header image update

even though the pic is actually of a sunset, i’m going to choose to interpret this as a marker that the sun is rising.

is it legal to make backup copies of your DVDs?

This is one of those questions that has bothered me ever since the DeCSS thing went down way back in 2001. The crux of the problem is this: the movie industry wants to sell you a DVD like it’s a physical object, and then use technology to restrict your use as though you have taken a license to the content.

If they are selling you the physical object, they can’t complain when you decide to make a backup of the content- it’s classic fair use.

If they are selling you a license, they either need to (a) give you the option to negotiate the license, or put it on the outside of the product packaging, or (b) replace the physical media at cost (a few cents) when it becomes damaged, because your license has nothing to do with the physical media.

Right now, the industry is trying to claim that it gets to work the deal both ways, depending on which context is more favorable to them in any given situation. The facts of this case make it sound like it’s ripe to really treat the issue properly.

SAN FRANCISCO – Hollywood studios told a federal judge here Friday consumers have no right to make copies of their DVDs.

The U.S. courts, however, have never squarely answered whether that was true, a legal vacuum that might be answered in the Motion Picture Association of America’s lawsuit against RealNetworks.

if he regrets it so much, why doesn’t he resign?

Really it’s the only honorable thing for Jay Bybee to do- he certainly shouldn’t wait for the Congress to remove him via impeachment. But this kind of half-assed “oh my bad, I had no idea they would take my memo that said torture is OK and then actually use it” non-apology press release bullshit is not going to cut it.

You would think that people would figure out that Texas is just a bad place to go banging on doors in the middle of the night. Mr. Hinojosa did what any armed and reasonable person might do when confronted by armed intruders- he shot them.  This is exactly the kind of result enabled by the Castle Doctrine.

“I feel bad for the guy, but I just thought they were trying to hurt my family.  I mean, what would you do? You open your door at 3:30 in the morning and you see guns pointed in your face? I mean, I think I did the right thing,” Hinojosa said.

Shotguns in San Antonio

You would think that crooks in Texas would start to get the message:

SAN ANTONIO — Police say a homeowner shot a would-be thief outside his South Side home early Monday morning. . . .
Because of the “castle doctrine” law, which gives a Texans the right to defend their property, the homeowner will most likely not face any charges.

second-chance shooting in ohio

if you get shot at the first time, it takes a special kind of stupid to try to break in again:

A 68-year-old city man fired his pistol once at a 49-year-old man who had broken into his sister’s house on Wallace Street Southeast and demanded money while holding a 12-inch knife.

The shot missed, and the intruder fled Wednesday.

Less than two hours later, the same man broke in again, Warren police said.

This time, Kurfward Hutton’s aim was true. The intruder fled a second time, this time with serious injuries.

Bottomless Bailout or Nationalization- the only choices left

What TPM does not say is that it’s been clear since, say, August 2008 that these are the only choices.  Either we keep pissing good money after bad, or we … stop.

The issue isn’t whether people like the idea of ‘nationalization’. It’s better framed as whether you a) want the government to temporarily take over certain banks or b) want to continue giving away hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars in an effort that probably isn’t even going to work. Especially for Republicans, you really can’t be anti-bailout and anti-nationalization. Those are the only options.