Slashdot Mirror
PIRATE Act Introduced in Congress
certron writes "Xeni Jardin has written a story for Wired about the "Protecting Intellectual Rights Against Theft and Expropriation Act of 2004" aka the PIRATE Act. It and another related bill are designed to criminalize P2P filesharing by lowering the burden of proof for law enforcement and proposing jail terms of up to 10 years. The bill was introduced by Sens. Orrin Hatch and Patrick Leahy, both of whom received large contributions from the entertainment industries. Under the bill, even sharing a single file (if a judge decides the value is over $10,000) could land a user in jail. Read the full text of Orrin Hatch's remarks."
A bunch of college kids are sharing copyrighted corporate products (music and maybe movies), so we have to put them in prison because people who share music and movies online are a bunch of child molesters and terrorists. Yeah, makes sense to me.
This is the kind of thing that Frank Zappa warned us was going to happen.
Sure, we say it all the time, "Corporations are running the country," meaning that corporations have undue influence over lawmakers; but it's getting to the point that we're going to have to find a stronger statement, like "Corporations are completely and utterly in charge of every aspect of our daily lives, using the government and their nearly exclusive control of all media content to keep it that way." Or something shorter if we can think of it.
Mein Gott, what can we do?
You are in error. No-one is screaming. Thank you for your cooperation.
The fact that they sell the 'intellectual property' in question for far less than $10000, could go quite a ways toward minimizing the worth of said content.
This space intentionally left blank.
Million and millions of Americans take part in the sharing of illegal programs/music/movies on the internet, often without their knowledge. At the risk of sounding hackneyed, this kind of law makes it even easier for "Big Brother" to throw potential troublemakers in jail.
Hmmm, doesn't anybody remember when the EFF used to argue that we shouldn't hold P2P tech accountable for how some may misuse it? And that they themselves suggestted suing infringers rather than the technology?
Here's what I do: Bitty Browser & Andromeda
Laws like this make me proud to live in a backwards country such as Canada.
I hear ya man..
I think there will soon be a market in junkets to Canada for Americans that will want to (smoke pot|buy cheap prescription drugs|download movies and music)
I have 2 spare bedrooms for rent!
Trolling is a art,
Laws like this make me proud to live in a backwards country such as Canada.
Make room. If Bush 2.0 gets in again I have every intent of booking it to Canada or England as soon as I can, before he starts up the draft to fund the manpower portion of his neo-con wetdream wars. I won't be alone, either.
I'm sure both Canada and England have their problems but at least they aren't being ran by corporations in the background under an increasingly thinly veiled guise of Democractic Republic-ness.
Out of curiousity.
Some time ago on Slashdot the possibility of a "geek PAC" was discussed.
This is a quesiton somewhat along the same lines. Essentially:
Exactly how much money would it require to do whatever necessary to* remove Mr. Orrin Hatch from a position of legislative power in the United States government?
I think you could find a variety of private citizens, from a number of corners, who would be ecstatic to donate to such a cause, due to the probable benefit it would have in terms of protecting the civil rights, artistic expression, and technological progress of this nation. Slashdotters annoyed at his attempts to introduce increasingly violent anti-file-sharing bills are just the tip of the iceberg.
* legally
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
I think you meant to ask, "who wants to put everyone in jail?"
Prison is a booming industry. People make massive amounts of money keeping others locked up. Prison's even have lobbyists to help guide harsher laws.
Of course, rich people seldom go to jail. Congressmen and high ranking government officials are rich and abstracted from the common man. They could care less about you. You're just dollar signs to them.
Sure, we say it all the time, "Corporations are running the country," meaning that corporations have undue influence over lawmakers; but it's getting to the point that we're going to have to find a stronger statement, like "Corporations are completely and utterly in charge of every aspect of our daily lives, using the government and their nearly exclusive control of all media content to keep it that way."
Social evolution in action: corporations are more efficient -- better adapted to their environment -- than nation-states.
