U.S. Declares War on Intellectual Property Theft

bblazer writes "Reuters is running a story about a new US effort to stop intellectual property theft. From the article "The U.S. Justice Department on Tuesday outlined what it called its most sweeping crackdown on bootleg DVDs, fake designer goods, illegal music downloads and counterfeit drugs." It also goes on to say that media (movies and music) is highly affected, but so are products like batteries, baby food and Viagra."

Comments

And legality?

[metlin]

RIAA estimates that $2.6 billion worth of revenues are lost and the like through file-sharing - so what are they going to do about it?

Sue a kid in China or India for it? Unlikely, I think.

Re:And legality?

[CountBrass]

The War on Drugs. Yep that worked.

The War on Terror. Yep that's working: so far two countried fucked up and Iran's next.

So how can we deal with counterfeiting? I know: we'll declare war on it, that always works.

The US Government: the world's leading terror organisation for the last 50 years.

Re:And legality?

[metlin]

And oh, I was wrong about the figures.

He said the Motion Picture Association of America estimates that 2.6 billion songs, movies and software programs are illegally distributed over the Internet every month.

Hah! I'm sure that puts it at a much higher number than what I put up there.

Hmm, cost of 2.6 billion movie downloads? $260 billion

Cost of 1 nuke? $50 billion

Watching the US Nuke a country for RIAA? Priceless!

Re:And legality?

[mpe]

RIAA estimates that $2.6 billion worth of revenues are lost and the like through file-sharing - so what are they going to do about it?

Most likely spend several times that amount of money a year in "enforcement" and making sure that the "enforcers" have a job for life.

Re:And legality?

[mpe]

The War on Drugs. Yep that worked.

If it ended think of all those poor DEA agents having to get proper jobs.

The War on Terror. Yep that's working: so far two countried fucked up and Iran's next.

Unless Iran actually has WMDs, in which case Syria is most likely next in line.

So how can we deal with counterfeiting? I know: we'll declare war on it, that always works.

Except that kind of copyright infringement which a fuss is being made about isn't counterfeting in the first place.

The US Government: the world's leading terror organisation for the last 50 years.

Whilst the US Government may have made the "top 10" since 1954 it may not have been number one for each of those 50 years. The US Government faces stiff competition from Israel, Britain, Russia and France.

Re:And legality?

[mforbes]

And the inverse, of course:

1. Get other countries' citizens & subjects to pirate MPAA/RIAA recordings over the internet.
2. Nuke said countries.
3. Dude! Where's my profit?!

Re:And legality?

[VON-MAN]

Hmmm, you are a good example of what often is wrong with the USA. How about choosing a solution somewhere BETWEEN "waging war" or "let the bad guys run rampant"? You know, not black, not white, but gray.

Re:And legality?

[blackicye]

no, we should let the CIA do all the drug dealing, and only the terrorists that are US funded should be allowed to run rampant.

That would be the best solution /sarcasm

Re:And legality?

[mpe]

Are you suggesting that the government stop trying to aprehend and prosecute hard drug users/dealers?

Because the problems prohibition creates are often worst than any problems that the drugs create. The US gave up on alcohol prohibition for this reason.

Re:And legality?

[TummyX]

The War on Terror. Yep that's working: so far two countried fucked up


HOW DARE THEY remove Uncle Saddam's Utopia and the Uncle Osama's paradise and replace them with eeevil capatalistic and prosperous liberal democracies! They've ruin those countries just like they ruined Japan, Germany and South Korea (luckily Uncle Kim's Eden has thus far survived).

FUCKING TERRORISTS!

Re:And legality?

[Mosse]

First post! Had to comment on this one. I'd say that the situation in Iraq or Afganistan is quite different from the situation in Europe in 1940s. And USA would have happily sat on their assess during the war if Pearl Harbor wouldn't have happened. Hmm... I remember even that it was Germany who declared war against USA (big mistake, should not have done it and world might be very different place now). I'm not endorsing nazi Germany. Soviets would have crushed them by themselves in the end and taking Europe to the dark ages.

Re:And legality?

[BlackHawk-666]

The key difference here being that Germany was *known* to be systematically killing an entire race or people and were moving onto other undesireables (foreigners, gypsies, artists, poor people, mentally ill, etc). They invaded Poland, bombed London, invaded France, and were rolling their way across Europe.

I don't know about you, but I can make a distinction between an isolated act of terrorism on US soil but a party as yet unproven, and the mass invasion of countries and genocide that was being undertaken by Germany.

Re:And legality?

[amalcon]

And why was the Taliban there in the first place?

Oh right. War on communism. Religious fanatics were better than communism, so the U.S. put the Taliban in charge.

Re:And legality?

