It seems lately that constitutional rights are heavily under attack by so-called do-gooders that think they have our best interests in mind. As an American, you have the right to do many things unless of course you chose not to. That too is a right. Robert Heinlien said it best:

"When any government or any church for that matter says,

'This you may not see, this you may not hear, and this you may not read.'

The end result, no matter how noble the motives, is tyranny and oppression.

It's mighty easy to control a man whose mind has been hoodwinked. But it's impossible

to control a free man. A man whose mind is free.

The most you can do is kill him."

This is the next logical step in media control. Our nightly news broadcasts, although probably more

truthful than some other areas of the world, are 'cleaned up' of material that might be highly questionable

or too controversial for fear of losing ratings (i.e. advertising income). So, by copy inhibiting to prevent abuse of a freedom by a few, we all must pay the price in the loss of this privelege. While this copy prevention scheme may prevent Americans from exercising their right to free use and we may even impose substantial penalties for those who come up with a way to circumvent it, how can this restriction

be imposed on the rest of the world. It is a well known fact that we have little effect on the laws of other

nations. The most we can do is stamp our feet and whine a lot.

[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/articles/128/4274#4274