US To Push Criminalization of IP Violations

Dr.Hair writes " Soon to be ex-Secretary of Commerce Don Evans speaks out on 'piracy' just prior to his last trip to China for negotiations. 'That means criminalizing the laws as opposed to (having) just civil laws...You've got to start putting people in jail.' The article points out that this lust for prosecutions extends from Evans to his successor, the American Chamber of Commerce, and the US Senate. "

Comments

Re:Don't for a minute believe they won't do it.

[Seraphim1982]

"My advice for you all is to read early accounts of the rise of the Soviet state, and/or especially the transition years in Eastern Europe. Totalitarianism has a very recognizable feel, even in the very beginning, before you can barely feel its grip, you can smell it's breath long before it starts to squeeze."

China doesn't pretend to respect peoples rights to view whatever they want, and outside of North Korea they are probably the closest thing to a soviet state that is left in the world. So other the pointing out the blindingly obvious, what exactly was your point?

Re:An economy built on theft? Step right up!

[Dogtanian]

(Before I proceed, I should point out that I'm not American, which will obviously give me a different viewpoint).

A lot of what you said was valid, and insightful. However, it had to be pointed out that your country's economy was founded, in part, on what might be considered 'theft' of other countries' IP. This changed, not because someone woke up one morning and saw that it was 'wrong', but because the situation had changed such that it was in the US's interest to have stronger mutual IP agreements.

You say that you didn't take part in this; of course you didn't, but you enjoy the benefits of an economy built on such behaviour- right, or wrong. To criticise other countries for doing roughly the same thing at an early stage in their economic development seems distinctly unfair.

You may be right to say that this is not good for China; I suspect that, like the US before it, China would recognise this in its own good time and change its behaviour accordingly without outside forces. (Or you could argue that the situation China is now in is the one the US was in 100 or so years ago).

Personally, I'm not an "information wants to be free" idealist; I plan on creating a lot of stuff in my lifetime, and I want it to be protected under appropriate laws.

However, I am strongly opposed to the Disney-style extension of copyright for longer and longer periods. I don't see anyone from Disney lining up to pay the descendants of the original authors of the stories that they based much of *their* IP on, so it seems it has little to do with principle, and everything to do with protecting their own interest ("Well, duh!").

With reference to "playing by the same rules". Whose rules? Rules that suit those in a mature economy (built on rather *less* stringent IP protection) that now stands to benefit from strict IP? Or mutually agreed rules that would benefit everyone? (Nah... I'm not really naive enough to believe that that would happen, even if everyone could happily agree, which they couldn't).

As I said above, regargless of your personal behaviour, recognise that the economy you benefit from is built on freer attitudes towards IP; attitudes that have now matured. Ultimately, I think IP is a good thing if used wisely, but it can equally be a blunt tool to stifle rival economies.

Oh, and I think you brought the Nazis into your argument at some stage. By all rights, this means I get to win the argument, but I'll let you off the hook on that one ;)