[Fulcrum of Evil]

If you've ever met a real cocaine or heroin addict (there is no such thing as a casual cocaine/heroin "user", only "addicts")

This I doubt. I've seen a lot of studies that show cocaine users as being mostly casual (including our prezodent, so the rumours go), with a smaller core of hardcore addicts.

At any rate, the current witchhunt isn't helping anybody. If it were cheapa to get, then at least the addicts could blow their brains out in peace instead of dying in police raids, hanging out in prisons getting cornholed and robbing people for their next fix. Yeah, that's cold, but it makes sense from a least-harm perspective. Maybe you don't need to legalize Cocaine all the way, but it doesn't need to be this illegal - make it a $100 fine for possession and sell it at the pharmacy to addicts with a script for $2/gram. That way I don't have to worry about the DEA serving a warrant on the wrong house.

Re:And legality?

[Fulcrum of Evil]

Afghanistan today: Most of the people are feeling optimistic about their future after decades of war and oppression. First person to vote in the first ever democratic elections was a 19 year old woman.

That's the official line. What I've heard is that people are afraid to vote, as they expect to be killed for cooperating with the americans, Opium production is something like 70% of the world supply, and the fundie religous types (like the Taliban) are gaining power again. Call me when they're sovereign and at least halfway friendly.

Re:And legality?

[vorpal22]

If you look historically at opiate use (heroin is an opioid, or synthetic opiate), you'll see that it very much mirrored alcohol use in our society: the majority of users were able to consume casually, and a small subset allowed themselves to become addicted.

Incidentally, opiate addiction is far less dangerous than alcohol addiction: there are few, if any long term negative consequences to an opiate addiction (as clearly evidenced by the rampant use of opiates amongst artists in the UK, many of who consumed astoundingly high levels of opiates daily and managed to live healthy, productive lives well into their 70s). Unlike alcohol, opiate withdrawal cannot kill. Unlike alcohol, opiates do not cause extreme liver and brain damage with possible dementia.

I won't speak on drugs like crack and methamphetamines, because I'm not remotely interested in them. I think that they're dangerous, but I support people's right to use them if they so choose. If education is given, people will understand the dangers associated with these drugs, and if they decide to consume them anyways, they're playing with fire. Many people partake in many dangerous and silly activities on a daily basis, but we support their right to do so (e.g. car racing?).

The only drugs that I support to be fully controlled are antibiotics, because antibiotic abuse is the only abuse where it's clear beyond the shadow of a doubt that the long-term damage caused by overconsumption will harm society as a whole instead of just the individual.

Re:And legality?

[orasio]

I would divide your statement in two sections. First, you speak about what they did on the inside of their country. Nobody messed with them about that. They could have killed everybody in their country before others cared about them. International disputes are about international issues. In-country atrocities are easily overlooked by other countries. Like the things people from the US say about China, but they never think about messing with them. The US has now a history of using internal issues of other countries, in order to invade them and pillage what's left, and in the meanwhile showing off their power to kill people. And they call it preemptiveness, or deterrance. Smacking someone, or threats are deterrance, actually killing people by the dozen is just plain common murder.

Then you speak about their relationship with the outside, now it sounds like you are talking about the US, nowadays. The only difference with Germany is that the US has now actually more power to kill than every other nation combined, and that is why they don't get the same treatment, because in this story the US are the crazed bastards killing everybody in their way, but there's noone able to stop them.

Re:And legality?

[EllisDees]

>there is no such thing as a casual cocaine/heroin "user", only "addicts"

You're either joking or are painfully naive. A person is no more likely to become addicted to either of the above than they are to alcohol, and less likely than tobacco.

http://www.ccguide.org.uk/addicts.html

>It takes over your life. It creates a dysfunctional circumstance in which the person quickly loses the ability to carry on a normal life, hold a steady job, and maintain a loving relationship with family.

Oh god, you've swallowed the propaganda whole. Poor thing.

Re:And legality?

[Pxtl]

Hahah, did you not pay attention to the news? There were 10 million votes counted. That does not mean 10 million voters when you've a country with a slap-dashed voting infrastructure. The situation was so messy that Karzai was actually endorsing people to vote as many times as they wanted, rather than risk losing the multiple-voters' support. Voter registration slips were on the black market.

Re:And legality?

[EllisDees]

>Wow, someone is actually arguing that heroin is not addictive to most users? Geez, never though I'd see the day.

