Slashdot Mirror


Texas Rep Wants To Jail File Traders

kUnGf00m45t3r writes "There is an article on Wired about how Texas Rep. John Carter wants to jail some college students to scare people away from illegal file sharing. He says, "What these kids don't realize is that every time they pull up music and movies and make a copy, they are committing a felony under the United States code," Carter said in an interview. "If you were to prosecute someone and give them three years, I think this would act as a deterrent." Right..."

48 of 688 comments (clear)

  1. What these kids don't realize by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Am I the only one who finds this to be condescending? "These kids" is no better than "you people" - I'm sure most Americans will remember the "you people" scandal from the mid-90s.

    1. Re:What these kids don't realize by jehnx · · Score: 3, Funny

      I was thinking the same thing as I read this. If a politician is to be thought worthy of being listened to, the least he could do is speak civilly and not down about the ones he's complaining about.

      Who wants to bet he has KaZaA at home right now while he's at work downloading the new Kenny G album? Hah.

  2. Hmmm... by 91degrees · · Score: 5, Funny

    Does this bill also contain credit for all the CD's I've legally purchased? I mean, say I have 100 legally purchased songs on CD, and I've pirated 99 songs on mp3, this still represents a net sale of 1 song by the record industry.

    Using RIAA screwy logic, does this mean that I haven't actually cost them anything?

    1. Re:Hmmm... by jhunsake · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The key point, as I'm sure you were making by italicizing it, is potentially. In my case, they haven't lost any sales, because I will never pay for music again. Not under any circumstances whatsoever. But I will (and do) download music and occasionally rip friends' CDs. And should this imply, as some claim, that there is no incentive then for artists to make new music, that is fine with me. I would be happy listening to what I already have for the rest of my life. I guess this means I believe no one should be a musician by profession.

    2. Re:Hmmm... by 91degrees · · Score: 4, Insightful

      We're not talking about stealing here. We're talking about copyright infringement. i.e. violation opf their exclusive right to reproduce.

    3. Re:Hmmm... by PerryMason · · Score: 3, Insightful

      For me, if they can guarantee me that the CD I buy wont scratch, crack or split for my lifetime, then I would be happy to pay the money.

      As it is, I do buy a few CDs, but only if I consider the package as a whole is worth owning. If record companies want people to buy CDs they should try making the product 'value-added' enough that its better than just having the MP3. Good artwork, lyric sheets, stylised packaging. Do anything to make it worth the money, but don't expect people to pay for a CD when its as easy as ripping it, or P2Ping it.

      Thats my opinion anyway.

      --
      "I'm tired of all this 'Aren't humanity great' bullshit. We're a virus with shoes" - Bill Hicks
    4. Re:Hmmm... by macdaddy357 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Forget the muderers and rapists, they are no threat to society. We need to lock up file traders!" Who is this asshat? Boycott the recording industry.

      --
      How ya like dat?
    5. Re:Hmmm... by 91degrees · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We're not taking anything. We're copying.

      Using that logic, you might as well say that taking a photo of someone is stealing.

    6. Re:Hmmm... by $rtbl_this · · Score: 4, Funny

      A rumored Amish belief that I have heard (never validated, though) is that part of their soul is stolen when a photo is taken of them.

      I wonder if that also means that part of the soul of a song is stolen every time it's copied. That would kind of explain why so much contemporary music is soulless, bland, commercial mulch.

      --
      "Are you being weird, or sarcastic?" said Emma. I said I didn't know because I get the two feelings mixed up.
    7. Re:Hmmm... by orangesquid · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Copyright infringement is not as serious of a crime as politicians, the RIAA, and the MPAA would like people to think. If I cross the street at crosswalks 100 times, and I jaywalk 99 times, should I get jailed? Who has been hurt?

      Jails are for extremely violent or disorderly people who have the potential to ruin others' lives and do not care what happens to others. Most college students (except for some of the frat boys around here) do not fit into this category (not even close!). Jails are for dangerous crimes; violent crimes are dangerous, drugs are considered dangerous (perhaps if you are a pusher, but what about the rest of the people in jail for drug dealings and possession?), and cheating the (economic) system in grandiose ways is sometimes considered dangerous.

