In the aftermath of the $222,000 jury verdict that the RIAA recently won against a Minnesota woman who shared 24 songs on Kazaa, the U.S. Congress is preparing to amend copyright law.
Politicians want to increase penalties for copyright infringement…
Here are some of the major sections of the PRO IP Act:
* Fines in copyright cases dealing with compilations would be increased…
* Any computer or network hardware used to “facilitate” a copyright crime could be seized by the Justice Department and auctioned off. The proceeds would be funneled to the agency’s budget. The process is called civil asset forfeiture, and typically the owner does not need to be found guilty of a crime for his property to be taken.
Probably the most extensive part of the PRO IP Act is its creation of a new federal bureaucracy called the White House Intellectual Property Enforcement Representative, or WHIPER. The head of WHIPER would be appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate…with the head of the new agency bearing the rank of “Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary.”
The proper title should be “Ambassador Sheriff of Security”. That would make him ASS-WHIPER.
And, then, remove the “H”.
The process is called civil asset forfeiture, and typically the owner does not need to be found guilty of a crime for his property to be taken.
This is what happens when you think the Constitution is a god damned piece of paper. How could the SCOTUS not strike this shit down?
The process is called civil asset forfeiture, and typically the owner does not need to be found guilty of a crime for his property to be taken.
This is what happens when you think the Constitution is a god damned piece of paper. How could the SCOTUS not strike this shit down?
Because it’s part of the “war on (some,non corporate produced)drugs”. Besides, it makes money for the police, been in place a LONG time.
J/P=?
We need the Brits to burn Washington D.C. again.
Maybe it’s just me but I’d rather have Big Sister watching.
Ha!, so much for the Democrats saving you liberals weenies from the evil Republicans. And by weenies, I mean the ones who feel the need to blames Bush and the Republicans for all the evils of the world and think their Dems are altruistic saints, when in fact Democrats are just as big a douche as any Republican.
So a jury handed out this award? Normally they stick it to the corporations to the tune of millions of dollars for the victims, but here they gave the company hundreds of thousands. Perhaps not everyone agrees that getting something for nothing is the right thing to do.
This is ridiculous
Forfeiture laws started as a way to stop organized crime, nobody complained. Then they were expanded to drug dealers, then drug users, then… then… then…
Now they are applying forfeiture to civil cases? This crosses a very big line that there is no turning back from.
The simple solution is to reduce the copyright on music and video to five years or less. If that were the case, amazingly all of these copyright infringement cases would disappear.
Draco’s laws were shockingly severe (hence the term draconian)–so severe that they were said to have been written not in ink but in blood.
Now all you good little citizens go out and BUY your music. That is really what the crime is here… You are NOT supporting the US war on terror if you are not spending your money on useless overpriced mass produced crap.
Sharing music and trading anything without paying a tax is paramount to terrorism. You cannot just cut out the government.
After all you are all just CONSUMERS, no longer CITIZENS.
Rev. Billy is right.. Time to stop shopping.
Thomas said The simple solution is to reduce the copyright on music and video to five years or less. If that were the case, amazingly all of these copyright infringement cases would disappear.
It’s be pretty darn happy to just restore them to the original 28 years. That seems like PLENTY of time for the content originator to get their profit.
The problem with these INSANELY LONG copyrights now, is that much copyrighted work will be either be totally lost or so old that it’s irrelevant to anyone but historians when it’s finally public domain.
The original idea of copyright was to BALANCE the rights of the author with the public good.
The idea of benefiting the public good has been totally lost by our government — which pretty-much describes our government after Ronald Reagan.
I am not paranoid anymore. THEY ARE OUT TO GET ME.
#11 – After all you are all just CONSUMERS, no longer CITIZENS.
You are right.
But we let ourselves be treated this way when we don’t stand up to our irresponsible leadership whose authority is derived from borrowed power.
We are the government, but if we are more interested in voting for American Idol than American President, then we aren’t worthy of good and responsive government.
>>> bs said, Now all you good little citizens go out and BUY your music. That is really what the crime is here… You are NOT supporting the US war on terror if you are not spending your money on useless overpriced mass produced crap.
Oh my word! You’re as reactionary as the music industry. Anyone here with a sense of balance on this issue?
I’m a professional “content creator”, myself, but also a liberal who has a strong belief in the public good.
I’ve lived in countries with no copyright protections and seen how publishing and recording goes in the toilet if there’s no profit in it.
There was a report, recently, showing how little publishing there is in the Arab world. The bigots blamed the Muslim culture, of course. The more likely reason is poor enforcement of copyright laws in those countries. Why spend a year writing a book or producing a CD when it immediately gets pirated and sold for a buck or two, with none of that going to you?
So, I’m a strong supporter of copyright laws and enforcement.
BUT our government has gone STUPIDLY and SHAMEFULLY the other way, in favor of big media without regard for the public good.
I think a fantastic first step would be to go back to reasonable copyright length.
For example, if we had the original laws, the Ramones and Sex Pistol’s early work would be going into the public domain right now — along with all the other super-cool obscure music from the era. The rappers and mash-up guys would have so much fun with that!
Generally speaking, just think of all the creativity that would happen if copyrighted material that is still relevant was constantly being released and then creatively built upon. Also, gems that were overlooked back then would be rediscovered and re-released, cheap or even for free.
