Why you need to understand the DMCA.

I'm about to delve into tech talk...forgive me.

For those of you that don't work in or are obsessed with technology, you may not have even heard of the DMCA. The "Digital Millennium Copyright Act" (DMCA) was passed by the congress in 1998 in an effort to establish laws for dealing with copyright infringement related to new technologies. Existing theft and copyright laws were doing a dismal job of handling issues like music downloads or software piracy. A noble cause at it's core...artists and programmers deserve protection from theft just like other industries do.

It's a tricky problem, though. How do you crack down on a kid that downloads a song or computer program he should have paid for? Ethically, it's only a little different than shoplifting the CD from Walmart. Unlike shoplifting there are no security guards or cameras to notice the crime. Let's take a walk through the logic that has led to the DMCA of today:

1. Can't go after the kid? then go after the websites that provide access to steal the music and software...hence the shutdown of Napster. Problem is someone clever figured out a way to share the stolen files without a centralized website.

2. Can't go after a website? then go after the people that write software that makes it easier for people to steal stuff online. Problem is, the software has legal uses too so it is difficult to shut them down. At best, record companies sue them until they are out of business.

3. Can't go after the software creators? then encourage companies to develop their own software that will make their music and software impossible to steal. Problem is, the copy protection software causes all sorts of problems for people who legally purchase the stuff. At best, they interfere with the ability to listen to the music you have purchased. At worst, they install viruses and security risks onto your computer without warning. The ultimate irony, folks that are stealing the file easily find ways around the copy protection.

4. Copy protection is failing? then go after anyone who provides information about how to make it fail. Here we finally come to the one area of the law that has provided some successes to the industry. Successes in court at least. Destroying individuals that create or share information about software security vulnerabilities has become a full time endeavor for many companies. The problem is, people pointing out security flaws in software are not really lawbreakers, they are investigating and sharing information. Should they really be held criminally liable for the things others do to exploit the vulnerabilities that already exist in the software?

The big question you are probably asking (assuming of course that you have hung in with me this long...yay you!) is why should you care. You should care because a new round of legislation is coming that will push the boundaries of these laws even further. The legislation will increase the penalties for copyright crimes. It will also add more benign activities to the list of copyright crimes. Finally it will create and fund an agency within the FBI that is tasked with monitoring and enforcing these laws. This agency will be empowered with a new range of wiretapping and datatapping abilities.

Ok, Ok...I know, you may still be asking yourself why you should care. Let me give you a "for example": You purchase a shiny new Ipod and you want to listen to some of your favorite Beatle's songs on it when you go for a run in the morning. You pop your Beatle's CD into your computer and rip the songs into Itunes so you can upload it onto your Ipod. So far so good, right? Wrong. The record company installed some protection software on the CD to prevent it from being copied...unfortunately the protection software wasn't good enough to prevent the music from being transferred to your Ipod. You have unwittingly circumvented their security measures and technically you have violated their copyright...punishable up to 10 years in prison. Is anyone really going to come after you for this? No, but we shouldn't be passing laws that allow people to come after you for ridiculous things like this.

Here is another "for example" for you: You work at a place that allows a lot of telecommuting. Due to the large files that you and your workmates need to use, your company has set up a filesharing system to make is faster to share recently updated file changes between team members. As a result, you have an unusually large amount of data uploading and downloading from your home internet connection. You paid good money for your internet connection and all of the files are legal, so there is no problem here...right? Wrong. Your internet provider has an agreement with the FBI to tip them off to unusual internet activity from their customers. As a result they bring you to the FBI's attention who begins intercepting and examining all of the data going to and from your computer. Every confidential work document, every internet search, every email...everything. Is there any real immediate damage here? Probably not as you wouldn't even be aware that it was happening. Are you comfortable with government agencies having the power to spy on you for no reason other than you use the internet a lot? I'm not!

So what can you do?

1. Pay attention and speak up! Right now the loudest voices are the recording and software companies. Congress needs to here that we are aware of these issues and we care about our digital rights.

2. Support organizations that defend your digital rights. The EFF comes to mind.

One last thought to send you on your way...someone downloading child porn will face a sentence of up to 5 years. Someone downloading illegal music will face a sentence of up to 10 years. Something is clearly out of whack here.

Who Knew???

How did I miss what a cool chick the singer Pink is? Maybe I just dismissed her as too "overmarketed pop"* for my tastes. I started to think twice when I saw her "Stupid Girls" video...very funny if you're the type of person who get's sad when little girls emulate Paris Hilton. When I stumbled across this video clip this morning, I became an instant fan:



A quick Google shows that the version on the album was recorded with the Indigo Girls...I love them. I am soooo buying this album.


* I may mock pop music but my confession is that there is a certain Kelly Clarkson song that seems to rise to the top of my current playlist lately when I'm alone in my car and in the mood to sing really loud. Shhhhhhh...don't tell anyone. It's one of my dirtly little secrets.

Harry Taylor is my hero

I am difficult to please. More often than not when I see someone advocate for ideas that I agree with, I get frustrated with the way they do it.

Trust me, I know how obnoxious that sounds. Here I am, safely living my life...rarely making an effort to publicly stand up for the issues that I feel passionately about. Who the hell am I to criticize when someone stands up for something?

It's just that I get so tired of people exaggerating the debates. There is a tendency in activists to make their point by underlining the ridiculousness of the other side's point...the thing is, the other side's opinion usually isn't ridiculous. There is often some merit to be found in both sides. I have always believed that the most persuasive debaters honestly acknowledge the strengths in their opponents arguments. They can then clearly show why their position is stronger.

I really believe that the public is more than aware when they are being fed theater instead of facts. I also believe that are less likely to respect you and your cause when they recognize the theater. It's patronizing. My case for the cause I believe in is ultimately weakened by someone else's bad dramatic protest.

Every now and then, though, I come across something like the clip below. This man (Harry Taylor) speaking up at a public event is clear, eloquent, polite and respectful...even as he rips the President a new one. I am proud to be on his side.

I can only hope that if presented with the same opportunity, I would have the courage and ability to do the same thing.