Slashdot Mirror
President Signs Law Creating Copyright Czar
I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "President Bush has signed the EIPRA (AKA the PRO-IP Act) and created a cabinet-level post of 'Copyright Czar,' on par with the current 'Drug Czar,' in spite of prior misgivings about the bill. They did at least get rid of provisions that would have had the DOJ take over the RIAA's unpopular litigation campaign. Still, the final legislation (PDF) creates new classes of felony criminal copyright infringement, adds civil forfeiture provisions that incorporate by reference parts of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970, and directs the Copyright Czar to lobby foreign governments to adopt stronger IP laws. At this point, our best hope would appear to be to hope that someone sensible like Laurence Lessig or William Patry gets appointed."
1. Countries without extradition treaties to the US, as the act makes pirating a criminal offense - one that you can be extradited for.
2. Countries without friendly relations with the US, as part of this act involves convincing other nations to join.
That's about it on requirements, I think...
On a serious note, it's nice to know that with the economy in the crapper, rather than trying to correct problems with the US banking system, they've instead decided that the US's biggest concern is people downloading MP3s.
Uh, no. The US probably wants to forget that the industrial revolution started in the US thanks to one massive effort in corporate espionage. Cracking down heavily on IP actually harms the economy.
The US has signed its death warrant, again. This act can only hurt the economy, and it really doesn't need to be kicked while its down.
They are successful. So long as you remember that the goal is to make the police force so big that a dictator can rely on them to keep the population in check.
BTW, if we weren't all criminals yesterday, and we're aren't all criminals now, you can be sure we will all be criminals soon.
We've all been criminals for a long, long time. It's just that nobody has bothered to prosecute us yet.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Said the geek who has rarely left his mother's basement, let alone the USA.
Similar to the upcoming US election results
http://fear.org/
Assets should only be forfeited when the owner of said assets has lost a case (civil or preferably criminal).
Cases such as "County of X against $10,000" are just wrong and evil, and should be in violation of the 4th Amendment.
If I have nothing to hide, don't search me
Does that mean copyrights will now be available on every street corner?
Whaddaya mean the wasn't the goal?
Those who forget history and all that. Prohibition doesn't work, no matter what country you happen to find yourself. Well, it doesn't work in terms of forbidding access to products or services that the people really want. It may work when it comes to illegitimately extending government authority.
What this debacle should teach us (as if we didn't already know) is that the levels of corruption, malfeasance in office, and influence peddling in Congress are much higher than was previously thought. "Elected" leaders of banana republics whore themselves out in similar fashion, and really, not for much less money.
Depressing, really.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
With the war on drugs, the war on sex, the war on common sense, and now the war on "IP theft", the risk of raising a child in the US skyrocketing. :(
Young people often fundamentally don't understand the economic incentives, implications and justifications for copyright (regardless of whether or not they are still valid today). Couple that with very low purchasing power, and this new war-on-sharing is a disaster waiting to happen.
Mark my words. A lot of families will suffer terribly because of this.
A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
No, let's be fair. The blame is with those who voted them in.
Fellow people of the United States of America: You do a horrible job of voting. I don't expect clairvoyance, but I do expect you to see past the fit of the suit and the quality of the dentistry.
And when you make a wrong choice, I do expect you to take responsibility for having voted in the evil-doers.
The world: America, you've got a corrupt lunatic for a president. You suck!
America: Actually, half the stupid stuff we do is because our senators and congressmen are corrupt lunatics too.
The world: Uhh...
Repton.
They say that only an experienced wizard can do the tengu shuffle.
The intention: Since very little is manufactured in the USA any more, one of the few things we have to sell to the outside world is our IP, so we have to protect it.
The Unintended Consequences: As Lawrence Lessig has pointed out, draconian copyright and patent laws are a strong disincentive to building on the works of others, so there will be less IP to sell.
I guess we're sunk.
Are they going to make a fast food czar?
How about an SUV czar?
I mean, people are buying less SUVs than ever before, so we must have a cabinet level position to figure out how to get people to buy more SUVs right?
