Hidden Threats to Ham Radio - DRM & DMCA

[wa3yre]

There are many things a foot that can harm Ham Radio's future that most hams
are not aware of. One of the "silent enemies" of Ham Radio is the current move
by the entertainment cartel in the United States to force Digital Restriction
Management on the American public by act of Congress and FCC rule making.

In the world envisioned by the MPAA (Motion Picture Association of America)
and the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) there are 2 classes
of citizens, those that can have full general purpose computers (MPAA & RIAA
members) and the rest of the world. Among the restrictions that these folks
are trying to impose is the outlawing of ANALOG to DIGITAL CONVERTERS. I
was at a Department of Commerce hearing on DRM on July 17, 2002 when
Jack Valenti stood up and told all assembled that there was a need to
"Plug the analog hole" to prevent unauthorized digitizing of analog signals.
On behalf of New Yorkers for Fair Use (www.nyfairuse.org) I disagreed with
the entire premiss of DRM that the panel was discussing and pointed out that
it would prevent innovation and would stagnate progress. After this meeting the
MPAA and RIAA lobbyist and their congressional puppets decided to approach
forcing DRM on the American public by way of FCC rule making. There is
a current NPRM (02-230) for the so called "Broadcast Flag" that if enacted
would be backed with the force of law under the DMCA
(http://www.nyfairuse.org/dmca.xhtml) and would effectively put an end to
software defined radio projects such as GNU Radio
(http://www.gnu.org/software/gnuradio/gnuradio.html).

If the entertainment cartel gets their way and is allowed to castrate all
digital devices not owned by them there will be an end to development of new
forms of digital communications and signal processing by anyone that is not
part of the entertainment industry. Tinkering on software to enhance
communications could be a felony for Hams located in the United States.

Please get educated on what is going on by visiting the New Yorkers For Fair
Use web site at http://www.nyfairuse.org/ and also submit comments on
the Broadcast Flag to the FCC by December 5th 2002 by following the
links at http://www.nyfairuse.org/action/fcc.flag.xhtml. (http://www.nyfairuse.org/action/fcc.flag.xhtml) It is important to
use the form you will be linked to as the FCC only accepts electronic comments
in a special format. The form will submit them in the proper format.

Below is the New Yorkers For Fair Use Action Alert that has been sent out
to other outlets.

73

Brett
wa3yre@arrl.net


New Yorkers for Fair Use Action Alert:
--------------------------------------

Please send a comment opposing the "Broadcast Flag" Proposal
to the United States FCC by this Thursday, December 5, 2002.

Tell the FCC to Serve the Public, Not Hollywood!


Okay, you folks understand this issue -- it's very important
for concerned Americans to send word to the FCC by the
public comments deadline, this Thursday, December 5, that
you OPPOSE the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking #02-230. This
rule would make it illegal for ordinary citizens to own
fully functional digital television devices. We've made it
easy; just follow the links below.


1) Please send in your comments to the FCC using the form
provided below. Tell them that the movie industry should
have a special privilege to own fully-functional digital
television devices. Read the alert below for details.

2) Please forward this alert to any other interested parties
that you know of, who would understand and see the
importance of this issue.

3) Volunteer to help us with this and other alerts related
to your rights to flexible information technology in the
future. Two roles you can take up are to become a Press
Outreach Campaigner or a Commentator. Simply reply to this
email to show your interest.


Tell the FCC to Serve the Public, Not Hollywood!

Public Comments Needed to Stop the "Broadcast Flag" Proposal
at the FCC


Please follow this link and use the form on the Center for
Democracy and Technology's site to let the FCC know that the
public's rights are at stake:
http://www.nyfairuse.org/action/fcc.flag.xhtml.

What's Going On:

The FCC is considering a proposal that digital televisions
be required to work only according to the rules set by
Hollywood, through the use of a "broadcast flag" assigned to
digital TV broadcasts.

Through the deliberations of a group called the Broadcast
Protection Discussion Group which assiduously discounted the
public's rights to use flexible information technology,
Hollywood and leading technology players have devised a plan
that would only allow "professionals" to have
fully-functional devices for processing digital broadcast
materials.

Hollywood and content producers must not be allowed to
determine the rights of the public to use flexible
information technology. The idea of the broadcast flag is to
implement universal content control and abolish the right of
free citizens to own effective tools for employing digital
content in useful ways. The broadcast flag is theft.

In the ongoing fight with old world content industries, the
most essential rights and interests in a free society are
those of the public. Free citizens are not mere consumers;
they are not a separate group from so-called
"professionals." The stakeholders in a truly just
information policy in a free society are the public, not
those who would reserve special rights to control public
uses of information technology.

Please go to <a href="http://www.nyfairuse.org/action.....gt;http (http://www.nyfairuse.org/action/fcc.flag.xhtml) and follow the
instructions to file your comments with the FCC.


----

Some background links:

http://bpdg.blogs.eff.org/archives/one-page.pdf

http://www.eff.org/effector/HTML/effect15.22.html#III

http://www.cdt.org/press/020807press.shtml

[ke4pjw]

After alot of thought on the matter, the one part of the DMCA that should be taken out completely, is the part about Access Controls. It affords the MPAA, RIAA and others who license digital playback devices patent like protection for their devices via copyright law.

You might think, so what's the big deal? The big deal is this.

When you patent a method, you must disclose how that method works. In return, you are granted a monopoly on your patented method for a period of time. (25 Years IIRC) It's a win-win. We get to see how it works and won't have to pay licensing fees after 25 years.

Under the DMCA, anyone who produces a product that can be attached to copyright and uses access controls, no matter how trivial, must be licensed by the copyright holder. This restriction is never ending.

If you create a device or write software that can use such a product without a license, YOU ARE BREAKING THE LAW. You could be fined and/or put in prison for it.

This is what the law is NOW. The MPAA's new Digital Rights Management initiative has the makings to outlaw general purpose computing devices. The computer must no longer trust you, the user. Operating Systems that do not have DRM could be outlawed. The End of open computing may not come from the Great North West. It might come from Hollywood, New York and Nashville.

What does this have to do with ham radio? We will never be able to get programmable DSPs in the IF of your ham radio. This is because you will required to use DRM. Your DSP will not be user programmable, you will have to get ones that the MPAA and RIAA say are OK. Otherwise, somebody might use their radio to record something from a broadcast TV or radio station that has the "Dont record" bit set. Yes, yes, I know. That would be a violation of the DMCA. But with DRM, you simply outlaw devices and software that _COULD_ be used for copyright violations.

With DRM, you can't have "Continuation and extension of the amateur's proven ability to contribute to the advancement of the radio art." when the next step in the radio art is DSP and DSP programming is illegal.


Home of the free indeed.

[N0PU]

This just jerks my chain...

1. A bunch of little cheap cry babies want to STEAL music.
2. The rightful owners want to protect their property.

Now Hams are asked to support thievery in order to protect our RIGHT to use A to D and D to A techniques.

BS.. Big FAT BS... BIG fat PILE of BS... with flies !!

I say support the EXISTING laws and jail the persons downloading or allowing uploading of STOLEN music.

All a copyright is good for is a right to sue the person abusing your ownership. Now this big outfit figured out that they can't afford to sue 20% of the population and now they are crying and calling for legislation....

Again I say, let them go after the perpetrators themselves... That is what I would have to do if someone stole my book... SAME THING !!!

Arghhhhhhh...

Harry Kholer N0PU

[wa3yre]

Harry-
I invite you to go to www.nyfairuse.org (http://www.nyfairuse.org/)
and become educated on the issues. You should also read the post just
above yours by ke4pjw. He has a good handle on what is going on. The law to put force behind NPRM 02-230 was passed in 1998. It is the DMCA. It passed congress with only 3 no votes, all in the senate. I am sure that under the DMCA you can be hauled away to jail today for having a circumvention device in your home. I can not think of a home or office in the USA that does not have many circumvention devices. You can thank both congress and Sony for making you the criminal you are today. How did they do that you ask? I am glad you did. They came out with a new form of audio disc with what they called "copy protection" that did not work properly. A by product of the disc hitting music stores all over the country a few months ago was that many common household items have been criminalised.

The DMCA also gives anyone the power to shut down any web site they want to just by claiming that illegal copies of protected works are on the site. There is no due process the site must be shutdown upon getting notice and must stay down for a minimum of 14 days. Yes the DMCA is a nasty snake in the grass and some parts of it impact directly on HAM RADIO. The bottom line is that the MPAA and the RIAA bought Congress on the DMCA so that they could have total information control forever. It also criminalises what had in the past been a civil matter. This means that the entertainment cartel no longer has to track down and sue people they think are infringing on them. Your tax dollars get to do the job and in the bargain you lost your fairuse rights to material you legally own and the public lost any chance of much information ever going into the Public Domain.

