John Conyers, what have you done?!?!

[ReverendDeuce]

I respect John Conyers and what he's done quite a bit. But this really, really irritates me...

http://www.technewsworld.com/rsstory/47939.html

Congress is leaving a special gift under the tree for Hollywood's film industry. Just before closing for the holidays, legislators introduced a new proposal designed to curb redistribution of movies.

The Digital Transition Content Security Act would embed anticopying technology into the next generation of digital video products. If it makes its way from Capitol Hill to the Oval Office and becomes law, the measure will outlaw the manufacture or sale of electronic devices that convert analog video signals into digital video signals, effective one year from its enactment. PC-based tuners and digital video recorders are listed among the devices.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner Jr., a Wisconsin Republican, introduced the bill, which is backed by Democratic Rep. John Conyers. Sensenbrenner's goal is to protect analog content from theft, which has been made easier in the wake of the transition to digital technologies.

Essentially, they want to outright ban the manufacture and sale of any analog to digital video conversion tools...

CrooksandLiars.com video clips? Gone.

CanOFun.com video clips? Gone.

Recording your old home movies to the PC? Outlawed!

Like your Tivo? Sorry, it's banned.

John Conyers, what are you doing? You were doing so well and now this? And with Sensenbrenner (the guy who wanted to remove Presidential term limits earlier this year AND the guy who angrily shut down hearings on the PATRIOT Act when it wasn't going his way) of all people. Again, I have to ask... John, what're you doing?

[FreedomAngel82]

1. So no more vcr's either?

I use that to tape show's and movie's if I'm gone etc.

[mzmolly]

2. My guess is that this is more about recording to distribute?

Sort of like the warning on rental movies. We used to record copies with our VCR, but now we have a DVD player. ;)

[MrModerate]

3. Not to be a Pollyanna, but . . .

I think this will affect the conversion of DRMed content and not consumer or republisher content.

[dusmcj]

4. covering his back among his peers ?

making sure no one can tar him as an extremist now that he's effectively broached the subject of impeachment in legislation (H.Res 635, 636, 637, ask your Rep to support) ? Congressional leaders gain influence by building a network among their peers of people they can work with which spans both parties. If he can be blackballed as a leftist whacko, which would happen by rightist whackos convincing their moderate GOP peers not to work with him, he would be less effective than he is now. Hold your nose and close your eyes, and allow this white lie which serves to empower him to fight the serious ones. My interpretation. (Note I think that the entertainment industry intellectual property activism is a crock of shit (because it serves the legions of middlemen in the industry without doing shit for the creative talent), but that's a separate issue to be fought separately. We need every effective "leader" we can get these days, there are issues that are more important than DMCA and the RIAA/MPAA facing us. And if we ditch the GOP rimmers infesting the executive branch, then those entities will lose influence as well. Don't look for uniform perfection and positional correctness among your representatives in government, and you won't be disappointed... sorry, but I think that's how it is...

[FreedomAngel82]

7. You think he cares about that?

Give me a break. This is the man who had Rosa Parks work for him and was a lawyer prosecuting Nixon during Watergate and the DSM hearings he started. So you really think Conyers gives a damn about what the other side says?

[dusmcj]

9. he's smart enough to know

that he needs his network in order to be effective. Any smart politician would not dismiss that. Pick your battles and win the war.

[HereSince1628]

5. The guise of copyright protection.

I can remember when you had to copy books by hand with a quill using ink we made by crushing and fermenting acorns...

The prevalence of pirating really did set us up for the producers introducing copyright protections.

[NewJeffCT]

6. It's mainly to protect against movie piracy from China & Thailand

I know if I went to China today, I could find damn good quality DVDs of the latest Hollywood thrillers (like King Kong, Narnia, Harry Potter) for 75 cents to $1. I know, because I was there last year and saw it.

This is not like the "filmed in a theater" look you get off the street in NYC or any US big city. These are actual professional quality DVDs.

[Occulus]

8. Which come from where, exactly?

Why, the industry itself! Those promo DVDs given to critics and others prior to the actual release do not simply end up in the trash. They end up online, where the public gets lambasted for sharing them.

This is the fault of the industry itself. How do they dare complain?

HOW?

[mikelewis]

10. Your argument is disengenous...

"CrooksandLiars.com video clips? Gone.

CanOFun.com video clips? Gone.

Recording your old home movies to the PC? Outlawed!

Like your Tivo? Sorry, it's banned."

If you take this legislation to it's extreme, you still wouldn't be able to place a ban on TIVO systems or online video blogs. The legislation is aimed at the DVD pirates and manufactures who rip and burn DVD's and CD's and steal intellectual property. If you had spent $50 million on a movie and 30% of your after-market profits are automatically eroded by piracy, what would you do? The people who make films are citizens who also benefit from the protections offered by the Constitution and to ignore the blantant theft of property is equal to condoning it.

If Mr. Conyers supports the legislation then I for one will give him the benefit of the doubt and trust in his wisdom. I would rather have him address this issue than any other lawmaker in Congress. John has earned my trust and if he says this is good legislation then I will support it unless there is something in it that is really a danger to our Democracy. He'd have to do a lot more than trying to protect a valuable U.S. industry for me to question his itegrity or wisdom.

[lukasahero]

12. Here here! Applause! "John has earned my trust" Mine too. eom

[jobycom]

14. Oh, he's got my trust, but I still want to know what he's up to.

His intentions can be pure and perfect, but his information (supplied no doubt by corporate lobbyists) incomplete. No harm in questioning him, though I would never question his integrity on the matter. He's certainly proven himself in that regard.

[Opusnone]

11. If I buy it it's mine

[jobycom]

13. Question from an idiot on the subject

The article mentions it would ban PC tuners, as well. I'm not familiar with the technology of video and tv and stuff. I hear all the talk about television going digital, and satellite and cable boxes claim they are "digital." Are they still transmitting in analog, anyway? My boss has a monitor with a built in tuner that hooks directly to a Time Warner "digital" cable. Is that analog anyway, or is it truly digital? (Hey, told you I was an idiot!) :-)