Hi Roger! 03 Jan 2003, Roger Turk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
RT> I went to the U. S. Senate web site <www.senate.gov> and did a search RT> for DMCA and came up with HR5522, (House of Representatives bill RT> number 5522) which was introduced in October, 2002 and is now assigned RT> to the courts subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee which is RT> currently holding hearings on the bill. Transcripts of testimony RT> before the subcommittee is available on the House web site RT> <www.house.gov>. Thannks for reading thw whole thing ... I was too lazy to do it (as it doesn't directly affect me :) BUT on the PDF I sent stands: The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) was signed into law by President Clinton on October 28, 1998. The legislation implements two 1996 World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) treaties: the WIPO Copyright Treaty and the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty. The DMCA also addresses a number of other significant copyright-related issues. This means to me that the law was signed in 1998, and since than is active law. I'm pretty sure that the DMCA was used in the court before Oct. 2002. RT> Rather than reading what someone else has said about the bill, I read RT> the bill itself. This is how it should be ... but don't forget hat the law is often misused and abused. http://www.eff.org/Legal/Cases/Felten_v_RIAA/20010606_eff_complaint.html And read the URLs I have posted ... there is enough material. RT> It appears to do the opposite of what you state. It states that it is RT> NOT a copyright violation to make archival copies of digital media. I wrote that it forbids circumventing copyright protection and encryption. (and these terms are NOT defined in tha law imho so rot13 can be an encryption and if you decrypt it than you can go to jail !) Lbh onq, onq unpxre unir oebxra zl terng rapelcgvba - guvf vf vyyrtny ! And how do you make archival copies of copyright protected digital media without circumventing the copyright protection ?? RT> The bill is very short and appears to be very favorable towards users RT> of computers and digital media with regard to copyright protection. it is not. It is on purpose that short, and does not countain definitions, so that lawyers can basically use it against EVERYTHING. Walmart sued one person because he "handeled against the DMCA" by puting a walmart pricelist on the web. (and the list is "copyright" protected) Lawyers use the DMCA to bully people. Again ... I am no US citizen ... all I want is that americans wake up, and read the law and its implications by themselves, and act accordingly. DMCA is nothing compared to what some Senators have in mind with the TPCA ! RT> As far as bribery of journalists goes, I think that there are far too RT> many journalists in the U. S. looking for a Pulitzer prize winning RT> story for anybody to bribe all of them. But why is then this silence ?? PS: I also have not heared that US journalism spoke about absolutely criminal situation in guantanamo, which is against UN human rights convention. Type in this in babelfish http://www.heise.de/tp/deutsch/inhalt/co/13848/1.html The UN huamn rights are part of all european constitutions ... know I understand why Bush does not want Americans to be able to be sued before the UN Human rights court. And how is it possible that alquaida (spelling ?) fights the US with THEIR OWN WEAPONS ?? Oh ... yeah ... I forgot the US gave the weapons to them FOR FREE ... strange world we live in! RT> Roger Turk RT> Tucson, Arizona CU, Ricsi -- |~)o _ _o Richard Menedetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> {ICQ: 7659421} (PGP) |~\|(__\| -=> The problem with the genepool is there's no lifeguard <=-
