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.)

Comments

how do they determine which it is

[NetMagi]

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???

Re:how do they determine which it is

[Nos.]

That's just it. A lot of people using this file sharing programs have no idea what they're doing... my site (see sig) is a prime example of this. People need to pay attention to the software they're installing and what it is doing.

Re:how do they determine which it is

[timeOday]

how do they determine just where the thin line of knowingly and willingly is??? Well, I'd say a law like this is the end of distributed content systems like Freenet. Given the percentage of content that violates copyrights, and the way data is spread out and replicated, there is no chance of running a Freenet server without hosting infringing content.

Thus simply participating in the network constitutes "knowingly" distributing copyright material.

Of course precisely the same could be said for telephone networks - they run their services knowing (for certain) that on any given day, many people are using the phone network to break laws, from violations of the national "do not call" list to planning terrorist attacks.

While we're at it

[ravenspear]

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.

Re:Down with this bill

[the_leander]

I have to be totally honest in asking WTF is going on with all this emphesis on file trading? Seriously, America has the single largest murder numbers in the western world (Larger then Canada's and Europes combined - excluding ww2) I think that there are far bigger issues that the US could do with addressing then kids getting some singles on the cheep (free)..

That said, how long until Europe decides to follow suit, well, if not Europe, England (who have their own version of the DMCA, have tried very hard to keep their copyright laws in step with the US etc etc)?

Yet another reason...

[Zemran]

why I am glad that I do not live in America...

Insightful, perhaps... but with a flaw.

[mark-t]

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.

Re:Insightful, perhaps... but with a flaw.

[freshfromthevat]

Who says that the warning was received? If it is via email, what if my spam filter makes it go away?

Do they have to deliver the warning with a "Process server" in order for it to count in court?

Re:Insightful, perhaps... but with a flaw.

[lothar97]

When you install some P2P software, it gives you the option to "Find media to share," and sometimes you can choose where, and sometimes it does it by itself. I imagine most non-savy users choose this default option, and share everything- because:

1. The don't know how to share less files

2. Users trust the software they install

3. A popular /. complaint- they don't know any better.

Just for kicks I search for .pst every now and then, and am amazed at the number of people who are sharing their entire outlook file.

Re:Insightful, perhaps... but with a flaw.

[jedidiah]

Nevermind "progress".

I don't want MY tax dollars to be wasted with this nonsense.
I don't want that money wasted prosecuting swappers.
I don't want that money wasted imprisoning swappers.
I don't care to bear the social costs of ruining the lives of swappers.

Time and money are both limited, and far to value to waste on this crap.

Also, California has enough of it's own congressmen to push this crap without the Texas delegation contributing.

Re:Insightful, perhaps... but with a flaw.

[Lumpy]

Who says that the warning was received?

simple. Registered mail. It has a signature and verification of delivery.

or better yet a supeona.

They want to make it legally sticking, then they need to pay for it. Registerd mail or someone to track down and hand deliver something is expensive.

if the law allows an email then they might as well have written in that everyone is guilty by default.

Re:Insightful, perhaps... but with a flaw.

[maxpublic]

Congress doesn't amount to shit outside of the U.S. File trading will still be alive and well, sans America.

Max

Re:Because we all know that...

[fracai]

That's interesting because everybody accepts cops setting up speed traps and using radar guns to catch speeders. And investigating murders and fraud in order to capture criminals. Yet we don't like the idea of an organization that would police the internet in order to stop the theft of music and movies. Without considering the state of the music and video industry, downloading mp3s and ripped movies without paying for them is illegal. Whether the laws need to be adjusted to allow copyrights to expire or prices to come down is beside the point. Right now these things are illegal, but no one advocates that policing the internet is a means to making it safer or more enriching.

Re:The GPL is a copyright

[mark-t]

Clearly the wording of the bill needs to be changed so that it would only apply to distribution without the consent of the copyright holder. Otherwise, this bill would make it illegal for a coypright holder to distribute his very own material! (effectively negating the actual meaning of copyright completely.)

Re:Because we all know that...

[Maestro4k]

• 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.

And regular lawsuits against multiple people trading files online, including 12yo girls and grandparents who didn't even know that their grandkids had installed the software have worked too. But yep, a law will do the trick, heaven knows people won't break a law but are happy to risk financial ruin.

What do we expect though? It seems that one business or another owns every member of Congress, "We the people" is now "We the corporations" as far as representation in Congress goes. *sigh*

Re:This could be great news...

[bluGill]

Lots of things are different between the US and the UK. For instance the UK is banning fox hunting, while my state (MN) consideres hunting a legal right that is now part of the constitution. UK bans many more guns than the US. The UK has more cameras watching their streets than any other country. (Though the US is trying to catch up)

In short: there is plenty wrong with every country. I don't like the Induce act, but it isn't enough to make me exchange the rights violated in the US for the rights violated in the UK.

An Unjust Responsibility Shift

[Murdock037]

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.

Re:This could be great news...

[Em Adespoton]

Well, as someone who lives just North of the US Border, I have to say that a lot of talented US innovators are already moving.

A number of others are living in border states and are working on getting to know the Canadian technology world so that if they have to, they can emigrate quickly. In Canada, we take privacy seriously; there is a strict Federal Privacy act that all governmental institutions have to answer to, and at the beginning of this year, a new business privacy act went into place as well, protecting individuals from shoddy business handling of information.

Slashdot has covered our copyright laws and trials enough that I won't get into that side of things. The UK probably hasn't given the US emigration possibility a huge amount of thought, but believe me, in many Canadian provinces, it has been a major item of consideration when modifying our IT-related laws.

Ayn Rand on "making crime" as a tool of the tyrant

[D4C5CE]

There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals.
Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them.
One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.

Atlas Shrugged (1957)

Re:Intellectual Property (No Trespassing)

[3terrabyte]

Who exactly am I harming when I share recordings of Charlie Parker from 1946?

The music executives. And the people they bribe. And maybe their investors. That is who you are hurting. You are easily knocking them down to the top 2% of the wealthy instead of the top 1%. You greedy bastard.

Re:Because we all know that...

[d34thm0nk3y]

That's interesting because everybody accepts cops setting up speed traps and using radar guns to catch speeders.

Well, you don't do time when you are caught speeding. Which is even more psychotic because driving dangerously can actually get people killed whereas pirating music could potentially lose someone a tiny amount of money.

Re:'willing' vs 'knowing'?

[Rufus88]

Well, what law has ever stopped a crime

The 21st ammendment.

Re:and more Exactly

[PatientZero]

Then spend the next 4 years trying to fix the 2-party system ok?

Can you imagine how boring sports would be if there were only two teams? They'd each tailor their offense against the one other team's defense. There would be only slight innovation as each reacted to counter the other.

Now look at the two party system. What gets argued about? Big vs. really big government, higher vs. much higher taxes, barely distinguishable environmental policies, ad nauseum. They keep the voters focused on issues that polarize them but aren't much acted upon in the end (or are very similar in position).

Look, just get off your ass and vote Kerry in so we can put a stop to this insanity

If you're in a swing state, by all means vote Kerry rather than your preferred candidate, as I absolutely agree that while Kerry is bad, Bush is far, far worse and vastly more dangerous.

However, if you're not in a swing state, vote however you want, for more than the presidency is determined by your vote. Votes for third parties increase their campaign funding, ballot access and perceived credibility.