      How is file sharing, something that has been going on for years and years *anyway* (ever copied a tape or CD? recorded something off the radio kept it? recorded something off TV and kept it?), suddenly such a grandiose crime that it is ruining others' lives in such a serious way?

      Jails are designed to hurt and punish people who haven't learned not to hurt and punish others. By not buying a CD, who am I hurting? If I like an artist enough, I will by their CD. If I don't consider it worth my money, I won't. In the past, I would just tape songs I liked off of the radio to make mix tapes. How is this different? Let's start turning in powerful people for making mix tapes with songs off the radio, shall we? I do believe that qualifies as an "illegal download." Then maybe people will realize how ridiculous this whole business is (in most cases, anyhow).

      Piracy? Theft? Hahahahahahaha. I guess "copyright infringment" isn't scary enough of a word. If I go to jail for piracy, I better have looted and pillaged. If I go to jail for theft, I better have acquired lots of new physical possessions from a store, defeating store security.

      --
      --TheOrangeSquid Is it any wonder things seem so awry? We swim in a sea of confusion and don't have to think to survive
    8. Re:Hmmm... by Reziac · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Imagine the result in a "three strikes" state like California. It's conceivable, and was recently upheld by the Supreme Court, that someone could get LIFE IN PRISON for having a record of 3 felonies, each of which was for file trading.

      That's absurd.

      It's also absurd that someone is willing to ruin some bright and basically good kid's life (a felony on your record severely limits your options) just to make an example and a point.

      Here's a legal proposal for you: it should be unlawful to use criminal law to make examples of anyone. If you prosecute one offender, you should have to prosecute them all. (College campuses everywhere are suddenly vacant; millions of voices are suddenly silenced.)

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  3. logic? by matt4077 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If you drive drunk and kill someone, you get 2 years, if you share 500 mp3s you get 3. Sounds fair to me.

    1. Re:logic? by darkov · · Score: 4, Funny

      Why not just execute offenders? Then people wouldn't commit any crimes. And you would weed out just the bad people and leave only the good for a perfect society.

    2. Re:logic? by Flanders · · Score: 3, Funny

      I have most certainly NOT done anything illegal!!!
      ;-)

    3. Re:logic? by Safety+Cap · · Score: 4, Funny
      That doesn't make sense. We need to preemptively execute people who threaten to be offenders.

      Then, and only then, will we be able to go to "Green" alert.

      --
      Yeah, right.
  4. 3 years of training and a felony conviction? by Fred+IV · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Great 3 years in prison is plenty of time for them to learn how to be a real criminal. And since the felony will create problems getting a job when they get out, they will have the inclination to do illegal things for money so they can eat and pay rent.

    There just isn't enough violent crime in the US anymore. Let's all thank the Texan for finding a way to correct that problem.

  5. Re:Yeah, right.... by tomknight · · Score: 3, Insightful
    After all, the Pres has said that he'd spring from jail (in EU) any US citizen convicted of a crime by the International Court. Now who's respecting the international community? God, this man's hypocrisy makes me want to vomit. Yeah, this is offtopic but what the hell does any of this shit matter anyway?

    Tom.

    --
    Oh arse
  6. Stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    His priorities are all fucked up.

    His priority is corporate payrolls, not the people.

    Revolition time, overthrow the gov. that the people Remember, the gov is SUPPOST to represent the PEOPLE, lately they just represent the CORPORATION.

    Overthrow it.

  7. An ineffective stance by Motherfucking+Shit · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Says carter (according to the article),
    Carter said making an example of a few college students could go a long way toward bringing home the message that sharing and duplicating copyrighted materials is wrong.

    "Sometimes it takes the shock value of someone actually being punished," Carter said. "In this particular instance it might also send a message to these kids that are operating on these networks that, 'Hey, I better stop.'"

