Slashdot Mirror
MP Says 'Failed' Piracy Warnings Should Escalate To Fines & Jail
An anonymous reader writes with news that, not long after UK ISPs agreed to send piracy notices (Voluntary Copyright Alerts Program), thoughts have already turned toward adding criminal penalties. From the article: Prime Minister David Cameron's IP advisor believes that the carrot needs to be backed up by a stick. In a report published yesterday largely detailing the "Follow the Money" approach to dealing with pirate sites, Mike Weatherley MP says now is the time to think about VCAP’s potential failure.
"The Voluntary Copyright Alert Programme (VCAP) is welcomed and will be a good step forward once it is hopefully in operation in 2015, although it is primarily an education tool," Weatherley says. ...
"Warnings and fines are obvious first steps, with Internet access blocking and custodial sentencing for persistent and damaging infringers not to be ruled out in my
opinion."
These suggestions aren't new, but this is the second time in a matter of months that the Prime Minister's closest advisor on IP matters has spoken publicly about the possibility of putting persistent file-sharers in jail.
From the constituency who agree prisons trump paper from Politicians
When politicians running for election start getting in real trouble for stealing songs and images to use in their promotional material then they can start to think about applying this to the little people.
How about a fine and prison for making a false complaint or warning about a copyright violation?
Hey, that guy illegally downloaded a movie that's worth 20$ on DVD.
Let's put him in jail, costing the government thousands of dollars per year.
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
Prosecutor,"Yah, you're going to jail for downloading some crappy movie."
You,"But I never downloaded that movie."
Prosecutor,"Lets hear your defense."
You,"I run a free wifi spot for people who want to check the net when they're out and about."
Prosecutor,"You should have never said that fellow. You're responsible for what other people do on your router. So lets see what other criminal activities they did before we sentence you to just a couple years of jail."
There's an alternative dialogue that involves a guy who clicks on links he finds on Twitter and Facebook and doesn't realize he watched copyrighted material.
God spoke to me
For a moment it sounded like asshats sending out frivolous takedown notices via carpet bombing would end up in jail.
Should've known that adding sanity to the mix would be asking too much.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Content industries are merely a speck on the surface of the global economy. Why are we devoting so much judicial and legislative time to them?
Those sharing culture shall be prosecuted.
The rent-seeking shall continue until you comply.
Please insert your coins into this slot [ ] after reading.
Or you will be prosecuted to the furthest extent of the law.
As I understand relevant statutes, such as the corresponding US statute (17 USC 512), protections like "common carrier" and "safe harbor" stop applying once there exist "red flag" facts that reasonably should alert a provider to a subscriber's wrongdoing. Courts have lately been finding willful blindness when the accused intentionally arranges not to be made aware of "red flag" facts.
Just do it harder. That'll work.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
First, Copyright infringement is a civil matter and should remain a civil matter. Second, IP address and times are a terrible way to identify a person. With VPNs, proxies, dynamic IP addresses and carrier grade NAT, IP address is about the least reliable way to figure out who is doing something. The evidence we use for theft and breaking and entering is much more solid than the evidence given for Copyright infringement.
You insinuate that everyone who infringes copyright is "too cheap to pay for content". So what's the price of a lawfully made copy of the film Song of the South? And what steps should a singer-songwriter take to avoid accidentally rewriting someone else's song (Bright Tunes Music v. Harrisongs Music)?
Naturally for a person that is not on average income it's difficult to understand proportion.
Like a punishment (if found guilty) proportional to the crime (if proven as such).
Every so often someone calls for a tougher stance on copyright infringement. How about a more reasonable stance on copyright in general?
Maybe all this Gestapo copyright notions should be canned and a more enlightened, modern system be created?
I agree with some other posters, why not make false copyright complaints accountable? -You know for making lies available for download.
A 'singular oddity' is an event that cannot be explained and only happens when you are alone.
An IP address does not correlate to an individual. I would have thought someone with a user id below 1 million would know that by now.
"Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
And this was, of course, meant to go to a completely different thread. I should probably close a few windows...
(actually, it's kind amazing that this doesn't happen more often... now mod this offtopic please. Thanks)
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
The copyright concept has to be reviewed. The only problem is, people with the power to do it receive some bonus to keep ignoring it.