It's not. The vast majority of people who try heroin never become addicted. If you think that it is, provide some evidence to back it up.

http://www.users.on.net/~rmc/drugs.htm

"Research made unwillingly by the U.S. Army on its Vietnam War veterans showed that nearly half used heroin (95% pure), 7% of those stayed on it on return to the U.S.A. with only 1% of these being addicted. The research was forced on the U.S. Army because many soldiers claimed disability pensions on the grounds that heroin addiction is permanent and disqualifies the user from any sort of productive life. Originally the heroin was smoked until Authority clamped down and it became more cost-effective to inject.

The addiction rate for social ALCOHOL drinkers is 10% with another 5% "at risk". ("Addiction" is when stopping taking the drug leads to withdrawal symptoms not present before taking it. e.g. alcohol "Dependence" is when cessation means just returning to the previous status quo e.g. insulin.)"

>Let me put it plain and simple for you: if you try heroin once, you probably have a 75% chance of trying it a second time...

Honestly, are you getting your facts from a DARE bumper sticker, or what?

That's funny...

[TheCaptain]

I don't see anyone but Al-Reuters calling it a 'declaration of war'. The headline alone is going to cause a flame war.

Re:That's funny...

[Albanach]

I don't see anyone but Al-Reuters calling it a 'declaration of war'. The headline alone is going to cause a flame war.

It's a fair point, but these headlines usually reflect the way it was spun by the government. You have to know how press teams work - they send out the press releases to Reuters etc, then they'll call the individual journalists and put their spin on it. Because they're then first to answer any questions the journalist might have they can influence the story.

Picture the conversation like this:

Journalist: so is this a real crackdown? WIll there be resources to back it up?

Apparatchik: Sure. Think of it like our war on IP theft.

Journalist: Thanks.

War on abstract concepts

[Gene Ray]

When will the US stop trying to "declare war" on abstract concepts like "terrorism," "drugs" and "intellectual property theft"? (Recent) history has shown that things like this just do not work.

Re:War on abstract concepts

[mpe]

When will the US stop trying to "declare war"

Most likely when the rest of the planet says "enough is enough"...

on abstract concepts like "terrorism," "drugs" and "intellectual property theft"? (Recent) history has shown that things like this just do not work.

Actually it appears to work quite well. Assuming the aim is to keep various people busy and well funded. N.B. the funding goes to "both ends". So odds on the US Government is now funding "intellectual property theft". The whole idea of these "wars" is top ensure that they cannot be "won".

Re:War on abstract concepts

[whovian]

Declaring "War on X" creates talking points as a way to manipulate public opinion. It leads to one party being able to claim that another party [didn't fund | underfunded | misplanned] the "war".

Oh sure

[Megaweapon]

He said the Motion Picture Association of America estimates that 2.6 billion songs, movies and software programs are illegally distributed over the Internet every month.

Because we all know how accurate their numbers are...

Re:Oh sure

[TheRaven64]

You mean the top 40?

Darned Imitation Viagra!

[muntumbomoklik]

I can't tell you how many.... problems... I've had with my imitation Viagra. Luckily, my imitation woman is still holding up pretty good.

So

[Timesprout]

Is there anything or anyone the US is not actually at war with at the moment?

Re:So

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't seem to be waging a war on war at the moment...

Re:So

[mbbac]

No.

War on drugs? Check.

War on terrorism? Check.

War on third world countries that don't pose a threat? Check.

War on the UN? Check.

War on intellectual property infringement? Check.

War on its citizens? Check.

Re:So

[lxs]

Is there anything or anyone the US is not actually at war with at the moment?

Halliburton?

Yup, good timing

[Gentoo Fan]

Just in time for the elections. "Hey Hollywood, us government types are doing the job you want us to! How about some more 'donations'!?"

heah come de fuzz

[lottameez]

The Recording Industry Association of America welcomed the report. RIAA chairman Mitch Bainwol said the "commitment of focus, energy and resources outlined in this report is music to our ears."

FWEEET! Up against the wall! - did you pay for that song you're playing in your head?

War against $FOO

[fforw]

Seeing how the "war against drugs" and the "war against terror" went I would be quite worried if I was an american.

Who's Rights?

[marktaw.com]

Ashcroft said the FBI also would increase the number of agents assigned to investigations, and develop youth information programs to encourage respect for artists' rights.

Who's rights? The IP owner in this case is the record labels and movie companies, no the artists. When's the last time you looked at the copyright label on a CD or DVD?

The rich will get even richer

[master_p]

As if the people behind this move are not rich enough, they want to extract the last drop of milk from us. Don't they understand that they are rich because we are the customers?

It Will Never Work, And Here's Why

[syberanarchy]

And like drugs and terror, you'll never stop it.

And unlike drugs and terror, the politicians will never get the support they need from the masses to continue their latest favor crusade to the big cartels.

The war on terror is working because the majority of McWalmart Americans are convinced that them dirty a-rabs are just tootin' to bring their hoity toity core-anne over here and shove it down our capitalist lovin', god-fearin' country's throat.

