New Bill Ups Punishment For Hosts of Infringing Video Streams

halfEvilTech writes "Two months ago, the Obama administration asked Congress to make illicit online streaming of copyrighted movies and TV shows a felony. Such a bill has now been introduced by two senators. 'Online streamers can now face up to five years in prison and a fine in cases where: They show 10 or more "public performances" by electronic means in any 180-day period; and the total retail value of those performances tops $2,500 or the cost of licensing such performances is greater than $5,000.'"

Comments

I'd support this...

[Anonymous Coward]

If every-time a major corporation leaked my personal data (HI Sony!) they were faced with this same penalty. Per record leaked.

Re:I'd support this...

[hairyfeet]

Riiiight, because most folks have a couple of million lying around to hire some land sharks and keep them on the payroll for a decade or more right? Hell a friend of mine was running a little ISP and got screwed blatntly by one of the big boys who said "just try and sue us". Even his lawyer said ultimately he'd win, no doubt but it would cost a minimum of 1.5 million and a decade, maybe a decade and a half, for them to use up all their appeals and drag it to the highest courts.

You see the thing that makes the corps "better than you" in the eyes of the law (which is written by lawyers natch) is that they can afford legal teams that do nothing but smack guys like you around all day. Unless your last name is Buffet or Dell you can't afford justice even if you are right, simply because they can drag it out forever. So unless you can get a lawyer who'll go for class action (in which case the lawyer gets 99% and you get a coupon towards your next purchase) you are SOL dude.

WTF?

[MrQuacker]

Why does an industry that offers so little in terms of value or innovation hold so much power over everyone? Why do we keep allowing these bullies to push us around?

Re:WTF?

[Samalie]

Simple. They have the money to buy politicians. We don't.

And lets face it, in a 2-party system, there is no way in hell activists like us are going to get big 2 party nominations without taking the money from the lobbyists that we would thereby be bound to serve their corporate overlord interests.

Re:WTF?

[MightyMartian]

They have the money right now. This is a life-and-death struggle, but as we've seen with other industries throughout history that have been surpassed by newer technologies, not even artificial life-support by governments can buy much more than a temporary stay of execution. The Japanese government during Edo period banned firearms (despite Japan at one point being the largest manufacturer in the world) to prop up the Shogunate. They got an awfully rude awakening when Admiral Perry sailed into Tokyo Bay and shot a few cannons off.

I suspect, in twenty years, RIAA, the MPAA and all these ever-increasingly harsh laws will be history. They had their century or so of necessary economic scarcity and its done. At some point the government will realize that there's about as much use in propping these guys up as there would have been in banning flintlocks and cannons to keep fletchers employed.

Re:WTF?

[KingSkippus]

Same damn reason corporations in general are running everything. In the past few decades, "capitalism" and "free market" has been twisted by those with lots of money and a vested interest in having as much power as possible to mean unbridled, unregulated, free reign to do anything they want. When someone tries to inject some common sense into the conversation, they get called Communists (the Cold War buzzword) and/or Socialists (its modern bogeyman equivalent), the FTC, FCC, and other organizations tasked with looking out for us get emasculated and de-funded, a bunch of flag waving and chants of "freedom!" happen, and people vote and act against their own self-interest. All the while, those very rich people get to pay 15% capital gains tax on most of their income while the rest of us pay way more, and those corporations that are screwing us over pay little or no tax in the name of "creating jobs" all the while planning how to more efficiently cut our salaries and benefits and ship our jobs overseas.

Other than posting meaningless messages on Slashdot, what are you going to do about it? Are you going to cancel your cable subscription and stop watching big content? Are you going to stop listening to everyone except independent artists? Are you going to stop going to/renting movies? Are you going to support and campaign for people who have strong consumer rights stances? Are you going to tell your family and friends, even when it's a bit awkward because they're the very "freedom!" chanters you're fighting, why they have to buy movies four times to watch them on four devices? Are you going to write to your Congresscritters and your local media, set up a blog, and otherwise try to get the word out? Are you going to donate time and money to organizations like the Electronic Frontier Foundation? Are you going to stop buying iPods, Blu-ray players, PS3s, Amazon Prime memberships, and Netflix subscriptions?

