AVS Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,093 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·

·
Registered
Joined
·
509 Posts
The principal reason I will not consider buying a Lexmark printer is because they sued an ink cartridge maker making refills for Lexmark printers under the DMCA.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
235 Posts
I actually contacted my representative in Massachusetts about this law (currently still in committee) because of its ridiculous requirements. House Bill No. 2743 is a misguided effort to prevent households from using routers which allow multiple connections to a single broadband line. Unfortunately the language in the bill seems to make any kind of NAT firewall illegal for any use at all. This would include the router I use at work to connect my company's network to our cable modem. Supposedly the Bill is being reworked to fix the language, but I’m not holding my breath.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,638 Posts
I guess every OS that has ICS is also illegal? What a load of crap.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
87 Posts
I'm so ashamed that my home state of Illinois has already passed a version of this.


And I wonder how long the MPAA's Win2k Webservers would survive without their firewall protecting them?

http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?host=www.mpaa.org


I think it's terribly sketchy that they aren't willing to run their servers in an open, unconcealed manner. I mean, who knows what kind of mischief those machines are getting themselves into behind that comfy protection they clearly don't really need...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
73 Posts
I live in Illinois, and sit behind 2 firewalls. Come and get me! Breakin' the law, breakin' the law!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,082 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Widman
I actually contacted my representative in Massachusetts about this law (currently still in committee) because of its ridiculous requirements. House Bill No. 2743 is a misguided effort to prevent households from using routers which allow multiple connections to a single broadband line. Unfortunately the language in the bill seems to make any kind of NAT firewall illegal for any use at all. This would include the router I use at work to connect my company's network to our cable modem. Supposedly the Bill is being reworked to fix the language, but I’m not holding my breath.
I had heard of these various bills being lobbied for by the MPAA but had not heard that Mass wanted to ban people from sharing broadband in their own homes. Are you sure that is the reason behind it? Most phone companies cite this as a reason to get broadband and while many don;' necessarily support it (meaning they will make you hook your machine directly to the modem before they will troubleshoot your connection) they certainly do not ban it. Now the state of Mass is telling phone companies and ISP's that they can't use this as a selling point?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,030 Posts
No offence guys but did they hire people from Jay Leno's Jaywalking to come up with this ?


I'm glad I'm not affected by this ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,484 Posts
They are going to need to break down my door to make me remove my router, stupid laws. I wonder who thinks this crap up...
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top