Slashdot Mirror
Congress May Outlaw 'Attempted Piracy'
cnet-declan writes "Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is asking Congress to make 'attempted' copyright infringement a federal crime. The text of the legislation as well as the official press-release is available online. Rep. Lamar Smith, a key House Republican, said he 'applauds' the idea, and his Democratic counterpart is probably on board too. In addition, the so-called Intellectual Property Protection Act of 2007 would create a new crime of life imprisonment for using pirated software in some circumstances, expand the DMCA with civil asset forfeiture, and authorize wiretaps in investigations of Americans who are 'attempting' to infringe copyrights. Does this go too far?"
By definition "attempts" are unsuccessful acts. Why should the law punish attempts at all? Why punish people for things that never happened?
Does this go too far?
Yes, this goes too far.
I promise vehement grass roots activism to defeat any elected official, Republican, Democrat, or Independent, who gets anywhere near voting for this. Full stop.
This will not sneak by in the dead of night. We are watching. You are either against this violent insanity, or you are against the voters.
Tired of Political Trolls? Opt Out!
Yes, it does go too far.
The simple truth is that interstellar distances will not fit into the human imagination
- Douglas Adams
"would create a new crime of life imprisonment for using pirated software in some circumstances"
I dont know what circunstances are those, but yeah right any judge would sentence that.
Yet murderers and rapist get out in less than 5-10. WTF is wrong with our society.
No, I don't think so. Piracy is become rampant in today's world, and the government stepping up to make harsher penalties is fine by me. Piracy costs businesses money, as well as making it unfair to people who actually purchase legitimate goods.
But feel free to mod me down for a "wrong" opinion on slashdot, even though it's clear moderation abuse.
So I guess this means Congress will be able to see into our souls and say "You intended to copy therefore you go to jail."
Once life imprisonment for piracy is passed, the only safe software to use will be Free/Open Source.
If you aren't yet a member of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, now would be a real good time to start. http://www.eff.org/
Looking for hardware (Currently need: Large Etch-a-Sketch) Have one? See my journal!
I don't understand why Slashdot has to report on every bullshit bill that comes before congress.
Lifetime imprisonment for using software, pirated or not? Gimmie a break. This won't pass.
I sincerely hope that this legislation is used to fight against the people who are genuinely getting rich from copyright infringement (the international organised crime rings) rather than individual consumers. That's to say, it's a good thing when used by government against drug and people traffickers for good ends rather than by the media cartels against their potential customers to make up for the cartel's failure to sell music, movies and television at market value.
Attempted copyright infringement? When we can't get our elected officials charged with real, already committed and documented crimes? What is going on in this country!?!
The smartest man in the whole, wide world really don't know that much. - Mose Allison
"anything good for business is good" - this is the logic. see where this leads. People are going to be slaves to "intellectual property holder" elite, a new class of elite. LIFETIME imprisonment. DMCA takedowns - get a load of that - what a way to suppress free speech if need be.
act now. blow your congressman's/senator's ear off.
Read radical news here
FTA: Require Homeland Security to alert the Recording Industry Association of America.
Sure that is what everyone intended the anti-terrorism money to go to.
All considerations about copyright infringement aside (legal, illegal, etc), this just makes my blood boil:
" Require Homeland Security to alert the Recording Industry Association of America. That would happen when compact discs with "unauthorized fixations of the sounds or sounds and images of a live musical performance" are attempted to be imported. Neither the Motion Picture Association of America nor the Business Software Alliance (nor any other copyright holder such as photographers, playwrights, or news organizations, for that matter) would qualify for this kind of special treatment."
Since when did Copyright Infringement become an issue for Homeland Security to work directly with a specific corporation?
Why give only the RIAA this treatment? Do they notify Tropicana when off-brand OJ is smuggled in from Mexico?
"his Democratic counterpart is probably on board too"
Would it be too much to ask that you find out Rep. John Conyer's position - hell, even his name would be an improvement, and perhaps understanding why Rep. Smith is considered "key" (hint: check the committees) - before you start tarring him with the same brush as Rep. Lamar Smith?
-Richard Campbell.
-Richard
I intend to violate someone's copyright someday. In particular, I am going to go to a hospital that I suspect uses pirated Windows. Per you, they are 'recklessly endangering' life, and I am abetting them. Do your worst :)
Jackass.
Of course it goes too far. Electing George W. Bush was going too far. Appointing Alberto Gonzales Attorney General was over the top. This is a logical consequence of putting those baboons in charge.
How is this even possible?
If this is to pass, what immoral act would next be prosecuted? Being gay? Being obese? Being lazy?
This is clearly an admission by those who support it that they are UNABLE to enforce current laws, and even that they are trying to enforce laws that are thought to be bad laws by enough people that they can't possibly get 100% compliance.
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
I assume that's a rhetorical question? This sounds remarkably like thought crime. What needs to happen here: immediately laugh this law out of congress, start a massive movement to make certain that no politician who has even spoken well of this bill is ever elected to any public office again, and immediately begin investigations for bribery into those politicians who voted for it or promoted it. Even suggesting life imprisonment for copyright infringement is simply ludicrous.
Deja Moo: The distinct feeling that you've heard this bull before.
Life imprisonment? We would have to turn entire states into prisons to do anything remotely like this.
What other politicians are willing to end thier carreers by attatching thier names to this?
I am Jack's complete lack of surprise. -Fight Club
It should go all the way to the death penalty.
Maybe THEN the American people will finally rise up and take back their freedom.
Godspeed.
I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
With this kind of totalitarian mentality, we may as well as should have brought Saddam over here to be our dictator. He'd have done a better job than the idiot dictators we have now trying to pretend to be democratic. If it smells like crap, may as well be honestly crap.
Piracy save a huge amount more businesses money that the number of businesses it cost money
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
Pay for the content or go to prison? is that the deal?
ok screw you, I'll bin my TV, never waste my life watching rubbish films again and read books, play video games or talk to my spouse.
see how they like that, I'm sure my life will be richer for getting rid of what is basically a waste of my time.
This just goes to show how ridiculous US society has become. What will this mean for anyone who uploads a video of something that is copyrighted to You Tube? Or even the poor sap that attempts to watch said copyrighted video? There are so many people that do this now, and I just don't see how it could be feasible for the Justice System (let alone the overcrowded prisons) to have to try to prosecute and imprison all of those people alone.
Ok according to the letter of this law, they could go in to any software company that has the means to reproduce anything and just seize everything if anyone has a mix tape somewhere in somebody's possession. This seems a little much... Somebody correct me if I read this wrong.
Increase the maximum penalty for counterfeiting offenses
from 10 years to 20 years imprisonment where the defendant knowingly
or recklessly causes or attempts to cause serious bodily injury, and
increase the maximum penalty to life imprisonment where the defendant
knowingly or recklessly causes or attempts to cause death;
If this law passes, I see the following.
(mp/ri)aa will flood the various file sharing networks with dummy files, aka 'master_of_puppets.mp3' that are actualy null files of a certain size.
Random user tries to download file from *aa over the network.
*aa records IP address of user
*aa submits IP information to DoJ
Random user goes to jail for attempted piracy and *aa also files a civil suit.
PROFIT!
If my sole source of imcome were from copyright royalties, and some nut infringed and destroyed my income, I think I'd rather get a job than have him imprisoned for life. But that's just me.
Generally attempting to do something is nearly as bad as doing it- for instance, if I tried to murder you I don't think you'd want me to get away scott-free. Likewise, someone attempting to steal my car and getting busted by the police should be punished almost as badly (if not as badly) as someone who actually stole my car. The only saving grace an attempted criminal had is that they were too stupid to get away with it.
You are reading a copy of my copyrighted post.
Bin Laden should wake up and kill at least a few million people if he want to still be the most hated man on US ground.
...all violent crimes. All common law crimes.
None of them have been invented or re-invented in the last 200 years to suit the needs of particular, limited business interests.
Someone else framed this in terms of "unfairness" and economic damage. That really isn't good enough for the sort of consequences being comtemplated.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Note to politicians:
Your children have overwhelmingly likely been "pirates" of content. Your other relatives and loved ones too. Ever tape a song off the radio? That's unauthorized copying. Ever make, or ask someone to make a copy of something for a hearing? That's unauthorized copying. You have overwhelmingly likely copied a lot of material that was not exempted from copyright protections... because virtually EVERYTHING that anyone creates is protected by copyright.
This idea of jailing people for 'attempted' copyright violation is so absurd, I have to ask: Is this just a distraction for some reason?
Ryan Fenton
Unfortunately, due to the apathy of most US citizens, this won't end the career of any politician. Oh, it'll end careers of people who try to participate in society, rather than just being well-behaved consumers of pop-culture.
Life in prison? What the hell? Seizure of property? That's even worse! It's so easy to abuse a law simply to seize property.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
Does this mean I can finally when a nobel prize for attempted chemistry?
-- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
I am pretty sure that in view of the corporate copyright holder lobby, this is not yet far enough. Wanna bet with me ?
As for the public interest, it has long been lost from view by politician pandering to their corporate master. And no I am not exagerating. There is no way a sane person would make such heavy punishment for a so little crime, in comparison to other more grave crime. They HAVE to be paid to believe in that crap.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
This will just give me (and a hell of a lot of other people) more incentive to use linux/oss sotfware.
Trying to download the winner of American Idol, only to return with zero results 'cause nobody but you thought it's worth the waste of bandwidth?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
To be convicted of a crime, you must be culpable (ie. you should have known better). If you're not culpable, you're not convicted, even though it happened.
Conversely, if you are culpable, you can be convicted of a crime even if it didn't happen. Seems fair to me.
Patrick Doyle
I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
They're trying to prevent the stuff that happens in Snow Crash and Neuromancer.
u-bend
Do you think somebody who tried to kill you but muffed the job should be let free to take another stab at it?
These stories are free but worth money.
Need I remind you the DMCA itself started out as one of those "bullshit bills"...
One current loss factor for the RIAA and ilk is independent artists who are able to home record and publish. With the current direction it will soon be impossible, or very difficult to home record and publish. I expect to see authoring tools require registration and be prohibited from the general public, or at least be made very expensive by limited distribution. This will push people back into the welcoming arms of the RIAA. I expect this to be all part of the plan.
The media revolution of making us all creators will be stifled in the name of control and profit by the media barons.
and with the americans pulling citizens of others countries out of their native soil to prosicute them this isnt just an american issue anymore. If there is anything your canadian brothers can do to help you defeat this law let us know.
-Ours is the wisdom of Solomon, the magic of Merlyn, the fall of Icaris.
I guess he figures everyone hates him already, anyway.
It's not wasting time, I'm educating myself.
I think the American people have got a government they deserve.
Try to run a country on a scrap of 200 year old idealistic claptrap, and a culture of the almighty dollar, and see where it gets you.
