Slashdot Mirror


PROTECT IP Renamed To the E-PARASITE Act

bs0d3 writes "The U.S. House has drafted their version of Protect IP today. They have renamed the bill to 'the Enforcing and Protecting American Rights Against Sites Intent on Theft and Exploitation Act' or the E-PARASITE Act. The new house version of Protect IP is far worse than the Senate bill s.968 and it massively expands the sites that will be covered by the law. While the Senate bill limited its focus to sites that were 'dedicated to infringing activities,' the house bill targets 'foreign infringing sites' and 'has only limited purpose or use other than infringement.' They're also including an 'inducement' claim, any foreign site declared by the Attorney General to be 'inducing' infringement, can now be censored by the US. With no adversarial hearing. The bill can be read here."

28 of 373 comments (clear)

  1. American rights? by Bucky24 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I guess they're really going all the way with "Corporations are people".

    --
    All the world's a CPU, and all the men and women merely AI agents
    1. Re:American rights? by elashish14 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The only people, from the sound of it. Copyright harms far more real people than it helps.

      --
      I have left slashdot and am now on Soylent News. FUCK YOU DICE.
    2. Re:American rights? by Nimey · · Score: 4, Informative

      That's not even wrong. Nobody said that CU caused that.

      They're saying that CU gave corporations more rights to pour money into politics, thereby giving them more "speech" than natural people. This happens to be true.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    3. Re:American rights? by andresa · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's a good sign of a failing country. US fucked up their economy and many Asian countries took advantage of that by providing real, actual goods to people. The only thing US still has is entertainment industry, so it's not a surprise they're trying to protect that. But eventually it's a lost game, just because people got lazy and spend a lot more than they can, while other people (banks) tried to sell sell sell all those people loans. In the process many people got really rich, but it's not something you can do endlessly.

    4. Re:American rights? by Catbeller · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No. They have not. The Supreme Court decision happened in 1892, IIANM, when a former railroad lobbyist turned clerk of a Supreme Court Justice inserted it into an unrelated decision. The corporate lawyers ran with it, and it became impossible to call back. The trusts and tycoons had been try, without success, for decades to have the SCOTUS declare corporations people. One pro-corp lobbyist in a powerful position did the trick when law and reason wouldn't.

      In 1992, the SCOTUS declared money to be speech.

      In 2010, the SCOTUS removed all limits to corporate spending on lobbying, citing 1992.

      Result: corps, government licensed creatures, now have become the government, cuckoo-like, replacing the substance while the shell remains.

    5. Re:American rights? by Catbeller · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Fine, if the copyright expires. That was the deal, back in the 1780's. But the deal was unilaterally reneged on when copyrights became eternal. You want copyrights? Put a limit on them. Right now, the art and stories of the world are set to be owned by corporations until the end of time. And we are building a world-wide surveillance state to enforce that "property". There will be nowhere you can go, electronically, without the government, thru corporate proxies, looking over your shoulder and logging what you are looking at, what you are reading, what you are copying. Forever.

    6. Re:American rights? by click2005 · · Score: 5, Funny

      I propose changing it's name again, this time to the

      Worldwide Enforcing and Restrictively Protecting American Rights Against Sites Intent on Theft, Exploitation and Solicitation Act

      WE-R-PARASITES Act

      --
      I am a free slashdotter. I will not be modded, blogged, DRM'd, patented, podcasted or RFID'd. My life is my own.
    7. Re:American rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Welcome to the corporatocracy. It looks a lot like the oligarchies that were thrown out in revolutions in the 1700s and 1800s in the Americas and in Europe (like the French Revolution). The only difference is that the "official government" is a sham, while the "real government" - the corporate plutocrats - are holding on to power by telling a bunch of deluded fucking rednecks called "tea partiers" that anyone wise to the corporatocracy is a "socialist" or a "communist."

    8. Re:American rights? by WorBlux · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There are very though and well supported analysises that contradict your assertion if you care to look for them (Against Intellectual Monopoly) http://www.dklevine.com/general/intellectual/against.htm is one

      95% of rents for 95% of the works are extracted within the first 5 years. Also the vast majority of authors don't see a penny for their work unless sponsored by the publisher (and only the mega-authors are). Royalties are first applied to cover production setup costs. Most publishers require authors to transfer copyright to them, which prevents the authors from making derivatives of their own works without permission. In addition there are alternative models for such authors. If anyone can copy the work the value of the first goes up considerably and the main competition comes from being able to publish first. In addition there are alternative publishing and revenue models that have been successfully used. One such alternative is the maker endorsed mark

      Lastly the historical examples do not show that literature languished without copyrights. At the very least copyright should be reduced to a term less than ten years.