The war on drugs worked because well-to-do soccer moms were and are scared that their Harvard-bound princesses will end up giving blowjobs for coke, or that their sons will end up slanging yayo in the hood.

What's going to be the hook for Joe Sixpack to endorse the "War on Piracy?" The fact that CD prices may rise even more? That Regal and AMC might up the price from 8.50 to 9 bucks?

Unlike the terror and drug "wars," the middle class constituents that these piggish fucks in DC need to support their endeavors will not see the importance of "waging war" on something that they do not percieve as a threat. They will not see the justice in their sons and daughters becoming someone's bitch in a maximum security prison for what amounts to petty "theft" (and yes, I know it's not really theft. But we must keep it simple for the simpletons, both on /, and in the real world).

The 60 million people who file swap "illegally" in this country cannot all be put in prison. If they try, they'll be met with protest and the backlash from the public. Becausse file swapping is such a part of our culture now that all the laws in the world won't make any difference. They've lost, rightly or wrongly.

Re:It Will Never Work, And Here's Why

[syberanarchy]

Something I didn't think of before, but really illustrates my point:

These "IP" laws have really become like the speed laws. Your driver instructor tells you that yes, you can get fined, etc. for going 5 over the speed limit, or for putting the hood of your car over the white stop bar at traffic lights. But in reality, how much does this happen? (and spare me your "I live in a hick town where the one cop in town has a vendetta against my family so yes it happens" tales.)

Likewise, who ever gets sued for downloading a single mp3? How long will it take them to sue everyone? How long will it take them to sue enough folks to make anyone care? Will anyone care? The way I see it, I have about 8000 songs on my PC. Assuming I were a dirty pirate, and assuming they were all illegally aquired, if the RIAA came after me and demanded a 5000 dolalr settlement, I'd actually view myself as getting a pretty cheap deal, as opposed as to if I had gone through iTunes, etc.

They can't slap casual swappers with the "max fines" they advertise (250k per work,) because it would cause outrage. They're damned if they do, damned if they don't. I don't envy the RIAA at this point!

Re:It Will Never Work, And Here's Why

[Vicsun]

60 million people are a lot of people, but as many large numbers it's hard to conceptualize. To put it in contrast, in 2000 George 'Dubya' Bush got 50,456,002 votes (source: Wikipedia ). Does that mean there are more criminals walking the streets than people who voted for the president?
When there are so many people breaking a law, isn't it time to revise the law, rather than futilely try to enforce it?

Re:It Will Never Work, And Here's Why

[Motherfucking Shit]

The war on drugs worked because well-to-do soccer moms were and are scared that their Harvard-bound princesses will end up giving blowjobs for coke, or that their sons will end up slanging yayo in the hood.

Meanwhile, people like me are getting blowjobs from Harvard princesses and buying yayo at record low rates from their brothers. Vive le guerre!

Let's hope

[w.p.richardson]

that it's as successful as the war on drugs.

Maybe in a few years, prisons will be even more overcrowed...

"What're ya' in for?"
"Downloading Britney, you?"
"N'Sync"

What a joke.

Re:Let's hope

[DikSeaCup]

Well, in all fairness, people should go to jail for downloading Britney Spears or N'Sync.

Unfortunately, having extremely bad taste isn't illegal.

Dear US Govt,

[LiquidCoooled]

I am writing this letter in the hope that you can take affermative action against my local drug dealer.

He has been selling counterfeit drugs for the last few months. The quality of his wares have been steadily dropping now, and I demand action.

When I go out onto the street, I can reasonably expect to purchase high quality original drugs.

Sincerely,
A. Concerned Addict.

Those who do not learn from history...

[ControlFreal]

Sigh... When the US tried to stop the use of alcohol early in the 20th century, did that actually stop the use of alcohol? No! And in addition, there was a lot of crime, because people tend to go to great lengths for what they want.

When the US declared the War On Drugs, did that stop the use of drugs? No! And in addition, there was a lot of crime, because people tend to go to great lengths for what they want.

When the US declares a War on Copyright Infringement (not: theft!), will that stop the infrigement of copyright? No! And there will be a lot of crime, because people tend to go to great lengths for what they want.

Waging a war on something does not solve the issue. Never by itself. An issue can only be solved by looking for the motives that people have for doing things.

Ask yourself: Why do people use alcohol, why do people use drugs, why do people download material from the net? Only when you know people's motives, you can start to change things, because if you don't understand the motives, and just wage a war, you deny people something that they want...

... and there will be a lot of crime because people tend to go to great lengths for something they want.

What a relief

[blueforce]

I can't stand to lose any more of my intellect.