You're as screwed now as the Indians were when you raped and murdered them. Couldn't have happened to a better country!
We don't lock people away for life for any other kind of theft even if one buys the argument that all copyright infringement is theft. Sure we could have a "one strikes and you're out" rule for every civil or criminal infraction on the books but I suspect that might somehow work against society's interests. Whatever happened to the concert of a misdemeanor? One side of this debate has become unreasoning and irrational. When they come in off the ledge things might start to get better....
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Not even 250 years ago, the founders of this country willingly committed treason and went to war over laws such as this. Life imprisonment sounds a lot worse than taxation without representation to me. The general population of the United States are not served by this law. We are not being represented. Now, we can't even get the offenders voted out of office. Never mind trying to incite a revolution.
The only good politician is tortured and dead.
Except that Microsoft and other companies are trying to create the presumption that any and all open source software violates someone's copyrights or patents.
Microsoft is almost certainly already lobbying for laws that will place strong legal burdens and liabilities on open source software, with the intent of making it impossible for any serious business to run open source software.
Alberto may be down, but he's definitely not out... it wouldn't take much for him to be turned into a "hero", where people will follow his recommendations to the letter. If it puts people in prison, it must be a good bill, is the reasoning.
Even though Congress is in the hands of the Dems, the Dems are still kowtowing to the guys sporting the little (R) next to their names, so if Al says something, it would get rubber stamped pretty quickly. Most bills are not even read by the Congress people, so it would just get passed, then swing its way to the White House for an automatic signature.
Just remember, it was the Dems that passed the DMCA.
I can see this passing. Congress has nobody in their ear than the PACs.
Congress will eventually equate pirating someone's craptastic record album to major financial crimes, and pass the law "to help ensure financial security for US businesses."
The DOJ wants this bill... it would allow them not to just monitor network connections, but will give them the probable cause to search hard disks at will. They find a suspected copy of WinRAR whose demo expired? They now can seize hard disks of whomever at their will, most likely anyone complaining against the Iraq war.
This proposal would provide a nice setup for another law requiring all computers sold to have some hardware-based licensing/DRM chip that is another avenue for spying. Clipper 2.0 anyone? The proposal would also provide a nice setup for a law similar to England requiring people give up decryption keys, or face large amounts of prison time.
I hope the EFF can do something, but I have a feeling the EFF is fighting an uphill battle with a congress and administration that has little interest whatsoever in the welfare of the American people.
...and anyone who does not support it is nothing more than a criminal trying to justify criminal behaviors and activitiesThis ladies and gentlemen is a real sign of idiocy, assuming the wors out of people wrongly.
If you believe in privacy, and believe you have "nothing to hide" at the same time, you're a goddammed idiot
Equating "piracy" with murder or theft of physical goods is specious at best, and doublespeak proganda at it's worst.
This is all about revenue streams for an entitled few, failure to grasp this will only allow it to become codified as law.
Pull your head out of it's uncomfortable position.
This reminds me of the worst examples of absurd and exaggerated punishment in the world - like maiming and crippling a person for petty crime, which was common in several societies during the middle ages. But perhaps it is not surprising that this kind of deranged mentality is rife in this day and age, where religious extremism and unadulterated, capitalist greed are allowed to rule with few restrictions, and where common people are considered beneat contempt by those in power.
America deperately needs to get rid of these cancers and return the power to the people.
"My opponents would have you believe this goes to far. Well I believe this doesn't go too far enough!"
Since they are going for ridiculous extremes, how about passing a law so that exaggerating or cherry picking intelligence to justify a war is punishable by being hung drawn and quartered in front of your family who are also simultaneously being boiled alive.
All the more reason to stop tainting oneself with the material that enjoys the RIAA/MPAA "protection".
I'm going to ENCOURAGE my Congress-kritters to pass the law!
I'm going to copyright everything I do. Then, ask for protection from the RIAA/MPAA and the Congress-Kritters children and grand children. Ask them to enforce the laws on the troops of the United States.
Linux distros wanting to be 100% "libre" and clean, like Ubuntu, were just too anal about it. Now I think it will soon be the only safe way of using a computer. Safe for you that is, and not just safe for your computer...
"Sockets are the standard networking API, also useful for stopping your eyes from falling onto your cheeks" zeromq.org
The administration being behind it will help, and it will get more notice. The real question is whether the RIAA has bought off enough democrats to get this on the docket for a vote.
Hey, I'm willing to go along with this, just so long as they attach my rider: I want them to outlaw attempted bribery, attempted corruption, attempted child sodomy, attempted subversion of the constitution and democratic principles, attempted lying to the nation to get us involved in an unnecessary war of choice, and attempted douchebaggery. I mean, I'd like to nail their scrotums to the wall for actually doing this shit already but they just have too much political cover, maybe we can nail them for the attempt instead.
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
It's important to remember that courts, most often, have the right to bring common sense into the process. If your congressman writes legislation that oppress his constituents, then the process will chuck him out of congress and the courts will throw out the law. Our forefathers had more sense than you think they did!
I don't understand why Slashdot has to report on every bullshit bill that comes before congress.
Because this stuff matters. Big companies are spending billions to influence politicians. The only power that we, the people, have against that is to make our wishes clear to our elected representatives. If you don't, these companies will get their way by default.
And in order to do something about these laws, you need to know about them. So get off your lazy behind and let your representatives know where you stand on these issues.
Not that it actually justifies draconian legislation like this, but I don't think this would be happening if so many people weren't acting as if copyright had no merit whatsoever. It's no coincidence that this garbage never made its way into law before "file-sharing" became ubiquitous. Completely disregarding flawed-but-reasonable laws (e.g. pay someone for your music) evidently encourages fundamentally flawed, unreasonable ones.
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
Well, if the penalty becomes life in prison, it is better to put an eye patch, sail to the high seas and become a real murderous pirate, as, according with the U.S. Code, Title 18, Chapter 81, the penalty for being a real pirate is life imprisonment, but the profits can be way higher.
After the numerous bullshit answers he gives to members of Congress does he think he has any standing?
I for one welcome my new copyright holding overlords...
When the populace are all criminals, they become easy to control.
Hmm... it is probably a mistake to post this, they will be onto me.
Anyway, so I intend to attempt to infringe copyrights if this ever passes by creating a random number generator. You can download every song ever created as a mp3. Unfortunately most of the time, you won't actually get the song, but rather a random number.
Someone needs to email Alfredo an embedded video of copyrighted material. When he inadvertently watches it, BAM, he's gone for life.
This is going to sound like a screed, but now you figured it out. The implications of the last 6 years of legislative and executive action are damn obvious to academic economists (like me). The "ownership society" the Decider spoke so much about in 1999 and 2000 leads directly to this. Not long ago, Republicans would be very angry and resentful that the government would try and allow monopolies on our collective culture. Now, all politicians are content that well over half this country will be at the mercy of the "Owners." Being an "Owner" won't be easy though, because many, many employers are making employees sign away all rights to inventions, patents, and copyrights devised while at the company (we don't know how enforcable this is now, but will be within 50 years at the current pace). Any worker will never be able to own their own work, and will never be able to enter the "Ownership" class easily.
We will enter feudalism all over again, but this time over access to information. Instead of paying a 60% title to your lord, or paying 35% in tax, you'll be paying 1000s of micropayments to let you do things like sing "Happy Birthday" at your child's birthday, or to load that CD into your computer. Your right to know if there is melamine in your flour will just be more commoditized information, and well beyond your ability to afford. You'll have to buy all your human and property rights back from the barons that own them, if you have the cash.
Democrats stopped being "liberal" about 70 years ago. About 30 years ago, Republicans stopped being "conservative." We are left with two right-wing Authoritarian parties. As disclosure here, I voted for Bush in 2000, thinking he'd be less authoritarian than Al "My wife invented the Tipper Sticker" Gore and Joe "We need to censor video games" Lieberman. I may have been wrong.
See what it has become - something that is exploitable to the extent that people can propose LIFETIME imprisonment.
if anything, any concept or practice comes to this point, it becomes evident that it is wrong and harmful.
lets see what intellectual property has become :
nth generation inheritors still living lavishly on a single book their ancestors had produced 100 years ago, without giving anything to society.
big publishers enjoying a practical monopoly of the creative market, sign on promising talents, and thereby force (or try to force) entire population of earth to go through them to reach mankind's fruits of creativity.
same big publishers are utilizing connections and bribing statesmen so that their monopoly wont be broken, but furthered, in the expense of modern democratic rights and values.
A scoundrel's collection of lawyers, posing as RIAA, extorting and intimidating people arbitrarily, without even feeling the need to provide valid proof before accusing someone and demanding surrender.
combined, all these have reached a point that the intellectual property exploit parties are now insolently demanding that their hold on society be ratified and furthered with LIFETIME imprisonment. get a load of that. This is no less than INDENTURED servitude of 17th century. make one mistake, sign one paper and you are goner.
this is not what free countries of the earth were founded for. in every country every citizen has the right to take up arms against a state that compromises the principles of democracy and unjust. United states was founded in this fashion, and has open statements to that effect.
It is evident that intellectual property concept has to be revised fundamentally, to prevent such abuses and insolence. its current state is a one that it has started actually hampering free trade, freedom of choice, competition and civil rights.
Read radical news here
I expect to see authoring tools require registration and be prohibited from the general public
In Soviet Russia, copying machines and offset presses were prohibited for the general public, yet samizdat flourished nonetheless. And was the more popular for that! Even the "almighty" US government won't be able to stop people from being creative, and creatively spreading their (and others') works. Culture will remain free, even if spreading it may become a federal offense.
cpghost at Cordula's Web.
so, the lesson here is that murder and rape is safer for future criminals than IP works? Nice to see that the U.S. has the best laws that money can buy. Lets see what is going to happen, the law passes, they will have a few big cases were examples will be made out of random people for a short while so it gets media coverage. Then it will fade as it will have ZERO effect in curbing piracy. The people who's live were lost will spend the rest of their lives in jail, if they are lucky they may get off. I am sure after they get out of jail with REAL criminals they will be nice upstanding citizens.
From TFA:
"Anyone using counterfeit products who "recklessly causes or attempts to cause death" can be imprisoned for life. During a conference call, Justice Department officials gave the example of a hospital using pirated software instead of paying for it."
If I understand this correctly, this is meant to punish people that knowingly use pirated software for critical systems if the pirated software causes a malfunction in the system leading to loss of life. For instance, if you decided to implement a surgery computer using pirated Windows Vista (as dumb as that sounds) and the pirated software stops working as you operate (say due some malfunction introduced by the crackers).
Or do they want to use this against crackers if the pirated copy of Windows Vista they release causes someone's death due to some bug introduced by the crack? Wooaaah.....
