the great senator hatch.

[Dis]

crackers?

don't you think that kind of talk is inappropiate for this forum?

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by The Templar

Nah, Trent Lott got reelected enough times - and still shot off his mouth.

Which normally wouldn't have meant a damn thing, and still hasn't kept him out of the Senate or off any committees.

Hatch has the good fortune to be a dumb mormon cracker in a state filled with dumb mormon crackers.

At least he's not so dumb as to proclaim himself a communist and have a hammer and sickle avatar, like that's a good ad for communism.

[Sikander]

This thread has everything, crackers, cheese and whine.

And now of course, spam.

[Tuberski]

Originally posted by The Templar


Nah, Trent Lott got reelected enough times - and still shot off his mouth.

Hatch has the good fortune to be a dumb mormon cracker in a state filled with dumb mormon crackers.

Speaking as a mormon, formerly of Utah, people like you make me think this isn't a bad idea. Especially if it was your computer that was destroyed.

ACK!

[Imran Siddiqui]

Yeah, I think it's to get the issue out in the air, and get people's asses in gear. Hatch is a smart guy. He knows where he is going with this.

[The Templar]

Originally posted by Tuberski




Speaking as a mormon, formerly of Utah, people like you make me think this isn't a bad idea. Especially if it was your computer that was destroyed.

ACK!

Well, you aren't dumb given that you are no longer in Utah.

[Sava]

Hatch is a corporate wh0re... I wonder how much the RIAA gave him in campaign bribes?

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Yeah, I think it's to get the issue out in the air, and get people's asses in gear.

The issue has been in the air. If you want it in the air further, it'd be circling Pluto.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Tuberski
Especially if it was your computer that was destroyed.

How many posters would we loose if this went through anyway?

[Sava]

Who's Buying Into Copy Controls?

Entertainment industry bolsters its digital rights testimony with targeted campaign contributions.

Anne Ju, Medill News Service
Tuesday, June 18, 2002

WASHINGTON -- It's no secret that Hollywood fears losing property and profits to online movie pirates just as the music labels were panicked by Napster. But the entertainment industry is also vigorously backing up its call for copy controls with campaign cash to key lawmakers.

Political action committees (PACs) of Motion Picture Association of America members have sent at least $3.4 million to reelection campaigns of Congress members over the past four years, according to Federal Elections Commission data. That same period saw crucial decisions on legislation in which Hollywood companies had a stake, including the passage of the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

PACs from AOL Time Warner, Fox, MGM, Sony, Universal, and Viacom contributed to both Republicans and Democrats on Commerce or Judiciary committees in both houses. Both committees are center stage for legislation dealing with issues of intellectual property. The contributions to individual elected officials are in the thousands of dollars, so they account for only a single-digit percentage of the candidate's total receipts. But the amounts are typical of many industry PAC contributions. Also, they are spread widely across the relevant committee members, and lobbyists know they often open a candidate's office door.

Goals Achieved?
Representative Howard Berman tops the recipient list, with $68,000 from those MPAA members' PACs over four years. Berman, whose district includes North Hollywood, was a strong supporter of the contentious DMCA and was the top Democrat on the House subcommittee on Courts, the Internet and Intellectual Property when it passed.

"The marketplace is better suited than the government to pick technology winners and losers," Berman said in a statement. "[But] there are times when it's appropriate for the government to step in." Berman supported the use of a particular copy control technology in videocassette recorders in the DMCA, saying it was necessary to protect copyrighted content.

In second place among entertainment industry campaign cash recipients are two Republicans, Representative Billy Tauzin of Louisiana and Utah Senator Orrin Hatch, each with $49,000 from entertainment industry PACs.

Tauzin is known for a controversial piece of legislation that would deregulate the regional Bell telephone companies so they could sell broadband service nationwide. As chair of the House Commerce committee, Tauzin has also supported protecting the intellectual property of Hollywood companies.

Hatch was a leading crusader for the DMCA and chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee during the Napster hearings. He has shown a commitment to protecting the entertainment industry's copyright.

"I take it as a basic premise that copyright laws must play a role in protecting creative works over the Internet," Hatch said at the July 2000 hearing that drew anti-Napster testimony from Lars Ulrich, the cofounder and drummer of the heavy metal band Metallica.