It is possible that trying to build compatible IRLP system by looking at how the ve7tld system works is a crime as Dave will not disclose full details of how the system works and it uses encryption.

If NPRM 02-230 passes it will be backed up by the DMCA. The only stink I smell here is coming from Washington DC and from uninformed minds that do not want to learn the truth, or defend the rights that our forefathers fought so hard to secure for us.

73
Brett
WA3YRE

DRM is theft! We are the stakeholders! http://www.nyfairuse.org/

[N0PU]

I agree the stink is coming from Washington...By being in bed with the music industry...no doubt...

But, I go back to the origin of the problem... The original CAUSE...and THAT is music theft...

I say repeal any law that makes it NOT the responsibility of the Music Companies to go after the perpetrators...And then stick the perps with MAJOR fines...

Copyright was never meant to have Government enforcement outside the Judicial System... as persued by the offended party...

I say it again... snotty nosed music thieves started all this... If they had bought their records/tapes/cds to begin with, none of this would have happened...

Go after the REAL thieves and leave honest people alone...

Get the Cause and Effect in the correct order...
You appear to say that the effect of congress's action is the cause of the problem... and that is backwards... This is a common problem today... Folks don't seem to understand the difference between cause and effect... And we're not suppose to BLAME anyone for the problems... And God forbid anyone take resposibility for their actions...

I'll get off my soapbox...

Harry Kholer N0PU

They already stick "perps" with major viruses and adware- I spent all weekend fixing my OS after KAZAA and IMESH were loaded on one of the computers by the kids. Now they get "guest" access and can't install programs. I myself can do without the downloads and made it clear it won't happen again on our computers.

[n8ary]

Maybe they'll outlaw digital cameras. Next it will be camcorders and regular cameras, magnetic tape, and finally, paint brushes. Hell, put everyone's eyes out and install a chip that will only let you see what "they" want you to see.

[dseagrav]

You're all wrong. The restrictions of DMCA and so on are not targeted at limiting your freedoms. They are targeted at promoting consumerism and central control over the mass media.

The "Analog Hole" was not a problem when only analog media was in use. The relative difficulty and high cost of redistributing or transmitting via analog methods kept competition against the market, allowing the RIAA and MPAA to gain monopolistic control over their respective markets, radio and movies. If you wanted your band's song on the radio, you paid the RIAA and signed over your rights, and they would get you on the air. If you wanted to make tapes or whatever, you paid the RIAA and they made it happen. But you COULD NOT do anything of any useful scale on your own.

Enter the PC and the internet. Now anyone, anywhere can take their music, their art, their -whatever- and easily and (relatively) cheaply put it on the internet for others to see. Think about it - Instead of putting this message that I am typing right now on a bulletin board somewhere, or continuously broadcasting it on the radio, or putting it in magazines, I just sit here by the monitor and TYPE. The server stores the message and spits it out whenever you request it. All I had to do was create it, and all you had to do was chose to come here and read it.

Good for me.
Bad for the RIAA.

Since everyone no longer has to go through them to get their music out, they no longer have a monopoly. In fact, their function in the food chain - Getting your music on the air and out to people - is outright redundant. Why should I pay them to do something for me that I can do myself, easily?

The RIAA has two options to maintain their control and their business - Destroy the internet, or take control of it.
They've elected to take the latter - First by forcing all of the content they do not control off the internet, and finally by eliminating that which makes it easy to post content that competes with theirs.

Here at home, I normally have a radio running in the background, playing the Japan-A-Radio web-radio station. They play Japanese music and such. They play NOTHING that the RIAA has anything to do with. Yet, at the RIAA's insistence and by legislation the RIAA has caused to pass, they are being required to pay royalties to the RIAA for songs the RIAA had *NOTHING TO DO WITH*. #Why is JAR paying the RIAA for work they didn't do? Why do they have to pay royalties on songs for which royalties are not owed?

Because it's -THE LAW-.

And if they can't cough up the RIAA's money, they go off the air.

Right now, they're planning their next move - They have to either go commercial and eliminate most of their user base, or go off the air.

Personally, as I am unemployed, I will be unable to listen to JAR in either case. I do all I can just to continue to put food in my mouth and keep a roof over me. I have been living day-to-day for almost a year now, fighting to get enough money to get out of where i am and end up somewhere where there's jobs to be had. I don't even have an antenna anymore - Vandals cut it down over the summer - I haven't been on the radio for months now. I can't even afford the length of wire to make a damn dipole. But the RIAA does nothing but sit there and collect royalty payments which don't belong to them, exploit the artists they do have control over, and force legislation to squash anyone they don't control. And they make BILLIONS.

Why do these people control my government, and not me? #I voted - Why does my vote mean nothing? #Something's wrong with this picture. But that's another subject.

The RIAA and MPAA liked things the way they were - You went to work, you earned your money, you came home, and one way or another, you gave your money to them. #These companies no longer serve a purpose - Their functions are rendered obsolete by the relentless march of technology. Now they are trying to hold back the march - They want to put the demons back in Pandora's box and lock it up, then bury it somewhere never to be found.

This fight is not about theft, or artists's rights, or your rights, or any of that idealistic stuff - It's about money. These people make far, far, far more money than you will ever make, they control the minds of millions - And they like it that way. They're fighting to preserve their control. Nothing more, nothing less.

I'm sure you'd do the same in their situation.

[KE4MOB]

I don't see what all the fuss is about. #I have read the FCC NPRM, researched the "Broadcast Flag", and quite frankly don't have any major objections to it as it relates to ham radio. #The NPRM is very narrowly worded and only applies to broadcast digital TV. #Nowhere did I see the assertion that A/D-D/A converters would be outlawed. #

It seems like the FCC is openly wondering if the slow adaptation of digital TV is primarily due to regulatory or consumer issues. #The Hollywood types believe it is due to the lack of copy protection, therefore the NPRM. #I personally feel that digital TV offers very little improvement over conventional TV given the costs, and in today's ultra-competitive environment is economically unattractive to the consumer.

Do I agree with actions and proposals of the MPAA/RIAA and their ilk? #Absolutely not. #But does the current NPRM endanger ham radio? No.

The bigger problem the industry must face is this: #all of the really good stuff has already been done and is available on the TV, radio and internet. #The genie is out of the bottle, and all the lawyers and Nazi-style tactics won't put it back in.

In short, I have 500 cable channels, and a 20 theater movieplex within a 10 minute drive...and there's still nothing worth watching!

[W5MIT]

The RIAA's move to require copy protection in all electronic devices cable of handling audio is so outlandish that it would be tenamount to the US Congress selling itself to-- oh wait, they already did sell themselves to the RIAA.

Well, then I suppose we better get homebrewing!

[ke4pjw]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KE4MOB @ Dec. 02 2002,09:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I don't see what all the fuss is about. I have read the FCC NPRM, researched the "Broadcast Flag", and quite frankly don't have any major objections to it as it relates to ham radio. The NPRM is very narrowly worded and only applies to broadcast digital TV. Nowhere did I see the assertion that A/D-D/A converters would be outlawed.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

The problem is, any device or software that can be used to circumvent access controls is illegal under the DMCA if it is not licensed. From what I understand, the "broadcast flag" is an access control.

Maybe it's only the software that ignores such things, that would be illegal. If that's the case, it still annoys me that you loose your fair use rights to copyrighted works.

Classic Copyright law worked just fine. It was well understood and to the point.

I don't think ham radio manufactures want to be the target of some lawyers for the entertainment industry. They may just stay away from software defined radios because of the problems it could cause them due to US copyright law.


</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KE4MOB @ Dec. 02 2002,09:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
It seems like the FCC is openly wondering if the slow adaptation of digital TV is primarily due to regulatory or consumer issues. The Hollywood types believe it is due to the lack of copy protection, therefore the NPRM. I personally feel that digital TV offers very little improvement over conventional TV given the costs, and in today's ultra-competitive environment is economically unattractive to the consumer.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

I agree.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KE4MOB @ Dec. 02 2002,09:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
Do I agree with actions and proposals of the MPAA/RIAA and their ilk? Absolutely not. But does the current NPRM endanger ham radio? No
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

I agree, sort of.

NPRM is not a threat by itself, but coupled with current copyright law, it is.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KE4MOB @ Dec. 02 2002,09:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
The bigger problem the industry must face is this: all of the really good stuff has already been done and is available on the TV, radio and internet. The genie is out of the bottle, and all the lawyers and Nazi-style tactics won't put it back in.