And people need to buy more fast food too. Let's create a cabinet position for that.
This is not unprecented. I mean, there's already a banking czar who is taking over the banks now.
Next will come the porn czar. "Sir, put your hands up and your penis back in your pants!"
Bush certainly is tying up the loose ends in the fascism loop ins't he?
They're using their grammar skills there.
Bush is like Ronald McDonald.
When I get a bad Cheesburger, I don't blame the Server, I dont blame the Cook, I don't blame the store manager. No I blame Ronald. He is the figurehead that represents everthing about McDonalds so he is to blame. Also, when I get nice tasty fresh fries, he gets my high-five.
When the Government is out of control, the President is accountable. Just like Ronald.
So instead of faulting anyone who had a hand in the making of your cheeseburger, you place the blame solely on a fictional clown that was invented by marketing people? That's an interesting philosophy you have.
The only government that could have such power is a global totalitarian state. I used to use that as an argument for why copyright law cannot be enforced.
Now we have a copyright "czar," felony charges, and a push for global synchronicity of copyright laws... why am I not comforted?
This space available.
At this point, our best hope would appear to be to hope that someone sensible like Laurence Lessig or William Patry gets appointed
I hope you're kidding. In case you've been asleep for 8 years, the US has gone further and further towards Big Brother to the point where having our rights suspended in a city where there's a Republican National Convention is no longer shocking. Whoever is appointed to this post will be as dumb, vicious, and bloodthirsty as possible. I mean, really, do you think for a second that Dick Cheney and Karl Rove are going to appoint someone like Lessig?
No, they'll pick someone who is about law enforcement and headlines. Somebody who probably works or worked as a lawyer for the MPAA or RIAA. It's going to be a real shitstorm. Expect to see new, harsher mandatory sentence laws passed soon. There's money in prisons and fines!
I don't respond to AC's.
While it's influence has certainly been fading, the US still has quite a pull both economically and politically around the world. It's not exactly unheard of for the US to put pressure on other countries for things like this, and it's not unheard of for other countries to cave.
The more the US leans along these lines, the more other countries will. Sadly.
"A witty saying proves nothing." - Voltaire
So who exactly are we SUPPOSED to vote for? Rich corporate asskisser A or B? You see that is what the problem is. With a two party system either choice has been bought and paid before you ever get to the booth. Would it be better with a multi party system? Hell if I know. All I do know is it really couldn't get much worse.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
...to abolish "civil forfeiture". It's bad enough when it happens to someone falsely accused in a drug case, or even acquitted. Expansion of CF? Absolute oppression. No other way to put it. I understand that you probably need to have *some* civil law apart from criminal law; but I think that if the founders knew that impoverishment was being used as "the next best thing" to imprisonment, they'd be turning in their graves.
At a time when the decline of property values has caused so much trouble; expansion of CF makes no sense at all. I know that as I've considered investing in property, the possibility of CF has given me serious pause. I don't do drugs; but what if my tenant does? And then they come along and, without the stricter standards of a criminal case, they deprive me of the property. Now I have to worry if the tenant is a warez guy? Maybe there's a way to insure against CF, but then that's just one more thing that cuts into the bottom line for an investor.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
I think at this point I only read /. to depress myself thinking about the affairs of government.
You know what? I'm actually happy now. The government did something for me, for once.
They listened when I said we need to mass-educate the population about the DMCA and just how bad it is; now they're implementing a program to do it.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
"They are only allowed to use campaign contributions for their campaigns. What will their campaigns spend the money on?"
Yes, but they're allowed to use bribes whenever they visit foreign countries, or when they've been retired for long enough that no one cares anymore, or when their foreign shell corporation purchases vague services from their domestic LLC.
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
Which of course won't stop the Alphabet Agencies from kidnapping you from said non-extradition treaty country if they deem it a Good Thing. Remember Panama? Sure, Noriega was a scumbag that the United States put in power, but sending armed men across borders to forcibly remove him at gunpoint wasn't the height of diplomacy, it was outright invasion.
