Slashdot Mirror
File Trading Law Would Include 'Willing' Traders
mgessner writes "From InfoWorld comes a story on the U.S. House's approval of a new, tough law against trading files online. 'The bill expands the definition of file traders eligible for criminal penalties from individuals who 'willingly' distribute copyright files to those who 'knowingly' do so, an escalation that could result in jail time for file swappers.'" (The bill has yet to go through the Senate.)
I guess Granny won't be coming to Christmas this year.
:(
with boxes checked by default, and programs scanning ur hd's for stuff to share, how do they determine just where the thin line of knowingly and willingly is???
The GPL is a copyright so does this make it illegal to download opensource software?
Index
Summary
Text of legislation
Because we all know that passing laws to make, say, speeding in cars, murder, fraud etc. illegal has put an end to all those activities.
Another thing brought on by Big Government and Evil Corporations. BLAH!
LainTheWired = isgod( int Lain, int denial, float truth)
duh
Let's have:
people who illegally photocopy books go to jail
people who illegally perform plays and musical pieces go to jail
people who plagiarize or don't cite references go to jail
Hell let's just have anyone who says anything in a non-free speech zone go to jail.
If I "knowingly" share files, aren't I "willingly" sharing them as well.
Does this apply to people who KNOW that they share files, but don't WANT to???
I'm confused!!!
That being said, I feel it's important to note that what needs evaluating isn't the violation of copyright, rather, the purpose and effect of copyright itself.
We'll build large complexes to house all the file traders. Force them to attend some kind of "knowledge" classes, make them pay restitution, keep them up til all hours of the night studying how good societies act, how responsible citizens should act.
We'll ban all contraband and make sure we run them through a series of tests before letting them out.
Oh wait, I've done my time, it was called University!
Yo Grark
Canadian Bred with American Buttering
So long as they go after the traders and not the tools, I'm happy.
Eisgrau's right - it's a good idea in principle from the perspective of everyone in the music/movie industry and as far as copyrights go, but realistically, it's just more talk. Nothing is going to change. Everyone is used to free music, and until large percentages of people are sued (which probably will never happen), they will continue to break copyright law.
I have no will. Any copyright infringements I may be accused of will be the fault of the my computers, who told me to do so.
In abone head move Congress outlaws file trading amoung willing participants.. ..hmm they seem to have flunked intrnet 101 as your borwser reads afile/shares a fiel with the server to give you that nice graphical page..
Sonny Bono must be hitting that tree again and again and again
Don't Tread on OpenSource
From the article:
Detractors of the legislation claim that the measure would not stop the trading of copyright files and will not help the entertainment industry find a way to ensure artists get paid for the distribution of their works.
Well, what law has ever stopped a crime. Laws (theoretically) just reduce crime (but, obviously not in all cases).
Also, from the article:
"Putting downloaders behind bars, or decimating their college funds with civil lawsuits, won't put the genie of peer-to-peer technology back in the bottle or put real money in the pockets of real artists," P2P United's Eisgrau said in an e-mail interview with IDG News Service earlier this week.
This is the smartest thing I've read about file sharing in general to date.
P.S.: What is the difference between knowingly and willingly?
When people start abusing this law and the public gets fed up with it congress will be left with all the blame.
Regardless of who becomes president for the next four years, we are still going to see more stupid laws like these in the future.
You know, one of the reasons I take this position is because studies have shown that most people DON'T VOTE. Most people just bitch and moan. The people have the power, but they don't use it, and Big Biz knows this. The vast majority of Right Wing Assholes smile with their mouths shut as they vote. The vast majority of Liberal Thinkers scream and yell about rights, and don't vote.
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
why I am glad that I do not live in America...
I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
Woops, was I accidently distributing that copy of Windows XP? Since it was an accident I guess I didn't knowingly do it! No jail time for me!
"Gives the CHIPs Unit of the Department of Justice the responsibility of investigating crimes related to the theft of intellectual property" That should be easy since there's no such thing as "intellectual property" and even even though you accept that terminology it refers to something that is almost never stolen but sometimes illegally copied.
I suspect that those software engineers will set sail east across "the pond" in search of a land were they can have rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Rights that many in our government are trying to take away [if you aren't "with them"]. We tried it over here, it worked for about 224 years and at last the western empire is starting to crumble.
"Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a fat white guy who is threatened by change."
Actually, it almost certainly will happen, since it will be on the taxpayer's dime rather than the RIAAs. There is no disincentive to the RIAA asking for and eating up millions in taxpayer funds chasing down those using p2p networks.
In my opinion, laws like this should be to defend those without the resources from those with the resources. This is the other way around (using rich government resources to support an already rich organization against common individuals). There is no reason for the government to pass new laws (since trading copyrighted files is already illegal) when the RIAA already has the ability to defend itself using existing law and resources.
To me, "knowingly" implies that a file is being shared with the user's knowledge. Whereas "willingly" implies the user made a conscious choice to share the file.
What's the difference, legally speaking?
Said person supposedly operating in ignorance could be given the benefit of the doubt with exactly _ONE_ warning, and given a finite interval (perhaps 2 weeks) in which to rectify the situation. Failure to comply within that interval would leave them without any excuse for not knowing they were distributing.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
It's not "File Trading law Would Include 'Willing' Traders".
It's "File Trading Law Would Include 'Knowing' Traders".
I guess that at least it will help make the racial composition of our gulag system more representative of the population in general.
maybe I should change my user name.
My google-fu must be on the fritz today; I can't find a website telling me how representatives voted on this bill. Can anyone else do better?
If you have an infected machine that has an open exploit, you may be prosecuted since you willingly run a machine that is on the internet. That you didn't make sure that there was no open shares, ftp servers, or virus that might allow others to use your machine for sharing files.
Fight Spammers!
If Bush wasn't president then this bill would of died in the house of reps! ITS ALL BUSH'S FAULT!
Thats why they have to enact these laws.
Just like the days of cassettte
You know its right!
ATH0 Bitcoin: 1DnwFLXczVZV8kLJbMYoheUrpqHesjxrSi
I'm a legal layman but it sounds like they're taking the mens rea (guilty mind) out of it entirely. How do you determine if someone is "willing to do it?" At the rate they are going, why not just eschew all notions of this being about justice, since justice has to be both acquired for the victim and **delivered to** the perp.
If there was any copyright law for all sides to agree on opposing this is it. This is more of a thought police law than a copyright law.
Click here or a puppy gets stomped!
The submission title and submission body say different things. Wouldn't it be cool if slashdot "editors" actually editted?
getting windows isn't punishment enough?
Clearly this law is incompatible with American society.. tens of millions of people cannot be wrong.
A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
is known to make party line stance on virtually all of the issues ever to encounter, that its hard to envisage this guy has ever in his life, thought for himself, used his god given intelligence to seperate himself (or others) from the party line rhetoric, or to atleast understand the laws he is responsible for passing in the house.
A few of his noted yes/no votes can shed a lot of light on where he stands on the issues:
(1)Voted YES on allowing school prayer during the War on Terror - Yes praying as a collective does help in cleansing terrorism.
(2)Voted YES on giving federal aid only to schools allowing voluntary prayer
(3)Voted NO on raising CAFE standards; incentives for alternative fuels - Wants to rely on Oil and dont want the Automobile industry to answer to better environmental standards.
(4)Voted NO on prohibiting oil drilling & development in ANWR. - Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, enough said!
(5)Voted YES on speeding up approval of forest thinning projects - Apparently want the rest of the US start looking like Texas (no offense).
(6)Voted YES on Permanent Normal Trade Relations with China - Yes, Cuba - BAD, China - GOOD!!
(7)Voted NO on $156M to IMF for 3rd-world debt reduction - Handouts are good when its to your automobile industry cronies and to big corporations, bad idea when its to third world countries.
(8)Voted NO on campaign finance reform banning soft-money contributions - No Finance Reform!! Period!
(9)Voted YES on decreasing gun waiting period from 3 days to 1 - By God! Yes, we all know how excruciatingly painful it is to wait 3 days for appropriate checks to be made..
(10)Voted NO on allowing reimportation of prescription drugs - We really believe you should pay 20$ for that tylenol pill instead of 30 cents if you were importing it from Canada.
What pisses me off is that even if Kerry wins this November, the senate and the house under Republican control will end up making him an acting president and not a real one. Not that I think a Democrat controlled house and senate is any better. I just want politicians to really understand the bills they sign and talk to people who these laws ultimately affect.
Rapid Nirvana
They are changing it _from_ willfully _to_ knowingly. So this bill includes people knowingly transferring files which is more inclusive than covering those willfully (intentionally) doing it.
m e= News&file=article&sid=1619
So people with shared download folders are now covered even if they do not know what files they are sharing.