In short, I have 500 cable channels, and a 20 theater movieplex within a 10 minute drive...and there's still nothing worth watching![/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

I just don't get why they think they need to micro manage the private use of not only their product, but anything that can play their products as well. Has been illegal to copy and distribute copyrighted material for a long time. Those who wish to traffic such materials will ignore the law and do so anyway. It will be us, the law abiding consumers that are the most effected by these bad laws.

-- Terry
KE4PJW

[wa3yre]

KE4MOB-
The broadcast flag will hurt Ham Radio because to
"properly implement" it one must castrate general purpose
computers. Take a look at the NPRM again, and also
take a look at the DMCA which is what gives the NPRM teath.
You can find links to both at www.nyfairuse.org (http://www.nyfairuse.org/).

73

Brett
wa3yre

[kt8k]

I see many problems with "digital flag" and similar initiatives, including added cost and hassle
to consumers everywhere, a ton more government controls we can't afford, higher cost
consumer electronics, impediments to innovation, and, worst of all, continuation of a
general erosion of our rights. This idiocy needs to be stopped, and I have entered my own
response to the NPRM reflecting all these points.

No commercial interest group should be
catered to this way, and I agree with prior comments about the MPAA and RIA - they are
dinosaurs and have done much to damage the public and impede better protection of content
producers' rights. I am a content producer, but they have no interest in protecting my
rights unless I am willing to pay them. Ther must be a better way, but this is the wrong way
to approach the issue.

[ke4pjw]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (N0PU @ Dec. 02 2002,04:38)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">But, I go back to the origin of the problem... The original CAUSE...and THAT is music theft...
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

The DMCA was written long before music was easily stolen on the Internet. As a matter of fact, there are no Access Controls on anything labeled "Compact DISC".

This is about controling devices that _MIGHT_ be used to view licensed content on unlicensed devices.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (N0PU @ Dec. 02 2002,04:38)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
Go after the REAL thieves and leave honest people alone...

Get the Cause and Effect in the correct order...
You appear to say that the effect of congress's action is the cause of the problem... and that is backwards... This is a common problem today... Folks don't seem to understand the difference between cause and effect... And we're not suppose to BLAME anyone for the problems... And God forbid anyone take resposibility for their actions...
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

The thing is, it is no longer even about stealing. You can copy encrypted works. There is _NO WAY_ to stop people from making copies of Movies and Music. It's now about controling the devices that record and play Movies and Music. If they want to add those features in their equipment, that's fine with me. But passing a law that allows private groups to regulate what devices can and can't be used to display legal,licensed content is wrong.

[N0NB]

I broached this issue with the ARRL earlier this year when Fritz "The Senator from Disney" Hollings presented the CBDTPA into the Senate. At the time I sent copies of a letter with my concerns to the ARRL president, the division director, the assistant division director and the section manager. I only heard back from the assistant director.

In his reply several days after my initial message the assistant director told me that League counsel Chris Imlay had looked into the matter and he (Imlay) and others in the League hierarchy did not believe the CBDTPA posed any significant threat to ham radio. I disagreed with that assessment then and nothing has occured in the intervening months to change my opinion. Anything produced for the ham shack in the future from the lowliest APRS TNC to the most advanced DSP for an SDR would need to comply with the provisions for access control as required of "digital devices" had the CBDTPA become law.

I'm afraid that many hams, League leadership included, believe this NPRM along with the DMCA and DRM in general to be an "Internet issue" or a "broadcast issue" when it is quite evident to me that the parties involved do not wish to leave any loopholes whatsoever available to the population at large.

Whether you believe it or not, the threat to general purpose computing is real, folks. Like it or not there are parties out there that have placed their business models ahead of all else that is important in this country. Right now ham radio hasn't been on their list of talking points, but it will be once they understand many of the technologies available to us. Don't underestimate their motivation or their ability to acheive their goals or their sheer panic at the thought of powerful technology controlled by common citizens.

I believe that we hams need to align ourselves with the groups that best advocate our interests. The ARRL won't be able to take on Hollywood and win, and by the disinterested reply I received, when the League does decide this is a problem, it will be too late. This means we need to get on board with organizations like the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the Free Software Foundation.

It is issues like these that dampen my optimism for the future of technology. I can only hope that this nonsense doesn't spread to the rest of the world.

"When general computers are outlawed, only outlaws will own general computers."

[KE4MOB]

Let's look at the actual DCMA and see what it says:

"``(2) No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that-
``(A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title;
``(B) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title;"

Ok, what does this mean?

My interpretation: This deals only with intellectual properties that are copyrighted and possess some form of copyright access control. If a CD, or DVD, or Computer program has an embedded copyright protection scheme, and I design a way around it, I am guilty of violation of the DMCA.

However, owning a CD/DVD burner or other copyable format is not illegal, because the argument can be made that such devices do not fall within the parameters of the above quote. Ditto for an A/D-D/A converter--one of the mainstays of everday industrial and consumer processes and products.

As I said before, I think the MPAA/RIAA tries to strongarm and bulldoze its way through common sense in an effort to maintain its grasp on an industry on the decline. We need to keep an eye out for things like this and express our concerns, but by the same token, don't bite at every fly that lands in the pond.

[kc9ani]

Not exactly the same but look at the news from the US Naval Academy. Apparently the music/movie industry had recently sent a letter to 2300 colleges requesting their help in thwarting the evil college students from downloading music and movies. Most are taking a wait and see attitude but at the good old Naval Academy, they confisicated 90 laptops and those midshipmen face punitative action and possibly expulsion. Nothing like serving as prosecutor and executioner. It may be time to take a close look over our shoulder. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[N0PU]

I think you'll find those Midshipmen being charged with violations of the honor code... Theft is still not condoned by the US Navy... And I doubt it ever will... Those individuals prone to not being able to tell the difference between right and wrong are not considered good candidates to lead our young sailors into battle... It shows lack of ability to make good decisions...

Harry Kholer N0PU

[KE4MOB]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kc9ani @ Dec. 03 2002,13:56)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Most are taking a wait and see attitude but at the good old Naval Academy, they confisicated 90 laptops and those midshipmen face punitative action and possibly expulsion. Nothing like serving as prosecutor and executioner.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

I'd agree that it's probably a violation of the honor code, and it's not that the computer equipment was confiscated because it was illegal, it's because they contain evidence of copyright infringement on them.

Kinda like an instructor seizing a plagarized report as evidence.

[ke4pjw]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KE4MOB @ Dec. 02 2002,14:50)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">As I said before, I think the MPAA/RIAA tries to strongarm and bulldoze its way through common sense in an effort to maintain its grasp on an industry on the decline. We need to keep an eye out for things like this and express our concerns, but by the same token, don't bite at every fly that lands in the pond.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Who would have thought that reverse engineering DVD players and implementing them in software would have been illegal. The access controls are not there to keep you from copying the DVD. They are there to regulate via the DMCA what types of devices can PLAY a DVD.

I can't imagine them allowing software defined radios in the hands of just anyone. Real DSP requires that you have general purpose computing devices.

I say kill all those flys. This is our freedom we are talking about.

Respectfully,
Terry
KE4PJW

If it doesn't make people any money to share music, pictures, and movies, why do they bother doing it? I don't think the internet sharing of music is causing problems in the industry; however, it is a good place to point a finger. WAAAAAAAA!

I checked out Napster before it was made illegal and the only use I had for it was to find old songs that weren't in the stores anymore. The new stuff wasn't very high-quality and, really, newer stuff wasn't very prominent.

If I could COMMERCIALLY download legal, high-quality, virus-free music for a "piecemeal" fee, I would consider it. $.50 per song wouldn't even be so bad. I wouldn't like an annual fee commitment, because I might decide not to use it much.

I'm probably getting off subject, but this is where my train of thought ended up. "NEXT STOP, PACKET RADIO."

[k3zd]

Does this mean I can't work 17m mobile anymore?

[W5HTW]

That damned chicken just ran by my window again ...

What is that he's cackling about? Hard to understand ..

Oh, now I hear it "The sky is falling, the sky is falling."



If anyone here was a creative individual producing a product, and it was being ripped off for free over the internet, he would (a) sue, or, (b) switch careers and dig ditches for a living. Someone on here said he can write and it is on here and anyone can read it, and that's fine. But what if he made his living doing that? And anyone could still read it, for free? Well, he'd stop writing it, or he'd sue. Or both.

Napster brought this on, and the thieves made it a big issue. Folks, when you steal from others, someone is going to wind up trying to do something about it. If someone keeps breaking into your home, you are going to put up alarms. If they don't work, you'll build a big fence. It that doesn't work you'll get a mean dog. If they still steal from you, you'll shoot them. Escalating problem. So the public stole from the artists (not the RIAA) and the RIAA acted to protect its artists and itself, for, for some damned reason, they are in that business to actually make money. Weird in this day of "I'm the only one allowed to earn a living and everyone else should give me their services/products" attitude. So they reacted. Did they overreact? Yeah, that's what this is about. But we kept stealing and they kept having to react. And now we are getting a re-reaction here.