It all sounds either far-fetched or redundant to me. If you recklessly cause someone else's death due to criminal neglect, that is surely manslaughter regardless of this being done by reckless use of pirated software or dangerous driving? (depending on the severity of the neglect).
The GP didn't equate piracy with murder. He merely demonstrated that an 'attempt' can often be, and often is, something we should consider criminal.
Read the legislation. The life in prision provision is with respect to situations in line with existing product tapering, etc laws.
e rty.protection.act.2007.051407.pdf
http://politechbot.com/docs/doj.intellectual.prop
Overall this proposal is a crock of shit.
Seriously? The last time around (DMCA) went too far. This is an insult. Land of the free and home of the brave is looking less and less of either.
That this is unConstitutional, and against the common law.
No earthly court is competent to evaluate someone's thoughts.
Using the Infamous Act and the GeheimStaatsPoleizei to 'bundle' with corporate interests is massively unConstitutional. The several States did not grant such powers to the federal government. Those rights are reserved to the several States and to the people - see the 9th and 10th amendments.
Remembering the FBI files, VAAPCON and Waco, I don't think that a change of parties in power is going to help.
As to legislating morality, ALL laws legislate morality. That is the only thing that they can do. All laws are based upon some notion or other of what is right, and what is wrong.
No, wait! I've got it! Goddamn, I'm a genius. Why not put the INNOCENT people in prison. That way there'll be plenty of room for the law abiding and plenty of room for us copyright infringing, foreigner associating, freedom valuing, evolution accepting, internet surfing no-goodniks in the hellbound moral cesspit that is society today. Problem solved.
Why not kill them? It guarantees that they'll go straight to Heaven -- no chance for the rest of us in the Satan-bait section to tempt them with our sex, drugs, rock-and-roll music, and, apparently, unlicensed software.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
Haven't we seen enough incompetent political circus disguised as 'law enforcement' from this clown yet?
there is no provision in there for life in jail over pirated software. none. you get life in jail for selling fake pharmaceuticals that kill people.
anyway... this is the kind of government the US has devolved into: let the corporations write the laws that will keep them profitable, and will criminalize more and more individual behavior.
shit.
The Inquirer has an interesting bit in their article on the act:
"Gonzales said that this was critical as the US moved to digital television. This will strike EU readers as a bit odd as it was not vital when we all moved over to digital television."
This is another example of the US Government being taken over by the Corporations with the human residents being demoted to being just consumers and taxpayers.
A software audit of all government agencies and government officials' office & home computers the day this bill passes!
People need to understand that business as usual simply isn't possible anymore. We are all the benefactors of a technological revolution that has changed the rules, and there's no going back. The limited distribution and reproduction of ideas is a thing of the past. It's well past time for us to adjust our thinking and business models accordingly. Those supporting the intellectual property regime are fighting the tides, and make no mistake: they will lose. It's only a matter of time.
In the meantime, however, all laws like this will do is promote government waste and potentially victimize millions of upstanding citizens. It would be tragic if this were to come to pass.
-Grym
"You cannot and SHALL not legislate morality. Thought police should be shot on the basic premise that they cannot stop themselves from breaking the laws the are supposed to uphold."
I agree with your opposition to this law, but your argument is poor. An attempt is not the same as thinking about attempting something, so this has nothing to do with "thought policing".
Attempted crimes are already criminalised in most parts of the world, including the US. The obvious examples are attempted robbery and attempted murder. Just because you don't succeed, doesn't make you any less of a criminal. If we didn't criminalise attempted murder, someone could just keep on trying until they succeed without the law being able to stop them.
-You go to a concert with your MP3 player. It happens to have a feature to record sound (ie. your voice). The guards at gate notice the ear buds and call the cops. The crime: attempted copyright infringement.
-You are about to take pictures of your friends at the mall in front of an electronics store. A TV showing a movie is in the back ground. Mall security see you and call the cops. The crime: attempted copyright infringement.
I'm sure you can figure out some more.
Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
This bill may not pass, but who is to say the next bill like this will not pass. The buttholes in congress introduce bills like these to see how much they can get away with. There's a good chance this bill will pass, in some shape. Congress likes to "negotiate" and pass diluted bills through the system.
It's quite possible that Gonzales proposed all these items just so they could "negotiate" the wiretap clause into being passed. Gonzales likely doesn't care about the majority of the items in the proposed bill, he probably is only cares about one or two items. The rest of the bill is likely bait.
I can't help thinking that if the wiretap clause were to be passed, it could be then be used as a defense of all the illegal wiretapping currently going on. On a technical level, anyone using a internet browser could arguably be accused of "attempted" copyright infringement, as your browser downloads the content in order to display it. As such any person with a computer connected to the internet could be wiretapped.
The bottom line is that our congressmen and women need to be smarter than they currently are in order to do their job. Their inability to spot potential exploits like these are going to be our undoing.
This really bytes.
I don't understand why you American's are at all even surprised, given the Patriot Act.
:)
Indeed this is sick, but nothing like how sick it is to see rapists and killers only get imprisonment for 1-5 years - this is even worse in Britain. As prisons here are overloaded to max, which means releasing hardened criminals only after months / a few years.
Capital punishment / blood money works, IF it's implemented correctly - i.e. according to Islamic law. And no, Iran and even the Saudi don't implement it correctly - however, Mecca and Medina do, and you should see just how peaceful those cities are!
Shops are sometimes open without any attendants / doors - you simply leave the cash on the till, and leave
That made me feel a little more at ease from reading the sensationalist line in the summary. I don't think that too many major business centers government owned or otherwise would be using pirated software to begin with, especially a hospital.
Now honestly, what is that? Do they give a Nobel Prize for attempted chemistry?
Randall, old Buddy!
Maybe you haven't been paying attention to the news, but nobody in Congress has any interest in listening to what Bush is promoting, and certainly not what Gonzales is selling.
I'm just surprised Gonzales choose copyright to try to change the subject. I'd have thought he'd be promoting a bill to protect children from porn, or something like that. Maybe he's afraid of pulling a Mark Foley?
Either intentional or reckless behavior that results in the death of many people is still murder.
I'm not surprised that some posters didn't read the article, but how did so many moderators (i see a 5 insightful rating) not RTFA or have any common sense? Even if Slashdot has an excellent moderation system, "garbage in" will still result in "garbage out".
it has come to the attention of the homeland security department, the department of defense, the fbi, and the attorney general's office that thinking about attempting to infringe coopyright has been committed in some of the posts here
heretowithforth, slashdot.org has its domain is suspended by icann, for the crime of breaking statute 167.130b of the general federal criminal code: directing furtive sidelong glances at people who might have once been thinking about the possibility that copyright infringement is not a big deal, and statute 167.130a: being related to people who are considering the possibility that copyright infringement is not as big a deal in other countries
to be frank, dear slashdot posters, what crazy notion has gotten into your head that there is more important issues for these federal resources to be concerned with, that no greater threat faces this country than copyright infringement? wake up! smell the coffee!
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Intellectual Property Protection Act of 2007 would create a new crime of life imprisonment for using pirated software in some circumstances
...and openly suggesting investigative spying on U.S. citizens by the U.S. government for ATTEMPTS to commit a non-violent form of civil disobedience? Check!
Life imprisonment for non-violent "crimes", but which are not really "criminal" but of a "civil" nature? Check!
expand the DMCA with civil asset forfeiture
Essentially give the right to big corporations to intimidate citizens through the threat of seizing private property for doing things in a way they don't like? Check!
and authorize wiretaps in investigations of Americans who are 'attempting' to infringe copyrights
So tell me, why hasn't this country revolted against the government yet? No, I don't mean voting with the wallet, I mean taking up our rights to bear arms in bloody revolution? If you think bloody revolution is a bit too violent and a bit too extreme for an issue with something like "copyrights", then you obviously haven't wondered why the opposite is already happening, like suggestion of life imprisonment and personal asset forfeiture?
Disgusted with the government, but too lazy to get off your ass and stock up on weapons and learn how to use them? Then pick up a pen and write your congress critter. Now. Put him/her to good use. You're paying for their salaries while they work at taking yours away, for Christ's sake!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
...get in touch (preferably in writing) with your local Congresscritter if you're in the US:
Contacting the Congress
Write your House Rep
Senators of the 110th Congress
How to Contact US Senators
Your children have overwhelmingly likely been "pirates" of content. Your other relatives and loved ones too. Ever tape a song off the radio? That's unauthorized copying. Ever make, or ask someone to make a copy of something for a hearing? That's unauthorized copying. You have overwhelmingly likely copied a lot of material that was not exempted from copyright protections... because virtually EVERYTHING that anyone creates is protected by copyright.
This idea of jailing people for 'attempted' copyright violation is so absurd, I have to ask: Is this just a distraction for some reason?
Ryan Fenton No no, you're really onto something here. If the law passes, the first step is to catch some bigwig with their hand in the cookie jar. Either they get what's coming to them, or (more likely) precedent is set that this law is an ass and is overturned. It's a win-win for the common folk.
At least attempted idiocy is still legal. Keeps our politicians running at peak un-efficiency!
I am a Republican and stand by a lot of what this administration does. However, Republicans are shooting themselves in the foot by getting behind stupid proposals that do little but preserve outdated business models. We've let Democrats appear to be the forward-thinking party by taking bass-ackwards positions on things like IP law. While I'll stand behind the war in Iraq, I'll march against stupidity like this. Expanding the DMCA is a joke.
Sideshow Bob: Attempted murder, now honestly, what is that? Do they give a Nobel Prize for attempted chemistry?
Bush is history. The Republican National Committee might very well think that Congress and the White House will be lost for a couple terms, a la Clinton. It's not surprising they will try to pass as much pro-business crap as possible while they still can; they have to prime the cash pump for future campaigns.
Will Americans care? Don't be an idiot. As long as they can drive their SUVs to the mall, watch some sort of putrid "reality" show on television and have the latest tiny little cellphone or ipod they, by-and-large, won't give a fuck about something as arcane as their rights. It's going to take something big to wake up the (now) majority of naively religous, knee-jerking, insular, selfish Americans. There's still some out there that worship what has been called Jefferson's America but, vastly outnumbered, they're laying low. Much like the people in other countries do when Washington is trying to decide if they should be bombed.
Of course, the wise person will acknowledge that this must be said about the Democrats as well, for they're all the same. That's why it's so important that the people be kept stupid and satisfied. So you don't realize that they're all the same. Remember that the next time that pork barrel project comes to your district or state rather than someone else's: A multi-million dollar highway interchange to nowhere tacked on to a school lunch spending bill, passed in the middle of the night. They are all the same.
Someday we will see someone on death row for copying music. People will acclimate to anything.
Big FUDder is watching you!
And not even crimes against the national interest, but against private business.
Max jail terms more than for crimes of violence?