And nobody would really be hurt. Yes, a very short list of already rich people would be a slightly less rich. (…and that’s the rub. Sonny Bono was one of those. So is Disney.)
The vast majority of copyright holders have already made all the money they are going to make off their content after 28 years.
#15
Reactionary? Isn’t this the SAME thing BUSHCO told us right after 911? Keep shopping, keep buying and everything will be all right?
Parents being forced to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars because their kids downloaded a $20 album from the internet. Meanwhile hardened criminals get minimal sentences and a $200 fine.
Private property being confiscated at will by the government, emminent domain, asset forfeiture, etc.
This is no longer about justice, it is about protecting the corporate machine.
Do I need to go on? I know I have diverged somewhat from the original focus of the article. But at this point, We NEED TO BE REACTIONARY. Enough is Enough?
I’d really like to know how we fix this. I don’t think a new president is going to help, since our whole system of government appears to be broken from the top down.
From now on I’m stealing my music from Best Buy and Walmart. Less risk of draconian bullshit this way. Besides, I need to finish using this can of pepper spray before the expiration date.
The best way to go about this is to write your Congresscritter. Tell them that you are opposed to this.
If that doesn’t work, well, the Second Amendment is there for a reason.
I should point out that, I’m an artist…I hate the way that copyright law is being treated right now. It should be very limited and only be granted to smaller people and organizations. It should be used to protect the creative endeavors of the individual, not be used as a sledgehammer against them and teenage music/movie pirates.
Another thought, maybe if the music and movie industries are so worried about losing profits because of piracy, maybe, just maybe, they should look at themselves. Maybe, just maybe, they should consider that music and movies aren’t worth paying $20 to obtain or view, that the quality of the product has decreased so much that it’s worth nothing. I mean, pirating a bad movie isn’t really stealing. If the movie isn’t worth anything, then how can it be called a crime. Is pirating Fantastic Four 2 a crime? Is pirating Hitman a crime? Is pirating anything with Hayden Christensen in it a crime?
Last thought, if the music/movie industries are worried about their cash cows, CDs and box offices hits, decreasing in profit, maybe it’s time to work up a new business model. Instead of trying to quash the current changing technological plane, they should figure out how to best use it to whatever advantages they want. For example, TechTv dying and Revision3/twit/Cranky Geeks/etc popping up. With bandwidth being cheap and the tools of video creation being easily accessible, a TV network has turned into several internet networks. With ever growing tech, comes new mediums for distribution. Maybe they could throw an ads into a torrent and release it themselves. Maybe they could try what Radiohead did, and allow the fans to set the price.
That may even weed out a whole lotta crap.
I don’t know.
Now I’m just ranting in the comments section of a Blog.
I’d really like to know how we fix this. I don’t think a new president is going to help
No shit, since this law was crafted by the Democratic controlled Congress. See comment #6 to see why you qualify as a liberal weenie.
You can’t stop piracy completely. No matter how high the fines are made. And the professional, for-profit pirates, are the only ones who can afford these fines and loses, and keep on pirating. But these laws and fines are really made to screw everyone else. Who can’t afford to pay out thousands of dollars, and/or lose their computer. Yet the average person isn’t SELLING anything they copy. And rarely are they giving it away to a friend or relative. But the entertainment industry perceives them as their biggest loss maker. Rather than the for-profit bootleggers. Which they haven’t a chance of stopping. And they know that! So they’ve gotten Congress to tighten up the law for the small timer and one timer pirates (the rest of us). Just as the US Congress tighten up the bankruptcy laws for the average person. While the corporate types still have lots of ways out. The origin intent of the copyright law, was to prevent someone else from illegally profiting from a work. Nothing about getting it for “free”. Like borrowing a music CD from the public library (is that the RIAA’s next target) or hearing it on the radio. The law was never intended to guarantee an income to the artist. Because, what if people just don’t like the works they make? Is piracy to blame for the money they’re not getting? They can’t prove that. The music industry just invents stats to justify their case. Next, they’ll want gov’t subsidies to compensate their imagined losses. And they’ll probably get it, as some of those dollars will get regifted back to congressmen.
@21 (gquaglia) Clearly you’re a buffoon. I said the government was broken from the top down. That means the president, the republicans, the _democrats_, the supreme court, your local government, etc. EVERYONE.
I never expected the dems to fix a damn thing.
Gee, here I thought the original law to confiscate citizens’ property from RICO type crimes was crafted during a Repugnacunt controlled Congress ? But really, does it matter ?? Like all laws enacted in the last 25 years that have granted extra power to elected officials at the loss of that same level of freedom for the little guy, I’ve never seen any of our two-party based assholes mention revoking those laws. Suppose maybe it’s because whoever “wins” gets to profit from the corporations who own the laws and lawmakers ?? Philosophically speaking, I see no difference between these two “parties”. All the nimrods who continue to bang the drum for the Repugs or the Dumbocraps can continue to beleive this is just like a football/basketball et al..game and they actually win something when their team wins. Cheering from the sidelines never cut the mustard and the founders knew this very well indeed. Use your brain when you vote because they really want to do it for you if you can’t.
If you are outraged and want reasonable copyright laws support the ACLU and EFF. They are fighting this insanity.
http://www.aclu.org
http://www.eff.org