stdClass Object
(
[nid] => 1684
[type] => release
[language] =>
[uid] => 4
[status] => 1
[created] => 1217355960
[changed] => 1217862715
[comment] => 0
[promote] => 1
[moderate] => 0
[sticky] => 0
[tnid] => 0
[translate] => 0
[vid] => 1810
[revision_uid] => 1
[title] => Public Knowledge Says Digital-Music Legislation Would Take Away Consumer Rights
[body] =>
Legislation considered today by the Senate Judiciary Committee would nullify rights consumers already have to record digital music, Public Knowledge said in written testimony submitted to the Committee.
The group said S. 256, the PERFORM Act, would also unfairly impose restrictions on some types of digital music, but not on others. For example, digital music transmitted over the Internet would have to comply with strict mandates on the use of Digital Rights Management (DRM), but digital music transmitted over the air by broadcasters would not.
Public Knowledge argued that the strict DRM requirements "are intended to prevent the recording of transmitted music -- an ability that users have legally exercised since the inception of recording technology and an ability that is affirmatively guaranteed by the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992."
The legislation "nominally provides" for home recording, but the definitions in the bill of "reasonable recording" are so "limited as to preclude any recording whatsoever," PK said. The result would be that consumers would need to purchase entire new sets of equipment to make all of their devices and networks DRM-compatible.
Public Knowledge also argued that it was unfair for webcasters to pay copyright royalty rates that have put many webcasters out of business, while terrestrial broadcasters pay no performance royalties at all. "Broadcasters' exemption from this performance royalty is solely a historical accident and the result of tremendous lobbying power. But there is now no reason to treat them differently from satellite and Internet radio," each of which pay those fees, PK said.
[log] =>
[revision_timestamp] => 1217862715
[format] => 4
[name] => Art Brodsky
[picture] => files/pictures/picture-4.png
[data] => a:6:{s:7:"contact";i:0;s:10:"form_token";s:32:"8ccae93257cd5bd08279c4b915d339a4";s:14:"picture_delete";i:0;s:14:"picture_upload";s:0:"";s:15:"googleanalytics";a:1:{s:6:"custom";i:1;}s:14:"wysiwyg_status";a:1:{i:7;i:7;}}
[path] => public-knowledge-says-digital-music-legislation-wo
[field_issue] => Array
(
[0] => Array
(
[nid] => 64
[safe] => Array
(
[nid] => 64
[title] => Copyright
[status] => 1
)
[view] =>
Copyright
)
)
[print_display] => 1
[print_display_comment] => 0
[print_display_urllist] => 1
[print_mail_display] => 1
[print_mail_display_comment] => 0
[print_mail_display_urllist] => 1
[print_pdf_display] => 1
[print_pdf_display_comment] => 0
[print_pdf_display_urllist] => 1
[last_comment_timestamp] => 1217356036
[last_comment_name] =>
[comment_count] => 0
[taxonomy] => Array
(
[53] => stdClass Object
(
[tid] => 53
[vid] => 5
[name] => DRM
[description] => Digital Rights Management
[weight] => 0
)
[54] => stdClass Object
(
[tid] => 54
[vid] => 5
[name] => Fair Use
[description] =>
[weight] => 0
)
)
[files] => Array
(
)
[page_title] =>
[nodewords] => Array
(
)
[build_mode] => 0
[readmore] => 1
[content] => Array
(
[print_links] => Array
(
[#weight] => -101
[#suffix] =>
[#value] =>
[#prefix] =>
[#title] =>
[#description] =>
[#printed] => 1
)
[field_issue] => Array
(
[#type_name] => release
[#context] => full
[#field_name] => field_issue
[#post_render] => Array
(
[0] => content_field_wrapper_post_render
)
[#weight] => -2
[field] => Array
(
[#description] =>
[items] => Array
(
[0] => Array
(
[#formatter] => default
[#node] => stdClass Object
*RECURSION*
[#type_name] => release
[#field_name] => field_issue
[#weight] => 0
[#theme] => nodereference_formatter_default
[#item] => Array
(
[nid] => 64
[safe] => Array
(
[nid] => 64
[title] => Copyright
[status] => 1
)
[#delta] => 0
)
[#title] =>
[#description] =>
[#theme_used] => 1
[#printed] => 1
[#type] =>
[#value] =>
[#prefix] =>
[#suffix] =>
[#children] => Copyright
)
[#title] =>
[#description] =>
[#children] => Copyright
[#printed] => 1
)
[#single] => 1
[#attributes] => Array
(
)
[#required] =>
[#parents] => Array
(
)
[#tree] =>
[#context] => full
[#page] => 1
[#field_name] => field_issue
[#title] => Issues
[#access] => 1
[#label_display] => above
[#teaser] =>
[#node] => stdClass Object
*RECURSION*
[#type] => content_field
[#children] => Copyright
[#printed] => 1
)
[#title] =>
[#description] =>
[#children] =>
[#printed] => 1
)
[body] => Array
(
[#weight] => -1
[#value] => Legislation considered today by the Senate Judiciary Committee would nullify rights consumers already have to record digital music, Public Knowledge said in written testimony submitted to the Committee.