Yeah, I'd say it's going too far.
---
"I can't complain, but sometimes still do..." Joe Walsh
To be honest, I'm glad they're busy passing laws that are unenforceable. It keeps them busy. If they weren't passing pointless laws like this, they're capable of inflicting real damage.
I've said for years that the end of the Republic is a bunch of idiots sitting in Washington passing laws that nobody bothers to care about. We're on track. Now, just as soon as enough people don't bother to care about their taxes, we'll have these little power-mad sociopaths right where we want them.
Microsoft leads to Bluescreen; Bluescreen leads to downtime; downtime leads to suffering.
All I can say is, "When's the last time they handed out a nobel prize for ATTEMPTED chemistry".
Thanks Bob.
That which is not dead may eternal lie,and in strange aeons even death may die
Same reason why Orin Hatch has been around for so long. He's got deep pockets thanks to his corporate overlords.
as some people will go down shooting to stay of prison for the rest of there life.
As a non american,
1 1/148220
:(
I _am_ very puzzled
by the "freedom" _talk_ by US
which _oppose_ to
so many freedom _restricting_ laws.
But there _is_ worse in other countries
for instance in France
where politicians _rule_ such laws
but with even fewer
publicity than in US.
Politicians _are supposed_ to
_work_ for citizens' benefit
where they _work_ for lobbies.
It _is_ safer
_to attempt to use_ a gun
than _to attempt to use_ some software
"in some conditions".
_If_ at least
it _was prooved_ such laws
really _help_ artists,
but most of money _seem_
_to end_ in politicians
and lobbies pockets.
Layout explanation :
"Scientists Offer New Way to Read Online Text"
http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/05/
I don't know how to bold text
The world belongs to those who get up early. - I'm far from being the king of Earth then
Specifically, the IPPA-2007 says "The secretary of homeland security shall issue regulations by which any performer may, upon payment of a specified fee, be entitled to notification by United States customs and Borer protection of the importation of copies or phonorecords that appear to consist of unauthorized fixations of the sounds or sounds and images of a live musical performance". While I'm as anti-RIAA as anyone here, and I certainly think that that RIAA will pay the "specified fee" on behalf of any member (or, heck, non member since they want royalties for even non-members on internet radio), the truth is that any performer who wants could pay Homeland Security directly. So, I think that it's misleading of the article to put that HLS needs to notify the RIAA specifically. The wiretap bit, on the other hand, is a big target. I'd say go after that one first and foremost. That and the "attempted" are probably the best targets.
Regards, Ian
I don't see this particular comparison as "specious at best." That such a comparison can be made is inherent in the law of nearly every country in the world.
I'm a nature photographer.
Nowhere am I saying that copyright infringement=theft. As DoohickeyJones pointed out, I'm merely showing that punishing people for attempted crimes is reasonable. I even had a car example, hoping that would be simple enough that even the idiots who put piracy in quotes could understand it.
You are reading a copy of my copyrighted post.
I don't believe a bill of this nature would actually be passed. Considering nearly most of the computer using population pirates software in some way shape or form. The prison system would be so overwhelmed with lifers that they'd have to force the non software pirating members of society to pay ludicrously high taxes just to afford the prisons. Then the quality of life for the free members of society would become so nighmarish that they'd pirate software just to get into the prisons. Then the United States would effectivley become one big prison colony, and since people in prison in the States are disenfranchised there won't be anybody left to vote in a new government. This would ultimatley lead to factions and in-fighting by the Wardens in the penal system. Eventually one enormous prison riot will break out, the Warden of the victorious prison will be appointed supreme Warden for life. However without taxes to pay his salary he/she would most likely quit along with all the other prison guards leaving the entire population of the United States to escape from prison and live out the rest of their lives as fugitives. No new government would be formed from the fear they might establish a police force and hunt down the fugitives and put them back in jail. So the entire population would just lay low for years and years. Eventually all the fugitives would flee the country to start new lives leaving the United States completely empty.
I have nothing compelling to say
just steal it from the store and get less time / no time at all.
Just to clarify. We don't want anyone to get the wrong idea.
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
Now we can put even more non violent criminals in an already overly bloated prison system for crimes that the general public doesn't even care about. It's so great when special interest groups dominate the American people into submission, dominate the media into ignoring it, and then dominate actual people into prison.
Expect this law to:
A) Not be enforced ever, or the fabric of American society will fall apart as too many prisoners ruin the economy.
B) Be enforced only on occasion, and in ways that are specifically beneficial to the power abusers who will wield this power.
C) Ensure that what was left of our civil liberties is gone, America really is a police state, and expect a massive, massive brain drain.
This guy should so obviously be in prison for crimes against the constitution. Our whole system, and every member in it is so corrupt that Jefferson is totally right: We need a revolution every 25 years, and right now we are 205 years over due.
rhY
I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
If you did, you'd know that your (properly maintained) books would show the purchases. You would have a list of assets you bought with the date and amount paid.
Then again, you might be running your company outof your garage and keeping the books on the back of In-n-Out hamburger wrappers, in which case yes, you'd be screwed.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
He says: "Attempted Murder?"
/Assuming it was subconscious.
The first thing that comes to your mind: "Alberto Gonzales"
Hmmm. I don't think you need any more help connecting the dots to your subconscious...
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
Slippery slop argument aside are you really comparing someone who downloads copy righted material for personal use (because thats what the GP was talking about) in the same league as a drunk driver or someone doing 75 in a 25 with their head lights off?
..... copy right infringement. Stop drinking the cool-aid, money can be recouped lives can't!
Are you kidding me? Drunk driving
Once upon a time, America used to be about the people. Laws were made that concerned the people and protected the people. Contrast that with now, where a majority of laws are being made to criminalize the people and protect the corporations. It breaks my heart. I doubt things will turn around until something drastic happens which may or may not be in our lifetimes. I just hope I don't spend most of my life in jail.
I just wasted your mod points! HA!
Attempted murder has that problem too- at point point can you charge someone with attempted murder? Typically owning weapons and disliking someone aren't enough to arrest someone for attempted murder (which is good, otherwise I'd be posting from a jail cell). I imagine that it could only be enforced against idiots who snagged NotARealSong.mp3 off some P2P service, which makes it useless, because they could just wait 5 minutes and prosecute him for downloading TheRealSong.mp3 when he finds out he downloaded junk. Honestly, though, I don't think they need this law. With attempted theft, it's in your best interest to stop someone before they abscond with your goods. With attempted murder, you need to stop the punk before they kill someone. But who cares if the guy downloading from your honeypot is downloading the real thing or a fake?
You are reading a copy of my copyrighted post.
Seriously or not, this kind of dumb law is why we still need to USE OUR 1st and 2nd amendments. Not to bitch about it or make fun of it on slashdot, but to really speak out. Our government does not hear us and our government certainly does not fear us.
I hate slashdot
Surely shooting a gun at someone with intent to kill is a crime..?
Guns don't kill people - people kill people. But seriously, attempted murder does not have to involve a gun. What would you charge someone with who came at you with a butcher knife, but was tackled (by the police, for example) prior to actually even touching you? If he hadn't actually done anything yet, what gave the police the authority to tackle him?Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
I would guess they have decided this is the best way to use that power. Not for the terrorists. Oh, wait.....terrorists harm the value of society. Our US society is determined by the value of the bank account. Money is god here. So I guess this goes hand in hand with the Patriot Act, Wiretaps, Tracking and No Fly lists. "You will be labeled a terrorist for THINKING bad thoughts." I would say that the US is turning into a "Police State" but I am pretty sure it is way too late for that simple assessment.
You keep going until you die..."Me".
I'm impressed by three things in your voting record: that you owned up to voting for Bush, that you voted for Bush because of a plausible assumption that had nothing to do with his rethoric, and that you didn't vote for him again.
I also agree that while your vision of the future is a little extreme, it isn't because Congress and the IP industry isn't trying to achieve it. I'm guessing that the population will wake up before that and put a stop to this insanity. Primarily, I believe that the IP barons (a nice reference to the robber barons - I'll keep using that one) will price information so that most people can afford most of it. They do intend to maximize their revenue, and they can't price everyone out of it. But I do think that this IP gold rush will ultimately lead to exactly the situation that you describe: IP is owned by corporations instead of individuals, and individuals will be forced to buy back their culture and essential information from said corporations.
Now someone go and mod this guy up.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
"Does this go too far?""
Rhetorical question? Anyway compare and contrast the laws and penalties we had when the economy was based on manufacturing. Now do the same with an economy based upon the embodiment of ideas.* Now post a summary on slashdot acting all surprised and let the hits roll in.
*Aka the "knowledge economy"
Anyone using counterfeit products who "recklessly causes or attempts to cause death" can be imprisoned for life
This kind of law (there are others like it) is just f*cking stupid. There is no logical reason for their existence. You can replace "counterfeit products" with ANYTHING and it wouldn't change a damn thing. Recklessly causing or attempting to cause death is what is/should be illegal - attaching it with a specific thing using a law like this is just a way to criminalize something by associating its existence/usage with illegal behavior.
I could use this same logic to criminalize Twinkies. Seriously. Hostess makes twinkies. Twinkies make people fat. Being fat kills people. You might be able to bring a civil suite for against Hostess for something like this, but a criminal prosecution would be preposterous. But if you created a law like the above replacing "counterfeit products" with "twinkies" all of a sudden you have grounds for a life imprisonment case. Its still rather shaky grounds and the case would probably fail miserably, but that isn't the point. Its the fact that it gives the prosecutor enough ammo to trump up the case in the first place. This kind of shit has to stop.
- sigs are stupid
Until we know precisely what we can and cannot do with digital media (insofar as actions like media tranfer and other activities which are considered "fair use" for analog media), it's hard to know precisely what "attempted" copyright infringement really means.
Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
If instead of stealing your car, I make a 1:1 copy if it, did I deprive you of anything?
Car analogy for the win. Also, the average car is 8 libraries of congress per fortnight.
Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
This has nothing to do with enhancing market competition or bettering society but is absolutely about ensuring profit for large corporations who are really the only entities that can afford the patenting process.
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be-T J
What is the opposite of pro?
Answer, con.
So then, what is the opposite of progress?
Answer, left as an exercise to the reader.
I only look human.
My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
This pattern is getting old.
1) Introduce bill with ridiculous provisions
2) Public upset over ridiculous provisions
3) Remove ridiculous provisions
4) Pass the rest of the bill, which by itself would still be ridiculous, but now everyone's happy that they "fought The Man" and won.
5) Slowly expand power and scope of existing bill until you can do really silly things with it.