But is this (yet) a ham radio issue? Well, according to that chicken that just ran by, maybe. But then, that is an old hen, and she's been running by my window screaming the same refrain for gobs of years, and she still has all her feathers, far as I can see.

This reminds me of the other hen-screaming act in our hen-house. "The US Post office is going to require you put a stamp on all your email."

Damn! There goes that chicken again.

Ed

[NO7S]

With all due respect: I start to glaze over when these forums have 2 or more pages to them. Things start to go "blaa, blaa, blaa" to me. (Sorry, nothing personal.) My confession should be that I'm just lazy and would like to get to the point. So........... if someone has already said this then please accept my apology for being redundant:

Just like the trouble harmony-central and OLGA had a couple years ago, doesn't this stuff have to be uploaded?? And if it's A-D at the source it is still D-D post conversion.

The computer manufacturers could (should) provide the encrypted binary code like SCMS (Serial Copy Management System) so that anyone downloading will also receive the SCMS code and they will have nothing.
I bet it has already been thought of.

If they "poo-poo" something as simple as this then we all know who is in bed with who and we are all just pissing up a rope anyway.

bob

[wb6bcn]

As for digital TV, this has been in the works for quite a while. First the industry had to agree upon a standard for HDTV. Some proposals involved using a compatible method of using existing transmitter equipment and deriving a method of apend apending the sides to the picture for 16 x 9 HDTV screens.
The method that was approved was an all digital method that could process standard 4 x 3 or Letterbox 16 x 9 or HDTV 16 X 9 over DBS and have local off air TV stations to convert to 100% digital by 2002. 2002 is nearly ended, and not all off air stations are set up to do off air digital tv. There are a lot of TV stations that have both digitat and analog transmitters. Again some don't have a digital transmitter yet. Most, if not all, of the digital TV transmitters are in the UHF spectrum. The next item was there was to be D/A converters available to the general public so they could convert these digital off air stations to analog for use on TV sets of current technology. I haven't seen any converters for off air digital TV with analog output yet.
When most of the satellite TV was on C band it was initally all analog. Then they went to the Video Cipher and later to the Video Cipher II. Both of Video Ciphers used analog video and digital audio. There was another method introduced about the mid '90s, but I don't remember what it was called. The industry wasn't happy with the lack of security, and the rampant piracy on with the Video Cipher.
At this time there was a lot of competion with no less then 30 or 40 vendors competing for your business. There are still some C band vendors out there, but the price for the Pizza dish and programming has made purchace of new C band systems unattractive. I don't care what anyone says, I have compared DBS and analog side by side with the same program material, and if the analog signal was noise free, it had superior quality.
There are only two primary vendors of DBS. A few months ago there was a move to merge them into one. This was shot down, for now. So much for competiotion, because once you buy one, you can't use it to receive the other guys signal. On C band you could switch vendors at will, or get some programming from several vendors at the same time. Without competition you can set the price, or jack it up, and the customer has two choices. Pay it, or discontinue service.
The DBS unlike C band no service, nothing except for thier info channels unless you purchace service. C band still has free unscrambled programming. Some of it may not be in a language you understand, or it may be in your tongue but not to your liking, but you still have Nasa Select on C band without having to subscribe to anything. I haven't fired up my C band at home for quite a while, but at last check there were still about 80 to 100 channels in the clear. The dish at the shop where I is for receiving Nasa Select and has 3 channels in the clear. I can't move it to check the other satellite locations, since the dish is locked in place.
I think I have beaten this horse enough. 73

[KI9A]

And this has to do with ham radio, HOW??

Yes, I did go to the linked sites.

Don't steal fricken music, don't copy programs, & you would not have to worry about this crap.

Now, back to "real" posts about Ham-related items!

[ke4pjw]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (W5HTW @ Dec. 02 2002,17:14)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Napster brought this on, and the thieves made it a big issue.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
That statement is simply false. Classic Copyright law covers the issue of copying material.

The thing that brought the DMCA to the forfront was when no one would make a DVD player avaliable under unix. So some folks got together and started to revese engineer DVD players. They released their source code. It has a module called DeCSS in it. That module had keys that they found on an un-encrypted DVD that would allow you to decode "Content Scrambling System" or CSS. CSS is a part of a DVD's access controls.

No one was making money on this deal. It was done as a project out in the open, with no fiduciary intrest involed. The goal was to produce free DVD player software that you could get the source code to.

Under the DMCA, this is illegal. The software is contaband here in the US.

The lawsuits (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&q=DeCSS+Lawsuit&spell=1) that followed is what made this issue big.

Stealing copyrighted works is illegal and immoral.

Viewing my "Shrek" DVD under Linux is illegal but moral.

This issue has nothing to do with stealing copyrighted works. It has to do with giving patent like protection to copyright holders via copyright law.

[ke4pjw]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KI9A @ Dec. 02 2002,18:22)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Now, back to "real" posts about Ham-related items![/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
This is about software defined radios and how they might be regulated.

With the upload of a new filter algorithm, you can view broadcasts on an unlicensed device. The license in this case, must come from the Motion Picture Association of America not the FCC.

Sure, it seems strange to think about. I mean really, how could they ban software defined radios. If the technology is as powerful as I suspect, the MPAA will have no choice but attempt to get it banned. My god, it will be like the 90's when you could record movies off the dish for later viewing. Do you have any idea how that could cut into their video on demand revenue?

[wa3yre]

For those that need more sources of info about the control the
content cartel wants over AtoD converters take a look at http://bpdg.blogs.eff.org/archives/000113.html

[w6th]

Wow, this all goes back when we went from black and white to the CBS color wheel. Think the same before that when http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif stole the FM from our buddy Armstrong and made Armstrong commit suicide. These companies that all of you are talking about, are they http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif, http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif?http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif, # # #This is a never ending battle, but take a fools advice and don't turn your back and most of all watch for the big money payoff.

Maybe I'm just young but I find all this very funny. No, I don't want to see ham radio impacted by this but on the other hand I enjoy watching the entertainment worms lose their shirts! #Fact is the only people getting screwed are the entertainment execs period, 'nuff said. There have been numerous studies done on the subject by many groups and the fact remains, file sharing actually helps the artist make money, and gives them maximum exposure to a broad audience. #Is it illegal, of course it is. #The problem is, the recording industry has been slow to react to the demand and instead of embracing technology they're trying to thwart it. #Not going to happen. They need to stop being so damn Orwellian and wake up!

# "``(2) No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that-
# # # # ``(A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title;
# # # #
Under this rule a person selling or posessing a "Sharpie" marker that can cover up the encryption track on a CD is actually breaking the law regardless of use. #Don't laugh, Sony spent millions of R&D dollars to develop this technology and within days of hitting the street some Euro-trash figured out you could by-pass it by running a sharpie along the edge of the CD.

The bottom line is, this is all hogwash. It's politics and the entertainment industry is lazy. #And frankly, F*(^ them! #Charging $21 for a crappy Sheryl Crowe CD?! #WTF? #They scream they're losing money but yet they found some way to pay Mariah Carey $30 Million for a four album deal. #She hasn't had a hit in 5 years! No wonder people are stealing music!

Ham radio will not be impacted by this legislation because the legislation is inherently flawed. #However, I do think we all, as hams, have a responsibility to protect our hobby and stay informed.

ham_is_meat

[n7wsb]

I think what is being missed is a law that has been pushed into various security bills (so far unsucessfully) in the name of 9/11 to require secure digital circutry on ANY electronic device that deals with audio/video - yes this includes amateur radio equipments. The requirements outlined in his bill (who's name changes from term to term) actually state this last time I read through it.

Edward W. Felten (he was the guy who was threatened with a dmca related lawsuite for just thinking about publishing a paper on how sdmi audio schemes work) has made a list called the Fritz Hit List - named after Senator Hollings - sometimes refered to as the senator from Disney (because they have given him well over 120,000 dollars). He is a senator from South Carolina - and in his own words this is his proposed bill http://hollings.senate.gov/~hollings/press/2002613820.html

http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/archives/cat_fritzs_hit_list.html these devices (updated day to day) are certified illegal under his law and would have to be equipment with secure digital circutry.

This law would in effect kill off any engineering company in the US that delt with audio/video processing - it would also kill of the market for foriegn made digital audio/video components as well by making them too expensive to produce or to purchase. Even electronic singing fish would have to have secure digital components in them - making them to costly to produce.

Who's side are these people on?