Outside of the UK, Afghanistan ('friendly' government installed at gunpoint by the US), and Iraq (see 'Afghanistan'), that's just about everywhere on the planet.
No, this is just a bait and switch from the Powers That Be to draw attention away from the fact that we're in a depression. It gives said Powers That Be the excuse to squeeze yet more taxes, spend more money, and do nothing but make examples of people who do not have the means to fight back without the ancillary effect of making a certain class of criminals ('drug dealers') rich in the process.
And of course, it has the Seal of Approval from the Senator from Disney.
Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
All I do know is it really couldn't get much worse.
Please don't tempt fate.
I'm old enough to remember when this would have been assumed to be a Russian joke. Now it's an American joke.
/.is against patents.
Which is exactly how I am left without anyone to vote for in the presidential election. No McCain (Military Commissiona Act of 2006), No Obama (FISA Amendments Act of 2008), No Bob Barr (*shudder*).
Wait a minute........
FTFB: "Copyright infringement is a felony"
If I steal a CD from a store that is a misdemeanor....
If I download a song...THAT IS A FELONY?!?!?!?!?
WTF?!!?!?!?!?
Don't worry. They are already have massive surveillance in place. It won't be hard to pick out the offenders. I think we need to start looking at the RIAA under RICO statutes.
Aren't the jails already full of non-violent drug offenders???
Disgusting. How much longer before we can convince the nation to pick up some rifles and march to DC?
zosxavius photography
People need to think logically, and vote their hearts.
Impossible. They are usually at odds. For an example, try to fall in love with someone based on a rational argument of what positive qualities they possess. You will not succeed. You will instead fall in love with a total nutcase, nine times out of ten.
Them's the breaks. The heart does not submit to reason. Politicians know this, too. They're actors first and foremost. Each and every one.
And this means eliminating someone as a possible voting choice when they see them do something foolish.
Also impossible. It's been Red vs. Blue now for decades. Nobody thinks anymore. Politics has become a sporting match. Doesn't matter what anyone says or does - you just want your side to win.
Besides, you aren't allowed politically to pick and choose good ideas from either "side". If you're for gun control it's assumed you also think global warming is man-made. They are two entirely unrelated ideas, but the left-side claims them both, so someone from the right-side cannot claim either. They must say they are against gun control and they think global warming is nonsense.
A candidate that came along and actually spoke their mind rather than quote the party line would probably at this point make people's heads explode. They would see it as impossible. Like saying it's day and night at the same time.
In short, they have us trained. Pick a side and line up. And for God's sake don't reach any of your own conclusions. If you're on this side, your position on topic X is Y. If you're on the other side, your position on topic X must therefore be !Y.
It's hideous, really. Both major parties don't do jack for the people. Remember when everyone got all happy that the Democrats won Congress, and finally something would put a stop to W's free ride? What happened? First thing Congress did was roll over and take it up the tailpipe about warrentless wiretapping. "Oh sure, that's ok, especially since it was just this once. No problem W, carry on."
Same horseshit, different crew. Doesn't matter who gets voted in anymore. Big business lobbies to get what it wants, and both Red and Blue will bow before Green.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
P.S.
"Copyright Czar" and "Drug Czar" are appropriate terms. I can not think of a title more appropriate for describing our loss of freedom than the word "czar" who terrorized Russian serfs (slaves) for centuries, or the "ceasar" that killed the Roman Republic and turned it into a virtual dictatorship. These new "czar" positions within the U.S. government represent a gradual but definite loss of republicanism, liberty, and individual sovereignty.
My downloading of Star Wars Clone Wars harmed no one. (It was trash; I saved money by Not buying it.)
My smoking of weed while watching said movie also harms no one. It only harms me, and it's my body, therefore my choice how I treat it. Besides: If we can abort babies on the grounds that a woman controls her body, then surely that same woman has a right to inhale some smoke.
The government is not your daddy. Its purpose is not to raid middle-class neighbors' wallets and give it to you.