Petition to Repeal the DMCA

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/repeal-digital-millennium-copyright-act-dcma-and-pledge-prevent-legislation-anti-circumvention/4Yy3p2qW

by haven • 13 years ago

35 49 13 years ago

petitions.whitehouse.gov

pstuart6• 13 years ago

It now has one more vote than my own petition:

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/make-alcohol-sched...

Please note that mine is not a joke, but is designed to be rejected by the administration. The goal is to capture on record why a known dangerous substance is allowed to be sold for recreational consumption.

It's been a hard sell, because people:

  - are too lazy to click on a link
  - don't care
  - love their booze and don't understand my proposal
  - don't believe in the petitioning process

edit: formatting

KC8ZKF• 13 years ago

Prohibiting alcohol would require an amendment to the constitution.

AnthonyMouse5• 13 years ago

Under exactly the same logic so would prohibiting cocaine.

Realize that the Supreme Court has interpreted the federal government's constitutional powers much more broadly in the decades since prohibition.

dllthomas3• 13 years ago

I don't see why. Yes, it was done that way last time; but we currently prohibit substances at the national level, that has been upheld by the Supreme Court, and I don't see any reason at all that should work differently than for alcohol. If I'm missing something, please elucidate.

axiak• 13 years ago

Not necessarily. Read the 21st amendment. It mostly repeals the 18th and clarifies that laws can be made to regulate alcohol use. The petition is to control alcohol under the Controlled Substances Act.

Sidnicious• 13 years ago

Would it? The 21st amendment only repeals the 18th, it doesn't explicitly legalize alcohol (I'm no constitutional scholar so clarification is welcome.)

pstuart6• 13 years ago

It did require an amendment (the 18th, as cited in the petition). It is the only amendment ever repealed.

It was an abject failure.

This is not about "letting people get loaded". That will always happen. This is about taking away what could be considered the primary tool of tyranny by the State. Now the War on Terror is edging it out for first place.

ComputerGuru• 13 years ago

I signed. That's brilliant.

I have not seen a single sane explanation for the US prescription laws. I'm almost certain they're unconstitutional and there is not a provision in the US constitution that makes it possible to pass laws banning the sale, use, or ownership of non-addictive prescription drugs.

Forget alcohol. Why is non-habit-forming blood pressure medication prescription-only? Sure, you can hurt yourself with it if you take it when you're not supposed to and use it when you don't need it.. but how is that the government's concern? Allergy medicine? Diabetes medication? NSAIDs? Pregnancy pills?

jessedhillon• 13 years ago

Perhaps you should have a petition which expresses what you actually hope to achieve, which sounds like some sort of reform of prescription laws. Who wouldn't think it's a waste of time to sign a "gotcha" petition?

pstuart6• 13 years ago

Anything that talks about the real agenda would then become the focus of the reply. It would be spun on that.

e.g., "This is to point out the fallacies and failures of the War on Drugs"

The moment that wording was part of it then Gil Kerlikowske (our "Drug Czar") would be writing the reply and repeating the same old lies about having to do this and that to keep us safe.

It has to have a minimal opportunities for spin.

chimeracoder• 13 years ago

Who wouldn't think it's a waste of time to sign a "normal" petition, given the previous response[0]?

[0]https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/response/what-we-have-say-a...

notahacker• 13 years ago

reason number 5: those people most likely to actively support your actual objective are those least likely to want to publicly associate themselves with something that will inevitably be perceived as a bona fide campaign for Prohibition, even if they completely understand why you're actually doing it

It's a good idea though... you just might have to get the actual Prohibitionists on side.

citricsquid2• 13 years ago

Although it's not your point, it would be great if Alcohol didn't exist. There's so many negatives associated with it, I don't know about America but here in England it's a huge problem. Unfortunately alcohol is to the first world what guns are to America, too entrenched in culture to ever be removed.

pstuart6• 13 years ago

No, all drugs should be legalized and regulated. Note how well prohibition worked for alcohol in the past.

Regulate for purity, educate for use, and provide medical help for those that need it.

Making drugs illegal doesn't stop people from using them; my brother died of a heroin overdose so this is an issue very close to my heart.

tlrobinson2• 13 years ago

Because it worked so well the first time we tried that?

stelonix• 13 years ago

I think that maybe if you added a bit more statistics about alcohol-related tragedies (car accidents, murder, etc) it might seem more serious to people. I really like the idea and would have signed if I were an US citizen. I'm trying my best to spread the word though.

AnthonyMouse5• 13 years ago

Title is misleading. It's not a petition to repeal the DMCA, it's a petition to revise it. And surprisingly it actually gets the facts right for once: Revising the law to allow circumvention for non-infringing acts would be a pure win. There is no legitimate reason to prohibit circumvention when there is no infringement, all it does is make criminals out of good people.