    9. Re:American rights? by moj0joj0 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Please allow me to expand upon this a little bit:

      As early as the mid-1800's the trusts and tycoons had been trying, without success, for decades to have the SCOTUS declare corporations people. In Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad, 118 U.S. 394 (1886), the Supreme Court recognized corporations as persons for the purposes of the Fourteenth Amendment.

      In 2003, the SCOTUS declared corporate funding cannot be limited under the First Amendment, in 2010 SCOTUS declared money to be speech and removed all limits to corporate spending on lobbying.

      The corporate person-hood aspect of the campaign finance debate turns on Buckley v. Valeo (1976) and Citizens United (2010): Buckley ruled that political spending is protected by the First Amendment right to free speech, while Citizens United ruled that corporate political spending is protected, holding that corporations have a First Amendment right to free speech.

      Result: corporations, government licensed creatures, now have become the government, by using their wealth to "unfairly influence elections." This lead to the first stirrings of unrest in the civil populous, most notably the 'Occupy Wall Street' demonstrations, citing no faith in their elected officials because of the undue power wielded by corporations and special interest groups to influence law makers.

      Now, protected by the very institutions that had been in place to protect people, citizens of the United States are denied at least two of the traditional corner stones of a democracy. Those foundations stones being the Ballot and Jury box.

      Timeline: -Tillman Act of 1907, banned corporate political contributions to national campaigns. -Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, landmark campaign financing legislation. -Buckley v. Valeo (1976) upheld limits on campaign contributions, but held that spending money to influence elections is protected speech as in the first amendment. -First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti (1978) upheld the rights of corporations to spend money in non-candidate elections (i.e. ballot initiatives and referendums). -Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce (1990) upheld the right of the state of Michigan to prohibit corporations from using money from their corporate treasuries to support or oppose candidates in elections, noting that "[c]orporate wealth can unfairly influence elections." -Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (McCain–Feingold), banned corporate funding of issue advocacy ads that mentioned candidates close to an election. -McConnell v. Federal Election Commission (2003), substantially upheld McCain–Feingold. -Federal Election Commission v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc. (2007) weakened McCain–Feingold, but upheld core of McConnell. -Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010) the Supreme Court of the United States held that corporate funding of independent political broadcasts in candidate elections cannot be limited under the First Amendment, overruling Austin (1990) and partly overruling McConnell (2003).

    10. Re:American rights? by Grishnakh · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There's a little more to it than that. The corporate plutocrats have effectively used the old maxim "divide and conquer", by having a system where there's only two parties, and there's really no difference between them (when you look at their actions, not their words). They get popular support by pandering to different groups; one panders to religious extremists and "deluded fucking rednecks" as you call them, the other panders to "liberals", "progressives", etc. They tell their target groups what they want to hear, whether it's "hope and change!", or "we need to ban contraception", or "we need to eliminate income taxes" or whatever. Then when they get elected, they simply continue the same policies with little or no change, while distracting the voters with "terrorists", or "the other party is being obstructionist", or "we can't allow this big corporations to fail or else the economy will be destroyed, so we're going to give them a no-strings bailout package", or any other excuse they can come up with.

    11. Re:American rights? by lexsird · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I have been pondering how to remove the SCOTUS without just putting a noose around their necks and giving them a good stretch. I think a Constitutional Amendment would do the trick just fine. Is there any other way to eject these seriously deluded people out of these positions of demigods of our State? There has to be a way to remove one if they go bad. If not then our founding fathers seriously dropped the ball on this one.

      Those two acts, one of of declaring money speech and removing all limits to corporate spending to lobbying, are blatant acts of treason against the State. Our founding fathers are spinning in their graves like gyroscopes on that. Hasn't it been said, that once the law becomes unlawful, the people themselves will become a law of their own? Or something like that?

      Effectively with the SCOTUS declaring this, has effectively removed all voice from the people in their government. Only the corporations will be served, and our country as we known it has been rendered extinct. You no longer have representation, because those elected will serve those who can dump mountains of cash in their pockets. Because it's free speech and corporations are free to speak because they are people.

      Wow, that is so fucked in the head it's surreal. If you look at the history of corporations, you will see how they were only allowed with control, but they have been struggling to gain more and more power until at last they have it all. Sweet Jesus, we are seriously fucked. Someone tell the OWS people to pack it in and go home, the SCOTUS has sold us out, we can't change the laws now even if we wanted to.