Enjoy getting your computers confiscated by The Man (sorry, "Civil Asset Forfeiture") just because you have Shareaza installed. Also enjoy having Homeland Security (a government agency) notify the RIAA (a private company) when you come back home with a bootleg tape of that concert you went to. Don't forget to smile when you get sentenced to many years in prison and many tens of thousands of dollars in fines because you downloaded MP3's of an out-of-circulation album. I'm sure you all have the tens of thousands of dollars required to fight all that in court and win, right? And you can do without our assets or money or liberty while you're fighting it...
How does that line go again? "... with liberty and justice for all* "
* liberty and justice sold separately
When ya'll get sick of this crap, Canada and Mexico are both just a few hours drive away.
If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
If you actually read the bill, the only violation of this bill that could lead to life imprisonment is covered in Section 12, which specifically mentions that this sentence may be imposed on someone who "knowingly or recklessly causes or attempts to cause serious bodily injury from conduct in violation of" trafficking counterfeit goods or services.
That seems pretty damn reasonable to me.
But hey...what do I know? I just RTFB.
Because you are discriminating against hard working software authors you will be guilty of a HATE crime and sentenced to 20 years.
Evidence of THINKING about pirating software will get you at least 10 in the slammer.
Civil asset forfeiture is certainly effective, but the last thing we need to do is expand the prison industry. Look at what this has done for the "war on drugs" since Reagan signed it into law in the mid 80's - prison population has quadrupled, but drugs are just as easy to get now as they were then.
Copyright and patent violations should not be criminal penalties, period.
In conclusion, we either need a full on revolution or we need to get a 3rd party with some freaking power in Washington! This bs can not continue.
It's called the Fairness Doctrine and they're pushing it right now...
"Attempted murder! They don't give out a Nobel Prize in Attempted Chemistry!"
It may be 2007, but it's starting to feel a lot like 1984.
With something like copyright infringement, you have a lot to prove, one of which is intent. The only way to really prove intent is to show that Joe Bob made 4000 copies of whatever. Otherwise, you're just making a backup copy for yourself which you are legally entitled to do. Attempted murder is allowed because you actually went out and tried to kill someone. You actually did something that was illegal - like shooting at someone and missing. That means that you had the gun, loaded it, climbed up on the roof top, took aim, and pulled the trigger.
What they're talking about doing is something like revoking your driver's license because you might be involved in accident.
2 cents,
Queen B.
HDGary secures my bank
If there are circumstances where you don't need to show any level of mens rea and an actus reus is sufficient for criminal liability, then surely the converse should exist as well?
Now if only they could find a way to get rid of both of those requirements...
sic transit gloria mundi
Here's some history in case you want to play a Googler as well. You have to find some other way to justify your actions.
Noooo, not at all. I'm all for the death penalty. Let's finish this once and for all. Oh, wait, the death penalty won't fill the prisons. Ok life is good enough. The economy needs all the help it can get.
What?
I feel your analogy is poor.
If instead of stealing a digital copy of one of my Winter scenes of Mono Lake, you make a copy and then hand it to the Mono Lake Committee, then the Mono Lake Committee, when it publishes tens of thousands of copies of its calendar, hands you $250 instead of handing me $250.
If you grab an image and use it on a web site, the numbers are smaller, but still contribute to my budget for things like food and camera equipment. I know several photographers who have entirely pulled their work off the web because of image usage without permission.
There is no question that copyright is a social convention, one that people have "agreed" has some putative benefit to society. And I suspect you and I might be able to find some sympathy for each others opinion in how ridiculously exaggerated copyright law has become. But I don't think copyright law, in and of itself, is bad, and given what I do for a living, it's pretty unlikely you're going to convince me that I'm wrong.
I'm a nature photographer.
These guys are obviously soft on people who might think about possibly considering piracy someday? COWARDS!!!
Give us the death penalty or give us.. well.. death!!!
idiots..
Win-Win for the government on this one. They get to please the big-money special interest groups, and amass more power at the same time.
This is just another example of laws that can be used for selective prosecution of political dissidents. Make everyone a criminal, and then just take down people you don't like for whatever reason.
To specifically address this analogy, let me offer another one.
May I camp for the next three years on your front lawn? I'll move out of the way when you're mowing the lawn, or playing outdoors, it won't deprive you of a thing.
I'm a nature photographer.
They need all the help they can get
Seriously, when are some of you smarter people going to just up and move to Canada?
Yes, yes I'm aware the application length and such isn't quite that easy. But let's face it, per capita we're generating more jobs, our dollar is doing great against yours, and some of your favourite companies (and potentially companies you work for) also have offices in Canada whether they be in a large city like Toronto, Calgary or Vancouver or in a smaller city like Waterloo.
Either that, or someone really needs to mount an organized, grassroots offensive against such bullshit.
Oh, not only was my vision a bit extreme, there are already major cracks in the system. How much internet traffic, exactly, is going into actively and passively violating copyright? 100%. 100%, you ask? Yes. The entire nature of the internet is to create an widely accesable library of information. The internet's existence is anathema to the commoditization and monetization of information as property. It is the free exchange of information. And despite how many new laws there are, or if content producers strike like good little Objectivists, we will produce the needed information, and we will share it freely (see legal and illegal filesharing). There is no "creator class" and there is no "owner class" for information.
So, you are entirely right, this will never happen. The best thing that could happen from this law would be to make most of us criminals, as it wouldn't stop anything. And in the highly unlikely event that the law does pass this time, the law's supporters would certainly have mass criminalization and intrusion in mind, not copyright protection.
Yeah, that's right, all criminals and should be taken care of.
Like that gotdam Saddam Hoosane, who tried to nuke us all but our great leader stopped him in his tracks. Too bad he hid the evidence and made the Decider look bad too all them stupid liberals out there who believe weapons inspectors with an agenda over our faithful and caring president.
In fact, let's go git all them dam hippies, freaks, and druggies that would stoop so low as to even THINK about stealing from the great lifegivers of our nation, the God Given Corporate Leadership. Bless their souls. They are 110% Jesus Approved(TM) so doing anything against them (even resistance to them stripping our rights) would be going against the will of God Himself.
BTW, in light of the bucketload of sarcasm I liberally drenched this post with, I'd like to point out that I in no way mean to offend real peace, love, hope and tolerance Christians, as I am one. I DO mean to offend those dollar-worshiping murder-happy Mammon worshipers who call themselves christian. Not that the parent-poster indicated religious tendencies, but that whole post sounded like it could come out of a "bible belt" sermon.
Why don't we make "attempted torture" a crime first? And then when Gonzalez is in prison for it, then we can start listening to his bill about copying a few files and losing a billionaire another $4 latte.
Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
It's bad enough that they infringe on our civil rights to "Protect against terrorism" but since when is downloading music a national security threat? And what the fuck is with the department of homeland security wasting time, energy and money to alert the RIAA, a for profit, corporate entity that someone may be infringing their copyright? How much fucking money *did* the RIAA donate to the Republican party, and could they be any more obvious about the corruption and bribery going on? The fact that this bill even exists is a travesty against the country as a whole. Anyone who took part in writing or supporting it should be thrown in jail for treason. If ever there was a reason for hard line campaign finance reform this is it.
Give all candidates a million dollars and have that be all they are allowed to use. There is no logical reason for there to be a primary going on a year and a half before the election. They could easily start a month before and probably be much more productive and informative than they are now, and spend less energy, time and money bashing eachother and more time coming up with a solid platform. It really is a shame more of us can't afford to buy fucking senators.
I am so disgusted with my government right now it makes me sick. GAHHHH
Sideshow Bob: Attempted piracy, now honestly, what is that? Do they give a Nobel Prize for attempted chemistry?
Are they saying a hospital using pirated software is deliberately trying to kill people?
Both of your analogies are god damn awful and show that you seriously don't understand what's going on.
First of all, the original content maker is typically unaware of every single user pirating their content. So the lawn analogy would only work if:
A- The pirate was invisible
B- You were not told of his presence
As for the photo analogy, not everyone makes money from copyright infringement. In fact, most people don't. What if he printed out a giant copy of your Winter scene, framed it, and hung it in his living room. It's not as high quality as it might've been if, say, he ordered a print from you based on the master; in the same way a DVDRip, for example, isn't as high quality as a DVD. He did not profit off of you, and for the most part, you're likely unaware of the transgression even occurring. Is this a crime worthy of such harsh punishment, when even rape and murder often aren't given life sentences?
I've seen some bad ideas that actually got through legislature and implemented, so I wouldn't hold your breath. Write to your legislators, and make your opinion known. Contact your congressman and make it known he will lose your vote if he supports this legislation.
... not that it will help in the slightest.
There is a war going on for your mind.
"Let him who is without sin cast the first stone."
"We are Microsoft. You shall be assimilated. Competition is futile."
While the proposed act may make the attempts to infringe illegal, there are more pressing loopholes in existing copyright law.
Currently, consumers can view or hear content and later recall it without paying royalties. While humming a tune to yourself or quoting bits of recalled dialog is clearly a 'performance,' and therefore infringement, if they are particularly attentive during the 'performance,' they may even be able to visualize or 'hear' it in their memory. Does this not consist of infringement? This Brain-Hole is of far greater concern than other sorts of grey area infringement. We must close the Brain-Hole and ensure that there is still an incentive to create.
Who will be first to introduce such a bill? Write your congressmen and demand action!
The two paragraphs that catched my eyes were:
Permit more wiretaps for piracy investigations.
and:
Allow computers to be seized more readily.
This is a fascinating, although a bit not-so-obviously coincidence with what's happening here in germany. One of our politicians, wolfgang schaeuble, currently tries to pass a new law which allows the police and secret services to secretely spy on your computers. All in the name of counter-terrorism. What he tells the german people is that there is a great deal of danger coming from islamistic fundamentals, left-wing fundamentals, right-wing fundamentals. If passed, this law enables the police to spy on literally everyones computer.
This ippa2007 tries to implement instruments which could be used to seize your computers and to wiretap you. All in the name of piracy prevention. If passed it will give the police the means to seize the computers of a majority of U.S. citizens. It can be used to criminalize each and everyone. If passed, this law enables the police to seize literally everyones computer.
Yt,
Gunnar
As one of Slashdot's few conservatives, I've viewed the recent push (by the media / Democrats) to fire Gonzales as simply partisan politics. Given Gonzales support of this bill - he SHOULD be fired.
[Insert pithy quote here]
Do you seriously think the Republicans have their lips more firmly planted on Hollywood's anus than the Democrats? Both parties are throughly sold out to the copyright lobby. The DMCA of 1998 was passed by a unanimous vote in the Senate and signed by a Democratic President. The TV, movie, and music industries give 68% of their campaign contributions to Democrats.
If anything, divided government makes it less likely that something like this will pass. If a Democrat wins the Presidency next year, I sure hope he has a Republican Congress.
-ccm
Too much Law; not enough Order.
>>when even rape and murder often aren't given life sentences?
