How far does this go? Am I guilty if I post a video on YouTube shot in my home that has a TV show playing on the TV in the background?

Two months ago, US Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator Victoria Espinel produced her wishlist of changes to US law. One item in particular caught our interest—the suggestion that the online streaming of copyrighted content be bumped up to a full-scale felony. Late last week, Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and John Cornyn (R-TX) introduced just such a bill.

The text of S. 978 isn’t yet available from the official THOMAS system, but Klobuchar’s office sent us a copy of the brief bill. Under current law, “reproducing” and “distributing” copyrighted works are felony charges and cover P2P transfers and Web downloads. But streaming is a “public performance” rather than a “distribution”—and holding a public performance without a proper license is not a felony. S. 978 adds “public performance” to the felony list.

Online streamers can now face up to five years in prison and a fine in cases where:
* They show 10 or more “public performances” by electronic means in any 180-day period and
* The total retail value of those performances tops $2,500 or the cost of licensing such performances is greater than $5,000

Movie makers and theater owners support the bill.

“What you in for, Bubba?”
“Murdered five people and ate their dog. You?”
“Illegal video streaming of an episode of Glee.”
Long pause.
“Oh, yeah. It’s touch your toes time.”




  1. Animby - just phoning it in says:

    #32 – Glenn E : Here’s a “hypothetical” (wink wink) situation for you. I am currently living in SE Asia. I like The Big Bang Theory but it is simply not available here. So, each week, I go to the Pirate Bay and download the new episode. So, here is something that is not available to me but that I can get from some kind people all over the world who seed the show. For a while, I allow my computer to make it available to others who may wish to borrow it. Sort of a lending library. When I’ve watched it, I put it in the trash can and wait for the next episode of the Simpsons to show up. I ‘borrowed’ something from the interwebitubes, I returned it to the digital realm from which it came, did not profit financially from my activity and increased Lorre’s viewership.

    Have I decreased Lorre’s profits? No theft has occurred.

    Now some people say that’s not like a lending library at all since the library purchased a copy. Purchasing this program requires somebody to watch it and “pay” for it by seeing the ads before it is sent to Pirate Bay trackers. (I know the major pirates have automated the task of removing the ads – but let’s not quibble.)

    One person I spoke to about this said Lorre ought to consider innovating a new revenue source: skip the ads altogether and just do product placements. Although I do see some real products on the show imagine if all the laptops showed the Apple logo on the back. Right now the logos are all covered. What if Penny wore low cut Coca Cola tee shirts and Howard’s mom shouted out, “Did you remember to pick up the Mogen David?” This way the ads would become part of the program instead of being a chance to go pee. In fact, I wonder if DC comics already pays a fee for all the placements they get? O mean, how many Flash tee shirts does Leonard own??? Is Chick Lorre double dipping? Commercials AND placements?

    The downside? He’d have to write a half hour program instead of a 20 minute script.

  2. George says:

    The problem is that they have to make this a felony crime because there really is no demonstrable monetary damage on a case by case basis. Video is ubiquitous and ephemeral. When producing movies and TV had a great cost and the illegal distributions channels were concentrated and physically traceable, busting people who sold bootleg videos made sense.

    Now that video is infinitely available, infinitely reproducible and infinitely distributable its per-unit value and thus recompensable damages is close to nil. Its a new paradigm and trying to put the genie back in the bottle is impossible and stupid.

  3. MikeN says:

    >Its a new paradigm and trying to put the genie back in the bottle is impossible and stupid.

    I agree. Movie studios should realize that when they make a movie they will get the theater sales, and sale of one copy of the DVD, which will be placed online and available for anyone to download for free. Perhaps they should consider product placements, merchandising, and special DVD sets for all future movie releases.


2

Bad Behavior has blocked 4187 access attempts in the last 7 days.