      Lets consider this big shit sandwich for a second before we all have to take a bite. Corporations are multinational entities. This means that we now have unknown foreign entities with unlimited influence upon our State. Do you think we will now have a prayer of stopping our labor/industry from being exported to whatever third world country that works for next to nothing? Nope, so give a big kiss and a wave goodbye to American jobs. Without American jobs, the 99% become quickly vagrants, no home, no vote.

      This is now the land of the corporations. They will thin the herd. They don't need us any more. They are setting on their money, just waiting for us to starve out, die off, while their political lackeys will cut off any help to the bottom end. They will then proceed to shove everyone not in their service down through the meat grinder, no safety nets, just whirling blades of homelessness, no medical, no food, no voice. Say hello to the American Gulags, the concentration camps, and if you are lucky prison. If you are extra special, you can have the treat to serve in their jackbooted enforcement corps or as a thug putting their thumbscrews on the last of the free world.

      The sad thing is, we deserve it. We have been stupid enough to just let them get by with creeping up on us. We watch "sports" when we should be watching these criminals against humanity and beating their asses down when they stick they heads out of whatever hole from Hell they crawl out of. We have fucked around with our own indulgences, while our slavery chains have been forged loudly right on our hands and feet. Forget "Bread and Circuses", we are mesmerized by Hollywood, fast food, cable TV, all the indulgences of the Internet. We have been reduced to gutless, spineless cowards who will just bow down and take whatever our Overlords decide for us.

      Watch now as these foolish protestors who are a decade too late, are made examples of. They will be crushed, and you will set on your fat asses and make excuses for those who destroy them or why "you can't get involved". That sickly feeling you will experience in your gut, that is the soul of your once great nation dying, and the shame will be overbearing. How ironic! The great American, taken down, not with an epic fight or struggle, but handed over by a bunch of simpering, ignorant pussies, not worthy of being the descendents of the forefathers who bled and sacrificed, only so that their heirs could just piss their freedoms away.

      R.I.P America

      You deserved going out a more glorious and dignified way.

      --
      Take the Red Pill.
  2. Land of the free? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Enjoy your police state.

  3. inducement? by click2005 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Wouldn't that cover any site that ever mentions copyright infringement in a non-negative light?

    Copy movies, games & music!!!!!

    bye slashdot!

    --
    I am a free slashdotter. I will not be modded, blogged, DRM'd, patented, podcasted or RFID'd. My life is my own.
  4. House v Senate by damn_registrars · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The conservative democrats in charge of the senate drafted a scary but not terrifying bill. The conservative republicans in charge of the house responded by making a terrifying bill to rectify it with. That is what we get when we keep pushing all of our politicians further to the right. Next, President Lawnchair will proclaim this bill to be a great victory for the American people and sign it into law to show how he can work with his fellow conservative politicians in Washington DC.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    1. Re:House v Senate by Charliemopps · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This has nothing to do with left and right. It has to do with the inevitable road to subservience that government control of social policy always leads to.

  5. You know you've given up on the government when... by orphiuchus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When you're response to garbage like this changes from outrage, and a motivation to act, to a sigh and a slump of the shoulders.

    You know what? Fuck it. The majority in this country doesn't understand or care whats going on in Washington, and the corporations now run both political parties, but at least I get to keep my guns. Well, I cant use them in self defense anymore, but they sure do look neat.

  6. Re:I fucking hate... by mattventura · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think its a great acronym. The RIAA, MPAA, and the other groups behind this bill are complete parasites, and I think they deserve to have a bill named after them.

  7. Re:china copys us stuff and pass it off as there o by inviolet · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Welcome to world where you do what's good for you at the moment. It's not like this is a new concept for US either. China practically owns US now, and in 10-20 years it will start to really show. In the end, they will probably fall again, but it will be China who controls the world soon (again). It's the cycle of life.

    It's hard to 'own' a country by holding its currency, when you don't also control its printing presses. In the past decade, the US has doubled its money supply (M2), which via inflation has pulled about 40% of the rug out from under the US currency holdings in China's central bank. And there is no let-up in sight. In terms of money, China has been royally screwed.

    Of course they weren't after money; what they wanted was to industrialize and modernize, getting their hands on our IP. They did, but you are mistaken if you think that such a thing is a net loss for the US. When the world contains many new manufacturers of the goods we desire, the real cost of those goods goes down. Have you noticed that even though your money has been inflating like crazy over the past decade, manufactured goods have nevertheless cost fewer dollars? A microwave oven these days costs $35!