    Students would learn quickly that copying even one album is not worth the potential punishment, he said.
    So he wants to punish "a few" students in the hopes of deterring the rest of them? Sorry, it's not going to work. As the article mentions, there are hundreds of thousands if not millions of college students engaging in file sharing. Putting "a few" of them in prison isn't going to deter the remainder; instead, those who aren't among the unfortunate "few" will think what everyone else is thinking: "they might bust a few people, but they won't bust me."

    Filesharing is, in my opinion, much like speeding. A whole hell of a lot of people do it, and only a small percentage ever get caught or have to face the music, so to speak. When more than half of drivers are doing 70 in a 55, and only 1 in 5,000 are pulled over and given a ticket, there is no deterrent! Similarly, if you've got hundreds of thousands of students sharing files illegally, and you only punish "a few" of them, that's not going to discourage the rest of them.

    The idea that "they won't bust me" is always going to be prevalent. Either we put them all in jail for committing these horrible felonies, or we don't bother busting any of them.
    --
    "BSD: Free as in speech. Linux: Free as in beer. Windows 10: Free as in herpes." --Man On Pink Corner in #52607549.
    1. Re:An ineffective stance by kenthorvath · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I think this would act as a deterrent.

      Yes, it would definately deter hundreds of thousands of filesharers from his reelection... Let's face it, if the American people made enough stink about changing the copyright laws to allow casual filesharing, it would happen. There are enough people who do this and vote that it would make a significant difference. All we need is ONE candidate up for election who makes this his issue and the rest will scurry into place, either immediately agreeing, or seeing the light after they lose.

  8. File traders by gmuslera · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The real threat right now is spammers, not file traders. Is something that affects and in some way or another harm or could harm us all. Why not put them all in jails? or in pits, or use them as human shields on iraq, etc.

  9. Let the punishment fit the crime by smylie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From the article:
    "What these kids don't realize is that every time they pull up music and movies and make a copy, they are committing a felony under the United States code," Carter said in an interview. "If you were to prosecute someone and give them three years, I think this would act as a deterrent."

    I know the american judicial and political system can be pretty screwed up at time, but just how much support does this guy think he's going to get from his constituents (read votes), when he starts sending kids to jail for three years in punishment for what amounts to fiften dollars worth of copyright violation?

    To compare, how long do you expect Jeffrey Skilling (former Enron CEO) to spend in jail for the $30 billion lost there . . .

    1. Re:Let the punishment fit the crime by z_gringo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I read that also, where he mentioned that they were "committing a felony under the United States code" every time they downloaded a song.

      Can that be correct? It may be illegal, but is it really a felony? That seems a bit harsh, but then again, there are a lot of things that are felonies in Texas that aren't felonies elswhere.

      Of course Unlawful Carrying of a Weapon (Handgun, whatever), is only a mesdemeanor.

      --
      -- -- Warning. Do not stare directly at the sun.
    2. Re:Let the punishment fit the crime by FreeUser · · Score: 5, Informative

      And yes, it is a felony to commit criminal copyright infringement.

      Yes, and this is one of the truly dangerous developments in the copyright cartel's assimilation of the United States government. Copyright violation was always, for more than two hundred years of American history, a CIVIL violation, not a CRIMINAL one. Redress for copyright violations was obtained through litigation in court, not the barrel of a government gun.

      Unfortunately the copyright and media cartels of Hollywood bought legislation from our disgustingly corrupt public officials in Washington, and in the late 1990's turned copyright violation into a federal offense, i.e. a Felony.

      A draconian police state and injustice we haven't seen since the American apartheid of the 1950's, a refusal to enforce an obscene law, or a repeal of those portions of the Sony Bono Copyright Extention Act and DMCA are really the only possible outcomes. Based on our experience with prohibition (creating two tremendous threats that have gutted our freedoms in the 20th century: the Mafia and the FBI) and its successor, the War on Drugs, I expect to see this law enforced widely, if haphazardly, with the result that our jail populations swell even more, and our country suffer social and economic fallout it will fail to recover from this obscenity for generations to come.

      Welcome to the Corporate State. Bend over and take it like a man.

