# They'll Get My VCR When They Pry It From My Cold, Dead Fingers **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [September 14, 2004, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyll-get-my-vcr-when-they-pry-it-from-my-cold-dead-fingers/264344 "2004-09-14T01:21:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2004, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyll-get-my-vcr-when-they-pry-it-from-my-cold-dead-fingers/264344/1 "2004-09-14T01:21:24Z")
[You Tivo users aren’t immune either.](http://savebetamax.org/) > [@](#): > > In the case “Sony Corp vs. Universal City Studios” the Supreme Court ruled that movie studios could not hold VCR manufacturers liable when customers made illegal copies, because VCRs also had “substantial non-infringing uses”. But now, Senate bill S. 2560, known as the “INDUCE Act” would undermine the Betamax decision by creating a new kind of liability: the VCR maker of tomorrow could be sued for “inducing” their customers to make infringing copies. > > “The iPod, the recordable CD-ROM, the VCR, and even the Xerox machine all owe their success to the foundation laid out by the Betamax decision,” said Holmes Wilson, co-founder of the Downhill Battle, which is organizing the call-in day. “But now,” says Wilson, “a handful of very well-connected entertainment companies are trying to undermine that foundation.” If the entertainment industry wanted to know what the best way to slit their throat, I’d have to say that this is it. ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2004, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyll-get-my-vcr-when-they-pry-it-from-my-cold-dead-fingers/264344/2 "2004-09-14T03:32:06Z")
> [@Tuckerfan](#): > > If the entertainment industry wanted to know what the best way to slit their throat, I’d have to say that this is it. Hm. I’d have to say that the industry is evil and greedy, not stupid. They won’t go after too many people, and they won’t go after VCRs or Xeroxes or any technology that Aunt Tillie or CEO Jones would know how to use. This will be aimed, in practice, to give more teeth to DRM software and EULAs. Of course, it will eventually kill off the industry. But I don’t think they’d be dumb enough to go after the very rich or the country’s single largest voting block. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2004, 3:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyll-get-my-vcr-when-they-pry-it-from-my-cold-dead-fingers/264344/3 "2004-09-14T03:35:22Z")
Well, i just spent some time reading the proposed legislation, [Senate Bill S. 2560](http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=108_cong_bills&docid=f:s2560is.txt.pdf) (warning: pdf), and the comments on the bill by its main sponsors ([1](http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2004_record&page=S7189&position=all), [2](http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2004_record&page=S7190&position=all), [3](http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2004_record&page=S7191&position=all), [4](http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2004_record&page=S7192&position=all), [5](http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2004_record&page=S7193&position=all). All pdf). As far as i can tell, this bill is targetted specifically at those who manufacture and distribute file-sharing software such as Kazaa and other peer-to-peer programs. There is nothing in Hatch or Leahy’s comments that suggest to me that technology such as VCRs, TiVO, CD Burners and similar equipment might be threatened. Admittedly, the language of the bill itself is rather broad and nebulous, and there’s no guarantee that the courts might not interpret it to over-rule the Betamax decision, but i really don’t think that it’s quite as dangerous as the article in your link suggests. Perhaps one of the SDMB’s legal types can go into more detail about the possible implications of this bill for copying technology like VCRs and TiVO. Now, whether it’s a good idea to ban P2P programs is another argument. I’m not sure that it is, and i don’t necessarily see why we should hold the makers of this software responsible for what free, independent individuals choose to do with it. Also, Hatch’s harping on about the dangers of pornography and the threat it presents to our America’s children rings pretty damn hollow and self-serving. Hate to break it you, Orrin, but you don’t need P2P software to find porn on the internet. ---
**Author:** ![JKilez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e5b9ba/32.png) [@JKilez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JKilez)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2004, 3:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyll-get-my-vcr-when-they-pry-it-from-my-cold-dead-fingers/264344/4 "2004-09-14T03:56:30Z")
I just read it and had the same interpretation as **mhendo**. This looks like a peer-to-peer and DVD-X-Copy killer. While you could argue over the meaning of the the specific language used (which seems to be the point), the intent seems clear. It is pushing for DRM. ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2004, 8:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyll-get-my-vcr-when-they-pry-it-from-my-cold-dead-fingers/264344/5 "2004-09-14T08:42:14Z")
> [@mhendo](#): > > Also, Hatch’s harping on about the dangers of pornography and the threat it presents to our America’s children rings pretty damn hollow and self-serving. Hate to break it you, Orrin, but you don’t need P2P software to find porn on the internet. Hatch is doing what he’s been paid to do: Sell Congress on DRM legislation the best way he knows how. If he can make P2P == Porn in the eyes of the voters, anyone who isn’t against something that would stop P2P must be for porn and, therefore… _a witch_! This is why computer people roll their eyes at politics. We see hundreds of overstuffed ignoramuses selling FUD to the public and supporting the business models of corporations that see everyone everywhere as a criminal. I’m a hacker, no matter how that word has been misused in recent years, and I’m damned tired of the whole system. Between the Patriot Act and the DMCA, I find very little redeeming in our current government. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2004, 9:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyll-get-my-vcr-when-they-pry-it-from-my-cold-dead-fingers/264344/6 "2004-09-14T09:03:06Z")
