Slashdot Mirror
CCIA Calls Copyright Wiretaps 'Hollywood's PATRIOT Act'
An anonymous reader writes "Ars is reporting that the CCIA, a trade group representing companies like AMD, Facebook, Oracle, Yahoo, Google and Microsoft, is calling the copyright wiretaps requested by the IP Czar 'Hollywood's PATRIOT Act.' For those who don't remember, IP Czar Victoria Espinel recently wrote a report calling for more charges of felony copyright infringement under the NET Act, as well as felony charges for illegal web streaming, authorization for the use of wiretaps in going after copyright infringement cases, and several other measures. In short, this means that the copyright cops are coming online."
What a c*nt.
The PATRIOT act allegedly protects the US against religious terrorists. Hollywood's PATRIOT act allegedly protects the US against economic terrorists aka pirates. I'm not so sure claiming that is a valid comparison is a good strategy....
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
See, what you don't understand is that an open internet has allowed businesses to succeed and generate revenue in new ways. These businesses have a vested interest in keeping the internet open. It just so happens that an open internet also serves piracy as well.
So you have a choice: go back to 1990, and kill the web... killing piracy, but also killing all the businesses that now are based on web technologies (to include MSFT, GOOG, AAPL, etc)... OR... evolve.
Very allegedly.
they understand. they understand very well that they dont want anyone other than themselves to succeed, no businesses competing them, customers feeding off their hand, on the terms they want them to.
and your explanation of the fundamentals of internet's success does not mean shit to them, neither they care - they want to have it, and you under their control.
explanations and talk will not do any good. you need to act, if you want to defend your interests.
Read radical news here
Joseph McCarthy is doing a happy jig.
Yeah, cause McCain is totally against things like the DMCA and these draconian copyright laws... Oh wait...
Comment removed based on user account deletion
That was true. "They" just conveniently forgot to say the same thing happens if you vote the other way!
soldiers, bombs and uavs
In only two states in the Union are you legally secure in pointing a loaded weapon at someone you catch in the act of robbing you. In most parts of the country, if a group of guys are loading the entire contents of your home into a moving truck, you become a felon if you even "shoot to wound" one of them. You can't even knee-cap them with a .22, but copyright owners can get $150k statutory damages on the spot for copying a single throwaway picture from a local rag.
I'm a conservative and most of the conservatives who know me used to think I was nuts on copyright law until I began to show them how utterly insane our system is. The closest parallel for the common man is a military legal code that won't allow a soldier to rough up a prisoner who he knows has useful intelligence, but that lets field commanders deploy low-yield tactical nukes on villages that remain neutral.
It's such an inversion of the natural order and justice that it's sickening. We don't allow a man being subjected to an armed robbery to confidently use lethal force on his assailant (note: I am advocating that victims of armed robbery should always be legally authorized to use lethal force to resolve an armed robbery situation), but we let big copyright utterly destroy families over sharing a dozen songs.
I don't know who the dumbass who first came up with 'czar' is, but I'd sure like to kick his ass. Geeks are very prone to linguistic fetishes. There's nothing romantic about a person in charge of some organisation. And if, somehow, that person has complete and unquestionable authority over something, simply calling him/her a 'czar' won't help. Changing the laws will.
Excuse my digression.
When the XXAA upgrade copyright infringement to a felony (to take the enforcement out of the civil court system and the cost out of the XXAA pocket and into ours.) we can be sorta like the old country. They had debtors prisons, we can have copyright prisons. (Maybe they will ship us off to Africa, I think Australia will have the same laws as us when the XXAA can arrange it.)
By RTFA and clicking through, it quotes, "Wiretap authority for these intellectual property crimes, subject to the existing legal protections that apply to wiretaps for other types of crimes, would assist US law enforcement agencies to effectively investigate those offenses, including targeting organized crime and the leaders and organizers of criminal enterprises," says the new whitepaper.
If violation of civil liberties extends to wiretapping for suspected IP violations, I predict that many now docile citizens will rise up and wage revolution, both underground and in high court. In the US at least, the (Constitutional 4th Amendment) guards against unreasonable search and seizure by requiring law enforcement to present "reasonable cause" to a judge in order to obtain a warrant. Wiretapping without a warrant is a clear violation of these 4th Amendment rights. I for one, would happy donate to the legal fight to protect these rights. Furthermore, legions of underground resistance will surely fight back as well. The foundations of democracy can only be threatened so far before the people decide enough is enough.
I think that is the craziest part! I love how we (the tax payers) are going to have to pay for the wiretaps, personal to comb though the wiretapped info, and cost of court cases that are brought. All so that the corporations can continue to make money by having us buy their products, and not have to pay to gather the evedince against those they deem pirates.
"Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security" --Benjamin Franklin
Just because a trade group has lobbying money, shouldn't mean that they get to play with society's rules.
