Slashdot Mirror
DOJ Opposes Extending DOJ Copyright Authority
I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "The White House has opposed the bipartisan bill that would create copyright cops on the grounds that it would cause the Department of Justice to end up 'serving as pro bono lawyers for private copyright holders.' And while they do occasionally prosecute criminal copyright infringement, they have no intention of dabbling with civil cases because, 'taxpayer-supported department lawyers would pursue lawsuits for copyright holders, with monetary recovery going to industry.' At this rate, the discovery of winged suiformes would appear to be imminent."
"immanent" is a (correctly spelled) word, just not the right one. They meant "imminent" (impending), not "immanent" (indwelling). Chalk it up as you would lose/loose then/than or (my personal favorite) "should of" for "should've".
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
What does this say about the Democratic party when the bill breezes through their hands unfettered? And the Republicans are saying no?
It says that Hollywood has paid the Democrats rather well and not so much for the Republicans. But then again, it's been that way for a very long time -- Hollywood makes no secret of favoring the Democrats and Democratic causes. Some of the largest contributors to the Democratic Party and to Democratic candidates for office include some of the biggest names in Hollywood -- Steven Spielberg, David Geffen, etc.
My blog
Copyright is treated as both a criminal matter and a civil matter depending on the quantity of items copied also if you are making a profit from them there is a better chance that it will be considered criminal. Also depends on the country.