Nail, meet head.
There is a perfect example of what's fucked up in the US.
Rape? Murder? You'll be out in a few years. Armed Robbery? Still be out in a few years.
Punch somebody in the nose while distributing Warez0rs? You're going to Rape Me in The Ass Prison for Life!
It's not like these laws are for you. I doubt you could even see any benefit from them. It's all going to benefit the big cartels. Unfortunately, no one gives a rat's ass about the little guy.
I agree that it sucks when someone uses your work without permission. You have to make a living, after all. But legalizing civil asset forfeiture for "attempted piracy" is not the answer.
I am asking Congress to make 'attempted' misrepresenting of voters interest by an elected politician a federal crime.
The so-called Citizens Property Protection Act of 2007 would create a new crime of life imprisonment for putting special interest above the electorate in some circumstances. Similar treatment would apply for cabinet politicians caught lying on record.
I was saying that "attempted murder" is a valid crime to have on the books because you can't guarantee that the attempt will necessarily break any other laws, and at the same time you don't want to wait until the murder is actually successful. That said, as others have pointed out, there are a lot of ways to distinguish "attempted murder" from "attempted turkey carving", whereas it is quite difficult if not impossible in most situations to distinguish "attempted copyright infringement" from "attempted fair use".
Despite my first sentence, my point had nothing to do with gun control, either pro or con.
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
is taken into account already. It can be the difference between manslaughter and murder or degrees of murder. Killing a guy to take his money is treated differently than killing a guy because he was banging your wife. Both are crimes but the former will garner a harsher sentence.
I'd also argue that someone who committed a crime because the victim was a member of a certain group is more likely to reoffend than someone who committed a crime over a personal dispute with the victim. If you have a grudge against someone, there's only person. if you have a grudge against an entire race, there's a lot more opportunities for you to lose control again.
I've got a better analogy.
This is slashdot, it's not like the readers aren't familiar with the issue at hand.
Software copyright infringement is like........software copyright infringement.
I think that should encompass all the idiosyncratic details related to the issue at hand without blurring the issue. An imperfect analogy here only serves to derail the topic by bringing to light all the flaws in the analogy rather than the original point of discussion. An analogy is only useful when the issue isn't clear. This is slashdot and it's crystal clear. Points should stand upon their own merit rather than a reference to an imperfect analogy.
"The Federal Intellectual Property Administration" or "Department of Homeland Intellectual Freedom", an extension of the Patent Office maybe?
I guess "Thought Police" would be too blatant.
Should we be worried about acts of intellectual terrorism next?
Wait, so under the strictest, most strenuous interpretation of this proposed law, if I google "adobe cs3 download" I'm risking a prison sentence?
How far do they want to take this bullshit?
The thing about the use of illegal software in a scenario where someone gets injured, is tenuous at best.
What about this scenario: An auto mechanic needs to update his fully licensed copy of the diagnostic software he's been using in his auto shop.
His system is out of date and he can't afford the upgrade for another 2 months, so he borrows and installs a copy of the update from a colleague, with the intent being he'll buy the legal upgrade as soon as he can afford to, in two months.
Now, someone brings a car in for maintenance, and the software correctly diagnoses a problem, and the mechanic fixes it.
But, the mechanic makes a mistake, a human error, and he doesn't fix the problem properly, which the next day causes the car to break down on the freeway, causing it to get into a crash and the driver is injured.
Under normal circumstances, the mechanic would be negligent and could be sued by the client.
With this proposed new law, he's now criminally negligent and can face life imprisonment, just because he used warez. His colleague would face the same charges, because he "distributed" the software.
I think this is just a bit absurd.
-- This sig for rent.
Hah! Attempted murder? Now honestly, what is that? Do they give a Nobel prize for attempted chemistry? Do they? --Sideshow Bob
Lifetime Imprisonment? What happened to letting the punishment fit the crime?
Using the Freedom of Speech while I still have it.
My god, this sounds like the "Corporate Ownership of Americans" act. I'm overreacting a little, but really, life in prison for copyright infringement? I thought that was reserved for real crimes.
Fanatically anti-fanatical
Ya, that's smart.
Why don't we actually do something about the real crime that is rampant in society now, instead of just making more people criminals for piddly CIVIL acts?
Where is the 2nd revolution? Its long overdue.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
You're kidding, right?
I mean the current state of affairs doesn't even seem remotely sane as is... to me...
In no time it'll be safer to shoot someone and steal a CD than to copy it, I tell you.
and burn the whole mother fucking thing to the ground. Then start anew.
This is act loses complete perspective with respect to the crimes of which it proposes to prosecute. Much like the Patriot Act, it would give unnecessary expansion of powers to law enforcement agencies, including wiretapping Americans through a specially created FBI unit.
It even proposes to imprison pirates for life if someone "recklessly causes or attempts to cause death"! I'm not even sure how someone could possibly cause death from pirating movies, music, or software. If a person is guilty of assault, battery, murder, or some other violent crime, then they should be prosecuted for those crimes as they are typically.
Another thing it does is criminalize attempts at piracy (and the proposed punishments are 1 to 10 years of jailtime). I'm highly uncomfortable with this proposition. Unlike attempted robbery, or even attempted murder, it's highly unlikely that anyone could be hurt by attempted piracy. It seems even more absurd considering that most pirates aren't violent, and yet this bill proposes to group these individuals with other violent people, since most people in jail are in jail for violent crimes. We may well be turning someone with little to no penchant for violence into someone with a high penchant for violence.
I'm not saying that we shouldn't be trying to up IP law enforcement, but the Intellectual Property Protection Act 2007 goes way too far. There are better ways of increasing IP enforcement without going into the absurd.
// file: mice.h
#include "frickin_lasers.h"
...Creative Suite 3!
"Attention Citizen! Place your hands in the yellow circles and wait for police retrieval."
I drank what? -- Socrates
What if someone thought about molesting your baby?
Ask Todd Goldman and Dave Kelley (aka Shmorky).
Whatever, Alanis
I've learned that they're worthless, so I don't read AC comments anymore.
Jesus! Does the Pope shit in the woods? Is a bear Catholic?
Mod parent +1 insightful.
People just love to make analogies, even when they are not needed.
Corporate feudalism does get a little bit scary, especially with computers and databases to track things.
On the other hand, there are work arounds. For example, if you want to sing 'Happy Birthday', use a different tune and different lyrics. Try "We wish you a Happy Birthday" with variations sung to the tune of "We wish you a Merry Christmas". (As far as I know, that isn't copyrighted yet. And the fact of writing it here gives ME the copyright, unless Slashdot claims it. If I own it, then I hereby give people the right to use it without payment.)
The problem of signing away rights to inventions, patents and copyrights is a serious one, especially if you work for a multinational that has fingers in all industries. Anything you do COULD be considered to be part of one of their core businesses, even if you work for a division that builds industrial equipment and you try to copyright a high fantasy story. (The publishing division could claim your writing IF the corporation was being VERY possessive and had a very restrictive 'IP rights' policy.)
If things get that bad, I can see a business model where 'independents' work with corporate 'serfs' under the table and claim credit for the items produced. They don't pay the 'serfs' directly, but they do pay all the taxes and such on the money earned. When the 'serfs' earn enough to leave their corporate lord, they get a low interest 'loan' from the 'independent' and start their own business. Or they become employees of the 'independent', who has a less restrictive 'IP rights' policy.
I don't think that things are that bad yet. But if they reach the point where a person can't have any part time business on the side without violating the 'IP rights' policy of their employer, then something will need to be done.
Thats one thing I never understood about the U.S. The predictions of how the Iraqi people would behave (dancing in the streets) was entirely ridiculous to everyone in the arab and muslim world. EVERYONE in our family knew that it would be chaos if the military stayed in iraq for longer then a month. That pretty much made the war unfeasible.
American's just never understood arab thought and probably never will. Is it gonna be worse then before if you pull out? Sure, but it's not going to be any better if you stay either so there is no point.
Hmmm... Pie...
What really upsets me about this legislation and the DMCA are two things: Congress is acting in the interests of the MPAA and RIAA, two private industry groups. This has nothing to do with protecting the interests of the public and shouldn't be the concern of Congress. But the primary thing that makes me mad is Congress's eagerness to criminalize actions that have no provable victim. They're taking about throwing people into prison for copying publicly available information. There's no provable victim. It's impossible to quantify how software "piracy" hurts anyone, and yet they want to throw people into prison for it. These are not people who have stolen money or real property. They've copied information. Copying is not stealing. Nobody can say with any certainty whether or not someone who uses "pirated" software would have purchased that software if the pirated copy hadn't been available. They're guessing. It's a hunch, and yet they are foaming at the mouth to throw people into prison for it. It's crazy. It's impossible to know how much, or even if, software or music and movie piracy has hurt those that produce it. All of the numbers put forward by the industry to support this legislation are based on the false assumption that every pirated copy represents the loss of a sale. It simply isn't true and they know it. Yet, our representatives whom we have elected to act in our best interests, have swallowed the industry bullshit whole. It's a dark day for America.
Why doesn't Attorney General Alberto Gonzales ask Congress to make firing U.S. attorneys to undermine political opposition illegal? Or wiretapping Americans without warrants illegal? Or lying to Congress about WMDs, outing CIA agents, taking bribes from Jack A., etc. illegal? Oh wait, they ARE illegal.
Why don't we just luck Alberto Gonzales up and throw away the key?
What if you like chinese soup but you accidentally leave the 'm' off of your favorite site, misohunt.com?
What is worse(better?) piracy or ninjacy?
"People are stupid; given proper motivation, almost anyone will believe almost anything."
You should consider voting for Ron Paul in the Republican primaries. He voted against both the Iraq War and the USA PATRIOT act while in Congress, and is running on a very libertarian platform. In fact, he ran for president in '88 as a Libertarian.
Though he hasn't gotten any love from the press yet, it's noteworthy that the traffic to his various web sites rivals that of the front running Republican candidates.
Step into a huge movement. Don't Tread In Me.
-1, Shameless Plug
The original question of the 1:1 digital COPY is a very smart one, since according to its definition theft has to deprive someone of its private property. So I reply to this one you pose as it is fairly easy. The question you pose is wrong: No you can't. You cant in the first place because there is a specific right for the owner to enjoy the view of his front lawn and secondly you might also damage the grass and thus deprive the value of the lawn. In other words you'd have to be invisible and etheral to do that... or be a playmate, possibly naked, that would grant my permission. I could go on talking about Jesus Christ and his very criminal succesful attempts to copy wine bread and fishes but I guess that's already been discussed here.
No harm, no foul.
Set your phasers on "funky"!
Seriously, how much longer could our society tolerate those criminals?
<^>_<(ô ô)>_<^>
Gonzales? With a mexican name like that, of course he stands for American justice!