While I agree with you, the sad fact is that lobbying money is pretty much the only thing that allows one to play with society's rules.
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
I kind of like the term czar. Recall that a Czar was considered by the West (at the time) to be an out of touch, despotic ruler of a backward country. I think that description fits the roles that it is being applied to quite nicely.
Btw, isn't there a clause in the constitution somewhere that says, "no citizen of the US shall bear a title?"
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
If violation of civil liberties extends to wiretapping for suspected IP violations, I predict that many now docile citizens will rise up and wage revolution, both underground and in high court....The foundations of democracy can only be threatened so far before the people decide enough is enough.
Wanna bet? The average Joe isn't going to understand the ramifications of undermining the 4th Amendment (see what's going on in our airports right now, if you don't believe me). There will be no uprising because most Americans won't give a rip as long as they can still watch American Idol and eat at McDonalds while driving their 10 gallons/mile (no, that's not a typo) suburban assault^Wutility vehicle. You and I might get in a tizzy about this, but the rank-and-file won't care until/unless it affects them.
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
One of the big issues is that is (currently, in the vast majority of cases) a civil matter. The two parties involved pay for it.
If it's criminal, your tax dollars are going to be increasingly used to pay for copyright enforcement that the copyright owner doesn't want to pay for. If they don't want to pay for it, why should I? Why should you?
Wouldn't that increase the burden of proof? That old 'beyond reasonable doubt' thing that we see in so many films & tv shows.
I am a free slashdotter. I will not be modded, blogged, DRM'd, patented, podcasted or RFID'd. My life is my own.
Who told you that?
The plane-crashing baby killer and his pet bimbo lost. Get over it. Obama is no prize...but he was the closest to a Liberal that had a shot and he's done OK by me WRT mortgage ReFi, drawing down Iraq, not persecuting gay people, etc...
Blar.
I hate to sound like a troll, but please, revolution? It's not going to happen. If you download a song, you will be painted as some evil criminal, vilified and justly hounded down in the public's eye. This bit about piracy is just a farce to implement their own draconian control measures. The Internet is too much freedom for the masses in their eyes. They need more control. You need controlled. It's for your own good. It's for the children.
Take the Red Pill.
Like an industrial trade group, wants to wire tap me, I reserve the privilege to sue them in open court (the US) and (in some countries) to hire hit men to to assassinate their corporate members. And in the EU to get arrest warrants issued for them.
Just because you (MPAA, RIAA) are "safely" protected by the bought and paid for US government does not protect you anyplace else!
I killed da wabbit -Elmer Fudd
I just keep having trouble with the realization that I have lived through the largest destruction of personal liberty (and personal dignity) in US history. I have listened to well read, college educated people who wholeheartedly support suppression of very clearly 1st amendment supported freedom of speech because the message bothers them.
This entwined with the juggernaut of corporate rights steamrolling over personal rights just because lobbyists write the laws, lobby money pays for the law makers, and people make decisions based on fear leaves me with a country that is just disappointing.
(Saddest part is you don't see anyone doing it any better...)
I completely agree with that should be how the legal system should work. It would mean that other laws are struck down though like environmental damage because it wouldn't cause direct harm. It is tricky where to draw the line. What benefits society to the greatest extent would definitely be the best, but again is hard to define. Who has the most money just simply does not work. I would say the best treatment would be to stop supporting these organizations with your money and your interest. Look for free music that people release and support them in what they do by listening to it and passing it around. It is like Microsoft where they would prefer you to pirate their product instead of using a competitors if that is what it comes to.
...draw the line on what is harm. Should have read what I wrote before posting.
I don't know, $100/barrel (or more) might make the amount of expendable income average families have suddenly dissappear. Then realisation of how much everything else costs should hit home. It'll take alot longer and alot more before anything happens in the U$A, but to quote a certain Smith: "It is inevitable". I'm not sure how printing more money can fix that.
US prisons are now private companies. It's in their interest to have their buddy corporatocracies put as many people behind bars as possible. It only costs something like $200k/year to keep a black kid locked up, who's done nothing more than caught smoking pot. Tax dollars from us to our corporate overlords.
Obama was put in power by the media, they're merely calling in all the favors.
I think that's just about to change.
The "heartland" of America gets its news ... wait for it ... from the plot stories of their TV shows. So when entire episodes are starting to feature the Homeland Security doings, Mr. & Ms Viewer are just about to say "wait, they're doing that?"
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
Really, it can't be all that bad...
...can it?
You do when you don't know what the other person meant by what was said, i.e. whether the comparison was intended to be negative or positive. Otherwise you're in a state of, "I agree with my interpretation of what you said without knowing what you meant when you said it," and may end up regretting throwing support to someone with whom you actually disagree.
Someone who says, "There's a problem with the amount of child porn on the Internet," should be made to clarify whether they think there's too much or not enough; "I stand by my previous statement," is not an acceptable response.