      --
      The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
  10. Whats good for the goose... by epicstruggle · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I would have no problem with this proposed law, if they offered something similar to music execs guilty of price fixing. So congress should make sure that both sides of this issue are playing fairly.

    later,

    --
    "Im drowning here, and you're describing the water!"
  11. Good, let's audit his home for MP3s by werdna · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ... and unlicensed software. Let's see if his children or spouse should be jailed. (Hey, 3 or more counts -- maybe for life!).

    Something about glass houses.

  12. All we need is several million by goldcd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    students, the intellectual future and security of a nation, all turning up on his doorstep turning themselves in for 3 years jailtime. A great way to point out the stupidity of his words, and secure free accomodation until the end of your education.

  13. John Carter's Details by MjDascombe · · Score: 5, Informative

    Can also be found here - why not drop him a line? :p

  14. Not the law by werdna · · Score: 5, Informative

    This demagogue ought to actually read the copyright Act before he starts making false accusations of criminal conduct against his fellow citizens. (He also better make sure his kids are clean.)

    1) Even where infringement is present, it isn't necessarily criminal:

    It isn't criminal unless willful, and it isn't willful merely because it was copied. Evidence of infringement doesn't suffice under the Copyright Act.

    2) Even where willful infringement is present, it isn't necessarily criminal:

    If not for commercial purposes or by taking a retail value exceeding $1,000 in a six-month period.

    3) Even where willful infringement is criminal, it isn't necessarily a felony:

    If not for commercial purposes, it is merely a midemeanor, in the sense that the maximum criminal sentence is limited to not more than a year. (Not sure if that is the relevant standard -- I'm not a criminal lawyer).

  15. Wonderful plan by liquidsin · · Score: 5, Funny

    College students are easily swayed by this sort of thing, and imprisoning a few for longer than most rapists get will surely straighten them out. I mean, once they showed that they put you in jail for smoking marijuana, pretty much every college student in the U.S. stopped smoking pot. This will be just like that, right?

    --
    do not read this line twice.
  16. Disney Jails for tots by dbcowboy · · Score: 4, Funny

    Wait lets not forget those middle schoolers. I know they download music too. But how to jail kids under 16. Disney Jails of course. With a special school in jail teaching all about the evils of downloaded music. I call it Disney Jail. Smaller cells for smaller minds. Jailers/teachers dressed in big eared mouse costumes. Special areas for kindergarden and preschool. Punish them while they're young. Better yet pre-crime... jail them before they do... cause you know they will.

  17. Re:logic? what about message? by jkrise · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I remember while rejecting the case for breaking up MS, Dubya said we don't want to send the wrong messages to American Corporations. They mustn't feel endangered to carry on innovating in their own country.

    What message does jailing students send to American citizens? The one I can hear is "Innovative students who offend Corporations will be jailed. Even if the 'guilty act' does not merit such severe action ".

    --
    If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
  18. Jailing file traders by unitron · · Score: 5, Funny

    But if we jail people with files, won't they just cut through the bars and escape?

    --

    I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

  19. fine, but let's do something else first... by g4dget · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Let's first jail some politicians for several years that have violated campaign financing laws or misused political funds for political purposes. Yes, this includes politicians that only violate them on "technicalities" or can't fully account for where the money went. Why don't we start by auditing Carter himself?

    In the grand scheme of things, cleaning out corrupt politicians is a whole lot more important than cracking down in file trading by people with no money. I'm sure jailing people like Carter for a few years would have a wonderfully deterrent effect on other politicians. What about it?

  20. Re:Yeah, right.... by pyrote · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Well, the USA obviously consider throwing their children into jail for something which everybody is doing and which has been done at least since the advent of tape recorders.
    That means they are causing fear by ruining the lives of few.


    Sounds like terroisim to me.

    --
    THE WORLD IS GOING TO END!!!! eventually.
  21. Drugs. by jez_f · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I think file sharing has gone the same way as Drugs (well at least pot), most (young) people do not see anything wrong with it and many quite happily do it. Yet is illegal. I am much of a philosopher but I would say if nobody supports a law then the law should be changed not the people?