Let's have Parliament put a law into place that warns him whenever he incorporates someone else's ideas and philosophies in his speeches, and after the third time, put him in jail.
After all, can't have him "pirating" other peoples' intellectual property, now can we?
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
I don't get how you can talk about incarceration at all in this context. Once you block someone's internet, their ability to "infringe" is over.
IANAL, but the process would be something like this: Copyright owner sends take down notice. Service owner fails to comply. Copyright owner files civil suit and court orders civil penalties, including an order to take content down. Service owner still doesn't comply and can now be held in contempt of court (criminal offense).
No new law needed.
Have gnu, will travel.
I'd like to know what this moron's bank account looks like.
...would that be before or after the media lobbyists have stopped by his office?
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Decreasing government revenues is a choice, not an inevitable outcome of some fundamental change in society. Part of the nature of the decreasing revenue is that we keep moving more and more discretionary spending into corporate welfare, like private prisons. The best part about this is that the worse you treat people in need, the more likely they are to wind up in prison. $$$.
Little people laws don't apply to "the elite", whether they be government or just rich.
Third: these are accusations; there has been no trial. They're saying after you've been accused x times, you go to jail. I think they missed a few steps.
An (IP address, time) pair correlates to an individual MAC address, so long as the DHCP server at the ISP and the DHCP servers on intermediate NATs log these (IP, time, MAC) tuples. And I seem to remember efforts to force ISPs to either log these tuples or go out of business.
...steal a handbag. You wouldn’t steal a car. You wouldn’t steal a baby. You wouldn’t shoot a policeman. And then steal his helmet. You wouldn’t go to the toilet in his helmet. And then send it to the policeman’s grieving widow. And then steal it again!
"Hey [music company], I'd like to use [song] in my campaign. I'm sure a nice company like you would be happy to support me in this manner"
The only time the music company might go after a politician for it is if he/she is using said material and is pro copyright-reform (a.k.a not in their pockets)
Just not against "infringers"...instead, they should jail the copyright maximalists, the MPAA, and the government stooges who pervert criminal justice systems to pad the recording industries bottom line! Enough of this! It's time that everyone, as members of so-called "free" societies REJECT the corporate takeover of our governments!
In these days of ever decreasing government revenues taxpayers money should not be wasted trying to save money for the huge multinationals that HAVE all the money. If corporations want to track down pirates it should by on their own dime.
Especially gieb that these multinationals often have complex schemes to avoid paying taxes to ANY government. So it's really individuals and small businesses who will be paying here.
They're saying after you've been accused x times, you go to jail. I think they missed a few steps.
And for that reason alone, there is absolutely no chance this is going anywhere.
No British government is actually going to pass a law saying you can be sent to jail without having your day in court less than a year before a general election. They get enough flak for pushing in that direction with terrorism-related laws that are only used against a tiny number of people in practice, because of the principle and the risk of later abuse, and that's a subject where a significant fraction of the population will give them a free pass for one reason or another.
Even if some British governments might try anyway, the current administration is a coalition, with a junior partner desperate to prove they are still politically relevant in the face of potentially being wiped out for a generation at the next election. A juicy civil liberties debate would play right into their hands.
And even if they did somehow manage to pass such a law, the chances that it would stand up to the inevitable human rights lawsuit the first time anyone actually tried to use it are slim to none.
This is almost certainly just a relatively unknown MP trying to make a name for himself in the run up to the aforementioned general election. In this case, he's pandering to potential donors from Big Media, possibly because there are finally some changes coming into force that make copyright laws (marginally) less anachronistic in the UK and Big Media inevitably don't like them (despite having managed to water them down to being almost meaningless anyway).
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Fraudulent Copyright takedowns should result in fines and jail.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
They're saying after you've been accused x times, you go to jail. I think they missed a few steps.
And for that reason alone, there is absolutely no chance this is going anywhere.
I don't know where the idea came from in this discussion that "infringers" would go to jail without a trial. Citation for that? I believe that what is meant is after three warnings you would be considered for prosecution. The prosecution if successful might lead to imprisonment.
You know what I find more amazing? It's amazing how arrogant and bold the US government is, when the people have the ABILITY to revolt, because they have guns. Governemnt officials act without any fear of retaliations, so they get away with... Well, with everything.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
Because an adviser with no real power stated something you disagree with?
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.