Do you like to record or TiVo the Daily Show? If Conyers' bill is passed, you won't be able to. On Friday,
Democratic Congressman John Conyers and Republican Jim Sensenbrenner introduced a bill that makes our TiVos, our PCs, VCRs, CD recorders and iPods as we know them illegal. The
Digital Transition Content Security Act is a gift to the music and movie industries, requiring electronics manufacturers to put a "big brother"-style chip in their products that prevents us from making the legal and fair personal copies of TV shows, music, and movies we make today.
This bill would also stifles innovation--the requirements proposed by him and Sensenbrenner remove the incentive to make the next iPod or TiVo. The US, under this legislation, would have the most restrictive technology controls in the world, forcing Americans to head elsewhere, such as Canada, Europe, or Asia if they want to be innovative.
Contact Conyers now! Tell him you are disappointed that he is giving a handout to the massive music and movie industries. Details of how you lose your rights after the jump.
[Added 7:32EST]: Conyers responds
From the article:
all consumer electronics video devices manufactured more than 12 months after the DTCSA is passed to be able to detect and obey a "rights signaling system" that would be used to limit how content is viewed and used.
And in case you thought you could just make your own, or buy equipment from overseas, you can't:
it would be illegal to "manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide or otherwise traffic" in such products.
This is what happens to you:
Once the MPAA and pals have their way, you're going to pay through the nose for even the most basic of Fair Use rights. You're going to pay for the right to rewind and "re-experience" content. The Copy Prohibited Content class, complete with its asinine insta-delete feature is nothing but a back door into attacking what the content industry hates most: your ability to timeshift content.
Here are the 'rights' you get:
Copy Prohibited Content, which would mark the transmission as off limits for copying or recording of any kind
Copy Unlimited No Redistribution Content, which means that the analog content could be passed through to a digital device for copying, but redistribution would be limited
Copy One Generation Content, which would allow viewers to make a single generation of copies
No Technical Protection Applied, programming that could still be recorded.
And lest you think those rights sound generous:
the DTCSA gives you all of 90 minutes from the initial reception of a "unit of content" to watch your recordings. Heaven forbid you get a long phone call or an unscheduled visit from a neighbor when you're engaged in some delayed viewing—once that 90-minute window closes you're out of luck until the next broadcast.
Show Conyers that he's going wrong here--that he should back reasonable middle-class principles, not the greedy music and movie industries.
Contact Conyers now! And please recommend this diary--let's make this the last mistake Conyers makes.
[Added: 14:45 EST] Some of you are skeptical that Conyers would do this, or think I'm being hyperbolic. He is, and I'm not being hyperbolic. I could start talking about the criminal penalties imposed by the law and more if I really wanted to be hyperbolic. This is a horrible piece of legislation not up to Conyers' usual standards, and we should get him to back away fast. Here are some more resources if you still don't believe me and think this is a good idea.
The bill Seriously: read it. If you have any technical knowledge, you'll quickly see how awful it is.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation:
The new bill is a rehash of the one we first mentioned on Halloween. It would impose strict legal controls on any video analog to digital (A/D) convertors "manufacture[d], imported or otherwise traffic[ed]" in the United States.
Digitizers and digital media devices that won't jump through the specified outrageous regulatory hoops - automatically deleting protected analog content after ninety minutes; outputting only "down-rezzed" images, and satisfying "robustness criteria" that weld the hood shut against user modification and open source developers - are expected to simply turn off and refuse to convert watermark-protected analog video.
And how is this analog video protected? Using an old broadcast-flag like technology called CGMS-A and a new watermarking system called VEIL.
Public Knowledge -- from their
analysis:
Analog Hole - This convoluted and lengthy statute (delivered to us two days prior to the hearing) would require that all devices capable of turning an analog video signal into a digital video signal be forced to recognize and enforce two forms of content protection. This would negatively affect the design of everything from video cameras to certain hospital equipment. Public Knowledge opposes this horrible technology mandate and Gigi made our position clear during the hearing, noting that event the content industry itself had argued that the analog hole was a safety valve for fair use under the strictures of the DMCA. It was also clear that the proponents of the bill didn't fully understand it themselves.
[Added 7:32EST]: Conyers responds