Infringement 'Detrimental To the Public Health, Safety'

I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors has declared that copyright infringement 'substantially interferes with the interest of the public in the quality of life and community peace, lawful commerce in the county, property values, and is detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare of the county's citizens, its businesses and its visitors.' You might laugh, but that means they can close up a property for up to one year for violations of the anti-infringement ordinance [PDF] and the owner can be fined $1,000 for each infringing work produced on site. Not to mention the penalties in the PRO-IP Act, which just sailed through the House."

Comments

This always happens

[Anonymous Coward]

All governments become more aristocratic over time. They serve the needs of a smaller and smaller elite few, to the detriment of the greater and greater majority.

Then the people rebel, and the cycle starts over again.

Re:This always happens

[David.R.Benham]

The politics in America are completely upside down. People pay the most attention to national elections, which have the least influence on their daily lives, while local elections go virtually unnoticed. Plus, third party candidates are never given fair time. SO it's not so matter of voting not giving power, people don't realize which votes really count. This is because media outlets are lazy, picking up a story or feed from the AP or your national office about the main contenders in a presidential race is easy. Putting a reporter on the street to cover po-dunk county's school board isn't nearly as easy, or exciting. Although, it all boils down to an uneducated public. If people realized what elections mattered most, they'd demand coverage for those elections. But it seems we're all lazy uneducated dotards. Is there any hope for us?

Maybe Not

[value_added]

I think this is meant to address "real" piracy, and not some guy in his basement downloading torrents.

From the ordinance (note the use of the terms "improperly labelled" and "sell"):

The revisions would expand the definition of nuisance property to also properties that are used to manufacture and sell recordings and audiovisual works are improperly labeled, as prohibited by California Penal Code Section 653w.

The revisions would expand the definition of nuisance property to also include properties that are used to manufacture and sell recordings and audiovisual works that are improperly labeled, as prohibited by California Penal Code Section 653w.

Then again, maybe my reading of it is incorrect. That's not to say laws don't have a funny way of being interpreted and reinterpreted, or used opportunistically by law enforcement. Worst case scenario? Instead of having your car impounded when you find yourself driving down Sunset Boulevard late one Saturday evening looking for blackjack and hookers and meeting up with an undercover officer, you get your car impounded for what's playing on your iPod.

Re:The blade cuts both ways

[Anonymous Coward]

There is no "forced openness". Nobody obliged Linksys to use code that was licensed under the GPL in their products. They could have written the code they needed from scratch and been under no obligation to distribute the source. Having chosen of their own free will however, to use code that is GPLed, they *do* have an obligation to abide by the terms of the GPL.

Re:So what's it gonna take...

[thefekete]

-1, Troll for Parent? Are you serious? Its a freakin' Southpark quote!
Come on guys...

Re:And in the mean time

[yuna49]

Sure. If Barry Goldwater had become president in 1964 rather than Americans re-electing Lyndon Johnson, most of the civil rights reforms that we take for granted today (in voting, accomodations, etc.) would not have been passed. Why do you think blacks vote 4-1 for the Democrats in most elections?