http://news.com.com/2100-1023-960731.html
If you didn’t hear it here first, folks, then you’re getting your news from someone who actually reads C|Net more than I do.
Saw that; it’s huge. I’m sad that the current consensus is that it won’t see a vote this session, but hopefully it will remain at the top of the list and be dealt with soon.
Similar good news about the online radio compromise for smaller sites this week. Seems people’s better judgement is begining to be put to use.
this guy annoys me though:
James Gattuso, a lawyer at the conservative Heritage Foundation, says he has mixed feelings about the Boucher-Doolittle proposal. “It’s neither 100 percent good nor 100 percent bad,” Gattuso said. “The core of it, putting in a fair-use exemption for the DMCA, seems to make a lot of sense. But then it also contains a number of provisions putting new regulations on the marketplace.”
“What it does is require a lot more disclosure, which sounds good,” Gattuso said. “But in reality it means a lot more unread and useless warnings and disclosures that consumers will have to wade through. There’s a cost to that. It could raise prices. It could take away from more important information that consumers really do want.”
…implying that the notices about intrusive copy-protection are saying something we don’t want or need to know about. To hell with to his agenda; it needs to be obvious exactly which products won’t work as expected.