> [@Mhendo](#): > > As far as i can tell, this bill is targetted specifically at those who manufacture and distribute file-sharing software such as Kazaa and other peer-to-peer programs. Targeted. That’s nice. Unfortunately, some people can’t hit the broad side of a barn, or they shoot a rabbit with anti-tank grenade. If you can show me that no law has ever been (ab)used beyond its original intended “target”, I’ll relax. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2004, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyll-get-my-vcr-when-they-pry-it-from-my-cold-dead-fingers/264344/7 "2004-09-14T14:00:57Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > Targeted. That’s nice. Unfortunately, some people can’t hit the broad side of a barn, or they shoot a rabbit with anti-tank grenade. If you can show me that no law has ever been (ab)used beyond its original intended “target”, I’ll relax. You seem to be implying that i don’t believe that a law can be “(ab)used beyond its original intended ‘target.’” Perhaps you missed the part where i wrote: > [@mhendo](#): > > Admittedly, the language of the bill itself is rather broad and nebulous, and there’s no guarantee that the courts might not interpret it to over-rule the Betamax decision… and also the part where i suggested that, even if it is narrowly interpreted to include only file-sharing programs, it’s not a good law. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2004, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyll-get-my-vcr-when-they-pry-it-from-my-cold-dead-fingers/264344/8 "2004-09-14T14:12:24Z")
> [@JKilez](#): > > I just read it and had the same interpretation as **mhendo**. This looks like a peer-to-peer and DVD-X-Copy killer. While you could argue over the meaning of the the specific language used (which seems to be the point), the intent seems clear. It is pushing for DRM. Very often, bills whose intent seems clear have purposes which only become clear until after the bill has passed. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2004, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyll-get-my-vcr-when-they-pry-it-from-my-cold-dead-fingers/264344/9 "2004-09-14T14:43:22Z")
> [@Derleth](#): > > This is why computer people roll their eyes at politics. We see hundreds of overstuffed ignoramuses selling FUD to the public and supporting the business models of corporations that see everyone everywhere as a criminal. I’m a hacker, no matter how that word has been misused in recent years, and I’m damned tired of the whole system. Between the Patriot Act and the DMCA, I find very little redeeming in our current government. I agree with you, both about this legislation, and in general. Perhaps the most interesting part of this is the way that Hatch and Leahy, in their speeches to congress on the bill, take so much time and effort to try and convince us that the people who use file-sharing programs are the helpless pawns of the evil P2P companies. Here are some relevant quotes: > [@Orrin Hatch](#): > > These programs are used mostly by children and college students–about half of their users are children. Users of these programs routinely violate criminal laws relating to copyright infringement and pornography distribution. Criminal law defines "inducement’’ as "that which leads or tempts to the commission of crime.’’ Some P2P software appears to be the definition of criminal inducement captured in computer code. “Criminal inducement captured in computer code.” Oooooooh, how eeeeevil!!! Except that all he’s talking about is a simple program that allows computers to talk to one another and share files—files that may or may not be protected by copyright. > [@Orrin Hatch](#): > > The "direct infringers’’ at issue are not the traditional targets for copyright enforcement. In fact, they are children and consumers: They are the hundreds of millions of Americans–toddlers to seniors–who use and enjoy the creative works that copyrights have helped create. > > There is no precedent for shifting copyright enforcement toward the end-users of works. For nearly 200 years, copyright law has been nearly invisible to the millions who used and enjoyed creative works. Copyright law was invisible to consumers because the law gave creators and distributors mutual incentives to negotiate the agreements that ensured that works reached consumers in forms that were safe to use in foreseeable ways. Now, those incentives are collapsing. As a result, artists must now waive their rights or sue consumers—their fans. Well boo-fucking-hoo. Hatch’s corporate sugar-daddies in the recording industry have made it clear that they want to stop copyright infringement, but they also don’t have the balls to go after the people who are doing the actual infringing—the “children and consumers,” the “toddlers and seniors” of America who “use and enjoy creative works.” They’re frightened of looking like big bullies if they go after the people who are actually stealing their stuff, so instead they chase down the manufacturers of a technology that has many potential legal applications. Do these consumers that Hatch paints as paragons of virtue have no choice but to illegally download music? Is someone holding a gun to their head, forcing them to load Kazaa onto their computers, and ordering them to start downloading Britney Spears songs? > [@Orrin Hatch](#): > > And imagine the poor parent who tries to tell a teenager that free downloading of copyrighted music is illegal. The teenager, confused because "everyone is doing it,’’ consults a leading technology-news site promising a "trusted source of information for millions of technology consumers.’’ There, the teenager finds a P2P distributor promoting "Morpheus 4.0, the only American filesharing software ruled legal by a U.S. federal court.’’ This statement is false: Grokster did not rule Morpheus "legal’’; in fact, the case only confirmed that downloading copyrighted works is illegal. Below this misinformation, the teenager will find an independent editorial review rating Morpheus 4.0 as a "Recommended’’ download and "an excellent choice’’ for those seeking "the latest and greatest.’’ Who will the teenager believe? Well, Orrin, surely you’d like to believe that, in the “family values America” that you and your fellow conservative Republicans promote, the kids would believe their parents? God forbid that parents teach their kids some personal responsibility, or that children learn the crushing truth that not everything they see on the internet is true. > [@Orrin Hatch](#): > > Worse yet, if artists must sue only the induced, they just feed the contempt for copyrights that inducers breed. Again, all the blame is placed on the producers of the file-sharing programs. No consideration is taken of the fact that people who use these programs to illegally trade copyrighted material have any responsibility at all for their own actions. Where’s the Republican language of individual responsibilty in this speech? (And in case anyone thinks my rant is only anti-Republican, i also send out a big “fuck you” to the Democrats who support this legislation, including one of the senators from here in Maryland.) > [@Orrin Hatch](#): > > This bill will protect American artists, \*\*children \*\*and taxpayers by restoring the privately funded civil remedy crippled by the Grokster ruling. Congress must act: A Federal court has held that artists can only enforce their rights by suing **exploited children** and students pending "additional legislative guidance’’ about whether artists can, instead, sue the corporations that profit by inducing **children** to break laws and commit crimes. Silence could be misinterpreted as support for those who profit by corrupting and endangering others. This bill will restore the tried, privately funded civil enforcement actions long used to enforce copyrights. “Please, won’t someone think of the children!” Jesus H. Christ. First, Hatch already admitted earlier in his speech that only about half of all file-sharers are children. I infer from this that the other half are adults. Also, there are many areas of the law where children can be ruled to have sufficient knowledge and understanding of their actions to be treated as adults. Surely it’s not beyond the capacity of a 14 year-old junior high school student to understand that file-sharing copyrighted material is illegal. Hatch makes these kids sound like toddlers being offer a lollipop by a stranger. Also, where are the kids’ parents in all this? If you’re going to buy your kid a computer, then make sure that the damn thing doesn’t have Kazaa on it. Or perhaps the parents don’t care about copyright either, in which case Hatch’s complaint about innocent Americans being the victims here is just so much bullshit. ---
**Author:** ![Spiny\_Norman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9de0a6/32.png) [@Spiny\_Norman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spiny_Norman)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2004, 8:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyll-get-my-vcr-when-they-pry-it-from-my-cold-dead-fingers/264344/10 "2004-09-15T08:04:48Z")
I e-mailed my congressperson about this. Long and carefully written mail. I got an automated reply with a notice saying that I was added to her mailing list. :rolleyes: It’ll be a while before I try THAT again. ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2004, 9:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyll-get-my-vcr-when-they-pry-it-from-my-cold-dead-fingers/264344/11 "2004-09-15T09:01:10Z")
> [@Spiny Norman](#): > > I e-mailed my congressperson about this. Long and carefully written mail. > > I got an automated reply with a notice saying that I was added to her mailing list. :rolleyes: It’ll be a while before I try THAT again. And here we have one of the major failings in our form of government: The politicians are trying to serve too many people. Individuals are so overwhelmed by the ambient noise that nobody has time to care what **Spiny Norman** or **Derleth** or any other single person has to say. Clearly, the only way to fix this is to organize. Happily, there is a good national-level group that shares our views on this issue. The [Electronic Freedom Foundation](http://www.eff.org) takes consumer-friendly stands on all of these issues. It was the EFF that went to bat with the ACLU against Janet Reno to kill the Communications Decency Act in 1997. The EFF is very active in this whole area, and it is one of our best allies. (I’m not a shill, honest. 🙂 I just like their work.) ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2004, 9:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyll-get-my-vcr-when-they-pry-it-from-my-cold-dead-fingers/264344/12 "2004-09-15T09:12:15Z")
Didn’t VCRs become popular in the first place because people used them to copy TV shows? Just curious. ---
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2004, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyll-get-my-vcr-when-they-pry-it-from-my-cold-dead-fingers/264344/13 "2004-09-15T21:42:26Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Didn’t VCRs become popular in the first place because people used them to copy TV shows? Just curious. That, and because they enabled folks to watch porn in the privacy of their own home. ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2004, 7:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theyll-get-my-vcr-when-they-pry-it-from-my-cold-dead-fingers/264344/14 "2004-09-16T07:20:21Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Didn’t VCRs become popular in the first place because people used them to copy TV shows? Just curious. More precisely, it allowed people to time-shift TV shows, so they weren’t stuck with the network’s schedules. The recognition of time-shifting as a legitimate use of technology was the biggest factor in allowing individuals to own recording tools at all.