Written by: Beck

This is so wrong for so many reasons. And yes, I intend to list all of those reasons. It's what I do.

The US Congress is considering making fast forwarding through video advertisements a crime.

Lawmakers in the land of the free have decided that it is costing their chums in the movie industry far too much money and want video fast-forwarders placed in the same league as pirates.

According to NBC news the new law allows families to use new DVD technology self censor explicit scenes of sex and violence but forbids them to edit out advertisements.

Where to even begin? Congress is actually contemplating legislating that DVD makers must include technology which coerces viewers into watching ads. You heard that right folks. Especially amusing is that in the day of the VCR, anyone could fast forward through ads and FBI warnings (did anyone in history ever actually read one of those?), and the technology didn't exist to prevent it. Only now that technology has caught up with advertising executives wet dreams does the legislature step forward to coerce its inclusion in DVD players.

When you buy a DVD, you're paying a price for content. As much or as little as you want. Beyond that, how you choose to view it is entirely your prerogative. Furthermore, how you use your DVD player is your prerogative. Once the purchase is complete, no obligation exists between you, any advertiser, or the maker of the DVD. The only constraint upon your actions are copyright laws. And congress wants to legislate otherwise? What's more, it's not like you're receiving a discount in exchange for watching advertising. The ads do not subsidize the cost of the DVD. You don't have a more expensive ad-free version.

Ask yourself: what rights are violated without this law? Who is hurt? The only parties inconvenienced by the ability to fast forward a DVD are the person who sold the advertising and the person who bought it. Inasmuch as these two parties represent very small constituencies, and inasmuch as no rights of theirs are being violated, the only possible reason for our legislators to even consider such a law is that their pockets are being lined by the Hollywood lobby. While perfectly legal, this nonetheless represents corruption of the most base variety.

But forget all of that. Forget the fact that this is only going on because of what basically constitutes a form of bribery. This isn't about corrupt politicians. This is about property rights. If the government can mandate how you go about using your property; if the government can mandate how you spend your time; if the government can essentially coerce you into watching product adverts in exchange for the privilege of being able to watch a movie you own, then you are not truly free. You do not truly own your property. You only engage in a pantomime--a shared fiction in which the state allows you to feel free and to keep property at their whim. And their whim is subject to arbitrary change at any time.

(Hat tip: Ace)