  22. if they put someone in jail for this by wadiwood · · Score: 3, Informative

    Then everyone who has ever copied a record or taped something off the telly, should give themselves up, and insist on the same treatment. This is called passive resistence path to law reform. If enough people do it all at once (ie organised), it will completely overwhelm the system.

    In the mean time wouldn't it be nice if the "no felony" rule applied to more than the military. And is it true that some people get a choice of the army or jail in the USA?

    (Doing the rounds on email - no idea if it is true or not):

    Can you imagine working for a company that has a
    little more than 500 employees and has the following statistics:

    * 29 have been accused of spousal abuse
    * 7 have been arrested for fraud
    * 19 have been accused of writing bad cheques
    * 117 have directly or indirectly bankrupted at least 2 businesses
    * 3 have done time for assault
    * 71 cannot get a credit card due to bad credit
    * 14 have been arrested on drug-related charges
    * 8 have been arrested for shoplifting
    * 21 are currently defendants in lawsuits
    * 84 have been arrested for drunk driving in the last year

    Can you guess which organization this is?

    Give up yet?

    It's the 535 members of the United States Congress. The same group of idiots that crank out hundreds of new laws each year designed to keep the rest of USA proletariat in line !!

    to mod or to post? posting wins. me, me, mod me, me ...

    --

    -- it must be true, it's on the internet.
  23. Waste of time ... by hpavc · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So they want to jail people for file trading/stealing a few hundred bucks worth of crap, but the corrupt CEO's of Enron (file trading/stealing peoples life's savings) and otherwise will likely do less time than the kiddies they make examples of.

    Nice to see our perspective of domestic and international law are on par with each other in the insane asylum.

    Didnt Texas just notice that their tried to give someone a needle in a case where the accused was found guilty with evidence from police paid witnesses and evidence was withheld? Yahoo Story

    Like they need to find more ways of fucking people with their backwards justice. Perhaps they could figure out how to administer what they have first.

    --
    members are seeing something, your seeing an ad
  24. Re:MOD PARENT UP -- NAIL ON HEAD by Cyberdyne · · Score: 5, Informative
    for most kids sharing files this is *not* a felony, it's not even a criminal offense! only civil!

    It was. Until the "No Electronic Theft Act" appeared, which altered the definition of "commercial" to cover file trading as well. So, if you're running Kazaa, WinMX or whatever except with an empty or disabled share at all times, that's (2) and (3) from the parent post covered. As for (1), are you going to claim you accidentally installed that file trading software? If not, NETA would seem to put you into the "felony" bracket as soon as you've traded a couple of dozen albums - or one copy of Win XP, it seems!

    Run a P2P app deliberately, trade $1k worth (at retail prices) of material, and it's a misdemeanour (1 year, $100k fine). 10 or more copies, retailing for $2.5k, and it's a felony (3 years, $250k fine). Ouch!

  25. My Rant by jfollas · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It really bothers me that the RIAA et al compares digital media piracy to be the very same as walking into a store and shoplifting a CD. Conceptually--alright, I see their point that theft is theft. But, let's compare apples to apples here.

    Swapping a song is more akin to going to your library and copying an article out of an encyclopedia. I mean, the library paid for that encyclopedia, but Britannica certainly isn't getting any type of royalty or extra revenue for your actions. And, this behavior is actually accepted (otherwise, why did my college library have eight copy machines on each floor?).

    The fact is, and this has been stated over and over again, that the recording industry is using a business model that is quickly becoming antiquated because it has not adapted to changes in digital media capabilities (i.e., instant gratification: easier and cheaper to download a single track from the Internet than to drive to the music store).

    Furthermore, what is the motivation or desireable quality of owning a physical CD at the cost of $15? For the eight garbage tracks that you get in addition to the 1 or 2 good songs? For the really cool cover artwork? For the satisfaction that your $15 contributed to the squandering lifestyle of the artist, or even worse, the recording label?