That still leaves the issue of whether circumvention should be criminal (as opposed to civil) when infringement does occur, and the related question of whether distributing "circumvention tools" should be illegal in itself, but those are things people can reasonably argue about. (I personally think they're both inane, especially given their demonstrable complete lack of effectiveness at their stated purpose.) But I have never heard any legitimate argument whatsoever in favor of prohibiting circumvention when there is no infringement, e.g. to unlock a phone or make fair use of the copyrighted work. So if anyone can supply any reason whatsoever why that should be prohibited then let's hear it, and if not then let's fix it.

haven5• 13 years ago

While the EFF's position on revising the DMCA is referenced by the petition, the petition itself does actually does ask to "repeal the DMCA", presumably in its entirety (which I personally support).

AnthonyMouse5• 13 years ago

Again, the title is misleading, including the title in the petition itself. The text is talking about a revision, which makes good sense. The DMCA itself is a larger piece of legislation that includes various other provisions not related to circumvention, like the safe harbor for sites that comply with the notice and takedown provisions. (Which has its own set of problems, but repealing that would not be helpful, because then there would be no statutory safe harbor since Sec. 230 of the Communications Decency Act that provides a safe harbor for most other things explicitly excludes "intellectual property.")

haven5• 13 years ago

Unauthorized infringing circumvention doesn't have to have a criminal OR civil penalty. Protect circumvention (hacking) rights!

haven5• 13 years ago

Text of the DMCA statute, for the curious: http://www.copyright.gov/legislation/pl105-304.pdf

thejerz2• 13 years ago

DMCA is not bad.

Like patents, it's become a popular punching bag here on HN. Well, I stand loud and proud against "the HN mob" of wanna be's and know it all's. I'm ready to get downvoted to hell on this one, but it's important that someone speaks up. I am pro DMCA! (And patents!)

Generally speaking, DMCA and patents are a pain in the ass for a really young company. Startups want to move fast and break stuff... which is great... except they typically do so at the expense of people who came before you and busted their butt just as hard as you're busting yours. Why should you get to play by a different set of rules then they did? You shouldn't.

When -- if ever -- your startup grows up, DMCA and patents are how you stay in business. It has to be easy and cost-effective to protect your creations, or else the incentive to create is greatly diminished and the ROI for R&D is zero. Intellectual property protection is the keystone of a modern knowledge economy. And if you don't understand why, I'd recommend taking a microeconomics 101 on iTunes U or Youtube. VC, private equity.. hell, even Wall St., wouldn't be in America were it not for our world-class intellectual property laws.

Just because 100,000 people sign a DMCA petition doesn't make it right. 1,000,000 McDonalds hamburgers are sold every day... is that the right thing to eat just because a million people are doing it? My point is: one of the downfalls of voting websites like HN, reddit, or even the whitehouse.gov platform is people who know nothing get their votes counted the same as people who are experts on the subject. Well, I've been litigated for patent infringement, and I work with DMCA at my current company, and I know both issues intimately. DMCA, and patents, work. I know there are other startups out there who depend on DMCA, and if you're one of them, upvote this.

For everyone else, please educate yourself on what exactly DMCA does and the importance of IP laws in the American economy.

(N.B. Yes I am lumping DMCA and patents together a lot here, because the complaints behind both of them stem from a lot of the same entitlement mindset that startups are somehow entitled to implement technologies or host data that is not theirs.)

Fargren• 13 years ago

one of the downfalls of voting websites like HN, reddit, or even the whitehouse.gov platform is people who know nothing get their votes counted the same as people who are experts on the subject.

Can't the same be said of elective democracy?

kunai2• 13 years ago

>When -- if ever -- your startup grows up, DMCA and patents are how you stay in business. It has to be easy and cost-effective to protect your creations, or else the incentive to create is greatly diminished and the ROI for R&D is zero. Intellectual property protection is the keystone of a modern knowledge economy.

Hmm. Then explain to me why the GPL and other free and open source software licenses have been booming and Creative Commons has been getting tons of attention, because I just can't seem to connect the dots.

Zak• 13 years ago

I don't have a problem with copyright. Takedown/safe-harbor isn't perfect, but I don't have a big objection there either. The anticircumvention provisions of the DMCA, on the other hand are bad.

In most cases, they only affect people trying to play by the rules; outside of a few specialized niches, almost all software and content ends up cracked and on The Pirate Bay no matter what. On the other hand, my right to back up content I legitimately purchased or use such content on a device that hasn't been authorized by some third party is restricted. Phone unlocking and jailbreaking are affected even though they're mostly about interoperability, not copying content.

jostmey• 13 years ago

And just who do you work for?

foob• 13 years ago

it's important that someone speaks up. I am pro DMCA!

The petition isn't entirely anti-DMCA and neither are many people on HN. The DMCA offers a safe harbor for websites that host user submitted content and it gives a mechanism for truly infringing content to be taken down. There are alternative approaches that some might like better but they are unlikely to happen anytime soon. In the meantime, these two aspects are both good for businesses and I doubt that they're as controversial here as you state they are. There are, however, serious issues with the DMCA. One of these is that there's little to no recourse when the DMCA is abused by a company to take down materials that they don't own the copyright to (this happens frequently). Another issue is that circumventing DRM is illegal even if no copyright infringement is taking place (this is the actual point of the petition). It's not impossible to support the positive aspects of the DMCA while simultaneously recognizing that it is far from perfect and in need of reform.

