A couple of weeks ago I sent e-mail regarding the Broadcast Flag to all three of my elected representatives in Washington. A staff member from the office of Senator Saxby Chambliss called me a couple of days later with an encouraging response. Today I received this weak and non-committal response from Congressman Lynn Westmoreland. This answer demonstrates that Congressmen are beginning to figure out what the Flag is, but gives absolutely no indication whether Westmoreland is in the pockets of the copyright cartel. Even if we don't know where he stands, he does seem to be grasping that knee-jerk acceptance of copyright hegemony is an increasingly risky position for a public servant to hold.
Dear Terry,
Thank you for contacting me regarding possible "broadcast flag" legislation. I appreciate having your views on this issue.
As you may know, the "broadcast flag" is a combination of technical specifications and federal regulations designed to combat unauthorized redistribution of content broadcast through digital television (DTV) signals. Its adoption was prompted largely by the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) determination that broadcast transmissions be digital by December 31, 2006. The FCC imposed a transition to DTV in part to capitalize on the sharper images, CD-quality sound and wider screen angles that are available from advanced digital technologies.
But in addition to technological advances, the FCC has also been motivated by the knowledge that broadcasters, upon receiving digital spectrum allotments, must relinquish their analog spectrum allotments to the FCC. The analog spectrum will in turn be auctioned for other commercial and public interests. Content providers, fearing widespread piracy that would endanger aftermarket sales (such as cable re-broadcast, and DVD sales), urged the FCC to provide for a means to protect their assets. Meanwhile, consumer electronics and information technologists, as well as consumer rights groups, came together in an effort to minimize the possible negative outcome that a wide-scale regulation might have imposed.
While the broadcast flag is intended to prevent the redistribution of digital broadcast content over the Internet or through similar means, the goal of the flag was not to impede a consumer's ability to copy or use content lawfully in the home. However, current technological limitations have the potential to hinder some activities which might normally be considered "fair use" under existing copyright law. For example, a consumer who wished to record a program to watch at a later time, or at a different location, might be prevented when otherwise approved technologies do not allow for such activities, or do not integrate well with one another, or with older, "legacy" devices.
This issue is one of both great complexity and importance. Should legislation regarding it come to the floor, please know that it will receive all due consideration. Hearing the views of all Georgians gives me the opportunity to better understand how important issues could impact the people of Georgia and the future interests of the nation. In that regard your views are most helpful.
Thank you again for taking the time to contact me. For additional information regarding current legislation and my representation of the Eighth District, I invite you to visit my website at http://www.house.gov/westmoreland
Sincerely,
Lynn A Westmoreland
Member of Congress
|
|
|