This guy is an example of why russia is starting to win against america too. China is getting free ameraca is getting worse than the ah not gitting is now worse than soviet union.
Updates.
With pirated software you are not likely to get any updates that may be necessary to handle OS changes that might cause it to crash. So you have the option of keeping the OS static, with all the problems that can cause, or doing various OS upgrades and hoping that you don't crash your software. If your software crashes, you may lose track of information that is essential to the health of the patients.
Then there are the regulatory updates that may make your software obsolete. State and federal laws change, along with reporting requirements. While this may not be as life and death as a crash, it can bring the government down upon you. The recklessness would be more financial than physical.
I don't think the theaters were ever crowded for Gigli....
If you want to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe. -- Carl Sagan
That this is different. In Minority Report they were dealing with pre crime, meaning that you hadn't committed a crime, or even tried to, and yet were being arrested. This is dealing with attempting to do something, which often is a crime. For example attempted murder is a crime. If I come at you with a knife and try to kill you, but you manage to trip me and hide in a locked room till the cops show up, I'm guilty of attempted murder. Doesn't matter that I failed to kill you, it's still a crime to try. Good thing too, you wouldn't really want the courts saying "Well, he didn't actually kill you, so no harm no foul, he's free to go," as I'd probably try it again.
Now that's not to say that attempted copyright infringement should be a crime, but you've got the movie confused a bit.
By the way, you and several respondents assumed that I supported this change to the copyright law--I don't, but I understand how that might be a sensible guess given the context. My feelings on copyright law are a lot more nuanced, but I don't support the proposed change, and I find even current law to be just a little too strong.
I'm a nature photographer.
This situation just justifies my lack of faith lately in politicians and politicians of both parties in general. Yes we can switch to open source but if M$ gets their way with the 235 supposed patent violations then there won't be any reason to pursue that either. Some people cannot afford the ridiculous prices for some of the commercial software. Although, I understand that M$ has to make a profit this situation is ridiculous. If this passes I will switch to Linux and OSS software exclusively. I do buy software sometimes. Bill, I hope you are reading this right now. Also, if M$ gets their way with legal pursuit of these patent violations and linux becomes unviable then I will just dump all of my computer equipment and screw the internet and computers in general. Its a waste of time if I am risking "life in prison" or not being able to use OSS software because its not available anymore. At that point screw computers, screw technology and screw the companies that sell it. Its not worth the trouble anymore at that point.
I chose the camping analogy for another reason. The idea of "real property" (real as in real estate) is notoriously fussy and complex when you look beneath the surface. The idea that you don't own the land that you own is a pretty good model (just try and keep it without paying your property "tax"). That idea, of owning land, is also a social construct, one absent from (say) certain Native American cultures--the idea that there is some "pure" meaning of "property" for tangible objects but not intangible ones is a little too simplistic.
You and several respondents assumed that I supported this change to the copyright law--I don't, I think it's stupid and I think asset forfeiture is the devil, but I understand how your mistake might be a sensible guess given the context. My feelings on copyright law are neither "all copyright law is bad" nor "all copyright law is good".
I'm a nature photographer.
He's so far into the MAFIAA's pocket, I don't think any number of calls will dig him out.
Better to get Texans to vote his ass out of office. The sooner the better.
"Representatives" like him are one of many things that drove me out of the Republican party.
If you really want to do something, find his home phone number, or better, his private cell, and have people bug him there.
I was pretty worried about that life imprisonment clause... then I realized that even if Alberto Gonzales gets it in his head to try me, he'll just forget about it 30 seconds later.
Anonymous Luddite: "What do you think of the dehumanizing effects of the Internet?"
Andy Grove: "Not Much."
What strikes me as strange is that although he has low name recognition, he seems to poll very well when referenced by his positions and voting record.
But that's the first rule of politics, "It's all who you know." If he had bigger friends and bigger financers, the public would know much more about him. Of course, then he'd feel obligated to listen to them more, and we'd be back at square one. And to bring it back to the original point, that's why we should never have let media companies peddle access to communication. We're starting to break away from the old model, and for the better. We can't afford to let them treat the free sharing of information as worse than murder.
Physical property rights are different.
Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
But, how many have called their Congresscritter to let them know how they feel about this?
If you don't know yours, you can go here to find out...it's less likely to be a frustrating experience than using this web site.
Unfortunately I feel it's unlikely to make much difference in the long run, against the moneyed lobbyists fronting for the copynazis, but it's always good to go on record as a voice of sanity.
Copyright infringement should *not* be criminalized to an extent that allows asset forfeiture to be part of the legal remedies.
Some days it's just not worth
chewing through my restraints.
That's a nice axiom, but it doesn't hold with my counters. The right to a "view" is not a physical property right.
I'm a nature photographer.
Hang on a damned second: wiretapping suspected terrorists hell-bent on blowing up civilians at home and abroad is the single most hateful act ever engaged in by the Bush Administration and is a complete infringement of our civil rights--but wiretapping individuals who are suspected of making an extra copy of the latest Rush album and gave it to a few of his friends is a worthy cause?
Am I the only who thinks Congress is out of it's friggin' gourd?
competing with free can be a problem. however, this is no reason to punish those who like to share for a non-commercial fair use aspect. sharing is good, naturual and healthy no matter what a piece of paper says. this will criminalize ripping and sharing and is bad for america. at the heart of it is a struggle to hold onto power through copyright law. those in office might lose their seat if they decide to use copyright law to interfere with basic human instincts like sharing.
If you think that only IP publishers push for such legislation, think again.
Criminology studies pointed out, that since the USA privatized the prison system, the number of jailed prisoners have gone up sharply.
There is lots of money made by operating prisons, to the level, that some cities fight for getting prisons built in their jurisdiction, since it's a great source of municipial income. This is the complete opposite what happens in other parts of the world, where citizens resist to build jails in their neighbourhood.
It's a perfect circle: politicians are getting popular to be "tough on crime", investors and municipalities are profiting directly: the more people in the jails the better, and IP owners can't be happier to fuel the cause.
The suckers are the increasing number of people who are criminalized increasingly easier and of course the public, which pays for all of this elaborate corporate welfare. The federal government has to transfer less money if "smart" municipalities can generate revenues locally, private jail operators and IP owners happily pocket the profit from taxes.
Perfect little heaven for all the smart ones. The suckers? Well... they are just that: suckers.
translated from the german wikipedia article on dictatorship, section "characteristics of dictatorships":
abrogation of commensurability: penal laws where the punishment is much tougher, than it would be commensurable to the harm done (often combined with selective amnesties and mass-imprisonments)
The MAFIAA is a bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes
Right back at 'cha, Buddy! ;-)
Right - Gonzales gets it a bit of added press (though I agree that "Gonzales" attached to it probably hurts it right now). The question is how many dems have been tempted with RIAA money... Or is it just Lamar making sure his buddies keep throwing money towards him.
...including the NEWS media...
This will push everybody to open source, common public and free software. That way, no (or less) copyright laws would be broken.
Is there a way to say this bill is a bad idea? Copying and analyzing data is at the core of computer science. Also, how many bad ideas can he come up with?
Fuck this. Fuck Washington. Fuck it all. It's time to expand our 2nd amendment protections by exacting "politican life forfeiture" via high velocity, fully jacketted rounds. Every politican who supports this crap needs to be taken out. We're dumping billions of dollars a year into the Middle East fiasco despite all sorts of domestic issues and the AG is talking about life in prison for copyright infringement? Life in prison, for copyright infringement?!?!?!! How about life in prison for being a lying douche bag who destroys people's careers for political gain? Posted anonymously because I'm seriously aggrivated enough to be considered seditious.
The real question is whether the RIAA has bought off enough democrats to get this on the docket for a vote.
The DMCA was passed under the Clinton administration with 'bi-partisan' support.
Copyrights were defined in the US Constitution as an exception to the first amendment. You can say and write what you want. But you can't write a book about Harry Potter. You can't film a movie about 'Spiderman'. You can't sing the lyrics to a song by Madonna (not that you'd want to). At least without paying for the privilege. Copyright was intended to TEMPORARILY restrict some 1st amendment rights in order to encourage the arts and provide income for authors and artists.
It was not intended to maintain a lucrative business model for large corporations ad infinitum. It took a bunch of corrupt politicians from both parties to achieve that.
[Insert pithy quote here]
I have a better idea. How about a law requiring Homeland Security to alert FEMA when there's a FRIGGIN' HURRICANE!
So murder in the third degree... isn't murder... because... at Slashdot every moron votes his special intrest fan-boy friends up, and insightful people down.
I've long awaited the day when brutally murdering the entire board of the RIAA, and all their families, had a less stringent fine than copyright infringement.
...against an individual becomes more egregious when it advertises violence against a whole group of people based on arbitrary traits like skin color, ethnicity, sexual orientation, religious background, etc.
Showing such an act in a music video is not a hate crime as you imply. Although if it is done in the wrong way, it could be construed as incitement to violence in which case the advertiser/speaker could reasonably be convicted. But note this does not rest upon hate crimes legislation, has long been a cornerstone of good public policy, and yet comes far closer to being anywhere near a "thought crime" than does hate crime legislation which is concerned with violent acts themselves turning into incitement.
OTOH, if a black person assaults a white person, then whether or not they advertised that violence against a group would determine the severity of their sentencing; hate crime laws would be the vehicle for increasing the severity. It may be that there are more instances of white people assaulting blacks while using racist language; I don't know but I would guess that's the case.
Now when it comes to the question "Do people who advertise their crimes as directed against racial, etc. groups deserve more severe sentencing?", I say emphatically yes. You can't have a civilized society without punishment of incitement to violence.
You're confusing two different things here. On my property, I can tell you what to do, and if you don't do it, I can remove you.
You seem to think that trespassing is the same as using a photocopying machine.
Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
"Does this go too far?"
No, they haven't yet managed to make it mandatory to spend your disposable income on entertainment industry products.
Why, only yesterday I saw someone walk into a music store, browse a little then leaving WITHOUT BUYING A CD! That's a loss to the industry that they should be PUNISHED for causing. People are passing by cinemas IN DROVES without filling the seats as they are supposed to. Remember, every empty isle in a theater means one less cocaine dose for our pampered stars!
I rtfa, and the pdf, and then I had to go have a drink.
Does anyone know how much money it costs to buy a Senator?
My Gods............
Today's show is brought to you by the number 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0: 25
"Attempted piracy! I mean really, do they give an Academy Award for attempted acting?"
On a more serious note, though, did anyone else see the title and straight-away think "thought crime"?
