Meet the DoJ's 'Anti-Piracy' Lawyers

This week's Slashdot interview guests are the 'point people' for Federal criminal actions against online file-traders and software misapproprators. They know some Slashdot readers may have little sympathy for what they do all day. Be that as it may, this is a great chance to understand what it's like on the enforcement side of the intellectual property coin. We have a special set of 'ground rules' for this interview (below) supplied by the Department of Justice that we must ask you to read before submitting questions. From the DoJ (verbatim):

Answering your questions will be the attorneys assigned to prosecute intellectual property crimes in the Department of Justice's Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section (CCIPS). Spearheading this group will be Michael O'Leary, Deputy Chief for Intellectual Property who oversees the day-to-day intellectual property enforcement operations. Here is some background on CCIPS and their intellectual property efforts:

CCIPS began as a small group within DOJ in 1991, with a focus on network crimes (e.g. hacking into machines, destructive worms and viruses, denial of service attacks), intellectual property crimes (e.g. software piracy and counterfeiting), and electronic evidence issues. CCIPS is part of the Criminal Division of DOJ (which, as its name suggests, is primarily responsible for enforcement of federal criminal laws). Today, the section has grown to almost 40 lawyers, of whom about a dozen focus on IP issues. (Please keep in mind that it will be the IP prosecutors answering questions here, so save your non-IP-related hacking or electronic evidence issues for another time.)

What do the attorneys assigned to IP at CCIPS do? The IP prosecutors in the Section are responsible for establishing and enforcing the Department's overall intellectual property rights enforcement program, including the prosecution of federal intellectual property crimes. In some instances, CCIPS handles the prosecution of intellectual property cases. More frequently they work closely with prosecutors in the U.S. Attorneys' Offices around the country who handle the vast majority of federal criminal prosecutions, both IP and non-IP. They also provide training on IP issues for prosecutors and law enforcement, both domestically and internationally. Other responsibilities include reviewing new policy proposals, legislation, or international agreements related to IP, and providing advice to other government agencies or components of DOJ. The prosecutors also work closely with foreign law enforcement counterparts to coordinate IP enforcement activities around the globe.

While they are committed to fully answering your questions, as Department of Justice attorneys, they are subject to various Federal laws, Department of Justice rules, and ethics rules. They are not permitted to provide legal advice to individual private citizens. This means that there is no attorney-client relationship between CCIPS and Slashdot readers, users, or moderators (and answering questions on Slashdot should not be interpreted as creating one). Therefore, they will not answer questions seeking legal advice. Finally, they cannot discuss ongoing cases, investigations or related hypotheticals.

To learn more about the Department of Justice or the Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section, visit the following web sites, www.usdoj.gov and www.cybercrime.gov.

Comments

Re:Fair Use

[Znork]

As far as I can tell, the term "fair use" is widely misused. "Fair use" applies to your right to quote half a page out of Harry Potter for your criticism of it, or your right to create the DomiMatrix parody of Matrix.

Wether or not you have the right to make any copies for personal use has very little to do with the Fair Use provisions in copyright law.

Re:Regarding law-changing:

[Grishnakh]

That's easy. You need to pay a personal visit to your congressman, carrying a large bag of "campaign donations".

Re:Here's my goddamned question:

[eclectro]

Our favorite law, the DMCA, changed all that. The DMCA changed it from a civil action to a criminal action, making copyright law violations federal crimes.

Just another reason (that hasn't been talked too much about) to hate this vile piece of legislation.

Re:Definition of "Fair Use"?

[gte910h]

"hey, I bought the VHS version of a movie, so I'm entitled to the DVD version now!"

You CAN make a LEGAL DVD copy of your VHS for your own use. I plan on doing this to all my VHS tapes when the price goes down a bit on DVD recorders.

This is entirely different from making a copy of your friend's DVD of "Where Brother Art Thou" because you own the VHS version. They are NOT the same content, even the movie itself is often higher quality.

I showed an "audiophile" associate of mine that he could make high bitrate MP3's of his records that still sounded like a record when played back (that "vinyl" sound is actually distortion, not some beautiful lossless analog magic most record freaks claim). He then spent WEEKS converting his records to MP3. That perfectly legal. If he sells them now though, he must destroy his "backups" (the mp3's).

By the way, you only have to buy a high quality needle etc once when you want to rip your vinyl, then you'll always hear that high quality from that point on.

Oh, and you didn't buy a license. You bought a copy. See "Doctrine of First Sale" in google, or read that other good reply to your own post.