb and just a veiled tax and therfore say "screw it". I'll bet again if you rewrote that ordinace to say "You onlyl need to be inspected if you change a loaded portion of the structure" people would obey and we'd all be safer.

    Look at the history of our first revolution. Here is the scary part noone are thinking about. If you keep makeing stupid laws and by extention keep makeing averge joes who were once well behaived citizen criminals and subversives then you only have criminals and subversives. People don't like to feel that way about themselves forever. Eventually that emotional stage starts to work really good for revolutionary reasoning. Then you get a revolution. I am not saying its gonna be a bloody revolution or anything, but sooner or later people are gonna toss out the current power brokers, they simply will not play ball any more. People are gonna say, forigen policy be damned I don't think think my neighbor Ted is really fit to lead this nation on the national stage but if I elect him at least I will be able to live my life like I used to for awhile I am gonna do it. I think the future is bright domesticly but its gonna ruin our place in the world when it happens, and its all because the current powers that be are two blind to stike a ballance.
  • by squatex (765966) on Sunday September 12 2004, @08:55PM (#10231597)
    Its just something Ive been curious about, but how far would they go with this act? Would external hard drives become illegal? usb memory sticks? the internet itself? This legislation seems so broad, that it seems they could ban just about any device on a whim. Jesus, I gotta move.
    • Wrong! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by BalorTFL (766196) on Sunday September 12 2004, @07:19PM (#10231058)
      This is perhaps one of the most important legal battles in this area for quite a while. If the Betamax decision is overturned, it will be an enormous setback to proponents of fair use. As for the INDUCE act? Not only is it full of ridiculously vague wording, but it boggles the mind in terms of the rights it would take away. If it passes, things could change in a big way . . . and not for the good of the people, but for the good of the big corporations backing it.
      • It would be madness if Hollywood et al got their way, if only because as the article stated, Hollywood benefitted enourmously from sales of VCR.

        Yes, it would be madness. But Hollywood doesn't care.

        Now it is possible for them to sell read-only playback devices (such as the DVD) and if they ban all DVD-R, CD-R (+/-RW etc etc) then it won't affect their bottom line in the least. They can still profit from home videos that people can still play, but no one can record anything, except the organized criminal
    • The last half dozen coral links I've used, for slashdotted articles and non-slashdotted articles, have been basically down or so extremely slow as to be not worthwhile.
    • by mvdwege (243851) <mvdwege@mail.com> on Sunday September 12 2004, @11:01PM (#10232327) Homepage

      Just look at the sordid history of the EUCD (European Union Copyright Directive). You will see that the entertainment industry will meet up with some European Commisioners, have lunch, and presto! two months later the relevant committee comes up with a new EU directive implementing the latest draconian US copyright law into an EU Directive.

      I am not hopeful. And I live in one of the countries that generally implement EU directives in the most liberal way possible.

      Mart