Dear Glynn, you've written some excellent posts, but I must point out something in this one.
You quote Mr. Fred Teeven, the same man who proposed a ban on downloading last December after having a great meeting with someone called Chris Dodd.
As a Dutchman, I trust him about as far as I can throw him.
The copyright reform your post speaks of only proposes increased exceptions, not the drastic restructuring of copyright terms and stimulation of new models that we really need.
TL;DR: It's all words, and insufficient ones from unreliable politicians at that.
Really, if I were a citizen of the USA i'd be at least slightly annoyed by the disconnect between politicians and the people (oh, hi OWS).
Yes, I'm European (NL). We're on the track to get fucked over in much the same way, but we're not there yet. When that happens the irony of the situation will not escape me, but until then I'll just keep enjoying these :popcorn: moments.
Then I'd be more than slightly annoyed at the fact that apparently these same politicians think they can guarantee that a law will never be interpreted in any way other than what they claim to envisage.
I mean, wow, aren't you supposed to remember that laws continue to exist after the people who wrote them are long dead and gone?
EVEN IF this administration or the next manages to avoid abusing the canyon-sized problems of this law, can anyone in all honesty say they're sure that will never happen?
But at last, I'd just relax after realising that the cat is out of the bag, and no amount of knee-jerk legislation will get it back in.
Maybe I should clarify this for the deliberately obtuse AC's whom I know troll this website:
The cat being out of the bag is a metaphor for people following human nature; the internet gives us the tools to consume what we want when we want it. Attempts to curtail this aspect of human nature can only backfire in the long run.
You can call people freetards if that makes you feel better, but it will not change the fact that the massive community will always use technology in innovative ways to circumvent censorship faster than such solutions can be counteracted.
(Unless of course the plug is literally pulled, and we go back to fax machines and pagers - not a chance in hell)
The short-sightedness of Big Content and their lapdog politicians never ceases to amaze me.
So short sighted. But then what do you expect from the MPAA?
Go ahead, legislate all successful American storage services out of business. The revenue will just move to a company abroad that is not getting fucked over.
The ability to fast forward is a prerequisite for me; it'll be just like time-shifting TV, where I can do the same.
This means any proprietary player, as suggested below, is out.
I've always felt TV studio's are missing out on huge chunks of cash by not offering a legal, convenient, [etc.] service to ALL REGIONS!
I'm torrenting over a dozen of the most popular current shows from the USA every week, I'm sure thousands of my countrymen do the same, yet this is the only way we can watch e.g. Breaking Bad.
I pay for Spotify Premium to stream music in my car, give me the same thing for TV and charge a premium for all I care; just bloody serve me!
One way or the other, the will of the internet users cannot be stopped without killing the goose with the golden eggs (aka: DNS).
Misguided idealists and/or corrupt pundits may succeed in pushing legislation to ban [X], but will always be beaten by a group of clever pragmatic kids in a garage in Sweden setting up [Y] as an alternative.
The fact that bureaucracy almost always moves slowly, and the speed with with groups of internet users can respond, means that MPAA/RIAA etc. etc. might as well follow the advice in Mike's last sentence, because there is not nor has there ever been any chance of "winning" the war on infringement.
So, unless the plug is pulled at the highest level, more and more of the boomers will be replaced by tech-savvy kids finding ways around any limitation thrown at them.