    Perhaps my views are seeded in jealousy. There, I said it. Because I have no marketable talent, I'm forced to work 40+ hours a week and live entirely on that paycheck. Recording stars might put in long hours at the studio (boo hoo--we all put in long hours to meet our deadlines probably more frequently than they record an album), but in my eyes, they aren't truly working unless they're touring. And, just because they can sing or otherwise attract public appeal, they have the opportunity to afford all kinds of luxuries PLUS have big companies give them all kinds of products for free in hopes of some sort of endorsement. I wonder what that would be like....

    Call it theft or whatever, but I think that the everyday 40+ hour a week employee has voiced its opposition to the practices of the recording industry that takes money away from the working class to support the lifestyle of the artists.

  26. Finally! by InadequateCamel · · Score: 3, Funny

    I can't wait for this to become reality! Soon they'll jail everyone who pirates music, and lump them in with all those software traders too. Good thing we taught poor students a lesson about trying to get free versions of $500 pieces of software. Those cassette recording punks are rotting in there somewhere too! Good thing that evil Satanic practice was stopped before everyone starting doing it!

    Even if they start randomly jailing 0.1% of all offenders you have to make room for tens of thousands of "criminals" in your already overcrowded jails, and the net result is that 99.9% of people will get away with it, scot-free.

    I think they SHOULD enforce it, and make the record companies pay for the prosecution and the new jails that will be needed to house millions of young adults. Sure, schools will be pretty empty for a while and they might cause long-term economic damage, but at least kids will no longer be sharing files and can get back to smoking weed and drinking & driving!

    Go Texas! Can't trade files but you can pistol-whip that black piece of shit who offered to wash the windows of your truck.

  27. Re:Yeah, sure. by mpe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The US has a higher proportion of its citizens in jail than any other country - in all of history.

    This isn't just in comparison with other "democracies", this is of anywhere, including dictatorships.

    It now looks like it's trying hard to keep anyone else from approaching this record.

    This is something for the "land of the free" to be ashamed of, not proud of.

  28. Obligatory Soviet Union reference by panurge · · Score: 3, Funny
    Which country used to throw kids in jail for years for "hooliganism"? Yes, the former Soviet Union.

    However, I don't think this goes far enough. I have a more Texan solution for the rep. to adopt.
    Kill them all.

    Yes, it's well known that most crimes are committed by young men aged 16-30. Kill the lot of them. It'll stop most of the hacking, most of the file sharing, get rid of most of the drug addicts. It will get rid of most of the cheap foreign labor so senior US programmers will have jobs again. It will reduce US carbon dioxide output significantly so Bush can take credit for reducing global warming. It will reduce underage pregnancies. It will remove most of the opposition to the religious Right. It will greatly reduce drunk driving.

    OK, the downside is that CD sales will fall catastrophically. But in these difficult times, we must all make sacrifices. Even the RIAA. And we could have a stonking great memorial in DC, to all the young men who gave their lives in the war against (file-sharing) terror.

    Next off: Why they should bring in the death penalty for double parking.

    Stupid? Not as stupid as "let's give a few people a major criminal record for a minor offence to discourage the others." Texas and Saudi: the similarities run deep.

    --
    Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
  29. This is why file sharing should be legal by rpgguy76 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Even though this article from the Baen Free Library is about books it applies equally well to file sharing. Check out the entire article at Baen Free Library
    "And, just as important -- perhaps most important of all -- free books are the way an audience is built in the first place. How many people who are low on cash and for that reason depend on libraries or personal loans later rise on the economic ladder and then buy books by the very authors they came to love when they were borrowing books?

    Practically every reader, that's who. Most readers of science fiction and fantasy develop that interest as teenagers, mainly from libraries. That was certainly true of me. As a teenager, I couldn't afford to buy the dozen or so Robert Heinlein novels I read in libraries. Nor could I afford the six-volume Lensmen series by "Doc" Smith. Nor could I afford any of the authors I became familiar with in those days: Arthur Clarke, James H. Schmitz, you name it.

    Did they "lose sales?" In the long run, not hardly. Because in the decades which followed, I bought all of their books -- and usually, in fact, bought them over and over again to replace old copies which had gotten too worn and frayed. I just bought another copy of Robert Heinlein's The Puppet Masters, in fact, because the one I had was getting too long in the tooth. I think that's the third copy of that novel I've purchased, over the course of my life. I'm not sure. Might be the fourth. I first read that book when I was fourteen years old -- forty years ago, now -- checked out from my high school library."