A better article:
http://research.yale.edu/lawmeme/modules.php?na
Isn't that what they're doing now, going after those breaking the law. You can still file share legal stuff all you want.
This is a great example of the ways in which big business can manipulate government to its advantage.
It's perfectly within reason that copyright holders can sue, , in civil suits, to stop the unauthorized distribution of their works. Copyright violation is a matter between two parties: the copyright holder and the violator.
But with a law like this, the onus to police copyright matters falls on the government, and not the copyright holder.
What we're seeing is a push by big business, through legislation, to reduce their attorney fees. When copyright matters are criminal cases, not civil actions, the violators are punished-- justly or not-- at the expense of government, rather than at the expense of the corporation.
Wrong. It's not theft, it's copyright infringement. How many times does this need repeating? If copyright infringment were == theft, then there wouldn't be a need for separate laws. Also, copyright infringement has traditionally been a civil, rather than a criminal, offense. Please get your facts straight, and stop spreading FUD and lame justifications based on what "the law" is. It also used to be against the law for black people to sit in the front of a bus.
Hmm at this rate we'll soon have to put murderers, drug dealers, rapists, and terrorists out on the street to make room for all of the file swappers we're putting in jail! I know I'll feel a lot safer that way, and Britney will be able to sleep at night safe and secure in the knowledge that record company profits are secure!
To the making of books there is no end, so let's get started
Different laws (criminal and civil) punish actors differently based on not just the act itself, but also the actor's state of mind.
Generally, commiting the same act intentionally as opposed to recklessly or negligently will bring on a harsher penalty. Intentionally aiming a rifle at someone and shooting is punished more harshly than if the gun goes off accidentally and kills them. The victim is just as dead in both cases, but the first actor will probably be punished more severely than the second.
In this case, the House seems to have lowered the bar to include both intentional and willful conduct (there is probably a subtle difference between the two) but not negligent or reckless conduct. All of these terms are (or will be) defined elsewhere in the Act or in the U.S. Code. Without knowing what the devil Congress means by these qualifiers, it's hard to say what exactly has been passed. Odds are though, it's not good.
My guess is that if one is found to be sharing more than X number of files (or transferring X amount of copyrighted data) the law will provide that the requisite level of intent has been met.
Bush Lies On the Record.
Here I come!!
Then the government can crack down on anyone they want to. That is the typical behavior of tyrants.
This bill came up as a Suspension Bill in the House. Suspension bills are usually only lightly debated (if at all), are unable to be amended, and must pass by a 2/3'rds majority.
/.'er may know more than the average American, I doubt any of us know a ton about what it specifically does.
The most common use of a Suspension bill? To rename a Post Office.
I honestly don't know much about this bill, and while the average
It is shameful that this bill was put up and passed without any serious debate or review (outside of committee, if even there) by the actual Members of Congress.
Oh well, it happens all the time.
Why does the US government waste so much time debating and passing/not passing dozens of new laws on copyrights and file trading? It hasn't even been conclusively shown that file trading hurts (record|movie|software|etc) sales. Some studies show it hurting, some studies show it helping.
Doesn't the government have more important things to do than make the (MPA|RIA|BS)A feel more secure (I'd say help them line their pockets, but they can't even prove it'd do that)?
I suspect that the contents of any given P2P app's EULA will have bearing on how "knowingly" people are when they use it to share.
Here's what I do: Bitty Browser & Andromeda
Before you mod a dissenting voice to -1, Troll, hear me out.
Why is this a problem? Our copyright laws protect the property of the creator. Illegally "sharing" files is a crime. The only people concerned and complaining about this are the criminals who violate our copyright laws. Sadly, our world is heading towards more and more socialism where people somehow believe they are "entitled" to other's property.
When the basic respect for one's property no longer exists in society, that society breaks down. Stealing music, movies, and software is no different than shoplifting. Both are crimes and both contribute to the decline of society.
Waiting until you have enough money to legally purchase music, movies, and software instills discipline, patience, and hard work. These are all essential values for a successful society.
With that said, however, I do not like some of the ways copy-protection laws have been implented such as the DMCA. They are too draconian.
soon, there will be more americans behind bars than in front of them...
It empowers federal authorities to prosecute counterfeiting activity on a greater scale with better results
Very poor choice of wording IMO. How can a byte per byte copy of a given instance of digital media be in any way distiguishable from the original file? I don't think it can. In fact that's why we use md5sums to assue a downloaded file is intact.
Just seems odd to hear about software piracy and copyright infringement being referred to a "counterfeiting activity". This isn't paper money we're talking about here.
The problem is that it could prove to be difficult to prove what "willingly" is. Now thats good and all if you want to jail the people willingly profiting on a mass scale of piracy, but you can't easily say that some 13 year old sharing some movies & some games is willingly aware that they are committing piracy.
What is the role of a firm in the rights holding business? It is to extract as much profit from those rights as possible, not to prevent sharing per se. Note that currently this means prohibiting trading/sharing, but it might not always. What if a scheme came about where ISPs would pay a "tax" to rights holders in exchange for free sharing of ISP users (which of course would be passed on to ISP users as a bill item)?? In this scheme rights holders may end up making much more money...but would still be illegal. Rights holders could end up back lobbying for this to be repealled as their shareholders abondon ship....
5.56mm, 600 metre accurate range, $.15 per round
.50 BMG, 1500 meter, $2.50 per round
30.06 , 900 meter,$.45 per round
number of Congresscritters dying of high velocity lead poisoning,550
time required, less than a week.
If you need to make a statement, make it a LOUD one.
What Slashbots say they want and what they actually want are often very different, and often contradictory.
They insist that the GPL is a valid lisense and (rightfully) insist that it be respected and enforced. However they sing a very different tune (no pun intended) when it comes to copyrighted music.
The average Slashbot just doesn't want to pay for music, and will make any (other) argument to justify violating copyright law.
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
So, if I understand this correctly, posting material that I've created (music, poetry, software, etc.) on a P2P system in order to distribute it more widely would make me a criminal?
Any copyright enforcement bill needs the exception for Senators that use unlicensed software:
, 00 .html
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,59305
in Federal laws. Since this is
IIRC it is there to distinguish acts committed intentionally from those committed by accident (or 'recklessly').
(I'm not a lawyer, this is not legal advice, etc.)
I want to drag this out as long as possible. Bring me my protractor.
...mean criminal trials.
If this does pass, it will be interesting to see how this will play in court, with Granny or a 12 year old being dragged in front of a judge because of Justin Timberlake song.
Our courts are clogged already. It would serve the industry right if judges simply laughed the cases our of court.
The City of Chicago is starting to wise up on the drug front at least. They are saying that they've had so many minor marijuana possession cases thrown out by judges that they are going to just forego criminal charges and impose fines instead.
After all, "YOU" broke the law, right. No punishment no matter how out of proportion to the actual crime according to you, after all.
We all know the difference. Copyright infringement is still illegal. If you're going to reply to the parent to justify copyright infringement, please use something other than the tired and irrelevant "copyright infringement is not the same as stealing" argument.
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
Eff and save betamax.org have organized a mass call in today. http://savebetamax.org/eff/ Call your senators before they vote tommorrow. Read feedback of people who've called here: http://savebetamax.org/eff/feedback-view.php The issue is not copy traders, which is a crime, its the movie and music industry having a veto on new technology. So to the idiot who thinks it does no harm, imagine a world without VCRs, Tivos, Cd burners and Ipods? The video industry tried to sue the VCR out of business claiming it would bankrupt them. Well, now more than 50% of the revenue comes from VCR tapes. These companies are often short-sighted and they shouldn't have the power to veto new tech. They don't even know when something is good for them. If they'd won, they would be out a huge amount of money. IBM, who's reveune alone is more than the entire music and film industry is opposed to the bill. So are most major techs. Call now. I wish Slashdot had published my account of this story, with links to the call in info on savebetamax.org, because right now there would be a flood of calls. But as usual they took someone elses, one which doesn't encourge people to do anything. Don't wait people. They vote tommorrow. Call now.
That virtualy everything is copyrighted? Sent a joke picture to your friends? Jailtime! (That is assuming it will be enforced for everyone not just the copyright cartels).
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
More and more the general public is hyjacked into gross mass murders.
For instance Ruanda and Congo, these millions of people died so that you can use your mobile phone like all the millions with you.
The CEO's of these companies have made you all accesory to mass murder for the Coltan (extremely precious metal used for tantalium capacitors in cell and gsm phones.
Whereever they can they try to drag the common public into these acts so that they can get away with it, while less fortunate can get even get a death penalty for much less.
More and more laws are writen in a way that exposes the general public as criminals so that a select group of people can rape our law system for their petty wellbeing.
