Still Not Perfect

Groklaw reports that the DC Circuit of the US Court of Appeals has ruled that the FCC does not have the authority to impose the Broadcast Flag requirement on digital TV consumers and equipment manufacturers. The Court decided that the FCC had overstepped it’s bounds and that it did not have any authority to make regulations regarding the Broadcast Flag until Congress grants them that power.

The FCC Broadcast Flag was an attempt by the MPAA and other content distributors to limit the legal uses of digital TV broadcasts to initial viewing. This means that recording for later viewing or otherwise archiving the broadcasts would be illegal (at least in their original digital quality), and it would therefore be illegal for manufacturers of consumer electronics and computer equipment to ship devices that allowed recording of content “protected by” the Broadcast Flag. Naturally the Broadcast Flag would really put a damper on the development of innovative technologies like Tivo that actually enhance and improve our lives instead of complicating them.

Of course I’m sure the MPAA and other proponents of the Broadcast Flag will not give up just yet. I expect that they will make every effort to get the ruling overturned by higher courts. If that is not successful I expect that they will return to lobbying Congress for legislation that grants the FCC the power to control what consumers do with content after it has been broadcast. I personally believe that the FCC’s power should only apply to the communication of information, which includes transmission and any interference with transmission. What a consumer does with the signal and the content after their device (which is their personal property) has received the transmission should be up to them (as long as their uses of the content respect the copyright). I do not believe that the FCC’s power should apply to devices that can be used to receive broadcasts (specific purpose consumer electronics or general purpose computer devices), other than regulating their interference with transmission of those broadcasts and other’s receipt of those broadcasts.

If you value your freedom to do what you want with your digital TV signal for your personal use after you have received it into your home please consider writing to your Senator and House Representative to make sure they know it. Because if the Broadcast Flag decision is upheld in higher courts, you can bet the MPAA lobbyists will start in on Congress. You can also contribute to the fight for your freedom in the digital world by supporting the EFF.

I finally finished reading Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged (except for one 50+ page monologue - just too much of one thing). I started reading it way back in August and got about half way through its 1100+ pages on a vacation trip. But once we got back home and life returned to normal (meaning too busy) my reading rate dropped off considerably.

Like many of my favorite books (George Orwell’s 1984, Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, and Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World) Atlas Shrugged carries a strong political message, or at least acts as a commentary on the state of politics, freedoms, and economics in our age. The book is really a vehicle for Rand’s philosophy of Objectivism (a philosophy that some say often influences the American Libertarian Party platform). That said, it is still quite a good story. However, if you are looking for a more concise presentation of Rand’s ideas, or maybe a piece of work that develops story and plot better, many people suggest The Fountainhead. Read the rest of this entry »

Living on Earth mentioned an Oregon DOT sponsored project to track the mileage that motorists drive on Oregon roads and use the data to institute a use-based road tax to replace the hefty state gasoline tax. Oregon, like all other states, charges a state tax on every gallon of gasoline sold on top of the $.18 federal tax per gallon. The states use this money to fund the maintenance of roads and bridges. Many states are noticing decreasing revenue with this model due to the increase in hybrid and fuel-efficient car sales.

Oregon DOT has been funding a project at Oregon State University (also mentioned in GPS World) as a potential solution to the decreasing revenue from gasoline taxes. The proposed program uses a combination of existing GPS and radio technology to tax the motorist for the miles driven every time they refill their fuel tank. This is how it works:

• The GPS receiver and the odometer are used together to determine how many miles were driven inside Oregon’s borders
• A radio transmitter transmits the mileage data to the gas pump when you fill up
• The mileage data is used to calculate your usage tax and you are charged the usage tax instead of the flat per gallon state tax

Read the rest of this entry »

Robin Good reports that the far-reaching PATRIOT Act may even be applied to blogs. US Federal District Judge Victor Marrero notes that the FBI can abuse the National Security Letter power given to them through the PATRIOT Act to go after bloggers. Judge Marrero says the FBI could use NSLs “to discern the identity of someone whose anonymous web log, or ‘blog,’ is critical of the Government.”

Those NSLs of course come equipped with a full gag order and can be issued without any judicial oversight (a judge doesn’t have to approve the FBI to issue one). Anybody see the warning flags yet? Seems to me that this could be a huge infringement of First Amendment rights as persons expressing dissenting opinions are bullied by the FBI for exercising their right to free speech. This amounts to censorship.

John Ashcroft, the US Attorney General and champion of the deceptively named PATRIOT Act, has resigned. His successor is still being discussed, but will likely be White House counsel Alberto Gonzales. I’m glad to see Ashcroft on his way out, but I’m not sure that I should expect any better from any potential successor - at least not under the current (and next term) administration.

I’m pretty disappointed with Ashcroft’s Justice Department. Their much touted PATRIOT Act was supposed to be just the tool they needed to fight terrorism, but why are they using it against a small time pot dealer and a corrupt strip club owner? Now I’m not refuting that what those people were doing was illegal, but this law was designed to fight terrorists not small time domestic criminals. I think the true intent of the PATRIOT Act comes out in this: to suspend due process in investigation and prosecution of anyone, regardless of any terrorist ties. It is not a law for fighting terrorism like it is so often claimed, but a law for spying on citizens, even innocent ones. Read the rest of this entry »

Now that it appears to be over and Bush has won I must say I didn’t expect the decision so fast. I guess I was expecting a knock-down, drag-out fight like we had in 2000. In fact I fully expected the votes in Ohio to be challenged for at least a week or so. I’m glad it didn’t happen that way again, though. Regardless of who you wanted to win or who you voted for (not always the same candidate, mind you) I hope you agree that a fight like we had in 2000 does nobody any good. After a fight like that the candidate who does eventually win has half the country (or more) against him, and even more bitterly than they were before. So, I’m glad we didn’t have another 2000. That said, I do think our current electoral college system leaves a bit to be desired. Read the rest of this entry »