    Author Eric Flint
  30. In Texasese.... by Rai · · Score: 4, Funny

    the verb "jail" means "temporarily detain until we execute them" or "hold them dang sonsabitches til we's can kills 'em. Yee haw!"

  31. letter sent to Texas Congressman Pete Sessions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Below is a transcript of a letter I sent to 32nd District (Dallas) representative Pete Sessions in response to this article. I encourage you to take this (in whole or in part), edit for your specific congressman, and send it along as well:

    ---------------------

    Congressman Sessions:

    As a voter in your district, I'm writing in response to an article (http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,58081,0 0.html) in which your fellow Texas Representative from the 34th District, John Carter, explictly expresses support for prosecuting as felons people who participate in illegal file sharing online. While I recognize that such action is in violation of copyright law, I also recognize that representative Carter's statements are a direct reflection of the common agenda of the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) and of the sizable campaign contributions that these organizations are using to influence legislation in thier direction.

    Let me be clear that this letter is not in advocacy of illegal file sharing, but rather in response to the misguided stance of felony prosecution that your fellow representative has publicly taken. This is a problem that is endemic of the internet age, and is a result of there being an inadequate system of permanent distribution of these media from their respective industries (e.g. CDs & DVDs that scratch/crack/break, and audio and VHS tapes that degrade with time) and the availability of technological measures to ensure the indefinite lifespan of the media with digital archiving on computers.

    Thus, it is apparent that, rather than fight the swell of illegal file sharing with threats of felony prosecution, thereby placing the onus of responsibility on the end user, the onus is instead squarely upon the RIAA and MPAA to discover a means to utilize the advancement of technology to discover a better means of distribution for their media.

    This issue has arisen purely from the sphere of economics. Simply, why would I pay $18 for a CD/$30 for a DVD whose lifespan I cannot guarantee and whose replacement I will have sole financial responsibility for in the event of loss when an alternative, regardless of its legality, exists and is readily available (e.g. internet file sharing). However, if these industries were to offer their product in electronic format for a reduced cost (effected by saving themselves the cost of physical media and its physical distribution), or in some other way ensure that I have indefinite access to the media I purchased, then the argument for legitimate purchase would be much more compelling, and I'd be much less likely to engage in illegal file sharing in lieu of commercial obtainment.

    These industries try to stand on both sides of the intellectual property argument, which hurls the legitimacy of their entire stance into a dubious light. On the one hand, by claiming violation of copyright law by unlicensed distribution of the content electronically, they clearly state that the value of the CD or DVD is in its artistic content and not in the physical media. On the other hand, by denying the availability of indefinite access to the content in case of a damaged CD or DVD, they state clearly that the user is purchasing not the content with their dollars but rather the physical medium itself.

    Obviously, these ideas are contradictory, and quite obviously, the internet file sharing phenomenon of RIAA and MPAA content is a clear REACTION to the failure of these industries to act responsibly and consistently in their obligation to participate in fair commerce with the public sector.

    And so, returning to the genesis of this letter, I ask, as a voter, that you take all measures to oppose any movement within the legislature that would seek to prosecute as criminals users who participate in illegal file sharing, and instead support legislature which would direct the RIAA and MPAA towards all efforts at finding an appropriate mechanism for media content distribution that would insure indefinite access for the consumers who purchase their products.

    Thank you for your time. Regards,
    --<name>

  32. Great Idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Locking up a few of "these kids" worked so well with our War on Drugs!
    If he succeeds, pretty soon there won't be any file trading, just like now there are no more illegal drugs in this country!

  33. Local Hick Makes Big, Puts Foot in Mouth by ziriyab · · Score: 3, Informative
    It's scary that this guy is so opinionated on this matter yet he doesn't even have an email address listed on his web site. He also seems to be on the Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property, which makes him a powerful moron - a dangerous combination.

    Anyway, those in the Austin, Round Rock area, call him: 512-246-1600 and politely express your opinion.