I think it is really odd that the RIAA and legislators can't seem to find a way to make this technology help them.
It is so weird how the tools are the problem not the process itself. No one would care if people were copying songs bit by bit, by hand and then after a few hours(days? idk), compiling them back into entire songs.
Its the fact that the tools allows this to happen on a massive, global scale.
That bothers me. We have gone from a time when books were copied by hand (long ago I know) to a time where copying anything copyrighted could send us to jail.
I understand the world has changed, but I just don't like it when other people tell me how to use my technology.
I always thought I was paying for the format I was getting the media in, not the write to own those 0's and 1s, in that particular ordering.
I guess that is changing too.
Weird world we have.
Does anyone have a link to the actual bill?
Im a little confused, since copyright law states that all works are copyrighted the instant they are produced.
From what I've seen so far, if I place a file on a network and allow others to download and trade it, we're all guilty of a crime under this bill. I've not read anywhere that the copyright in question must be registered, or that a complaint or statement of infringement must be filed by the copyright holder.
Put simply. if the language of the bill is as simple as reports make it out to be, the the World Wide Web will be effectively banned in the United States, indeed the Internet as a whole would be since almost everything could be considered a "file".
Article X: The powers not delegated... by the Constitution...are reserved...to the people
This sort of fascinated and horrified me when I finally realized it was true, but then upon reflection, one sees that the U.S. was essentially born out of a property rights dispute with the English crown(taxation without representation), and in the Civil War, nearly tore itself apart over a property rights issue, that being human slavery.
I guess we take them seriously here.
Murder rates (even in the US!) are down since the introduction of the court system. The period of introduction is different in different parts of the world, but were-ever it's been introduced, it seems to have played a large part in stopping people from killing each other (vengeance belongs to the judge)
Fraud is, and has always been a huge problem. It seems that we find fraud less abhorrent to murder. For example, if you were talking to a guy in a bar, and he told you he'd got out of jail for [murder|fraud] would you re-act, at a basic level, more negatively to murder? I think many people would.
As for speeding... since the introduction of laws, a campaign by the police, both in the media and on the roads, both speed and road injuries due to speeding have decreased dramatically in Australia.
The real change came when speed cameras were introduced... everyone slowed down since there was no chance you wouldn't get caught if you speed habitually. Now everyone just drives at the speed limit and it's not a problem.
In brief, my point is that laws _can_ and _do_ help. My point is not that we need more laws, or that this particular law is a good idea.
A democracy introducing a law that makes most of it's citizens into criminals for the benefit of a few seems a little... ironic?
Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
I find it interesting how the American Politicians consistently speak of freedom, yet take so much away from the Americans as a whole...
I live in Canada, and although we do not tout such unsurpassed freedom as Americans constantly boast of... I have more rights as a Canadian Citizen, and truly live in a society where I am free to say and act in any fashion which I choose... as long as it does not impose on any other person's rights.
Positive Examples
i) I have the right to download MP3's, however, I do NOT have the right to distribute them -- this is handy because most MP3's come from international sources via p2p.
ii) I have the right to live, therefore.. I have healthcare provided by taxpayers (which I am proud to pay into as a taxpayer) -- if we did not have this system, I would be dead and/or blind (I had 4 operations on my eyes, and 1 appendectomy)
Negative, but Funny Examples:
i) It is illegal to spit in the public square
ii) It is illegal to carry more than 44 pennies
iii) When arrested, you do NOT have the right to remain silent (what if you are mute?)
Yep, Here in the US, We have the best politians that money can buy. This is just another example.
In Change the Law I point out that while the Constitution allows for Congress to enact copyright laws, it doesn't actually require it to do so. Copyright could be repealed tomorrow if we could get enough votes in Congress to do so.
If you don't think this could happen, consider that there are more Americans sharing files via peer-to-peer networks than voted for George Bush in 2000.
In my article I detail a number of steps you can take to bring about much needed copyright reform. My suggestions are that you:
-
Speak Out
-
Vote
-
Write to Your Elected Representatives
-
Donate Money to Political Campaigns
-
Support Campaign Finance Reform
-
Join the Electronic Frontier Foundation
-
Practice Civil Disobedience
If you feel as I do that more people need to read my article, you can help by linking to it from your website, weblog, or from other message boards.If you're a US citizen and 18 years of age or over, you can vote in November. But to do that, you must be registered to vote in your state. The voter registration deadline for most states is just a few days away, October 2nd for most states. So register today! Rock the Vote can help you with registration.
If you're a US citizen residing in a foreign country like me (I live in Canada), you can register to vote with the form you can obtain from the Federal Voting Assistance Program. You can register to vote in the last state you resided in in the US. But again, your registration must be received by your state by the deadline, so either express your application, or fax it, if a fax number is available.
(If you've never lived in the US, but one of your parents was a US citizen, then you're a US citizen too and you can register in the last state your parent resided in.)
If you want to make a campaign donation, a good choice would be Representative Rick Boucher. Rick Boucher has worked tirelessly for copyright reform, as you can see from his article Time to rewrite the DMCA.
Request your free CD of my piano music.
The bill changes the law from "willingly" to "knowingly". That's the opposite of what this writeup says. In law, that's a huge difference. Having a box checked by default is no longer an excuse under this law as knowingly doesn't require the person to take an assertive action or to intend to share files. They just have to know, or should know, that they are.
Are you saying your country has better Pot (which I would argue) or that we've lost our sense of humor (which I would not)?
Linux users are "pirates" as well. We download copyrighted ISO files or binary or source or what not then we install it on our PCs then we share it with others willingly. On a technicality, Linux users are criminials. Maybe this law will teach us a lesson: a good idea is a criminial act.
There's a difference, and I'm pretty sure that the article (especially the title) has them backwards. The new standard will be "knowingly". See this:
m e= News&file=article&sid=1619
http://research.yale.edu/lawmeme/modules.php?na
Only public property is considered a free-speech zone really...and even then it only applies to the government...not individuals (which is beside the point you are making). If you are in my house and use language I don't approve of I can have you removed because I own the property (actually I would ask you to leave first...then have you removed if you didn't comply).
Real (as opposed to personal...i.e. land ownership) property rights are what should trump everything else.
Unfortunatly these rights are being eroded as well. Thst is why "...life, liberty, and the pursuit of happyiness" used to be "life, liberty, and property".
Vote the peeps out of office that erode these rights already!
I guess I'll stick to using the usenet.
Oops, how did this get here?
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Let me slightly re-edit and repeat something I previously posted to /.
Concerning Freenet, countless times I've read that once you've been online for a while you will find that you achieve downloads more quickly, and you will have a better experience. However, after a couple of weeks of continuous use, my Freenet experience is no better than at the beginning - awful. It's slow. It's impossible to browse around at random to get the feel of the place. It's extremely difficult to find anything. Unless I'm missing something major, it's nigh onto unuseable.
Would somebody please tell me how Freenet is supposed to work? I must be missing something because what I'm seeing surely isn't what was intended unless the designers just happen to like dishing out pain...
A good read for those interested.
How the music biz can live forever, get even richer, and be loved
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. -- Harlan Ellison
the difference between these two types of mens rea (or guilty mind) is slim to none. The model penal code has done away with the willfulness level instead leaving purpose-knowledge-recklessness- and negligence.
2 .t xt
here's a good outline of criminal law if you have more questions.
http://www.ibiblio.org/jwsnyder/outlines/crimf9
For the longest time it has irritated me that "the other side" doesn't get it when talking about file sharing and peer-to-peer. There's always a sense that the only thing these technologies are good for is infringing copyright.
Now I'm beginning to see our side talk about it that way.
This will not do. Leaving aside any discussion about whether sharing copyrighted files (against the will of the copyright owner) should or should not be illegal, we have to face the fact that it is.
But we must also never forget that sharing files (even copyrighted ones) within the will of the copyright owner is legal. If we forget that, then we surely will lose this war.
The effect of making it illegal, or even more illegal to infringe using p2p will simply clear the way for a culture where those copyrighted works which allow sharing replace those works which don't; a victory for those who create.
The effect of making it illegal, or even more illegal to use p2p at all hands the victory to those who own other peoples creations and exploit them for profit. RIAA, MPAA and crew.
I just can't understand why young people today are willing to forgo their only chance to create a culture for themselves in exchange for a chance to buy (or obtain illegally) a piece of somebody else's culture.
Come on, now. Boy George just wasn't that good.
The thing about things we don't know is we often don't know we don't know them.
In Bush's America, Laws Break You!
[/would be funny if it weren't true]
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
Welcome to the War on Copying. I'm sure it will be as successful as the War on Drugs.