[wa3yre]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (MattBeers @ Dec. 04 2002,00:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I wish the original posting had been written better so that I could understand the actual issue, but unfortunately it was mainly innuendo - and it was certainly long enough to have summarized the actual law being proposed. So I cannot comment on whether I think hams need to respond to the issue or not.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>


FCC NPRM 02-230 is 15 pages long and the DMCA is even longer. Neither
lend themselves to "executive summary" very well. You can find them
both at www.nyfairuse.org (http://www.nyfairuse.org/)

If the NPRM goes through it will require all digital devices to be under the ultimate control of the "content cartel", or they will be considered "infringing devices" under the DMCA.

I urge you to read the DMCA there is more scarry stuff in there. We need
to work on getting it repealed, but right now we must stop the "Broadcast Flag" NPRM.

73
-Brett
WA3YRE

[k8nqc]

I have not noticed these legal activities but it seems that impairment of personal freedoms is showing up in many places. I feel a bit nervous. It is a time for vigilence. I commend those who are waving flags in areas they understand. Carry on.

[N2RJ]

Before this forum begins to sound like DSLReports.com (should be renamed RIAAReports.com), I'd like to add my piece as follows.

The RIAA and MPAA (particularly the RIAA) have absolutely no regard for fair use. #This has been proven time and time again by some of the following actions:

The lawsuit by the DVD CCA against DeCSS. #They claimed that DeCSS was meant to copy DVD's. #Quite simply put, DeCSS is was not meant to copy DVD's. #DeCSS was made because hollywood did not provide us a means to play DVD's in any other OS but Windows and Macintosh. #Imagine, we can't even play the DVD's we bought, far less copy them! #We would just love to have software to play our DVD's on Linux, but none was available. #Therefore the community had to code their own, and thus was born DeCSS. #By the way, DeCSS also underscores another point - when you use weak encryption, don't bother screaming bloody murder when it gets cracked.

Cactus and other CD corruption (copy protection) that crashes Mac's and PC's. #One of Celine Dion's most recent CD's was so horrible that it not only refused to play, but got stuck inside of new Mac's and crashed some PC's. Corrupt CD's (http://www.fatchucks.com/z3.cd.html) not only refuse to copy, but they refuse to play on PC's, DVD players, car CD players, high end audio CD players/changers and can even damage your expensive hardware.

Now they want to ban A/D converters? #This means that the following devices will now be useless:

Sound Cards
TV cards
CD Recorders
Ham rigs with DSP
TiVo and other PVR's (except DirecTiVo and DishPVR)
DAT
Answering machines
Digital memo recorders
Digital oscilloscopes

And the list goes on and on!

I agree that those stealing music over the internet are doing something illegal and should be punished to the maximum extent of the law. #However RIAA isn't doing anything that would encourage consumers to buy their product, like:

Lowering prices on CD's to a reasonable level
Having a good method of subscription music downloads (eMusic is a nice concept, but unlimited should be unlimited)
Compensating artists properly instead of ripping them off (IMO, recording execs are overpaid)
Allowing adequate fair use
Actually producing good music (no more of that Britney/N Stink/ cr*p we hear now)

Things we can do as consumers:

Write to your local reps and the FCC (with regards to ham equipment).
Don't contribute to the RIAA's legal fund by buying their CD's (I personally like to support independent artists)
Don't re-elect corrupt politicians into office and write them and let them know what they are doing is wrong. #(Ok, I know this is hard to do).

EDIT:
By the way, all of this CD corruption copy protection is not going to stop the big time pirates who cost the recording industry the most money. For the most part, those guys use industrial duplicators and even make illegal orders at CD/DVD manufacturing plants. Both of the above methods pretty much make bit for bit copies and ignore any form of copy protection. Furthermore, smart pirates operate outside of the United States, particularly in Asia where they are far outside the reach of US law.

Further reading:
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (http://www.eff.org)
Boycott the RIAA (http://www.boycott-riaa.com)
CD Price Fixing (http://homerecording.about.com/library/weekly/aa080900.htm)
DVD for every OS (http://www.opendvd.org)

[KE4MOB]

"One of Celine Dion's most recent CD's was so horrible that it not only refused to play, but got stuck inside of new Mac's and crashed some PC's."

I think if somebody tried to feed me a Celine Dion CD I'd get sick and crash, too.

[W4SFC]

It was started this is due to "music theives". #Not really true. #The Napster case opened a small crack in the law and someone is trying to open a flood gate. #It is due more to greed. #This is an age old battle. #It happened when cassett recorders became popular, then with the introduction of the Sony Beta-Max and with DAT and CDs. #In all cases they lost. #As stated with the Sony Case, a company can not be held liable for what the end user used the product for, production continued and the rest is history, so to speak. #The mistake was when the court shut down Napster. #This opened a little crack in the door. #Now they try again because of computer and home DVD recorders and digital TV. #It seems that when ever new technology arises they are waiting around the corner with hip pocket lawyers trying to make money on it. #Would it affect Ham Radio, they would like you to believe that would be a far fetch conclusion, but as with all laws you have to look at all possibilities. #Right now both of the industries are about the only ones I know that sell products with little or no warranty. #Ever try to return a DVD or CD, if you are lucky you can to an "exact exchange, same title". #Positivily no refunds. #Break it you own it, no returns. #After you open it, it's yours with no warranty on how long it will last or how it will perform. #Would you by a new $3k radio under the same conditions? #Passage could/would have immediately effect on many people. #Many I know, to include myself no longer have "big stereo" systems. #The home theater works fine. #However, now you may not be able to play your favorite CD on your home system, becuase it utilizes CD-ROM. #Forget about listening to them on your computer while working, won't work there anymore either. #What they complain about has gone on for years, and been through the courts. #People have always made a copy of an album, recorded their favorite tv show while at work, or copied a movie they rented. #The way I see it, they want to own the rights to their product "forever" and to dictate how it is used "forever". #Many ,legal internet radio station have already been forced out of business as well as many broadcast stations have stopped their shows from being heard on the net. Why, because after they became popular the record industry raised the cost of the license so much that is was now unaffordable. #Well some may say that is ok and is how it should be. #But what if this opens a door for other types of manufacturing to say the same. #What would happen if the drug industry used it to stop generic companies. #How affordable would medications be then? #What if ICOM or Kenwood or whoever, said only our filters and mics maybe used with our radios? Would it be legal to share anything? #How about back up copies? #All gone. #Stupid examples, maybe, but how far to big companies push to secure the extra dollar. #Even now the MPA is fighting within itself. #Many distributors want to drive the cost of a DVD down to 10.00, while others want to keep it up to 25.00. #Why? Because at 10.00 more people may purchase the movie, at $25 more people will rent, and they claim to make more in the rental market. #I agree they have the right to and do use copy protection. #I did think it was funny when after spending who knows how much to develope music CDs that could not be "played" in a computer cdrom, it only took hackers less then a week to figure out a 98cents marker solved the problem. But it is too late in the game with so many playback/record devices on the market to try a dictate what they can be played back on. #I do agree that something needs to be done to stop the black marketing of "bootleg" material being sold at the flea markets and such. #That should be law enforcement, it is already against the law to sell copywrited articles without permission. #Sorry for the rant, been a thorn in my side for years. #Guess I'd better check to ensure I haven't accidently quoted a song lyric or line of a movie. #Might get sued for "sharing" it with you. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif

Next they will outlaw "Memory to Speech Converters," or vocal cords so I can't memorize a song and share it with you by singing it.

[N2RJ]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">In all cases they lost. #[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

This may be changing, my friend. #RIAA/MPAA/BSA have gotten older, wiser and greedier. #They have decided to attack their problem on two main fronts:

Technology - the big players in technology like Microsoft and Intel are making Digital Rights Management mandatory in their new product offerings. #Planned obsolecense ensures that we will have no choice but to some day buy their products.

Legislation - The DMCA is just the beginning. #Ever heard of the Berman bill? (http://www.digitalspeech.org/berman.shtml) #This bill, introduced on June 25, by Howard Berman (D-CA) will allow the RIAA/MPAA/BSA and their appointed agents to basically engage in vigilante justice and hack your computer, if they even suspect that you have taken part in copyright violation activity. #Say goodbye to your privacy on the internet.

Many big players in the hardware industry are in bed with the RIAA. #Many <s>bribes</s> campaign contributions (http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/indus.asp?CID=N00008094) are often passed on to congressional reps by people in the entertainment industry. #One only has to look at the location of Berman's congressional district to see why he is behind legislation that takes away our fair use rights.

[kd8apd]

I have an idea. Let's all just put a "hit" spot in our DVD's so they can only be played once, and incinerate when they do. That would solve these copyright issues.

[N2RJ]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KC8VGM @ Dec. 04 2002,19:06)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I have an idea. #Let's all just put a "hit" spot in our DVD's so they can only be played once, and incinerate when they do. #That would solve these copyright issues.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Then you'd just have Divx.