Senator Conrad Burns, a Montana Republican, and Michigan Democratic Representative John Dingell are close behind Tauzin and Hatch. Burns received $46,500 in contributions from the entertainment industry, and Dingell received $46,162. Both are members of Commerce committees and key players in the digital copyright debate.

In each case, the PAC contributions from the tracked entertainment industry companies amounted to less than 3 percent--and sometimes just 1 percent--of the member's total campaign contributions, according to FEC records.

Consumers Counter
Political action committees play the money game every day. Carefully targeted contributions, augmented by lobbying on the issues, are a key component of the legislation game, industry sources note.

Hollywood's contributions come as no surprise to Norman Ornstein, a campaign finance policy analyst at the conservative American Enterprise Institute.

"I'd be stunned if most of the giving didn't go to those members of Congress on the Judiciary and Commerce committees, because they deal with intellectual property," Ornstein says. "Most of this giving is about access. You're going to give to members where that access matters to you."

Consumer and technology advocates say it's an uphill battle to oppose legislation that Hollywood champions. Consumers are difficult to organize and are a silent minority compared with campaign contributions, says Steve Weissman, legislative counsel of Public Citizen, a consumer advocacy organization founded by Ralph Nader.

"The only way consumers can have an impact is if they're organized, intense, and there's a lot of them," Weissman says. "In that case, Congress has to listen to their constituency."

Consumer groups like the Electronic Frontier Foundation are trying to mobilize consumers against a bill that would mandate built-in copy controls for DVD and CD players, introduced in March by Sen. Ernest Hollings. The legislation, currently being considered by the Senate Commerce Committee, has come under fire by pro-consumer groups who say it's a direct affront to fair use rights.

Other activists are trying to engage lawmakers in discussions geared toward consumer rights, rather than the interests of large corporations. Public Knowledge, an advocacy group that focuses on intellectual property and technology issues, is fighting the Hollings bill by coordinating libraries, educators, journalists, and scientific researchers to contact Congress members.

"When they start to get hundreds of letters from constituents, they need to listen," says Gigi Sohn, president of Public Knowledge.

http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,101988,00.asp

It's nice to see Hatch is bought... I wonder what else I can find...

[Sava]

Orrin Hatch takes two media hits. Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), whose 1994 Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act has greatly weakened the FDA's ability to protect consumers, has been rebuked for suggesting that the FDA has not done enough to protect the public from ephedra's dangers. Calling Hatch's remarks "a dazzling display of hypocrisy," Time senior science writer Leon Jaroff said, "The time has come for drastic revision of DSHEA, the re-empowerment of the FDA and the rejection of cynical proposals by legislators like Orrin Hatch." [Jaroff L. It's time to rethink ephedra regulation. March 5, 2003] Meanwhile, the Los Angeles Times noted:

From 1998 to 2001, while Hatch's son Scott worked for a lobbying firm with close ties to his father, supplement industry clients paid the company more than $1.96 million, more than $1 million of it from clients involved with ephedra.
In 2002, Scott Hatch opened his own lobbying firm in partnership with two of his father's close associates. So far, the firm has received at least $30,000 in retainers from the National Nutritional Foods Association and a major manufacturer of ephedra (Twinlab) , both of whom were clients of the previous firm.
During the past decade, Orrin Hatch has received nearly $137,000 in campaign contributions from the supplements industry. [Neubauer C and others. Senator, his son get boosts from makers of ephedra. Los Angeles Times, March 5, 2003]

oooh, the makers of Ephedra bought Hatch's political clout as well...

[Kuciwalker]

If there was a way to have music files, when not run using some sort of authorization provided when you buy it, physically damage the computer, I'd be all for it. It wouldn't be a violation of your property rights because you aren't using the product in the proper manner, so they aren't liable (they could even have a warning label: "if run without the authorization thingy, this product will damage your computer"). I even have an idea how it could work: if it could access the controls for the computer fan, then it could shut it down, then overheat the processer.

[Sava]

That's called hacking skywalker... I'm glad the federal government has laws against it.

[Kuciwalker]

It isn't "hacking" in the normal sense. It is how the product behaves when used in a manner specifically warned against. It is SOLELY the user's fault if it happens.

EDIT: also, it wouldn't be illegal

[Sava]

So let me get this straight... sorry, I have problems understand conservative logic (if there is such a thing)... you write programs... that damage peoples computers... without their consent...

how is that not hacking?