I'm just waiting for the Copyright Office to get its allocation of jackbooted thugs...mandatory minimums for unauthorized copying...the death penalty for "copying kingpins"...Partenership for a P2P-free America (funded by the RIAA, just like PDFA is funded largely by beer and cigarette makers)....
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
Yes, you have all those wonderful rights, but you don't have the right to free speech now do you? When Ernst Zundel is out of prison, then Canadians such as yourself can talk about how wonderful your country is.
When the economic conditions of Canada improve to the point beautiful young French women aren't driven from the countryside to lives of prostitution and drug abuse, then you can talk about freedom.
I go to Canada and I see a country that is being invaded by hordes of foreign elements, whose national character and heritage is beseiged endlessly to the point it is practically extent, a corrupt government which exhibits everything that is evil about their so called democracy and egalitarianism, and the quiet desperation of people with no future, no hope, and a nihilistic acceptance of it all.
I don't read or respond to AC posts
Yep, it's good to be a Canadian. Thanks to the CDR levy, it's perfectly legal to download all the MP3s you want. I think it's implied that you ought to be burning the CDs, since I suspect most people just download the mp3s and get around the levy by simply not buying CDs.
(and yes, it is outrageous that when I buy a spindle of CDRs for backing up my irreplacable self-created data (photos, programs, etc), I pay a levy that helps support the corrupt music industry).
Well, yeah, that certainly would distinguish between "knowingly" and "unknowingly", but "willingly" seems to also imply "knowingly" and maybe a little bit more - the distinction between "willingly" and "knowingly" is the one that needs elucidation here. This little phrase
or
http://tinyurl.com/6n654
I'm sure there are better sites with more to-the-point examples and definitions,...
of government regulation of the computer industry. They have to stick their noses into everything. This industry is capable of regulating itself, and it can do a much better job at it too. I also completely despise mega-corporations that constantly whine and bitch about their patents while in reality its only "ideas" they are trying to make money off of. Seriously, the collective tech industry should give all these regulations/regulators the finger(while mouthing something about Bill Gates' mother.), and do it the right way. They are trying to regulate an idea - the idea being "the sharing of other ideas in the form of code be it compiled or not."
Personally i don't care what they pass in the government, I will still share files, and download music, and "pirate" software (and they can come knocking on my house, they won't find anything anyway after i'm done with it), not because of revenge, but of the principal of "freedom of ideas and information" the net was built on. What next? Maybe we should start censoring Google because we can find file sharing software through it. Hell, maybe we should just re-name our country to "China 2'nd edition".
Write your congressman or congresswoman! Here's my letter:
Dear Senator ---- ---- ----,
I urge you to vote against HR 4077, The Piracy Deterrence and Education Act of 2004 (formerly HR 2517). Although I do not share files on peer-to-peer networks without the copyright holder's permission, I feel that most legislation which explicitly criminalizes the activity is not appropriate.
It is already illegal for file traders to infringement on someone else's copyright - the copyright holder already has the right to sue for damages. Despite what the proponents of this bill say, there is no 'loophole' that allows this activity to occur within the law. Yet just as the complicated web of gun control laws don't decrease their illegal use, for instance, this bill and others like it won't deter file sharing. This bill is not needed.
HR 4077 does make the punishment unfair for these non-violent criminals. No person is physically or directly hurt by the activity. File traders don't participate in violent crime to continue their activity. Copyright infringement does not lead to more serious crimes. Why should a file trader - most of whom are middle class - have to pay potentially millions of dollars in infringement? It ruins their life for an activity that doesn't hurt society as much as illegal drug use, violent crime, or other illegal activities. This is not fair.
Furthermore, the Federal agencies that enforce these regulations tend to only help the large corporations that own copyrights. Small businesses, bands, and individuals are generally not helped by this legislation. Thus this bill only benefits a small subset of rich individuals and firms and not most Americans, in practice.
For these reasons, I submit that you should vote against HR 4077, The Piracy Deterrence and Education Act of 2004 (formerly HR 2517) when a vote is called in the Senate.
Sincerely,
---- ---- ----
It is impossible to enjoy idling thoroughly unless one has plenty of work to do.
- Jerome Klapka Jerome
...for being caught launching a snail mail DOS attack against the individuals responsible for this legislation?
I have an academic interest.
Copyright, patents and some of the ridiculous laws and penalties we've seen out of the US recently simply are not on the radar screen of most Americans. It isn't until more laws like this are passed and little Janie and Jimmy (hopefully the offspring of one of the braindead Congressman) go to prison for trading the latest Britney song that someone will stand up and say 'WTF have you been doing in the Senate?'. One of these laws will eventually be the straw the breaks the camel's back.
I watched with horror as this bill came to the floor on CSPAN yesterday. It only highlighted how poorly our government is run.
For half an hour, the proposing legislator used the work "piracy" as many times as he could, which by itself shows that they cannot distinguish piracy from infringement, and therefore shouldn't be allowed to write copyright legislation, much less comment on it. These scare tactics are unacceptable.
Furthermore, there were maybe 5 or 10 representatives listening. What exactly are they paid to do if not sit there, read the bills, and vote on them? Very eye opening!
And finally, as the representative said, "for the efficiency of time," this house resolution also includes a proposition that the oak tree be the national tree. Wow, copyright, and trees. I see the relation.
Ugh.
"It bothers me that there are those who think it's their God-given right to free music or movies simply because they're available to download."
Precisely. That bothers me too, but not as much as people who thinks copyrights are a god given right. But you're a smart guy, and I think you realize copyrights are a limited license to commercialize a creative work, not an indication of ownership, right?
Gran-ma got run over by a RIA-ndeer, walking home from our house . . . .
I know I'm trading files, but I don't know how to stop it! It's nice to see another law that penalizes people for knowledge.. shame on them, that's just for the gov't.
And apparently you don't understand the difference between "willingness" and "willfulness". They are quite different.
Any ISP on earth knows, indisputably, that illegal files are traversing their network. It is gauranteed.
So while the ISP's are not WILLFULLY trading these files, the are knowingly allowing them to be traded. One has to believe that the wording of this law was done intentionally to force ISP's in a round-about manner to monitor and proactively shutdown file traders.
(yes, that was intentional.)
i) I have the right to download MP3's, however, I do NOT have the right to distribute them -- this is handy because most MP3's come from international sources via p
Right, but if you are in a small band like two friends of mine, and you buy blank CDs to distribute your music, you are forced to fund your competition by paying an unfair tax.
As far as your healthcare, I have news for you. If you think that people in the United States do not get healthcare if uninsured you are wrong. The system provides care to all. I've worked in hospitals, and all people are treated.
The difference under the US system is that where some people get just basic care - not much worse than their poor Canadian counterparts - some people get very, very, very good care. The best care you can get anywhere in the world. This type of care would not be available to anyone else anywhere. For example, a sister in-law of a co-worker had a most-complicted pregnancy. She went to extremely premature labor, was rushed to the hospital where she delivered and the newborn was amount the half-dozen earliest premature babies to ever survive. The mother was in intensive care for several months. Several rare techniques that are unavailable outside the US were employed. Specialists from all over came to her aid. All told, the incidents generated well over $2.5M in medical bills. She paid 20% of the first $1000, and the rest was covered. $200 of $2.5M.
Canada is a fine country. But do not decieve yourself. America is still the premiere democracy in the world. And it still is a bastion of nearly unparelled freedom despite scare tactics and the internet-echo chamber of naysayings and phantoms of liberties lost.
The right analogy would be "But officer, I didn't know I was selling heroin to second graders. The wholesaler told me that this white powder was sugar and I believed him."
Now what I want you to do is go to www.congress.org and enter your zip code in the box under where it says "Write Elected Officials". It will show President Bush, your two Senators, and your House Representative.
Click the "info" link below each of your Senator's names to get their phone number and call it. When someone answers, politely give your name, and say you're calling because you want the senator to oppose the Piracy Deterrence and Education Act of 2004.
I did this just now, calling the offices of Senators Snowe and Collins from Maine. The staffers who answered asked me to repeat the name of the bill slowly so they could write it down, and then asked for my address.
I live in Canada, but am a Maine voter (where I lived before I moved). I explained that to them before giving them my address here in Canada. Just to point out you still can call your Senator if you live in a foreign country.
In a week or two they'll send you a reply letter on Senate stationery, suitable for framing.
Request your free CD of my piano music.
It looks like, if you really look at it with a sense of "the big picture", that the U.S. Govt. doesn't like the internet. Just like it's easy for citizens and average computer users to be "infringing" without knowing or realizing it, it's easy for the legislators to be disliking the internet without realizing it. So the end result is, is some ways, not unlike China - although on the surface it simply appears that the legislators want to pick and choose those parts of cyberspace that will please the campaign contributions for the incumbents. But they are rapidly becoming enemies of the internet and free speech, without even realizing it.