[n9kpn]

A standard PC soundcard can be used to "bypass" digital copy protection/watermarks/etc. #Thus, the way the proposed law is written, soundcards with INPUTS can be considered illegal. #Before anyone say "The quality won't be as good" I will agree. #But for nearly 85 years we all got by using ANALOG recordings. #Do you really think an MP3 is that clean to begin with? #

Anyone have scanners that have a couple of "notches" in them in the 800 MHz spectrum? #It does not matter that the signals originally inteneded to occupy these "notches" are now outside them and mostly digital, the law still applies. #Do you think it will be reversed? #Yeah, right.

[k7jeb]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (AB2MH @ Dec. 04 2002,09:31)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">By the way, all of this CD corruption copy protection is not going to stop the big time pirates who cost the recording industry the most money. #For the most part, those guys use industrial duplicators and even make illegal orders at CD/DVD manufacturing plants. #Both of the above methods pretty much make bit for bit copies and ignore any form of copy protection. #Furthermore, smart pirates operate outside of the United States, particularly in Asia where they are far outside the reach of US law.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
I foresee enormous opportunities arising from
this in the fields of black/gray marketing, terrorist-
cell funding, Asian technology development, police
corruption and citizen disenchantment with gov't
anything. It's a wonderful way to usher in the
21st century and the new millennium of world disorder.
It is the perfect vehicle to make anarchy acceptable
to the masses. Who wouldn't resent an electronic
nanny, particularly one that assumes that all subjects
are guilty until proven innocent (oh, excuse me,
validated).

[KG4PZZ]

I just have to add my 2 cents. In theory, would this outlaw my HP Printer? I mean, it takes digital signals and converts them to analog format. So I *COULD* type copyrighted things, print them, photocopy them, and then distribute them (sounds like a high school english class to me!http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif. And that... that would be illegal. *Sigh*. Why does everything have to have a law now-a-days? People that complain about Napster and Kazaa don't use the tools correctly. I've never (NEVER) had a virus from Kazaa. Same for Napster when it was alive. I guess I may have an "illegal thinking", but it seems that it's just the wave of the future. I forsee an internet where every last little thing is going to be regulated. What's next, FCC issued tests for internet use? (Haha. 56K and below until you can pass a 20WPM typing test without looking. Does THAT sound familiar?) I've probably bought CDs that I wouldn't have thought about if it weren't for Kazaa. I've found bands -- and supported them -- through Kazaa. It comes down to the fact I only want one song of a particular artist's and it happens that it isn't released as a single. Well, he's already making millions, no sense in giving him another $17.95.

I use Kazaa and Winamp more than I use my radios. It's just that I can emotionally cope with life better with music, and I have plenty of choice from the 1200 songs I have downloaded. Some people say they couldn't imagine paying $50 a year for a music service such as that. I'd get my own job to pay for $50 a month for unlimited file sharing. Some people use it, some don't. It's like echolink. I guess being younger I see it differently, but I remember my mom and her friends putting together $2 each, buying a new band's tape, having somebody make a few copies, and everybody had a copy of the tape for just $2 instead of $15. Even if everything was outlawed, there would still be those of us that would find a way around it, homebrewing and such. I guess it boils down to the fact that if there's a will, there's a way. Take away my file sharing and I'll find a new way to do it. (Napster shut down, and somebody came out with Kazaa. There's no stopping it, honestly.)

[wa3yre]

For those of you that want a direct short link to
making your comments to the FCC here it is http://www.nyfairuse.org/action/fcc.flag/nprm02-230.xhtml

You can find some comments by others and an executive summary at
http://www.nyfairuse.org/action/fcc.flag/

[AG4TL]

Just a thought here, add this to all the problems we "AMERICANS" have to deal with. take a gander at the recently passed Homeland Security Bill... I am litterally shaking in my boots. <sorry I dont have a url but I bet yahoo.com or google has> http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif

[AE4TM]

If our Government blindly outlaws A/D converters without paying attention to the consequences then Pactor-2 and Pactor-3 would cease to exist. These advanced HF digital modes are used for backup communications in embassies around the world and outlawing A/D converters would place all the embassy staff in danger. The PTC-II controllers used in these advanced HF communications modes require Sigma-Delta converters as part of their protocol:

http://www.rmsinst.com/dt3.htm
http://www.intersil.com/cda/application/0,1239,18,00.html

In my opinion, I don't think this will ever happen but again one never can predict the future with absolute certainty.

Cheers,
Ed AE4TM

Pactor protocol (http://ecjones.org/pactor.html)

[wa3yre]

AE4TM-
Remember that things can be illegal for members of the general public to own, but the goverment/military can still own them. A case in point is the automatic weapon, AKA machine gun. You can not own one even though the constitution guarantees you the right to keep and bear arms. In a similar way the goverment can reserve the right to own general purpose computers and a/d converters for the "content cartel" and themselves.
To any one that says it can't happen here take a good look at the DMCA (http://www.nyfairuse.org/dmca.xhtml) and remember when you look at it that it IS NOW LAW!

[KB3GFD]

There is no hidden threat to amateur radio, just a desire to protect intellectual property. A/D converters and CODECS are standard components and there is no way their sale could be limited. What is of concern is the building and sale of devices that will allow the theft of intellectual property.

Many people do not understand that when they buy a recording or book they have only limited rights. They cannot reproduce the material for sale or gift to others. There is a 'fair use' concept that injects some common sense into this.

This concern should be on a very back burner.

[n0xas]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"># # Remember that things can be illegal for members of the general public to own,but the goverment/military can still own them. #A case in point is the automatic weapon, AKA machine gun. #You can not own one even though the constitution guarantees you the right to keep and bear arms. #[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

Minor nit - but yes, you can indeed own automatic weapons, it's just expensive. #Get yourself the proper Federal license and you can own that Browning .50 or grease gun you've always wanted. #I've been out at the range when the guys come out with their toys - got to play with a cal .22 full-auto, 150+ round mag WITH a silencer. #Completely legal, and WAY fun for plinking!! # http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif # Too expen$ive for me though, and not much real use.

73,
Dale

[ke4pjw]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KB3GFD @ Dec. 04 2002,21:22)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">There is no hidden threat to amateur radio, just a desire to protect intellectual property. A/D converters and CODECS are standard components and there is no way their sale could be limited. What is of concern is the building and sale of devices that will allow the theft of intellectual property.

Many people do not understand that when they buy a recording or book they have only limited rights. They cannot reproduce the material for sale or gift to others. There is a 'fair use' concept that injects some common sense into this.

This concern should be on a very back burner.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

This point is, there are _NO_ technological means to keep people from stealing copyrighted works. Why should copyright holders be afforded patent like protection on devices that don't really keep theives from stealing?

This does not make for good law. Go after the theives, but allow the rest of us to advance the state of the art.

See, they changed the law. It used to be that "In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work." (US Title 17 § 102.b) But now it does because of the DMCA. Read about the DeCSS case.


On a side note, you can sale and gift copyrighted material to other people. (Used CD stores for example) What you can't do is copy that material _AND_ distribute it (copies or originals) to others.

The same can't be said for most computer software because it is bound by contract law.

[ke4pjw]

Oh good. Don't worry, Disney's lawyers (http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6513391182) are on the case. Exactly why is that Mouse still copyrighted? Oh yea, they keep changing the laws so it will never fall into the public domain. So much for fair use.

[wa3yre]

Here is a link to a detailed explanation of THE DISNEY LIE TO THE FCC (http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/12/06/0614253&mode=thread&tid=99).

[N5JHN]

and how is this going to have a #bearing on me? if you run a ts520s and a sb200 amp and a few other vintage boat anchors you dont have to worry about this hi tech bs. you just might have more fun too.73 N5JHN http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[N2RJ]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ke4pjw @ Dec. 06 2002,02:43)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">This point is, there are _NO_ technological means to keep people from stealing copyrighted works. Why should copyright holders be afforded patent like protection on devices that don't really keep theives from stealing?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Furthermore, there would be no need to steal music if good music was actually available at a reasonable price. #RIAA fails to realize this and instead is using high handed tactics to protect their market share. #It's not about preventing theft or anything like that. #It's all about control over what you can and cannot do. #The MPAA and RIAA would like to have it such that you cannot do anything without their express written permission. #The only way I would agree with that is if they gave me all of my equipment for free. #I paid top dollar for my equipment, I should be able to do what the heck I want with it.

Copy protection killed off or slowed the growth of some great technology, such as DAT for home audio recording and is currently hanging like a dark grey cloud over other technologies like HDTV. #Clearly the MPAA and RIAA do not understand that copy protection will never work and the only way to increase sales is to actually produce a good product.