Yeah, that's what I thought. That is why the bullies get to keep pushing us around.

Re:WTF?

[Wyatt Earp]

Manufacturing accounts for the lion’s share of U.S. exports—accounting for 62 percent in 2008

Royalties from Intellectual Property (patents, film, software, tv, music) - 13.3 percent in 2008

Re:WTF?

[houstonbofh]

Not downloading does not solve the problems of intrusive laws, required record keeping, and misdirected lawsuits.

Re:WTF?

[hoggoth]

> not even artificial life-support by governments can buy much more than a temporary stay of execution
> I suspect, in twenty years, RIAA, the MPAA and all these ever-increasingly harsh laws will be history

You are half right. In twenty years the RIAA and MPAA may be history... but those laws giving large corporations and the government the power to monitor everything we do and punish any individual or small business that gets in their way... they will never give up those laws.

And THAT is why Congress is letting the RIAA and MPAA push them around. It's an excuse for both parties to get what they want.
The same thing is going on with the "terrorism" industry.

Re:WTF?

[Alex Belits]

Why can't that beacon of democracy, the USA, manage to do it?

USA is a "beacon of democracy" due to complete subversion of democracy in it.

I would go further with that, and say that democracy is now completely worthless and its implementation should not be attempted or supported anywhere on its own, because US politicians demonstrated to the whole world how to effectively defeat it and build what amounts to a feudal society while keeping all attributes of democratic institutions and process. It's has an unfixable security bug with known exploit.

At best, "democracy" is now a minor, and optional, part that can be used to implement all kinds of societies -- oppressive or otherwise -- and people should stop sheepishly repeat US propaganda that promotes it as a cure for all social and economic ills.

Felony?

[Rei]

Felony? Seriously?

"Yes, ma'am, I know you were raped, but it's not like your attacker posed a couple episodes of Scrubs on YouTube..."

My official stance on this

[Anonymous Coward]

This will be used to squelch free speech and the Larry Flint of the 21st century will be in prison awaiting trial before he gets in front of the Supreme Court.

This could also be used in a copyright dispute with multiple owners (film school students vs their school, CGI hobbyists vs each other, etc.) It is unprecedented to give citizens the ability to create situations where they can send people to jail when they lost nothing but imaginary revenue and occording to several studies actually gained free marketing from the unauthorized streamers.

When you create a scenario where someone can be arrested for replaying something in fair use, and await trial to prove their innocence... it's a travesty of justice.

Re:Well..

[cpu6502]

I don't think civil v. criminal is as cut-and-dried as you think. If it was, people would not be thrown into prison for smoking a naturally-growing green plant.

The US Constitution (unfortunately) gives the US power to grant monopolies to artists and inventors. Wouldn't infringement on that monopoly be a criminal offense against the US Government?

I think Jefferson had the right idea with his version of the Bill of Rights. He limited the monopoly to ___ years which he suggested should be 14. I agree. If you can't make money off your product during its first 14 years of existence, then too bad. Time to put it in the public domain for the benefit of ALL the people.

Re:Filled-up Prisons

[spun]

Hell no, bucky, prison is a for profit industry these days. Prison is the new plantation. In California, for instance, prison industries are exempt from environmental and safety regulations. And state agencies are required to buy from a prison industry where one exists, even if the products are inferior, unsafe, and more expensive than those available on the free market.

The powers that be have every incentive to create more, and more ridiculous, crimes. After all, if you are wealthy and politically connected, you can commit any crime you like with impunity, so what does it matter to you that everything is now a crime?

Re:Ugh

[ALeavitt]

I know the Democrats are screwing up here. As a card carrying Dem I'll apologize for my people. Something that would help us help you though is if we could get a more solid base. The Dems are running scared, and they're pandering to Hollywood just to get enough money to fight the good fight.

So we should vote for a party that is willing to compromise its ideals on the vague promise that once they have enough power they will suddenly grow morals?