But it's also time to move on. It's not the responsiblity of the content distributors to enforce copyright laws. So in that sense, this bill makes some sense - if there are laws to enforce, it's the government that should be enforcing them.
The problem is that it's way to easy to get in trouble without even realizing what you are doing - sort of like driving a car that has no speedometer - better yet, driving a car that has no windshield so you can't see who you are running over. Anonymous p2p is going to solve this problem in the future. It is going to 1) further free speech, freedom of expression, and create a forum where artists and fans can share and learn and experience new things; 2) protect unwitting, inexperienced computer users from breaking harsh laws unknowningly. It may also protect parents from their kid's evil friends, and roommates from each other.
Furthermore, I don't see how you can pass a bill that places the enforcement of a three-year or greater felony in the hands of minimum-wage movie theater employees. Someone is bound to get hurt.
As with any Law that is unpopular within a group. The only thing that will happen is to inspire them to create a more legal or hidden way to keep doing what the Law prevents.
All I have to say does anyone remember what happened when the 18th Amendment was ratified?
I wrote up a two part article on my website about this.
www.geocities.com/James_Sager_PA
God spoke to me.
The sky in falling too chicken little d4c5ce. I fail to see tyranny in this situation. I see the politician's greed for corporate interest money overshadowing his desire to do whats right for the people he's elected to represent.
Greed != Tyrant
In America, the average person spent $10,000 on health care insurance. Now, the average Canadian family pays $150 a month or so. $1800 a year.
Yeah, I'd say we're doing pretty good.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
with an entire wall of his house devoted to copied VHS rentals. The FBI supposedly has the jurisdiction to throw him in jail too.
It hasn't happened. I think the FBI is too busy tracking terrorists, murders, and spies.
At least, I hope they are.
Perhaps there is emphasis on this sort of thing because copyright-based industries employ approximately 4.7 million Americans and account for more than 5% of the U.S. GDP, accoring the office of the US Trade Representative. Which means that if all of that stuff gets "shared" instead of purchased, the economy will go even further south, since we don't really manufacture much else these days. Mmmkaay?
I just want politicians to really understand the bills they sign and talk to people who these laws ultimately affect.
You just can't grasp that he might genuinely disagree with you, can you?
A big step in maturity is realizing that everyone who disagrees with you isn't stupid.
And what's the lifetime cap on her insurance policy? What will she do if she runs into the lifetime cap and can't get more coverage?
Your last statement is quite bizarre. Have you ever spent more than six months at a time outside of North America. If not, you should try it.
Let me see if I have this straight: This bill will make it possible to prosecute someone who is knowingly, but unwillingly distributing files?
Why does that make no sense at all?
Shouldn't the law treat those forced to distribute copyrighted material against their will as victims?
Time to switch to an encrypted P2P...
Hmm, I must be your opposite. Lamar Smith has voted how I would, given what you have listed and the limited details included.
Just like Guns don't commit crimes, criminals do - no form of filesharing commits a crime, those who violate copyright law do.
This is ALREADY illegal. Why do we need more laws?
It is just congress doing nothing but wasting our tax dollars again.
Not to mention living costs in London.
People are far less idealistic than you think
The Raven
How often do you here about people flying to Canada for medical treatment?
Be better in bed. Wikiafterdark!
..than by file trading. Why don't they actually work to remove the larger problem first?
Where do you get this statistic? That would be $833 a month for health insurance. I don't know anybody who pays that much, unless they are getting an independent, non-group family plan with all the bells and whistles. Some people may pay this, but I don't see how this could possibly be the average for U.S. workers, especially a per person average.
If the INDUCE Act becomes law, those who publish filesharing software will become liable for the copyright infringement committed by the users of the software, even if the publishers themselves did not infringe anyone's copyright.
This would include not only the publishers of commercial software, but of open source filesharing software like eMule and gtk-gnutella.
What you do at the call in page is enter your name, email address and zip code. The EFF will email you the phone numbers of both your Senators, as well as some suggestions for how to talk to the staff member who answers the phone.
C'mon, call. You'll be glad you did.
Request your free CD of my piano music.
Just what we need. More stupid fucking laws keeping more Americans in jail per capita than any other country in the world.
"Land of the Free" is the biggest bullshit line I've ever heard/read.
I thought the Republicans were against big government, that it is better to have private interests take on as much as possible.
Yet, throw a few bucks their way, and look what happens! They fall all over each other having the federal government take over what should be a civil matter.
Funny, I think of the same thing when I think of the US in recent years...and I live here.
I hear about seniors coming to Canada to buy meds all the time.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Urban Institute Analyst Eugene Steuerle has estimated that households will spend on average $15,000 on health care costs in 2004, including $8,000 in taxes to cover government programs and tax subsidies. Health care costs now account for nearly 20 percent of household personal income. [Urban Institute, Tax Analysts, 9/29/03]
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
And what's the lifetime cap on her insurance policy? What will she do if she runs into the lifetime cap and can't get more coverage?
When that happens you are eligible for Medicare/Medicaid.
No, the average person does not spend $10,000 on healthcare. Maybe a household, but no, not per person.
Whether the family pays for it or not, it is paying for at some point. Whether through reduced services or increased taxes, it is being paid for.
and in the state of Utah, that Church is known as The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
(Ever note how some Right-Wing Christians can get so worked up about a subject until someone points out a corrollary works against them?)
As opposed to a society that grows more and more accepting of criminal behavior to the point where ... everyone IS a criminal?
An interesting point, but is it criminal behaviour then? Government (in theory) decides what the law is, and thus what is criminal behaviour.
A democracy is a form of government where (in theory) the citizens make the laws (by proxy of their representivites)
Thus the people have decided that their own behaviour is criminal and that they must be stopped en masse. How dysfunctional.
Well, not really, I think the problem is that the representatives aren't representing the average American voters... it's no secret. Either that, or the average voter feels that they are a criminal and should be dealt with by the law.
Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
This is one reason why we need to put such issues on the national election bollot. (Similar to California "Propositions"). Most voters would not go for this. This is corporate influence fucking with democracy. Representation is being pushed too much by greed.
Kerry should propose balloted national issues as a way to offer something different this time.
Table-ized A.I.
More and more pieces of legislation seem to serve the interest of non-voting corporations, instead of voting citizens.
Isn't it time for sweeping changes in the legislative rules?
Citizens should call their elected representatives and ask them that exactly what electoral need, wish do they represent by passing laws like this.
There should be a mechanism when bills are evaluated whether they directly represent the interest of corporations or actual citizens.
In cases of laws, which obviously represent corporate interest, there should be a constitutional challenge, whether elected representatives have the right, afforded by the voters to pass such legislation. After all, your elected representatives are responsible for you, not for non-voting corporations.
IMO USA is sick and it is getting worse.
Please remember that the DMCA was signed by (gasp) a democrat.
This issue is not a partisan issue. This is, IMAO, an issue of social engineering.
Information is not made out of matter, and does not operate according to the same principles as matter. That's why property law was written to govern matter, and copyright law was written to govern information. This was a good approach, people bought in, and the little guy received great benefit.
The rich corporate controllers see much greater profit potential if they can convince us that information should be governed by the same laws as property (hence the birth of the "intellectual property" buzzword). Slowly but surely, over the past few decades, the masses have been convinced that such principles as "ownership of information" and "creator controlling use" and "ownership is retained forever" are more consistent with the principles of capitalism, and the principles of good sense, than those principles set down in copyright law.
And they have done a supreme job of this. The vast majority of the people with whom I discuss these issues have little-to-no concept of copyright law, how it works, what ideals it expresses, etc., and they consider the "intellectual property" approach to be a basic no-brainer based on common sense.
That is why we fight a losing battle. The corporate controllers have the numbers advantage already (since they own the minds of the sheeple), and they remain the ones who have enough influence over the media to continue with their social engineering. Unless the geeks wind up buying the FOX network or Clearchannel or something, we are simply doomed to accept a world of controlled content.
$0.02
Fine, I'll do all my file swapping on Chinese and Russian servers. They have more stuff anyway.
"Reactionaries must be deprived of the right to voice their opinions; only the people have that right." - Mao
well, its almost to this point. That 1/2 or more americans have been through the leagal system. I think that is a good thing, because it will make us think about the laws and the harshness of the sentence's we are passing. We need to remove laws, and add law protecting our (citizens) freedoms from over zelous, and paid for cronies of big business. passing laws on behalf "of the the people" that do not want these laws. we need to get out of a republic and into a real democarcy. 'I' want to vote on these issues these are improtant to ME and I want to vote myself. I do not trust some rich ass hole that was elected, to vote on my behalf.
I have been living here since i was born,
but fuck the USA, this is our downword spiral.