[ke4pjw]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (AB2MH @ Dec. 05 2002,11:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ke4pjw @ Dec. 06 2002,02:43)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">This point is, there are _NO_ technological means to keep people from stealing copyrighted works. Why should copyright holders be afforded patent like protection on devices that don't really keep theives from stealing?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Furthermore, there would be no need to steal music if good music was actually available at a reasonable price. RIAA fails to realize this and instead is using high handed tactics to protect their market share. It's not about preventing theft or anything like that. It's all about control over what you can and cannot do. The MPAA and RIAA would like to have it such that you cannot do anything without their express written permission. The only way I would agree with that is if they gave me all of my equipment for free. I paid top dollar for my equipment, I should be able to do what the heck I want with it.

Copy protection killed off or slowed the growth of some great technology, such as DAT for home audio recording and is currently hanging like a dark grey cloud over other technologies like HDTV. Clearly the MPAA and RIAA do not understand that copy protection will never work and the only way to increase sales is to actually produce a good product.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

I think this is a sign of the apocalypse. Ryan and I, for the most part, are in agreement on something. (I happen to like crappy pop music, but that is just a matter of taste, or lack there of :) )

[KD7EFQ]

WOW! Does this mean I Can't run 1.5 KW thru my
AD/DA converter to put a +30db over S-9 signal on
CD and mail it to my most difficult to get DX contact
for DXCC?? Hi Hi 73's KD7EFQ

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">People that complain about Napster and Kazaa don't use the tools correctly. #I've never (NEVER) had a virus from Kazaa. #Same for Napster when it was alive.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

I got the NIMDA virus from one of the files my teen stepson downloaded from KAZAA. #



IMESH (another jpeg downloading program) loads all kinds of adware on your computer such as BONZI and Gator. #This adware results in pop-up ads that reside on your computer's hard drive. #It also loads a program that keeps nagging you to change your homepage to BONZI.
How can someone "use it wrong" when the downloading software installs unwanted crap all over your computer?



My point is- non-buyer beware. #There is a risk of screwing up your operating system if you use these peer-to-peer networks.



I think being able to download Jpeg files off the internet is not much different than recording a song off the radio or copying a song off a CD and giving it to a friend. #While it is illegal under copyright law, how is it going to be enforced? #Certainly not by outlawing D/A converters or what else, transistors, speakers, and microphones? #



I think common sense will eventually prevail and the only folks who will get this law used against themselves are the blatant violators and big distributors of the illegal wares.



In the mean time, More laws=more jobs!

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">This reminds me of the other hen-screaming act in our hen-house. #"The US Post office is going to require you put a stamp on all your email."

Damn! #There goes that chicken again.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

Pretty funny. #I think that one was actually a proposed system to get e-mail to cross over into actual delivered letters. #The Post Office has no control over the servers that distribute the e-mail. #I bet they COULD charge us if they bought the internet. #How much would that cost again? #Bill Gates can't even afford it or he would have already bought it.

I did hear he made an offer to buy the US Post Office, though.

Cackle Cackle

[N4DFP]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KC8VGM @ Dec. 04 2002,16<!--emo&http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I have an idea. #Let's all just put a "hit" spot in our DVD's so they can only be played once, and incinerate when they do. #That would solve these copyright issues.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

Guess you haven't heard about the new dye technology that, once the CD-DVD is unsealed, you have approx. 24 hours use before the dye degrades to the point that the media become unusable.

This whole issue is about a change in concept of use from ownership rights to liscensed use. When I was a kid, you bought a 45 rpm record, copied it onto tape and listened to the tape (if you were smart) because the diamond stylus of the turntable ate vinyl like crazy and seriously degraded the the product that you OWNED.

Along came computers.... forget for the moment CD's DVD's and other digital entertainment media. You paid a significant portion of a years salary for a useless box filled with cards full of chips. To make it work you had to buy software; from OS to apps. But when you bought the software, you weren't buying a product, you were buying a license to use someone elses intellectual property. Most of us never really knew or even thought about the implications of such a scheme at the time. Now it has come back to bite us in the nether regions.

The RIAA/MPAA feel, with some justification, that their content is directly co-relative to software. Where this gets completely out of control is their expectation that their CIVIL rights be protected under CRIMINAL code. Any copyright holder has always had the full range of civil legal remedies at their disposal. It is their responsibility to prosecute violators in CIVIL courts. Of course there they would have to prove actual damage to collect an award, and that only commensurate with the damage. The costs to prosecute each violator (aside from tieing up the courts for centuries to come) even with treble or quadruple damages would be prohibitive. So rather than acknowledge that the value of their service has reached the point of diminishing returns, they apply to govenment for protectionist laws to place their dinosaur on life support at the expense of emerging new technologies.

Pardon me, but this is the land of the free. Want to see where such protectionism leads? Look at the Soviet Union. I am not just flag waving here. The Sovs stayed locked into old technology while the West went with newer, faster, cheaper technolgy and allowed it to grow in a free marketplace. THAT was the ultimate downfall of the Soviet Union. It appears that we are on the verge of closing our maketplace. Do you really think it will take 70 years for us to become unviable?

[wa3yre]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (n8ary @ Dec. 07 2002,19:45)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
I think being able to download Jpeg files off the internet is not much different than recording a song off the radio or copying a song off a CD and giving it to a friend. While it is illegal under copyright law, how is it going to be enforced? Certainly not by outlawing D/A converters or what else, transistors, speakers, and microphones?
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

This shows some of the common misconceptions of the rights of
the American public under U. S. copyright law. While I am not a lawyer
and I think that the P2P stuff is too much of a grey area to speculate
on without a better knowldge of legal matters than I have it is very
clear that recording things off the air is perfectly legal. In fact the
supreme court has upheld it as legal and to codify it the home recording
act was passed by congress in the late 1970's . Take a look at http://www.nyfairuse.org/
and about 3/4 down the page you will find a summary of things that you may do with a copyrighted work. If you still doubt then take a look at
the copyright office info on the subject http;//www.copyright.gov/ (http://www.copyright.gov/)

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (n8ary @ Dec. 07 2002,19:45)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
I think common sense will eventually prevail and the only folks who will get this law used against themselves are the blatant violators and big distributors of the illegal wares.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

The DMCA is already being abused to shutdown websites and silence
cryptographic researchers. You should take a look at

how the Bank Of New York is abusing the DMCA (http://www.nyfairuse.org/archive/bony.xhtml) and realise that this is just one example of abuse of this really twisted law that was designed to attempt to abridge the public's rights under the constitution. You can find more examples of DMCA abuse on the New Yorkers For Fair Use page. (http://www.nyfairuse.org/)

Anyone that thinks that if the FCC does mandate the Broadcast Flag no one will ever be prosecuted for DMCA violations if they are not swapping music files in a big way on the internet is not educated on the issue.
I am begging everyone to get educated on the issue. It all sounds so far fetched as to be the stuff of phantisim, but it is not.

Here are some good resources:

New Yorkers For Fair Use (http://www.nyfairuse.org/)
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (http://www.eff.org/)
EFF BPDG Blog (http://bpdg.blogs.eff.org/)

You can also just do a google search for DMCA and you will get plenty of resources.

Before making snide and uninformed remarks about a very real and present danger to both Ham Radio and general U. S. Civil Liberties
take a moment to get educated on the subject. Remember that it is better to be silent and thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

[KD5SYH]

Not everybody has enough money to buy music CD, especially at the $12 to $25 price range today, and this is especially more so if that CD has only 1 or 2 songs on it. I know that I surely dont have the money to spend on CDs, and you shouldnt have to refrain from lsitening to music just becasue you dont have a large pocketbook. The radio stations don't play much of anything anymore, just the same "hit" songs over and over...nothing new, nothing with political messages, no artists struggling to make a name for themselves and have their music heard, etc... Also, being a musician myself, I personally wouldnt care if someone downloaded some songs of mine. I know I would still be making money performing or selling CDs or tapes, and as long as people hear my music, rich or poor, thats ok with me.

And on the MPAA and RIAA's attempts at controlling the digital world, I feel that they're going to encounter much resistance by ham operators, electronic hobbyists, computer hobbyists, software programmers, the whole lot. This is ignorance at its best.

TNX & 73's,
Fabian C-S.
KD5SYH

[KD5SYH]

Not everybody has enough money to buy music CD, especially at the $12 to $25 price range today, and this is especially more so if that CD has only 1 or 2 songs on it. I know that I surely dont have the money to spend on CDs, and you shouldnt have to refrain from lsitening to music just becasue you dont have a large pocketbook. The radio stations don't play much of anything anymore, just the same "hit" songs over and over...nothing new, nothing with political messages, no artists struggling to make a name for themselves and have their music heard, etc... Also, being a musician myself, I personally wouldnt care if someone downloaded some songs of mine. I know I would still be making money performing or selling CDs or tapes, and as long as people hear my music, rich or poor, thats ok with me. #

And on the MPAA and RIAA's attempts at controlling the digital world, I feel that they're going to encounter much resistance by ham operators, electronic hobbyists, computer hobbyists...the whole lot. This is ignorance at its best.

