The Register has a really strange article about Red Hat's latest update. Apparently, for people from the US, Red Hat can't, under DMCA rules, explain the update. Instead, Red Hat directs people to thefreeworld.net's site where it tells you:

If you're a US citizen and you are hurt because the DMCA doesn't allow you access to the information on this site, you should realise that you live in a democratic country and it's time for you to change the law so that you aren't hurt by it. Don't expect us to take the risk of going to jail because of a law which is inconveniencing you but write your congressmen instead....

Red Hat's update is a (video) security patch but since I'm accessing the site from an obvious US ip address, I'm not sure if I'm getting the whole thing or a sanitized US version. But if you scroll to the very bottom, you are directed to the download part of the freeworld.net site where they appear to be a repository for items censored here but at least for now, okay elsewhere (until the US gov can enforce the censorship elsewhere....) This even applies if you are a US citizen, residing out of the country. But there is also the question, is Red Hat using copyright as the restricting mechanism, so that freeworld.net only can distribute the patch, thereby in effect restricting the license? So confusing, and head spinning. And weird and and and... I could go on and on with the adjectives.... Why are we doing this? It was supposed to be a good thing (according to those short-sighted paid-for legislators)?

My plan: to buy a copy of Why Orwell Matters and mail it to my congressman with a copy of the Register article.