China is a fileswapper's utopia!
"Reactionaries must be deprived of the right to voice their opinions; only the people have that right." - Mao
Death rates in the table you cite are per 100,000 : it's already been adjusted.
Or you could stop downloading music online from your favorite Pirate2Pirate application and move on with your life.
There needs to be a Slashdot story done on the following application that is breaking new ground on almost a daily basis .Soon there will be Jabber support for this application via Jeti Java Messenger http://jeti.jabberstudio.org/ .
Ants P2P Website
http://www.myjavaserver.com.nyud.net:8090/~gwren/h ome.jsp?page=custom&xmlName=ants
Ants P2P Sourceforge Page
http://sourceforge.net/projects/antsp2p/
Ants P2P Features
* Open Source Java implementation (GNU-GPL license).
* Multiple sources download.
* Torrent download from partial files.
* Automatic resume and sources research over the net.
* Search by hash, string and structured query.
* Embedded support for etherogeneus data types (not only arrays of bytes...).
* Completely Object-Oriented routing protocol.
* Point to Point secured comunication: DH(512)-AES(128)
* EndPoint to EndPoint secured comunication: DH(512)-AES(128)
* Automatic serverless peer dicovery procedure.
* IRC based peer discovery system.
* IRC embeded chat system.
* Full text search of indexed documents (pdf, html, txt, doc etc) -> QUERY REFERENCE.
* Distributed/Decentralized Search engine
* HTTP tunneling.
The programers answers to all those damn FAQ's
1) ANts supports point to point encription (AES 128 - DH 512)
2) ANts supports endpoint encryption ( " " )
3) ANts supports multipath routing for packets
4) ANts supports preferential connections (to create a fast backbone and
to let everyone going faster)
5) ANts supports PARTIAL DOWNLOADS and it has a unique and very
innovative system to do this (in theory it could be better than
bittorrent inspite of routing overhead and speedes reached on LAN showed
this!)
6) ANts supports AUTOSEARCH SOURCES function for active and interrupted
donwloads, if your donwload pass in the interrupted box this DOES NOT
MEAN that you have lost it... it is just paused and it will restart as
soon as possible!
7) ANts can find partial files through normal queries or queries by hash
since version 0.4.1 beta!
8) ANts supports FULL TEXT indexing and do searches over full file
content and FULL FILE PATH LOCATION.
9) ANts will (perhaps) support instant messaging integration
10) ANts IS NOT a simple IRC client
11) ANts relies on ad-hoc network theory as well as MUTE
12) ANts is strongly beta... this means it is not intended to be dummies
probed!
13) ANts releases ARE NOT backward compatible, so if you can't find
peers you probably has an old version! Use Java Web Start to be sure to
have te newest one.
14) ANts exploits IRC CTCP commands for initial ip exchange!
15) ANts supports internal ip exchage during and after your first
connection.
16) ANts queries are cripted in an asymmetric way. This means YOU are
the ONLY who can read you queries results. Everyone can read the query
string but this approach reduces drastically the potential power of a
node in trasit queries analisys.
17) ANts uses TWO consecutive ports (Like HTTP does) default are 4567 &
4568 but you can change the lower getting automatically changed the
highest. If you are NATTED you don't need two non consecutive ports,
cause these ports are used ONLY for incoming requests. Your own requests
are made on any free port, so you don't have to care, it can take a
little bit more to obtain your first connection if you are natted, but
ANts can work with natted peers as well as with unnatted ones without
ANY difference
17) Internal protocol is not harmed by nats and firewall... so once you
get a connection it doesn't make sense saying "I'm natted my queries are
not working!".
1
Please employ someone to better disguise the surveillance cameras within the UK. I am afraid their presence may unnerve our recent American arrivals.
The police, FBI, etc. have nothing to do with it.
The only assistance the government ordinarily provides to help with copyright enforcement is to provide a court and a judge to hear the case, and to enforce collection of the judgement if the copyright holder wins the case.
It's important that it stay that way. Not just because we don't want kids going to jail for something they only would have had to pay money for (if they lost a lawsuit), but because the copyright holders are trying to shift the expense of enforcing their copyrights from themselves to the unsuspecting public.
It's expensive to sue somebody. You have to pay for the use of the court, pay your attorneys, pay for discovery process and so on. If you sue and lose, you might be required to pay the defendant's legal fees.
But if copyright infringement can be criminalized, this cost will be born by the taxpayer, and the movie and record industry corporations (who are by no means short of cash) will not have to pay a dime to have their copyrights enforced. You and I will pay, through are taxes.
Not just to pay for the police, FBI and the courts, but to pay for the imprisonment of the convicted copyright infringers. Do you know how much is costs to keep someone in prison, even for just a year?
We must stop this from happening.
Request your free CD of my piano music.
It looks like the House of Representatives doesn't represent us, the people, anymore but its representatives prefer the millions of dollars of RIAA money in return for paving the way for censorship of free speech on public filesharing systems. What a shame!
I believed that that day would never come but I was wrong as many others have been. If the Senate doesn't do its job and listens to us, the people, and stops this insane proposal it is time for censorship-free anonymous encrypted filesharing.
Commercial music sellers are only able to sell music files because the file sharing movement created the need for a portable music file player. Without the MP3 and MP3 player, the selling of music by file would not exist. The sharing of music files created the next generation music market to be exploited by the re-sellers of music. Such Cruel Irony
sigh.
- "History shows again and again how nature points out the folly of men" -- Blue Oyster Cult, 'Godzilla'
I subscribe to internet access via my cable provider for use on my home desk tops - however my laptop has wireless capabilities and there are numerous unprotected wireless hotspots that I can connect to from inside my home... If I utilized my laptop to file swap while connected via WiFi to another account, how could someone (the RIAA) track such occurrences?
Also, in this scenario could one be faced with 'stealing' from the cable company even when I still pay my monthly cable internet bill? In addition, if the neighbors didn't want anyone piggybacking on their account they can enable WEP - I'm not exactly hacking anything...
With that said, as communities start providing free internet to the public won't it make it impossible for this law to be enforced?
if its a legal document from the court clerk, an email wont be enough..
It will come via your friendly local postal carrier...
And you get to sign for it..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
remember that when you hear someone tell you you will "waste your vote" if you don't vote D or R.
Of course, not to say what any of them other parties would do with it, maybe the same, who knoweth, but at least third parties have actual contentious debates with real live thinking people involved when they hammer out their platforms and policies. The two-for-one party we have now is locked up tight, if you ain't a mega corporation, well, you just "ain't" to them.
The combination of both, makes it pretty easy to setup 'zombie P2P' machines..
Hard to prove it wasnt intended.. ( ie: 'willing' )
And before you say ' people should know better and be responsible for their actions' , most average people cant figure out how to put files on a floppy.. you cant expect them to secure their 'network'..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Seriously, as long as there are still uploaders in Finland and Zaire, how exactly are they going to get rid of P2P? Heck, most of the popular P2P program's servers are in Europe.
And now to add some insightful: geeks, stop helping people fix their computers, because if you get busted your only defense is "I didn't know that l33ching would also give away the file thingies to other people!" (use "file thingies" in court to strengthen your case)
Condemnant quod non intellegunt.
Yes, not exactly what I was trying to say... I guess I worded that badly. I understand where you are coming from though.
What I meant to say was that DRM should be done away with. I guess I was thinking in an abstract sense that infringement, or the criminal aspect of copyright infringment, is something that falls outside of the process of distribution. The act of creating a work of art of some sort and sharing that work of art with the world is (should be) a completely seperate and distinct process from hauling people into court for plagiarism or other infringement type actions.
For instance, a photographer would distribute his or her photography in whatever way they chose to distribute it, and then if the unfortunate were to happen and someone were to infringe on the copyright or other property rights of that photography then the steps would be taken to deal with this as a distinct and seperate process. I also think it's more effective this way - you don't know exactly what is going to happen or exactly how it's going to be dealt with.
It just seems to me that content distribution IS DRM - which would be a type of preventative action, perhaps - my idea was that if the legal threat were strong enough, DRM wouldn't be necessary. This might also allow the concept of fair use to be fully realized. You could just distribute the content and warn people that they stand a good chance of being sued or having some other type of entanglement if they infringe. It just seems to me it's better to just identify the places the infringement takes place and deal with them in a proper, legal manner then and there, rather than try to have everyone make concessions and cripple the products.
I think this goes hand in hand with the products being priced reasonably to begin with. How much does DRM add to the price of a product?
It's great that your coworker's sister in law got such great care. What do you say to the millions of people who work hard their whole lives only to die of something suptid that could have been prevented if only they had some basic tests done a few months ago. Do you know what basic care means? It means that if you are in the process of dieing (quickly, as in bleeding to death) they will do what they can to save your life. So sure you can stumble into an emergency room with multiple gunshot wounds and expect medical treatment but not much else. In many countries working for a living while not having access to a real doctor and medical care would be an outrage.