PS - I downvoted you. It had absolutely nothing to do with whether or not I agree with you. You're baiting for upvotes/downvotes with statements like "I'm ready to get downvoted to hell on this one" and "I know there are other startups out there who depend on DMCA, and if you're one of them, upvote this." You're also being unnecessarily insulting and condescending when saying *"I stand loud and proud against 'the HN mob' of wanna be's and know it all's," when this adds nothing to your argument. This behavior is clearly against the Hacker News Guidelines (http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html) and more importantly it's both rude and nonconstructive.

thejerz2• 13 years ago

I agree with your comments on DMCA. Good thoughts here.

As for stating the truth -- how I don't care if people downvote my opinion, observing how HN is filled with a majority of wanna be's and know it all's and very few do'ers, or encouraging startups with similar views to support my comment -- it isn't necessarily "baiting" for votes. That's colorful language meant to incite dissent, and for that I applaud your salesmanship; but, I actually find your PS to be a bit sanctimonious and churlish. But -- we all have a choice to up/down vote based on content or presentation of someone's comment. I guess I just care more about the content.

And for that, I give you an upvote.

vy8vWJlco• 13 years ago

"Why should you get to play by a different set of rules then they did?"

Because 1)the rules are arbitrary, and 2) the same argument was made by the first guy to get locked out of commercializing his own invention because someone else patented it first. The "because: the status quo" argument is isn't very compelling.

"It has to be easy and cost-effective to protect your creations, or else the incentive to create is greatly diminished and the ROI for R&D is zero."

The incentive might shift, but certainly not disappear. The focus would be on tangible and less speculative areas (food, shelter, basic tech; all positive in a recession), but I wouldn't expect to suffer. Fear of eliminating patents and copyright is a boogyman. (Edit: To elaborate: you don't "protect" ideas, and winning by holding people back is misanthropic.)

"VC, private equity.. hell, even Wall St., wouldn't be in America were it not for our world-class intellectual property laws."

Correlation is not causation. I would say "in spite of". The US (and NA) markets are different, and arguably less competitive, than even 50 years ago. (Edit: The current economic downturn coincides with ramping up on copyright and imaginary property law, among other things.)

"the complaints behind both of them stem from a lot of the same entitlement mindset that startups are somehow entitled to implement technologies or host data that is not theirs."

That entitlement is the sentiment that used to be associated with "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," IMHO. Hardly something to dismiss or resent.

RKearney• 13 years ago

The DMCA has helped me get knock off websites taken down that consist of nothing but one of my blog posts copy-pasted.

I had a very high traffic blog article copied about a half dozen times with domain names purchased JUST to post the article and replace all the Amazon affiliate tags and advertisements with their own.

Had it not been for the DMCA, I'm not sure what I could have done. But for exactly $0 and 5 minutes of my time, I was able to email their host and the content was taken down in less than a few hours.

VonGuard• 13 years ago

Agreed. I actually protested the DCMA when it was originally created, but then, 7 years alter, I was threatened with a suit because a commenter on my Website had written ugly things about someone. As a common carrier, I was safe thanks to the DMCA. The EFF actually told me the DMCA saved my butt. Weird, huh?

AnthonyMouse5• 13 years ago

The EFF told you that the DMCA protected you from a defamation claim?

kunai2• 13 years ago

Doesn't matter. The negatives of the DMCA greatly outweigh the positives.

Why should I not be able to hack my OWN tablet? Why can't I unlock my OWN phone? Why is it that the government exercises near-dictatorial control over digital rights? Sure, it does help with copyright issues, but there's a ton of things in there that have nothing to do with copyright, like the law against jailbreaking tablets.

The point is, the DMCA exists for a good reason, but it was written by people who know nothing about how digital media works while they were in bed with the RIAA and MPAA. It can be revised to eliminate the freedom-limiting aspects while still preserving the good portions of the law.

bsimpson• 13 years ago

All the laws about things that tend to be only well-understood by the younger half of the population tend to be written by representatives from the older half.

I'm sure there are politicians who don't know how to check their own e-mail, but who have strong opinions on DMCA-esque legislation because they think piracy === theft and overbearing laws like the DMCA are the only way to prevent theft 2.0.

You have to be immersed in technology to understand the nuanced implications of technology law, and most of our representatives have not spent their lives immersed in technology like most of us have.

walshemj• 13 years ago

Seeing as the president cannot propose his own bills is not this a rather "pious" and pointless exercise - surly would not the effort be better spent finding a sympathetic senator or congressman to introduce a reform the DMCA bill.

rshm• 13 years ago

I would like to see the registered agent registration with the fees go away. And replaced with the free and online 'registration of the point of contact' approach.

greenwalls• 13 years ago

If the DMCA was repealed I have a bad feeling that whatever the current administration and congress/senate would come up with to replace it would be far worse than what we have now. When the DMCA was written the government had more of a hands off approach to the Internet than it does now.

Petition to Repeal the DMCA

Related Stories