__/ [ Martha Adams ] on Friday 10 November 2006 13:14 \__
> "arachnid" <none@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:pan.2006.11.10.01.04.13.182354@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
http://news.com.com/What+the+Democrats+win+means+for+tech/2100-1028_3-6133833.html
>>>
>>> What the Democrats' win means for tech
>>>
>>> On a wealth of topics--Net neutrality, digital copyright, merger
>>> approval, data retention, Internet censorship--a Capitol Hill
>>> controlled by Democrats should yield a shift in priorities on
>>> technology-related legislation.
>>>
>>> <big snip>
>>>
>>> If Boucher gets the nod as chairman, a broadcast flag becomes far
>>> less
>>> likely and changes to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's
>>> "anti-circumvention" sections become politically feasible. "He
>>> would
>>> be a big boost to our efforts to allow innovation to develop," said
>>> Art Brodsky of Public Knowledge, an advocacy group that has opposed
>>> content providers on many digital copyright bills.
>>>
>>> If Rep. Howard Berman, however, gets the job, the recording
>>> industry
>>> and motion picture industry will have a staunch ally as
>>> subcommittee
>>> chairman. Berman, a Hollywood Democrat, has sponsored legislation
>>> in
>>> the past that would let copyright holders legally hack into
>>> peer-to-peer networks. (Berman currently is the subcommittee's top
>>> Democrat, but there's speculation that he'd take a different
>>> chairmanship.)
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> A detail: let's get our words right. Namely, not "Rights" but the
> reality is *Restrictions*. I'm not convinced our two-party system
> can produce the good we need.
>
> Because, given only two parties, the Party that is in (Republicans,
> most recently) and the party that is out (Democrats, most
> recently), those business lobbyists who seem these days to
> write current legislations can turn a larger cash flow to the In
> politicians and a smaller cash flow to those currently Out. Then,
> when change comes as a few days ago, they simply switch their
> cash flows to the opposite spigots -- until change comes again.
> Their objectives remain the same, labels change, reality does not.
> So yesterday's digital restrictions may appear in less apocalyptic
> language tomorrow, but I think that basically, they won't change.
>
> That's why we need *piracy*. *Piracy works* where the existing
> Washington political system fails. Badly.
>
> Cheers -- Martha Adams
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_posting
Please. It's a gentle request that you repeatedly ignore. You still post
'jeopardy-style'.
For what it's worth, here are some further links that cover the impact of the
election.
Democrat Sweep Good News For Net Neutrality
,----[ Quote ]
| Whether the Network Neutrality debate is officially settled amongst
| charged, polarized stakeholders is an issue that will be tabled
| for the moment.
`----
http://www.webpronews.com/insiderreports/marketinginsider/wpn-50-20061109DemocratSweepGoodNewsForNetNeutrality.html
Election Spawns New Hope for Tech
,----[ Quote ]
| Tuesday's losers here include global warming skeptics, creationists and
| Bush henchmen who censored climate-change evidence at the National
| Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration and NASA. Gordon has vowed to
| investigate claims of malfeasance.
`----
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,72089-1.html?tw=wn_story_page_next1
|
|