It's time for a little perspective:
And it still is a bastion of nearly unparelled freedom despite scare tactics and the internet-echo chamber of naysayings and phantoms of liberties lost.
The USA (call it "freedom" land if you want) has the HIGHEST encarceration rate (% of population in jail) of any nation. Does that sounds like a bastion of unparalleled freedom to you? It would almost be funny if it wasn't so sad.
bit trollent
Holy Shit! I'm an average person in America, and I make $28,000 a year. Thanks for telling me that $10,000 of that goes toward healthcare insurance. I had no idea I only had $18,000 to live on.
Somebody needs to organize a campaing to ruthlessly enforce these laws on the close friends and family of the Representatives which passed this legislation.
:\
Maybe, just maybe, if the gun they were bribed for started shooting people they cared about, they would think twice about 'doing a favor' for corporate lobbyists?
But then again, maybe not....
Jesus fucking christ, people! We are talking about making an immoral act (copyright infringement) illegal. What the fuck is wrong with that? The "western empire" is not starting to crumble. Your liberty is fully intact with regards to this particular issue. Sorry you may have a harder time getting away with immorally downloading the intellectual property of others, which you didn't rightfully pay for!
1, 2: Congress shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise of religion.
3: CAFE standards drive people into either small cars or exempt trucks instead of safer larger cars.
4: Beauty is in the eye of the Beholder. No beholder no beauty. And drilling would not affect the wildlife.
5: Burn, California Burn. Forest management reduces forest fire damage.
6: China allows free trade with their people, Cuba does not.
7: The IMF has not been very effective in helping 3rd world people, just 3rd world governments.
8: Campaign finance reform and the 1st amendment are in conflict.
9: The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
10: Price controls are a bad idea, importing price controls from Canada is an even worse idea.
How do you like being someone else's bitch? That's a shitty salary, chump.
The U.S. government pays me to do research on reactive chemistry. I am required to move very large files across networks. I am afraid that this movement of files might be misconstrued as illegal file sharing by corporations that can put me in jail. Is it important for me to continue doing research for the government that also may allow corporations to accuse me of file sharing based solely on large amounts of local area network traffic?
The answer is that I should probably quit using a computer in order to preserve my status as a non-felon.
The USA (call it "freedom" land if you want) has the HIGHEST encarceration rate (% of population in jail) of any nation. Does that sounds like a bastion of unparalleled freedom to you? It would almost be funny if it wasn't so sad.
First off, your claim is wrong. It has the highest percentage of its population in criminal justice system of any industrialized (aka, G8) country.
I'd expect this, and even demand it. Why? Because first off, in many countries - namely certain European ones - violent even deadly criminals are not properly incarcerated due to financial contraints. Meaning, their average is low because they dont want to spend the money to do it right.
Second, justice dictates that those who ignore the mandates of the many and their elected representatives be treated appropriately.
Third, justice dictates that the law be applied evenely and fairly. In so many countries, rampant corruption is so regular that it is part of every day life. In this country as well as others a corruption case is a big deal. A sheriff or jailer taking a bribe to release someone is virtually unheard of
You have no idea what you talking about. Do some research. Our criminal justice system is effective, and it is a hallmark of a fair and equitable country.
David Blunkett, the Home Secretary is creating a compulsory database of every UK citizen's photo, fingerprints & retina scan. It is inevitable that our web, phone, banking, credit card, store card & travelling records will be linked to it. He is also giving permission for the police to take our DNA samples without our ever knowing.
Blunkett has also discarded vast numbers of complaints and ignored warnings from both his own Select Committee and the Information Commisioner.
Not only will this database go ahead without a national referendum, it is also bypassing any vote or debate in our sole democratic process, the House of Commons.
Uhm, Isn't $28,000 the poverty line?
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
"6: China allows free trade with their people, Cuba does not."
Trade WITH their people? Yeah i think we've noticed that. Just look at their wages. Chinese people are CHEAP.
"8: Campaign finance reform and the 1st amendment are in conflict."
ROFL. Bribing as free speech! YES!
"9: The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Yeah right. You can't wait 3 days to get your gun?
"10: Price controls are a bad idea, importing price controls from Canada is an even worse idea."
Price controls? You're talking about PRICE CONTROLS? Looks like the opposite, to my eyes. Why shouldn't people be allowed to import drugs?
Oh I see, you are a troll after all. Sorry, I replied before, I hadn't realized. Could you make it a bit clearer at the top of your first post next time? Thanks.
I did the research as you asked.
World Homicide Rates per 100,000 population. In 2000.
50.14 South Africa
21.40 Russia (1999)
10.00 Lithuania
_9.94 Estonia
_6.22 Latvia
_5.64 U.S.A.
_2.94 Spain
_2.86 Finland
A total of 5 nations in the world have a higher homocide rate than us. Wow, I'm impressed that we only have the 5th highest homocide rate in the world. It sure is worth locking up so many nonviolent drug offenders and other thought criminals. In fact, I'm glad to live in a country where everyone is a criminal for one reason or another. Of course only some are prosecuted for the crimes which we all commit but I'm sure they are chosen fairly.
You have no idea what you talking about.
Clearly.
Our criminal justice system is effective, and it is a hallmark of a fair and equitable country.
Yeah, I sure get kick out of any system that can ruin the lives of young people with pointless posession convictions while letting a (well connected) former cokehead off the hook so he could become President and push the whole process one step further.
Justice? Wake up!
bit trollent
Does this mean that my brother in Georgia (I live in Texas) can't send me digital photos that he has taken. The photographs are copyrighted and he is using AIM for file sharing, so this fits the criteria for the law. Furthermore would AOL be fined if people used AIM to file share. It would be shccking for the government to bring charges on the largest ISP in America for sponsoring a service that supports file sharring. I'm probably wrong but oh well...
From Straight Dope:
We have the largest number of incarcerated citizens of any country in the world. The only country in the world with a higher incarceration rate is North Korea, and that is speculation at best.
I'd expect this, and even demand it. Why? Because first off, in many countries - namely certain European ones - violent even deadly criminals are not properly incarcerated due to financial contraints. Meaning, their average is low because they dont want to spend the money to do it right.
Oh yes, obviously it's because those damned European socialists are penny pinching tightwads, and not because they have principles. That must explain all those convicts escaping from improperly secured incarceration facilities. Obviously, it's Belarus, Bermuda, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, and Belize which have the financial wherewithal to prosecute the War on Crime.
Second, justice dictates that those who ignore the mandates of the many and their elected representatives be treated appropriately.
Buzz. Begging the question. Who said that by incarcerating them that they were being treated appropriately?
Third, justice dictates that the law be applied evenely and fairly. In so many countries, rampant corruption is so regular that it is part of every day life. In this country as well as others a corruption case is a big deal. A sheriff or jailer taking a bribe to release someone is virtually unheard of
Yes, it must be those corrupt sherrifs that explain why our incarceration rate is more than 350% higher than our industrialized peers.
While in this country, overzelous police and prosecution are equally unheard of. Oh wait...
You have no idea what you talking about. Do some research. Our criminal justice system is effective, and it is a hallmark of a fair and equitable country.
You, sir, are a hallmark of hypocracy, to say such a thing at the end of a post with no factual or logical points.
Bah weep granah, weep ninny bong!
While not totally secure, and ungodly slow, free net is an alternative I'd like to see progress. I don't condone trading copyrighted software, but these laws are getting ridiculous.
http://freenet.sourceforge.net/
its time for california and oregon to leave the union and save america, otherwise texas et al will make usa another soviet. `
3 days is outrageous!!! the evil government will have troops surrounding my house within 45 minutes, I must have my guns now NOW NOW! I need to be able to kill people who want to steal my underpants!
Let me see now... I been "spending the next 4 years" trying to "fix" the two party system for going on NINE OF THEM FREEKING 4 YEAR CYCLES. I QUIT. IT'S NOT FIXABLE LIKE THAT. ENOUGH'S ENOUGH.
Here is my opinion based on the past track record of the two party apologists, the ones who have always said "don't waste your vote, lookout, that other guy is worse" and etc., and any perceived differences in the top levels of the two parties and what REALLY happens in politics.