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
Oh wait, you were serious. Let me laugh even harder.
Ryan T. Sammartino
"Ancora imparo"
And then all those found guilty will never be able to vote again. Coincidence?
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - Evelyn Beatrice Hall, re Voltaire
You don't need "revolution", only violence.
How's all that hopey changey doing for you?
Thanks to file sharing, I purchase more CDs
Thanks to the RIAA, I buy them used...
If violation of civil liberties extends to wiretapping for suspected IP violations, I predict that many now docile citizens will rise up and wage revolution, both underground and in high court.
Only if it prevents them from TIVOing the newest episode of "Three and a Half Lost Heroes of Beverly Hills".
In its modern sense, that would be either Gaius Julius or Gaius Octavius Thurinus (later Augustus). And they've been dead for a while, but either one could have kicked your ass 6 ways from Sunday.
Hollywood is a *business* (or collection of businesses). They aren't ALLOWED a "patriot act". What's next, questioning our patriotism if we don't go to their movies?
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
The big companies/RIAA/MPAA pushing for stricter copyright enforcement, felony charges for copyright violators, etc. are wrong.
So wrong, in fact, it might just be enough to save us from them.
It was one thing when they targeted poor college students on bittorrent. How many average Americans or other companies are going to stand up for them? It was a great way for the RIAA, for instance, to make a killing. (Off of creative content they never created, by the way -- what's the point of copyright anyway?)
But this is a whole new ballgame. When you try to make showing a music video on youtube illegal (which it would be under these laws, as far as I can tell), suddenly you've turned 90% of America against you. When you stop entrapping people by offering up torrents, and start using the word "wiretapping", you move objections from the underground nerdosphere up into the mainstream. And most importantly, you've stirred up till-now sleeping giants in Google and the other companies mentioned.
The folly of the MPAA etc in trying to extend these bans (surely, if people can't stream movies, they'll start spending thousands more on DVDs!) may have caused them to overstep their bounds just enough to ruin them in the copyright wars. Once other corporations with profits on the line get involved, the playing field evens up a little. When that happens, there's a chance for reasonableness to win out.
So, I'm not saying I applaud these new initiatives by our government, but it's about time copyright law got some negative publicity and opposition by companies with $$. Let's hope some positives come out of this.
It's been in use since at least the energy crisis:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Czar
Were that I say, pancakes?
What isn't mentioned, is how a member of Congress grilled this new IP "czar" (how I hate that term) about how they bungled the child pornography raid and took down more than 84,000 innocent websites, replacing them with a page that said they had been taken down for child pornography! Talk about class-action material for suing the government!
.100 right now.
The Congresswoman made the Czar look like an idiot in front of everyone else. Not to mention that the Czar was chastised for acting illegally in that an other matters.
The fact that this new "czar" might want it does not, by a long shot, mean she'll get it. She's batting about
I've noticed the TSA getting lampooned a lot (e.g. "Cat people, dog people" "We all look the same way nude." "Good point") -- and have seen some less than flattering portrayals of Fatherland^W Homeland Security on popular TV. Now this could be all part of a Hollywood conspiracy to let the hoi polloi blow off some steam with comedy, but it could also be a reflection of public opinion tilting against the insidious creeping fascism that threatens to blanket us in the absence of popular resistance.
Patriot Act + Net Patriot Act = Welcome to the 4th Reich Nazi America, imperialism, totalitarianism, lost of FREEDOMS!
I'll go further.
I'l leave it as an exercise which way the causal sequence runs, but I feel that such tv episodes are a profound mechanism for social processing. While geeks can do it within a few weeks after reading a couple of SF stories or novels, it seems to take a many years for society as a whole to get there. Arguably it took twenty years for society to really process sexuality issues.
Now if "we're taking on safety vs security", I'd start the clock at 9-11 and say we're half way there at the 10th anniversary this year. But maybe it will happen in another ten years.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
very well formulated and pragmatic post. please mod parent up.
Read radical news here
1. Fraud and other white-collar crimes are estimated to divert about 6% of gross revenue. That's more than $700 billion a year in the U.S. , or the equivalent of the U.S. Department of Defense's annual budget.
2. Economic damage is almost never 100% recoverable, particularly in criminal cases. Did Enron shareholders get made whole?
3. White-collar crimes affects people as much as violent crime, although conventional constructions tend to focus on violent crime. Would you rather be robbed once, or lose most of your life savings to a ponzi scheme? Has the recent financial crisis not caused direct harm to anyone?
4. The deterrence effect of criminally punishing white-collar criminals reduces occurrences, reducing future costs to society. Put a senior executive in prison, and it changes how corporate culture operates for the better (at least for that industry)
For a great overview on whether white-collar criminal penalties are too hard or too soft, see this article from Fraud Magazine