Listen, if we want to beat this thing, write your representatives in Congress and make sure they understand the Will of the People. Also, I skimmed over the proposed legislation. Apparently it affects *all* forms of copyright infringement, including counterfeit prescription drugs, etc, not just MAFIAA stuff. But the wiretapping is kinda spooky, as if I don't have enough to worry about already with the Bill of Rights shot to pieces. Good thing I still have my gun... and I plan to keep it.
e rty.protection.act.2007.051407.pdf
http://www.senate.gov/
http://www.house.gov/
Let's get this thing. Here's a PDF of the proposition: http://politechbot.com/docs/doj.intellectual.prop
- CautionaryX
'Attempted Piracy' reads to me in a similar vein of 'Mostly Harmless'. I wonder if they consider talking or dressing up as a Pirate as 'Attempted Piracy'. There will be mass arrests this September 19.
Cheers, Chris
So rather than Democrats vs. Republicans, we should call it movie producers & labor unions vs. bankers & defense contractors?
Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?
"I'm just surprised Gonzales choose copyright to try to change the subject"
t e-house/- house-block-cunningham.html
Im sure they are getting big money from the struggling recording/software companies to pass this kind of legislation...
Maybe just like they sandbagged the Duke Cunningham scandal in order to protect the White Houses "friends" in the Defense Industry.
San Diego U.S. Attorney Carole Lam was fired while investigating the case, when all those attorneys were let go a few months ago. A California Republican responded in the news by saying something along the lines of "she should have been focused more on border control issues and less on white collar crime".
We are pwned by the $$$ and the IMC...
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/19/carol-lam-whi
http://lippard.blogspot.com/2007/01/cia-and-white
The charge will be that this ring sold counterfeit drugs or airplane parts.
When it is your burnt and broken body being wheeled into the OR it won't seem like such a dumb law after all.
Metal oxides: They It can't be bargained with, they can't be reasoned with. They don't feel pity or remorse or fear and they absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.
No sig today...
So if I plant a half-burned CD in your trash and call the cops you can be put away for 1-10 years?
How many cars would I have to steal, how many people would I have to beat up to get the same punishment?
No sig today...
Perhaps he realizes that he can get his name off of TV if he simply gives the media something they are pushing for.
I'm afraid that what this means effectively, is that they are tired of being blocked by the use of applications like peerguardian, which more or less blocks them from seeing that the actual piracy is taking place. They want to be able to use the fact that the tracker has you listed as a peer at one time, as "evidence" of attempted piracy, and thus convict you based on this alone. What is more worrisome, is that given the current situation where the USofA are abusing the extradition rights to extradite people for breaking american laws when never having been to the US, this will only lead to more abuses towards the entire world. Maybe it's time to block ALL american ip's at the border routers of the civilized world? //Svein
Hi, I'm a signature virus. Copy my to your ~/.signature to help me spread.
There's an old quote from Thomas Jefferson that I think sums it up well:
This is more true now than it ever was. Once an application, piece of art, or anything electronic is generated, it can be duplicated an infinite number of times at no cost whatsoever. None. That's the key problem that exists. It costs nothing to duplicate, the only actual harm is that whoever created the work originally is not compensated for its use. That is actually a notion Jefferson addressed in the end of that statement, which I had left off, where he says that the "exclusive right" to an invention or idea exists SOLELY to encourage the inventor to continue creating ideas, such that they may make a living off of it if they are good at it.
This is the fallacy of comparing theft and copyright violation. It is NOT theft, but by simply not being theft, that does NOT make it legal. It simply makes it a different situation, one which MUST be considered separately from theft if a fair copyright law is to be established. As it stands now, copyright law is perhaps one of the largest blemishes in the US legal record. It is unfair to the creator of content, it is unfair to the user of content, and only benefits the intermediary corporations that distribute it. These intermediaries are dinosaurs, are ceased to be necessary at the dawn of the internet, and more importantly, broadband. This is a fact that they are acutely aware of, and this, the DMCA, and the RIAA's actions are all the death rattle of a colossal machine that we have created for a purpose that is no longer necessary. They refuse to move on, they refuse to adapt, and in spite of the dark times in intellectual property history that we are experiencing currently, they cannot grasp at straws forever.
Maybe they want intelligent people getting convicted and sentenced to 5-10 years imprisonment so they can bargain for a reduced sentence by serving in the armed forces.
Do it yourself, because no one else will do it yourself. [beta blockade 10-17 Feb]
sounds a little too close to future crime to me, I think Gonzalez might be violating the copyright on minority report., on a more serious note i think this bill sucks shit and i certainly hope it does not get passed.
I can't think of a better way to drive paying customers into the loving arms of FOSS and Creative Commons.
Even though a number of courts ruled in Inslaw's favor that the Justice Department had stolen the software, to this day Inslaw hasn't been paid anything as compensation for the theft.
That the Justice Department is threatening software pirates with life-terms in prison, when the department itself has been engaged in the greatest single incident of illegally using software, is the epitome of chutzpah.
Here's my blog post about it from earlier today.
Even though a number of courts ruled in Inslaw's favor that the Justice Department had stolen the software, to this day Inslaw hasn't been paid anything as compensation for the theft.
That the Justice Department is threatening software pirates with life-terms in prison, when the department itself has been engaged in the greatest single incident of illegally using software, is the epitome of chutzpah.
Here's my blog post about it from earlier today [blogspot.com].
hey guys check this out:
e rty.protection.act.summary.051407.txt
wtf is this?
excerpt of http://politechbot.com/docs/doj.intellectual.prop
Increase the maximum penalty for counterfeiting offenses from 10 years to 20 years imprisonment where the defendant knowingly or recklessly causes or attempts to cause serious bodily injury, and increase the maximum penalty to life imprisonment where the defendant knowingly or recklessly causes or attempts to cause death;
what the hell is this? are they trying to charge us on attempted bodily injury to a corporation
can anybody explain how this would appy in context?
I do not support the mainstream movie industry for any reason, and I will not "subsidize" their industry because, like a small child, they've had their tantrums.
They Do Not Deserve It.
CS majors know the time/space tradeoff, but they never get taught the 3rd, crucial, tradeoff of the set: comprehension!
I'm calling that if the US falls, its going to be related to these laws. Not anything to do with Iraq or the Economy, oil, etc.
Has the government asked themselves the question "who owns the Internet?". And the answer being... Senator Ted Stevens.
^sarcasm^
Only if the people of the US had a lobbying group for internet freedom as big as the NRA.
You've missed my point. The post I responded to seemed to claim "It doesn't hurt you directly, why should it be illegal." The same can be said (modulo the damage to the lawn) of my campers. And yet you have demonstrated no qualms in suggesting that the camping wouldn't be ok, and thus (as near as I can tell) granted my conclusion.
I'm a nature photographer.
I simply got a little creeped out ... we'll all finally be able to sleep with our sisters and daughters!
You've got to remember the historic background to this, ie. the fact that inbreeding has disastrous consequences, genetically speaking. Because of this, it's no wonder that Mankind developed a strong and near-universal social taboo against it, and it's breaking this taboo that gets you creeped out. You've been socially conditioned to find it creepy.
In the absence of genetic dangers though, such as in the world of Heinlein's books, it's a perfectly valid idea to explore. Many science fiction authors use this basic approach for developing new world cultures and storylines: take some aspect of our world that we think is immutable, reverse it, and see what happens.
What's interesting about this in Heinlein's case is that his novels are definitely not erotic, not even mildly so --- the sexual relationships are so "pure and loving" that it's more cute and innocent than titillating. He's certainly not selling sex, but more of an anti-status quo approach to society in general.
Whether he succeeded in whatever he was trying to do I don't know, but his works are pretty readable even after all these decades, and the bits that creeped you out actually fit perfectly into the worlds that he created.
Due to mass disobedience of copyright law, the only way to enforce copyright law is totalitarianism. So they're making the government totalitarian.
"Screw Sun, cross-platform will never work. Let's move on and steal the Java language." - Visual J++ Product Manager
Or something like that... So everyone who has caching enabled on their browser and stumbles upon a site with copyrighted content is now a criminal? You downloaded it, didn't you? The absurdity of this can only make one wonder WTF has happened to common sense.
From TFA, they give the example of a hospital using pirate software that results in harm to its patients... maybe fair enough, if by not paying for that software it somehow makes it fail...
I mean, isnt "pirating" the software meant to give you a working copy???
e.g.
Purchased Windows crashes, shame on MS,
Pirate Windows crashes, shame on you? WTF!
It's pretty amazing to see the differences between the cop's narration, and what is on the video.
The best part about it is that it would still be protected by copyright, and they would still be violating copyright by downloading it.
You are reading a copy of my copyrighted post.
The parent's comment should be mandatory reading for every poster who writes in a copyright discussion.
For God's sake, please stop using physical property analogies.
Just... stop. It's not helping.
Absolutely this goes too far. Life imprisonment for using pirated software? Does anyone think this doesn't go too far? There's a lot of people using pirated software who probably don't even know it. You'd have to be crazy to support something like that.
Sorry, but like all photographers who make this argument, you lose. If you put something on the web you've lost it, "information wants to be free" is not a rallying cry for digital piracy, it's a simple statement that it's really easy to copy data. Doesn't matter about the law, doesn't matter about rights, if you want exclusive control over your data, do not put it on the web. The web is there to grease the motion of data. Of course if copyright was still there to ensure that works of art were properly attributed, as opposed to fill the coffers of large companies, putting things on the web would be safer. But it's not, so it isn't.
If you can read this you've gone too far.
Yes. I think that is there to distract you from parts of it like this:
Section 6 of the Administration's proposal would create new forfeiture, destruction, and
restitution provisions for the offenses contained in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act
("DMCA). This provision has been harmonized with the other forfeiture and restitution
provisions contained in the bill, as descrihed in the discussion of subsection 4(b), and is also
consistent with the forfeiture, destruction, and restitution provisions for counterfeiting cases that
were enacted in 2006 as part of the Stop Counterfeiting in Manufactured Goods Act. Although a
violation of the DMCA does not require an underlying infringement of a copyright as an element
of the offense. the restitution provision is tailored to provide for restitution to copyright holders
in those cases where the offense conduct does involve violation of a copyright owner's rights.
There is a huge section about forfiture. Now copyright infringment is the same a trafficking drugs or terrorism.
Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
When Gonzales first started feeling the heat I noticed he kept saying stuff about "protecting our children" over and over and over again. This seems to be a catch-all in Washington. Sure we're developing more nukes, "its for the children". Whenver I hear something about "the children" comming out of a politician's mouth I scratch them off my list of possibilities when I vote. I can protect my own child and any proportion of nasty perverted drugged up Washington lackeys doing anything with children absolutly disgusts me.
I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
This is just unbelievable! I know I for one, shoudl this pass, will be automatically be breaking the law. I record DVD to my system as well as music.. I dont share them but I do use my computer as my entertainment centre. And this is what they consider important enough to pass laws restricting this? I am curious how many people here are going to break this should it pass?