Here it is---It's UNFIXABLE unless you STOP supporting the TWO PARTY CRIMINAL CARTEL THAT HAS HIJACKED THE GOVERNMENT A LONG TIME AGO. If you vote for them THEY WILL TAKE IT. You can't just every 2 or 4 or six year election cycle say you will do it "someday" but "this time" you need to "get them other bozos out". THE TWO PARTY guys in congress and the executive branch are NEVER going to FIX themselves, because THEY DON'T HAVE TO IF THEY ARE IN POWER AND PEOPLE KEEP VOTING THEM IN. They won't sign a law against themselves, investigate themselves honestly, or do anything different than what they have been doing, which is say anything before the election, then back to good old boy business as usual corrupt politics once they get VOTED BACK IN BECAUSE PEOPLE WERE TOLD TO NOT WASTE THEIR VOTE.
And yes, I was YELLING. It will be just as bad if kerry is in. Bush sucks, kerry sucks, that's another reality. They both lie, both are elitist globalist millionaires. Both cater to special interests behind the scenes and overtly. Both are part of the corrupt "system". I will NOT vote for institutionalised corruption.
Younger folks may be fixated this 4 year cycle on "neocon" Republicans and gulf war 2 as a stupid illegal war, along with all the other strange crap that's going down, but I ALSO remember the combo of eastern corporate elite establishment and running yellow dog DEMOCRATS who maintained another long running devastating illegal war and were responsible for massive corruption, and other sorts of strange crap that went down back then.
That's historical reality and hard facts DATA, YOU deal with it.
Freenet is kind of slow, look at the 2nd generation of anonymous P2P
applications:
AntsP2P
I2P
Freenet is kind of slow, look at the 2nd generation of anonymous P2P applications:
AntsP2P
I2P
I would not have bought the Aqua Teen Hunger Force DVDs, or about 15 CDs this summer (that's more than I'd bought in about the previous 3 years...alright, about half were used, that doesn't make the RIAA any happier)
Blistering fast cable modem (thank you Cox!) plus file sharing.
The way I see it, in effect the RIAA & MPAA want to criminalize listening to anything that isn't being fed into the mass-market pipeline. The stuff that has a higher margin because they can sell more copies to more people. Sure, you COULD still buy other things, but how would you know WHAT to buy? The way I do that now is by file-sharing, because listening to the radio these days makes my ass pucker.
Stupid....Fucking....Assholes.
How 'bout this:
.etc.
.)
Those slashbots, first they want the GPL to be enforced, but they also want music copyright to NOT BE enforced. Then, they complain about their contradictions. THEN, they complain about the complaining of the contradiction . .
I don't know about you, but I think when things go into an infinite loop, it might be time to reevaluate the logic that has gone into that idea (not that the moderators seem to care . .
Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
Make sure you're using the unstable build and network. The stable build/network sucks. Pump up your data store size. A LOT. Read the freenet mailing list archives, this issue is discussed periodically
French women? In Canada?
If this law is passed it wouldn't be that hard to keep yourself out of jail. I am currently connected to the internet through a WiFi network. All I would have to do to protect myself would be to hack into my WiFi network and do all my downloading and uploading on the Laptop I did this on. If I was ever charged all I would have to do is plead not guilty. Present the alternative scenerio of someone hacking into your WiFi network to the Jury, show some network activity logs as evidence and have some expert testify on the plausibility of the situation. If the jury really needs convincing have some script kiddie hack into a WiFi network in court. It creates reasonable doubt and gets me off the hook. I'll sooner go through the effort of making the small preperations necessary than be coerced into giving money to the RIAA.
...and the unstable build and network isn't better because they've suddenly become so brilliant, it is because it is smaller (it's ALWAYS been this way). Nothing like fixing an insufficient routing algorithm by making the network small enough to be traversed anyway.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
But he can't "move on" with his life without breaking even more silly laws designed for and by the corporate officers of mega-corporations.
They could also go to India or China.
You own a piece of land. On this piece of land, people are allowed to cross. As it is, many of these people bring items with them, some might be camping, others stashing drugs. The analogy of a police officer would be a cop planting drugs. The second would be searching your land, then arresting you for anything illegal that turned up on your property. The illegal goods would be impossible to find unless you knew exactly where to look (i.e. had the key)
None of the material in your Freenet node was (provably) placed there by you. You have no means to discover what is there. All you need to show isn't a common carrier status - it is good faith. You had no reason to believe your node was being used for anything illegal. That is no more illegal than renting out an apartment, without knowing it is or was going to be used for anything illegal. Or letting people cross your land. Good faith will go pretty far, if done by a good lawyer. You sought access to Freenet. In exchange, you in good faith provided a part of your HDD as a Freenet store. Others used that to store illegal goods without your consent, knowledge or ability to find out.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
No, poverty line is more like 18k. Maybe higher, maybe lower, depending on where you live. You would only have a hard time getting by on 28k a year in major cities on the coasts. Even then I think you could manage if you were to split a place with somebody, or live in a downscale area. Where are you from that you can't live on 28k a year? Geez. Even if you spent $1500 a month on rent that would leave you with probably 500-700 a month depending on your taxes. You wouldn't be living it up but you could do it.
Australia would be happy to take all the IT workers the US can provide.
Advantages:
1 - Australians speak English, which is close to American;
2 - Surfing
Disadvantages:
1 - No IT industry worth speaking of.
A land such as...? The EU has the DMCA. Very soon we will have software patents. It's not the US Empire. It's the Empire of the Dollar. Specifically the Empire of the Transnational Corporation. Unfortunately most of them are asleep right now. Many of them, with the exception of Disney et al, stand to lose almost as much as we do...
Your post deliberately misrepresents the content of the article you refer to.
The article says in it's first paragraph: "are generally not eligible for federal copyright protection, but must be protected, if at all, under the disparate laws of the individual states".
Translated, this DOES NOT mean "everything before 1972 is out of coyright", just that the state or common law applies before 1972, and federal law after 1972 (YANAL, I suppose).
"The musician has to find a different means of marketing, basically."
Examine the music industry: more people buy CDs than go to live shows, more money is spent on CDs than live shows. Are you really suggesting that record companies are using a product which is successful in it's own right to promote a less successful product? If so, which planet did you learn marketing on? The only people in the music industry who regard recordings as promotional material are the independants, and they're resigned to not making a profit from recordings anyway.
"If there are fewer musicians in the future, well, I suspect the ones that go will be the ones that suck the worst in general"
Yeah, for the last few years P2P has been scaring the record companies into promoting quality acts with real talent, instead of than easily mass-marketable, pliable pop-morons, hasn't it? You might want to look at marketing trends before you apply wishful thinking...
"And before some musician or record company shill starts whining to me, I don't see a lot of people crying when my industry gets devastated by foreign outsourcing."
Copyright and outsourcing are two unrelated issues, but since YOU made the connection:
First, outsourcing actually places IT on an even footing with musicians for employment prospects: there is always someone who will work cheaper (free, even. Musicians do not have a minimum wage, and most lose money over their "careers", unlike IT folks). "Suck it up and deal", as file sharing advocates say.
Second, your perception of copyright is based on seeing the top 2% of musicians earn 95% of the money; this is the greatest income disparity of any industry. The equivalent in IT would be having a few "star" programmers who can charge $millions (not necessarily because they are good, but because they are well publicized), while every other grunt has to work purely for the love of it, regardless of ability. Historically, this kind of situation quickly leads to the best and brightest moving on to other fields ("Failing to learn from history..."?), which might go a long way to explaing why music is crap: perhaps the hard to market, talented musicians are giving up...
Third, if copyright is relaxed, and all the wage-earning IT work has been moved overseas, how do you expect to make a living from your programming skills? The GPL would be invalid since it is based on existing copyright, and other licenses couldn't be enforced, so there would be no legal recourse for shareware authors, and small startups would be doomed to be ripped-off by the big players from the word go. Better start practising those burger-flipping skills, you'll need them to pay for your F/OSS development of MicroSoft's Next Big Product(TM).
"So why are we protecting the content distribution industry?"
We're not, specifically. We are protecting copyright, which is primarily about content creation; distribution is a necessary consequence of exploiting intellectual property, so it is incidentally covered by copyright. You are confused by the fact that most content creators are good at creating content but lousy at distributing it and so tend to rely on licensing deals.
"Threatening to throw people in jail for sharing files is akin to say, huge sentences for selling marijuana."
The sale of marijuana is a victimless crime: both the buyer and seller are consenting parties, both are fully aware of what is involved. File sharing usually involves gaining benefit without compensating the author of the work, without the author's conse
If you want to do something about the Induce Act go to EFF's action alert: http://action.eff.org/siteapps/advocacy/index.aspx ?c=esJNJ5OWF&b=124605&ievent=59502&action=1197&tem plate=x%2Eascx
It will send a pre-composed letter to the senators. Let's all do it and get their attention. Now!
Using peer-to-peer there are connection with each other, but with Usenet isn't it more somone "dumps" onto a server then I "leech" it. I think the only way to find out the users are by the gov. going after the company.....