Nation-states, in their day, were more efficient than kingdoms; which were more efficient than city-states; which were more efficient than tribes; which were more efficient than individuals.
I don't like it, but I accept that it's nature's way: the strong flourish, the weak fail.
Mein Gott, what can we do?
About corporate power? We can do nothing.
Live your life well, try to bring more love than hate into the world. That's all. No big stuff -- no Revolution, no Topple the State, no Stop the Corporations. Work to your scale, as an individual; the rest is History.
-kgj
-kgj
Someone said something about democracy - about Micky mouse being elected if enough people voted for him. Well, Micky and his friends have been at home in the US congress for quite some time now, and i dont think the exterminator was called? So what sort of jail time you reckon we should give all these crooked politicians when justice is finally served?
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
Weird, Part of it says that more powers needs to be given to law enforcement to combat "Piracy" but then it contridictoraly says that, most antipiracy legislation has been unseccessfull. Um, whats the point then?
:)
Also, out of the blue it suddenly throws in pornography? What is it about republicans and this constant crusade to stop porn? Someone please contact this fool and tell him that PORN IS NOT ILLEGAL! Sorry, when they start going after our porn, thats when they have GONE TOO FAR!
I mean, 10 years for "expropriating" the potential sale of proprietary data that a judge deems "worth" more than $10,000? Give me a break. Actually, they probably will give me a break; 10 years is more than they want, and they'll compromise downward a bit for what they really wanted in the first place.
Still, the chilling effect of a law like this would only hasten the inevitable development of more secure P2P, and the spread of open source and open content.
Enforcing perpetual copyright is next to impossible without a global police state, and I'm much more likely to fund the Bruce Perens and Corey Doctorows of the world because they've earned my respect by choosing open licenses over the default "AllmineMineMINE!(C)(R)!".
--
Power to the Peaceful
America has enough in the way of issues with giving kids something to do. Dance clubs, live bands, and many forms of entertainment are 21+ only. This lack of entertainment gets worse the smaller the town.
I have nieces and nephews, and one thing I show them how to do is get media online. It sure beats drinking, doing drugs, and generally getting into trouble. Making what I perceive as a wholesom activity a criminal act will result in one less thing to do. Why risk 10 years in jail when you can just smoke some pot and risk only 2 years in jail?
There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
"Tens of thousands of continuing civil enforcement actions might be needed to generate the necessary deterrence." -- US Senator Orrin Hatch The "tends of thousands" phrase sounds more like a declaration of war against the citizens of America by the increasingly corporate owned government of ours. When 1.5 million people are downloading today in America, most of which are law abiding citizens that don't traffic in drugs, commit violent crimes, and pay for their groceries. Could this have happened if the RIAA and MPAA were not busy purchasing our congressional representatives? How do we stop this? I don't just mean the bill, I mean how do we stop the trend. How do we get politicians to represent the people again? One question I have is how are we a representative democracy if we are no longer represented? After years of this news growing, I still have not seen a coordinated large-scale effort to restore balance in our government so that it truly represents the people, and respects our principals. While I consider myself a free market capitalist, and personally choose not to download music that the creators do not offer for free, I completely disagree with treating the American people as dissidents, as this bill and other are increasingly doing. Is China becoming more like us, or are we becoming more like them?
Open Standards Portal
Indeed, our government recognizes that its enforcement powers are appropriate when protecting intellectual property and public safety. Recently, in a speech to the United States Chamber of Commerce, Deputy Attorney General James B. Comey, Jr. asserted that the Department of Justice should assist private enforcement of intellectual property rights if any of three criteria are met: (1) the level of piracy becomes particularly egregious; (2) public health and safety are put at risk; or (3) private civil remedies fail to adequately deter illegal conduct.
When would that be? People aren't going around killing each other with p2p applications, nor do I know how that is even possible. What a moron. Let's put the blame on terrorism, way to go.