The group said S. 256, the PERFORM Act, would also unfairly impose restrictions on some types of digital music, but not on others. For example, digital music transmitted over the Internet would have to comply with strict mandates on the use of Digital Rights Management (DRM), but digital music transmitted over the air by broadcasters would not.
Public Knowledge argued that the strict DRM requirements "are intended to prevent the recording of transmitted music -- an ability that users have legally exercised since the inception of recording technology and an ability that is affirmatively guaranteed by the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992."
The legislation "nominally provides" for home recording, but the definitions in the bill of "reasonable recording" are so "limited as to preclude any recording whatsoever," PK said. The result would be that consumers would need to purchase entire new sets of equipment to make all of their devices and networks DRM-compatible.
Public Knowledge also argued that it was unfair for webcasters to pay copyright royalty rates that have put many webcasters out of business, while terrestrial broadcasters pay no performance royalties at all. "Broadcasters' exemption from this performance royalty is solely a historical accident and the result of tremendous lobbying power. But there is now no reason to treat them differently from satellite and Internet radio," each of which pay those fees, PK said.
[#title] =>
[#description] =>
[#printed] => 1
)
[#pre_render] => Array
(
[0] => content_alter_extra_weights
)
[#content_extra_fields] => Array
(
[title] => Array
(
[label] => Title
[description] => Node module form.
[weight] => -5
)
[body_field] => Array
(
[label] => Body
[description] => Node module form.
[weight] => -1
[view] => body
)
[revision_information] => Array
(
[label] => Revision information
[description] => Node module form.
[weight] => 2
)
[author] => Array
(
[label] => Authoring information
[description] => Node module form.
[weight] => 3
)
[options] => Array
(
[label] => Publishing options
[description] => Node module form.
[weight] => 4
)
[comment_settings] => Array
(
[label] => Comment settings
[description] => Comment module form.
[weight] => 10
)
[menu] => Array
(
[label] => Menu settings
[description] => Menu module form.
[weight] => -3
)
[taxonomy] => Array
(
[label] => Taxonomy
[description] => Taxonomy module form.
[weight] => -4
)
[path] => Array
(
[label] => Path settings
[description] => Path module form.
[weight] => 8
)
[attachments] => Array
(
[label] => File attachments
[description] => Upload module form.
[weight] => 9
[view] => files
)
[itunes] => Array
(
[label] => iTunes feed information
[description] => iTunes specific information.
[weight] => 0
)
[path_redirect] => Array
(
[label] => URL redirects
[description] => Path redirect module listing
[weight] => 5
)
[print] => Array
(
[label] => Printer, e-mail and PDF versions
[description] => Print module form.
[weight] => 6
)
[xmlsitemap] => Array
(
[label] => XML sitemap
[description] => XML sitemap module form
[weight] => 7
)
[nodewords] => Array
(
[label] => Meta tags
[description] => Meta tags fieldset.
[weight] => 1
)
)
[#title] =>
[#description] =>
[#children] =>
Legislation considered today by the Senate Judiciary Committee would nullify rights consumers already have to record digital music, Public Knowledge said in written testimony submitted to the Committee.
The group said S. 256, the PERFORM Act, would also unfairly impose restrictions on some types of digital music, but not on others. For example, digital music transmitted over the Internet would have to comply with strict mandates on the use of Digital Rights Management (DRM), but digital music transmitted over the air by broadcasters would not.
Public Knowledge argued that the strict DRM requirements "are intended to prevent the recording of transmitted music -- an ability that users have legally exercised since the inception of recording technology and an ability that is affirmatively guaranteed by the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992."
The legislation "nominally provides" for home recording, but the definitions in the bill of "reasonable recording" are so "limited as to preclude any recording whatsoever," PK said. The result would be that consumers would need to purchase entire new sets of equipment to make all of their devices and networks DRM-compatible.
Public Knowledge also argued that it was unfair for webcasters to pay copyright royalty rates that have put many webcasters out of business, while terrestrial broadcasters pay no performance royalties at all. "Broadcasters' exemption from this performance royalty is solely a historical accident and the result of tremendous lobbying power. But there is now no reason to treat them differently from satellite and Internet radio," each of which pay those fees, PK said.
[#printed] => 1
)
[links] => Array
(
[print_html] => Array
(
[href] => print/1684
[title] => Printer-friendly version
[attributes] => Array
(
[title] => Display a printer-friendly version of this page.
[class] => print-page
[rel] => nofollow
)
[html] =>
[query] =>
)
)
)
