Slashdot Mirror


DOJ Doesn't Like the Idea of A Copyright Czar

sconeu writes "Seems as if the DOJ is not particularly happy about HR 4729, the 'Copyright Czar' bill. The Deputy AG told Congress that the current structure works quite effectively. 'Panel members also expressed concern over Section 104 of the bill, which would allow a copyright owner to collect statutory damages for each copyrighted work that is stolen. Detractors fear that this provision could result in protracted lawsuits ... Section 104, however, would penalize criminals on a per-song basis, so if someone pirated a motion picture soundtrack that had songs from 12 different artists, the pirate would be charged with 12 separate offenses and be subject to exorbitant fees.'"

15 of 215 comments (clear)

  1. What does "stolen" mean? by Mesa+MIke · · Score: 5, Insightful

    > ... would allow a copyright owner to collect statutory > damages for each copyrighted work that is stolen. So if I buy a Metallica CD, and someone swipes it, Metallica gets the money when the thief is caught? Bizarre.

    1. Re:What does "stolen" mean? by Conspiracy_Of_Doves · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, of course not.

      The RIAA gets the money. Metallica doesn't see a penny.

  2. All Pau... by quickpick · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I gotta be honest, I was at best buy and I didn't see any particular movie or CD that interested me and I had a $5 off coupon to spend. Movie, music, and TV executives take note: I'm done. You can keep your ball and play by your rules, but I'm going to go home and do something constructive, like build a book shelf, or read a book, and maybe stop, look up at this beautiful world we live in and decide I don't need your crap to enjoy life.

    1. Re:All Pau... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A few hundred years ago life was hard. Now, life is fat. That is why things will go differently this time.

    2. Re:All Pau... by Brad+Eleven · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As much as I'd like to find a way to agree with you--I dislike the RIAA and their ilk--the answer is no.

      The unfair taxation which fomented the American Revolution was judged to be preventing merchants from making a living. Add to that the insult of excluding British merchants from the taxes and tariffs, and you've got a revolt.

      The RIAA's tactics aren't preventing anyone from making a living--at least, not directly. Like the 18th century British crown, they're woefully out of touch, but they're not so much exacting taxes and tariffs as they are filing ridiculous lawsuits based on wild accusations.

      --
      "Press to test."
      (click)
      "Release to detonate."
  3. It this passes... by tgatliff · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It will be a huge turn for the federal government in US history. Meaning, this is a blantant example of politicians wanting to use the federal government resources to help primarily large businesses maximize and enforce their revenues. Piracy, like it or not, provides a market balance where in many industries it did not exist before, and most of the politicians know this.

  4. The real reason for unhappiness by Applekid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The IP division works closely with the DOJ's cyber crime laboratory, so separating a copyright unit could fracture investigation More likely, then, is that those currently enpowered for enforcement don't want their power diluted. Makes perfect sense.
    --
    More Twoson than Cupertino
  5. Bottom Line by Stanistani · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Abuse of the court system to slam 'Intellectual Property' offenders benefits corporations.

    Taken past a certain point, though, it impairs the ability of the court system to be responsive, and brings massive costs to the agencies which have to support the infrastructure.

    We're getting to that point.

  6. Pointless by subl33t · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The American drug Czars have done soooo well haven't they? A copyright Czar is SURE to end all copyright violations!

    Yanks: DO something about your electoral system! It's time to move back to Democracy from Corporate Oligarchy.

  7. These people need to get real by Finallyjoined!!! · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Copyright infringement is a civil offence. Nuff said.

    --
    If I had an Ass, I'd call it Fanny Bottom, then I could slap my Ass; Fanny Bottom, on the Arse.
  8. Check and balances by techpawn · · Score: 3, Insightful

    We already have laws that punish real bootlegging pirates. Walk down the street in most major metropolitan areas and you see people making money off other peoples hard work. Would those people be charged with both the original crime AND a crime for EACH of the copyrights they violated to sell a five dollar version of a 20 dollar RIAA CD?

    This isn't a bill written to make the constituents happy... I'm glad the DOJ is doing more than following along.

    --
    Ask not what you can do for your country. Ask what your country did to you
  9. Heh by Cleon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If the "We Don't Torture, but Oppose Anti-Torture Legislation" DOJ thinks a piece of legislation is a little too heavy-handed, Congress should damn well get the message that it's time to reconsider.

    --
    Gifts for Geeks - Stuff that really matters!
  10. Each blow in assault is not a seperate offence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How is it that copyright receives a higher standard of punishment than traditional crime. Maybe because the RIAA holds itself more important than people who really get hurt.

    If someone is assaulted they cannot prosecute the assailant for each punch/stab/whatever....

    They are entitled to fair protections but the system must make the redress fair as well. Each $2.99 song is a million dollars by their accounting. Now they want each instance to give them a retrial and more ability to punish the poor with larger threatened lawsuits. This is not trial by judge or jury anymore. They are fighting for trial by the inefficiency of our judicial system. They want to make the court system worse and more expensive while they use it as a hammer to win settlements - out of court. And who picks up the tab??? The country.

    Go back to the initial copyright as set out by the constitution. Remove the extensions and emphasize the benefits of a global distribution system that costs peanuts to maintain.

  11. when reality changes by circletimessquare · · Score: 3, Insightful

    you can dig in your heels and fight it tooth and nail, until reality passes you by

    or you can adapt gracefully, and keep right on swimming

    adapt, or die

    i mean these are some pretty fantastic death throes we are witnessing now

    riaa, mpaa: in 5 years i want to see shocktroopers on the street with congressionally mandated shoot to kill on sight orders for anyone caught singing christmas carols without prior authorization

    that's the logical progression of your denial

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  12. Re:The NET Act Made it Criminal (sometimes) by jamstar7 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Better yet, two terms.

    One in office
    One in jail.
    No exceptions.

    --
    Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.