SAILING MISHAP
It's gotten pretty interesting in a purely scholarly way. We have a backlogged stockpile of literally 100 years of audio and video entertainment now. I mean, how much can a person consume? Entertainment _should_, by economic laws of supply and demand, be as cheap as tap water.
Ergo, draconian protectionism. Something has to give.
As for me, this is exactly why I dislike people such as Larry Lessig who persue a compromise approach to copyrights. All that ever happens is that they end up getting used and exploited to appease the masses with wishfull thinking, while the MPAA and the RIAA make their next move to screw everyone over.
If anything, it is in our best interest to force the death of copyrights once and for all. It amazes me to see how many people fail to see that the 'emperor is naked' - they actually think that copyrights are just like other free market property rights - that restricting what people can copy actually creates some kind of benefit. Well, bullshit. All people like Lessig do is just get in the way, like those who tried to delay the fall of the USSR, like those who wanted the free states to get along with the slave states. They are useless.
consumer backlash no longer means anything.
Most of the people I know consider P2P a form of nonviolent protest. It's a way of voicing our discontent with the way our consumerist society corners us with the belief that there are no alternatives. Well there are alternatives, many of them, and no matter what the rich white men in suits may believe we can actualize these alternatives into something they can't touch! P2P is our protest! P2P is our power, our voice, our constitutionally protected free speech! Outlawing P2P is outlawing free speech!
Well, not really. But that argument is no dumber than what has been coming out the the copyright companies. Like saying that in an economy that is down %10 due to a massive worldwide recession record sales are down %10 because of... computers. Or that the value of a copy of a song which the sell for 4 dollars suddenly becomes 10,000 dollars because it was put on a P2P network. Or that computer hacking is terrorism and terrorism is treason and treason is punishable by death but hacking to protect copyrights is a noble form of copyprotection and stopping someone from hacking to protect their copyright is a violation of the DMCA.
Sigh. All I want is a little sanity in our legal system.
The ______ Agenda
>Social evolution in action: corporations are more efficient -- better adapted to their environment
Okay, so considering corporate consolidation and conformity in business practices is the norm the next step is to just grant them all monopolies thus socialism - government controled means of production.
Or we can break monopolies, remove corporate money and influence from our politicians, and pass pro-consumer laws.
Considering how few companies own so much capital, our media fails us, and how little say we have and in anything then we're practically the USSR and we all know how that little experiment ment.
>no Revolution, no Topple the State, no Stop the Corporations
Yeah, that's the defeatist attitude they want to have. Go back to watching Reality TV while us adults try to fix things.
The first analogy is that shortly after the invention of the car someone robs a bank a uses the car to get away. The banking industry pays congress to outlaw the car.
Second, the railroad industry has locked up the freight market. Nothing is shipped in-land without going through them. Except for short distances they are the only option. As soon as the model-T comes out someone takes the body off, hammers on some boards and viola --- a truck. The railroad industry pays congress to outlaw the auto.
Either way what is today a vital industry dies in America.
I am working on p2p business applications for ERP, and CRM applications. I guess I should consider moving to another country.
If this becomes the next new new thing, the US looses out.
This is way out of hand. Wasting all this time and energy and money to go after a person sharing a 99cent song is insane.
Why don't we go after the real criminals and people who mean this country harm, instead of a wholesale expansion of who is considered a criminal? ( but then again, convicted criminals legally loose most of their rights, perhaps this is the actual goal of this movement.. that is if I was paranoid... )
And while I've not read the entire thing, what is this about 'reducing burden of proof' ? When will we reach the point that unsubstantiated 'suspicion' gets you jail time with no recourse but to rot in jail..
Are they taking into account exploited computers? Are they going to PROVE it was the owner that was sharing ( or even knew it was wrong ) ? Or are we now responsible for the actions of a criminal that breaks into our home ( effectively ) and steals your stuff, and uses it inappropriately.?
---- Booth was a patriot ----