MPAA Worried That People Don't Know A Gun Can't Shoot Through Your TV

from the how-nice-of-them dept

Apparently the MPAA is quite worried that people watching a movie trailer might not understand that a gun pointed at the screen can't actually shoot through the screen. The organization is forcing preview trailers that show someone pointing a gun directly at the screen to actually change the video or cut that scene out of the ad. As the report at the AV Club asks, is the MPAA worried that someone from a century ago who's never seen TV or a movie is going to suddenly show up and freak out? Anyone who's seen the movie This Film Is Not Yet Rated knows that the MPAA works in mysterious ways, but this just seems ridiculous.

42 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Supreme Court Decision On Guns May Cut Promoting Progress Out Of The Constitution

from the promote-the-progress dept

I was debating whether or not to write anything about this, but William Patry has done a good job discussing how the Heller case may impact copyright, and it's something I was concerned about, so it should be discussed. No matter what your thoughts on "the right to bear arms" (which was affirmed as an individual right in the Heller decision), it may come back to cause trouble for those of us who believe that intellectual property has gone too far and does not "promote the progress."

As I've pointed out multiple times, one of the big questions concerning whether or not intellectual property law should be strengthened or weakened is based on how you parse the clause in the Constitution that enables Congress to create the IP system:

"The Congress shall have Power... To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;"

By my reading, that means that if the act of securing exclusive rights for a limited time does not promote the progress of science and the useful arts, then it is not covered by the Constitution. That is, the first part of the clause is defining under what conditions (to promote the progress...) it is okay to do certain things (secure exclusive rights). Thus, any intellectual property system that is shown not to promote progress (or worse, to hinder it) is by definition unconstitutional. Others, however, read that first part "promoting the progress" as a sort of "preamble" discussion. Thus, their reading is that securing those exclusive rights for a limited time, by definition, "promotes the progress."

So, what does the Heller decision on guns have to do with all of this? Well, as some in our comments pointed out way back in March, the key to the Heller decision was how the court interpreted part of the clause: "Because a well regulated Militia is necessary to the security of a free State...." If it interpreted that as meaningless preamble, saying that the right to bear arms had nothing to do with "a well regulated militia" then it opens up some pretty serious questions about constitutional interpretation. As Patry notes, the court can now treat sections of the Constitution it doesn't like as preamble, rendering them meaningless.

Again, so whether or not you're happy with the way the court decided the Heller case, the fact that it has no problem deciding that a clause in the Constitution can be ignored as "preamble" could have very bad consequences for those of us pointing out that dangerous innovation-hindering intellectual property systems are against the Constitution. Hopefully, the courts would still recognize that this clause is relevant and not meaningless -- but they now have the necessary tools to claim that promoting the progress is meaningless and has no bearing on whether or not a particular intellectual property system is constitutional.

56 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Dumb Thieves With Saws, Not Guns, To Blame For Internet Blackout

from the by-saw-or-by-gun dept

Well, well, well. Earlier this week we wrote about a report (the second one we'd ever heard of!) saying that gunfire had damaged a fiber optic cable, causing a bit of an internet slowdown in the northeastern part of the US. Turns out that wasn't exactly accurate -- though the real story isn't necessarily any less bizarre. It appears that the cable was actually cut with a saw, most likely by thieves hoping it was copper that could be sold. Of course, fiber optic cables don't contain copper, so the thieves ended up with something worth a lot less than they expected. But what about the gunshot? Well, it turns out that when crews arrived to fix up the cable, they discovered that the replacement cable had been shot up by gunfire. It's not explained how or why this might have happened, but the folks who store the fiber optic cable might want to come up with a better storage place.

36 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Gunshots Slow Down The Internet... Again

from the really-need-to-do-something-about-all-that-gunplay dept

Back in 2005, we had quite a story about how DSL lines in New Mexico were apparently knocked offline due to "random gunfire." That story got even more bizarre when a guy who was playing online poker at the time, blamed the outage on him going "all in" on the wrong hand (he claims he went all in just as the DSL turned off, but when it came back, it went in on a different hand). However, it still struck us as interesting that random gunfire could impact your internet service. Apparently, it wasn't an isolated case. The latest is that random gunfire is being blamed for a general slowdown in the internet, after fiber-optic cables near Cleveland were "sabotaged by gunfire." Who knew that gunfire and internet wiring were such a dangerous combination?

20 Comments | Leave a Comment..