[free-sklyarov] AAP response quoted in a previous thread

[Lars Gaarden]

Ethan Straffin wrote:

> Very much so -- which is why I agree only partially with your statement
> that DMCA proponents understand the technological issues.  They are
> perceptive enough to recognize that encryption-based DRM is inherently
> circumventable, but they are *not* perceptive enough to recognize that the
> Internet makes it well-nigh impossible to prosecute anyone who doesn't
> want to be prosecuted.  Individuals who are technologically savvy enough
> to compromise encryption systems are, by and large, also technologically
> savvy enough to share what they've learned anonymously.  So why not try to
> punish them anyway?  Because the only way you stand a chance of doing so,
> once the lessons learned from the 2600 and Sklyarov cases become common
> knowledge, is to inaugurate a new era in which Echelon-style surveillance
> is everywhere, the "safe harbor" and "common carrier" defenses for ISPs
> are nonexistent, and Internet privacy is a thing of the past.  Even more
> than the prosecutions themselves, and the chilling effect on free speech,
> *this* is what scares me about the DMCA: it's an authoritarian time bomb 
> wrapped in pretty free-market packaging.


The interesting thing to note here is that Echelon is under quite heavy
fire. The spooks have wanted for years to deploy a complete Internet
surveilance system, but have been stopped by the privacy concerns that
have been raised.

However, when the copyright goons want to do the exact same thing....

Seems like the US has a government that thinks that national security is
less important than protecting a few large publishers.

-- 
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can
change the world.  Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has."
- Margaret Mead.