TNX & 73's,
Fabian C-S.
KD5SYH

[KB2PSM]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KD5JDG @ Dec. 08 2002,19:45)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
And on the MPAA and RIAA's attempts at controlling the digital world, I feel that they're going to encounter much resistance by ham operators, electronic hobbyists, computer hobbyists, software programmers, the whole lot. This is ignorance at its best.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

Resistence to this legislation would only be effective if it is amassed before it is passed into law. #If this form of legislation becomes a done deal, and therefore turns out to limit and upset all of the above people and more, the response would have come too late!

Rob KB2PSM

[wa3yre]

The unfortunant thing is that The DMCA (http://www.nyfairuse.org/dmca.xhtml) is already law. It passed very quietly in 1998. Now the MPAA & RIAA are trying to get goverment regulations in place to expand the things the DMCA can
apply to. This is exactly what NPRM 02-230 (http://www.nyfairuse.org/action/fcc.flag/)
is all about. It is fortunant that there was an overwhelming response
against the NPRM in the comments to the FCC. We can hope that the
FCC listens to the will of the people, but unfortunantly there is no
mandate that they listen.

The next part of the fight on this front is the reply comment period, unless of course the FCC accepts the request for extension of time to file (http://www.nyfairuse.org/cgi-bin/nyfu/news) that New Yorkers For Fair Use (http://www.nyfairuse.org/) filed Friday due to malfunctions of the FCC ECFS system. (http://www.nyfairuse.org/cgi-bin/nyfu/news)

Keep an eye on the New Yorkers For Fair Use (http://www.nyfairuse.org/) web site for information on the reply comment period.

In addition while repulsing the assults that are using the DMCA as a
launching platform we need to work on getting congress to repeal the
DMCA. When I started to warn folks about the evil that is the DMCA (http://www.nyfairuse.org/analysis/tidbits/) back in 1998 before the law was passed everyone was so
sure that this could never happen in America that no one took the threat
seriously with the exception of those in the Free Software Movement.

[al0m]

The entire effort by the 'artist industries' is hilarious and pathetic. #They did the same thing with cassette tapes years ago. #There are already more AD/DA devices manufactured than they can round up. #There are more computers already manufactured than they can control. #Too late RIAA, cat's out of the bag.

SHOCKER! #A majority of the music pirated is by kids listening to kids music. #The industry has targeted our children for years, and overcharged them for years. #For something that influences children in a negative way and they eventually they outgrow it I think the public should CHARGE the RIAA and the recording industry with the criminal offenses of 'contributing to the deliquency of minors' #100 million counts, one for each record sold. #At watch THEM squirm. #The RIAA is diverting the attention from the real crime committed which is giving $millions to the worst examples of human beings and then telling us we are cheating them! #Let's get out a rope and cut out the double talk! #These guys are double talking criminals! #They say we are being irresponsible with THEIR music? #We these jerks are being irresponsible with OUR CHILDREN too and they use the free speech laws to continue. #I say we use the free speech laws too!

[keltec]

One common thought here is that the gov't is looking out for MR. BIG. That is definitely true in that, gov't is self perpetuating in it's existence and any organization or group that will help them "grow" will get what they want. Thus, the new and improved regulations. I agree totally that the requirement for HDTV is nothing more than a marketing ploy for manufacturers that had seen their television product competition become stale so, they lobby the gov't for new and improved products and we will all be buying new TVs in the near future or, spending $400 on each TV we now own for an upgrade. I am seriously considering finding a new form of self entertainment. They will also try to take over all control of ALL airwave frequencies slowly but surely. Big Brother is more alive in the USA than almost any other country. Our "delegates" in DC like the model of total gov't control that they see in China. Mark it down.

[N5JOB]

I have not read the related documents yet, so I really can't comment specifically. #BUT - all this sounds like the HDTV ripoff that is taking place.

The color television standard as we have known it is perfectly satisfactory for 99.9 percent of the population. #HDTV is unnecessary. #Why is it happening? #It's just another big SCAM.

They are making a market for themselves. #They know that if they change the standard, then EVERYONE will have to buy new televisions. #What's that... about 500 million televisions in the United States alone? #That's big money.

This is all B.S. and at this point in my life I'm SICK of continually being SCAMMED. #I rebel by NOT BUYING all their high priced CD's, computers, televisions, radios, etc. #I use all ANALOG equipment in my SWL station and it works fine. #It was inexpensive and I can work on it if I need to.

Now MAYBE if all those things were built in the U.S.A. by U.S. citizen workers I would get some of them. #But why should I support slave labor in China and Mexico?

[WA4RYW]

Well, this hasn't got a thing to do with ham radio (at first), but since we're on the subject of RIAA/MPAA, my two cents worth. I, for one, have not purchased an industry-produced CD in over 10 years. My reasons have to do with the industry's insistance that I purchase a $15+ CD full of crap for perhaps one cut that I want. Remember when CDs first came out? The options were $4-7 dollar LPs and $1.25 45 RPM singles. We were supposed to imbrace the CD concept because cheap manufacturing costs were going to cause the cost to the comsumer to plummet, among the technical advantages. But to cover the engineering and development costs, we need to endure a brief period of paying $15+ dollars for media. Yeah. Well, singles are AWOL, and CDs are still $15+ dollars, even though production costs are down to pennies per disk. I hate being forced to accept their marketing with no recourse and no options. Sans the college kids that are "stealing" material for whatever reason they use, the grand majority of people I know of engaging in Internet exchanging are staging either "civil disobedience on a grand scale" or distributing their self-produced music without having to beg the great music industry for their blessing, or both. One thing for certain, they have their attention! Personally, I hope they drive their greedy bones (cleaned up substantially) out of business and take Metallica with them. Almost everyone I know that is engaged in the practice downloads self-produced material, or old out-of-circulation 50s-80s music that one couldn't buy for any amount of money, unless subscribing to a Time-Life subscription of never-ending hell. As someone else put it in an earlier post, the major reason their sales are in a death spiral have more to do with the programmed crap they put out for consumption, and people's lack of desire to listen to it. There hasn't been any real talent released from the "machine" since the 80's (in my opinion, of course). All we get now is rap and "made for consumption" formula pap like the Back Street Boys. Perhaps if they would get out of the office on occasion and scout around some of the places new talent would likely be, and of course stick by them (read: commitment) until they built a little name recognition, maybe they could deliver some real quality atristic material again. They don't nurture potential any longer, they just formulate for the quick buck. I for one say MPAA/RIAA, ROT IN HELL! Disclaimer: This rant has been focused primarily at the RIAA, however I do also have a good rant for the MPAA. For another day. In the meantime, get off your A** and don't take it lying down! This "devil may care" attitude that Americans in general are adopting is what attributed to Amateur Radio's decent/devolution into CB Phase II, and will ultimately be the finishing touch that kills off our spectrum at 220MHz and above. The greatest threat to our spectrum that has ever existed is our situation today, and the bands above two meters are all but dead. My God people, get involved!!! In something. Anything!

I'm finished now. And yes, I feel better.

[n1ztb]

To all of this I must say....

You have GOT to be fuc*ing kidding me....

More and more lately I find myself wondering I we really beat communism, or joining it.

JM2C


73 de Erik N1ZTB

[K2PG]

The DMCA is not the only obnoxious law to come out of the reeking dung heap that is Washington. Does anyone remember the ECPA of 1986, with its subsequent amendments? Thanks to that law, pushed through Congress by the cellular industry, the government now dictates which frequencies we may or may not tune to and the government dictates receiver design. It seems to me that the other countries that joined this "land of the free" in passing receiver laws included Communist China, the Soviet Union, the now-defunct "German Democratic Republic" (East Germany), and Hitler's Germany. And, of course, the forced conversion to digital television broadcasting (DTV), fueled by Cong. Billy Tauzin (R-LA) with a push from his masters in the cellular industry (which wants the upper UHF channels), will make all of your television sets obsolete within three years--especially if Tauzin gets his way in taking away the provision that 85% of viewers be capable of receiving digital broadcasts before analog is shut down.

The filthiest, vilest whores reside, not on Times Square, but on Capitol Hill! And it's obvious that the place that needs a "regime change" is not Baghdad but Washington! Time for us Americans to take back our country!

It is said that nobody's freedom and property are safe when Congress is in session. Perhaps the people should see to it that no congressman or senator should be safe from the people's wrath.