    Not to mention new R&D. China is beginning to invent new things, and make new discoveries. While these things have temporary effects on the movements of money, in the long run we benefit from having other people making discoveries alongside us, rather than continuing to scrabble in rice paddies.

    --
    FATMOUSE + YOU = FATMOUSE
  8. Re:China copies U.S. Intellectual Property... by jd · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Indeed. Didn't the US do this for a longish while, signing up to the International treaties after they'd got the good stuff?

    I'm not saying that China is "faultless" or the US is "all bad", but let's face facts - America would not have made the progress it has if it had respected European patent laws and European property rights. If it wants to claim China is in the wrong, then I have nothing against that provided it is NOT for the purpose of maintaining a hegemony obtained solely through the same practices. If China is guilty, then American corporations and the American government owe Europe a percentage of the profits secured through IP theft.

    Sure, that might push the US into recession. Isolating China and closing down all counterfeit goods plus genuine goods based on stolen IP would not merely put China into recession, it would bankrupt it. If you're willing to do the latter, you should be man enough to accept the former.

    The good news is that 100+ years of compound interest for some of the products and 60+ years of accumulated value in the case of property illegally confiscated from British and other Allied nations during WW2 should cover the combined debts of Italy, Greece, Spain and Ireland, and leave enough left over for the heads of State to put in advance orders for GTA 5.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  9. Re:china copys us stuff and pass it off as there o by ackthpt · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Welcome to world where you do what's good for you at the moment. It's not like this is a new concept for US either. China practically owns US now, and in 10-20 years it will start to really show. In the end, they will probably fall again, but it will be China who controls the world soon (again). It's the cycle of life.

    Back in the eighteenth century Lord Macartney approached the Emperor with the finest goods of Britain - which paled in comparison to the riches of the asian court. There's a saying, "China already has everything, would could you possibly offer China", ultimately the answer was Opium.

    China is returning to glory days, where China will have everything everyone else has and the question will be, "What can you possibly offer to the Chinese?" Tough question to answer.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  10. So bye-bye these American rights by jpapon · · Score: 5, Informative
    A long, long time ago...

    I can still remember

    How that music used to make me smile.

    And I knew if I had my chance

    That I could make those people dance

    And, maybe, they’d be happy for a while.

    But legislation made me shiver

    With every takedown I’d deliver.

    Bad news on the doorstep;

    I couldn’t take one more step.

    I can’t remember if I cried

    When I read about their lawless crime

    But something touched me deep inside

    The day the freedom died.

    --
    -- Let us endeavor so to live that when we pass even the undertaker shall be sorry. -- M. Twain
  11. Presumption of guilt by Adrian+Lopez · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In the United States, people accused of a crime are guaranteed a trial and presumed innocent until proved guilty. Under the E-PARASITE Act, a website is presumed to be infringing unless and until the affected party can, if allowed to do so by the government, prove to the government that the website is perfectly legal. What a shameful perversion of a justice system that prides itself in being a model of justice.

    --
    "In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
    1. Re:Presumption of guilt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In the United States, people accused of a crime are guaranteed a trial and presumed innocent until proved guilty.

      Tell that to the people in Guantanamo Bay...

  12. Re:china copys us stuff and pass it off as there o by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    A microwave oven these days costs $35!

    Yes, and it costs $35 because corners have been cut in its production. Microwave ovens today are far simpler and more fragile than their counterparts from 20 or even 10 years ago.

    A side effect of this: because new ones are so cheap, a broken one will be thrown away instead of repaired. More waste. More consumption. Is the world any better off because of it?

  13. Re:china copys us stuff and pass it off as there o by turing_m · · Score: 5, Funny

    World of Warcraft?

    --
    If I have seen further it is by stealing the Intellectual Property of giants.
  14. Re:china copys us stuff and pass it off as there o by waddleman · · Score: 5, Informative

    For example most microwaves are missing the ability to have constant output with variable power level. Now microwaves duty cycle unless you by the higher end Panasonic with "Inverter Technology". What was once standard component is now a differentiating feature for higher price models.

  15. Re:china copys us stuff and pass it off as there o by Curunir_wolf · · Score: 4, Informative

    Could you please at least try to refrain from running your mouth before you check your facts? The largest owner of American debt is not China- Over 40% of US debt is owned domestically. China owns about 10%. These figures are about a year old, but they've changed significantly.

    China is, for all intents and purposes, a single creditor. While domestically held debt is a much larger share of the total debt, that is spread out among millions of individual creditors. So, Chiner is still holds the largest share of US debt than any other creditor.

    --
    "Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
    --- Jerry Garcia