"Beware of he who would restrict you from information, for in his heart
he dreams himself your master"

"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue."

Intellectual Property is owned by the Thinker, Author, Artist and Scientist,
not the corporation.
Knowledge is the object built upon this Property.
Control the Knowledge and you control the Intellect.

When did the copyright holders become the Corporations?
Who owns the Intellectual Property?
Who controls our Arts and Sciences?
They are slowly eroding our rights. The authors, scientists,
researchers, students and you are very much at risk.

Corporations on Books -- We can't burn them so let's digitize them!

FAIR USE NOTICE: This contains copyrighted material, which is reproduced under the Fair Use Provision of Title 17, U.S.C. Section 107, and is posted for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research. This material is posted without profit for the benefit of those who, by accessing this site, are expressing a prior interest in this information for research and educational purposes.

"Your fair use of this book is restricted"
"You may only read this book once"

My rights and freedoms are a product of moral, ethical, and philosophical thought.
They represent the intellectual property that I most want to keep secure.

The Bill of Rights is my protection.

The DMCA a circumvention device.

Programmers speak in Code.
Mathematicians speak in Symbols.
Deaf people speak with their Hands.
P.O.Ws talk with Taps and Gestures.

This is not about Napster, DVDs, etc. It's turning into something else.

I'll see your DMCA and raise you a First Amendment.

From a WTO Document:

Article XIX of the General Agreement allows a GATT member to take a "safeguard" action to protect a specific domestic industry from an unforeseen increase of imports of any product which is causing, or which is likely to cause, serious injury to the industry.

Remember, in the Declaration of Independence safeguards protect Human Rights not corporate rights:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident...with certain unalienable Rights..."

"The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), a gift to the well-financed entertainment and software industries, trashed the public interest. It gave copyright owners the right to assert absolute control over copyrighted material, effectively allowing them to prevent the public from asserting a variety of traditional user's rights, including the ``fair use'' of making personal copies.

To the Adobe Protesters:
"Until they become conscious they will never rebel, and until after they have rebelled they cannot become conscious"

To Adobe:
"The capitalists owned everything in the world, and everyone else was their slave. They owned all the land, all the houses, all the factories, and all the money. If anyone disobeyed them they could throw him into prison, or they could take his job away and starve him to death. When any ordinary person spoke to a capitalist he had to cringe and bow to him, and take off his cap and address him as 'Sir' "

Adobe, we do not call you sir.

Yes! People will finally realize that the mattress tag nightmare has come real.
It's Farenheit 451 all over again. How about this?

Warning, this product contains copy restriction technology that prevents fair usage.
Circumvention of these restrictions could result in fine, imprisonment or both.

Adobe Press Release:
However, no software is 100% secure from a determined, illegal attack. When used legally and in its intended fashion, the Acrobat eBook Reader secures eBooks purchased by locking the eBook to the hardware from which it was purchased. The Elcomsoft software circumvents the security afforded by our software to protect copyrighted works."

Parse this logic with me: When used LEGALLY, it's secure. Well, duh: it's ILLEGAL under the DMCA to attempt to circumvent security, so of course it's freakin' secure. "This alarm system works great, sir... as long as no one attempts to enter your house without first ringing the doorbell and being invited in."

"Once again, content owners have successfully promoted their own narrow financial interests over the broader public interest in preserving consumer access to literary, scientific, and other works,"