Posted on 07/30/2007 10:46:39 AM PDT by ShadowAce
Back in May, the Justice Department issued some proposed legislation to tighten US intellectual property laws and to criminalize some forms of "attempted infringement." Now, legislation based on the proposals has been introduced in Congress by Rep. Steve Chabot (R-OH), complete with stiffer jail terms for violaters and the controversial "attempted infringement" clause.
H.R. 3155, the Intellectual Property Enhanced Criminal Enforcement Act of 2007, aims widely. Everything gets a section: unauthorized recording of films in theaters, circumventing copy protection, trafficking in counterfeit goods. The bill even directs the Attorney General to send federal prosecutors to take up permanent residence in Hong Kong and Budapest and specifies the number and makeup of FBI investigative teams.
In most cases, the bill appears to simply double existing penalties. Section 12 alone, for instance, makes a 10 year prison term in a 20 year term, three years into six, five into 10, and six into 12. Poof! More prison time!
One of the bill's controversial features is the fact that people can be charged with criminal copyright infringement even if such infringement has not actually taken place. "Any person who attempts to commit an offense under paragraph (1) shall be subject to the same penalties as those prescribed for the offense, the commission of which was the object of the attempt," says the bill.
While copyright infringement is sometimes believed to be solely a civil matter, that's not the case. US Code 17, section 506 (a) spells out the conditions for criminal infringement under which the government can actually do the prosecuting, and they are quite modest. The infringement must be willful and the material in question must have a total retail value of over $1,000. This wouldn't be a difficult threshold for many P2P users to clear, except for the fact that this section also requires that the infringement be done "for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain."
The attempted infringement clause actually falls under this criminal infringement statute, meaning that it won't apply to file-sharing unless the courts suddenly take a hugely expansive view of "commercial advantage or private financial gain," and it's unlikely the government has some new interest in such cases.
The bill is full of the sort of things that groups like the EFF aren't going to like, and in fact the EFF has already issued a statement condemning the legislation. One of their concerns is that a small change to the law could have big effects on casual file-sharers for a different reason: P2P users could face greater penalties for infringement after statutory damages are expanded.
The bill allows "a judge to dole out damages for each separate piece of a derivative work or compilation, rather than treating it as one work," wrote Derek Slater, "for example, copying an entire album could translate into damages for each individual track, even if the copyrights in those tracks aren't separately registered."
When will the infringement on our individual liberties stop?
It has nothing to do with "restraining". It's merely another step in the quest to turn every "citizen" into a criminal--thus turning us into subjects, rather than citizens.
Ping....
Ping....
Why is it that politicians are hell bent to give everyone in America a criminal record?
You cannot control an innocent person.
To distract from their own criminal records.
“... There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any
government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one MAKES them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.
......just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted — and you create a nation of law-breakers — and then you cash in on guilt. Now that’s the system, Mr. Reardon, that’s the game, and once you understand it, you’ll be much easier to deal with.”
- p.411,
Ayn Rand, ATLAS SHRUGGED, Signet Books, NY, 1957
“The brutes, private or public, who believe that they can rule their betters by force, will learn the lesson of what happens when brute force encounters mind and force.” -Ayn Rand Atlas Shrugged
Libertarian ping! To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here.
Why?
because you end up losing certain rights.. one of them being firearms ownership for felonies...
The RIAA's Bribe and Graft checks are still clearing!
Party Time.
When it ceases to be profitable to politicians.
Liberals are great at fretting, nitpicking and scheming about what others do.
It is inherent in their narrow minded genes, not Levi’s for the Nancy Pelosi crowd.
Do as I say not as I do - AlGorerithem on global warming.
Cool, this means if someone infringes on the copyright for my program, I can get damages not for just one program, but for each of the many classes in it.
Actually, not cool. It's just dumb, designed specifically for the greed of the copyright cartel. No, it was probably written by them and handed to their purchased congresscritter with orders to run with it. We already have very good statutory protection for our works, no more is necessary.
“Why is it that politicians are hell bent to give everyone in America a criminal record?”
So they can kowtow to their new master’s from Latin America.
Do liberals have criminal records, Inquisitive Minds Want to Know????????????????????????????????????????
I always thought that for most Liberals a Criminal Rap Sheet was the same as a Curriculum Vitae... for the Nancy Pelosi crowd its called re-sue-me oops… resume.
It seems the Democrats think of our national treasury as a cookie jar perpetually refilling itself with our tax dollars.
The Democrats have certainly made a difference in Pork Legislation and Ear Marks unlike naivete Republican leadership, now they cover it up and hide it away in obscure bills.
Damn, Just Damn!
“””When will the infringement on our individual liberties stop?”””
Intellectual Property means It is somebody’s Property and you use it on their terms. Not because it is cheaper for you to consume a low price stolen or free version of the idea/product. If you do not like the price don’t buy it.
I have filed suit against one major computer company and 4 other manufacturers in the last 2 years and resolved all in my favor. These companies could have invested time and money to develop an alternative to my Idea but the risk to them was smaller to try and just steal it.
Where do all these good ideas come from? You are not going to get great literature, music, new inventions etc. without the promise of a capitalist payoff. That is the carrot that drives the engine of innovation. What you steal is the cream of somebody’s( or company’s) effort
Out of all the patents filed every year only 5% make it to market and only 2% are still there after a 5 years. Risks are very high. The same numbers probably apply to musicians, writers and artists
Even though whatever product you are looking at looks simple few have an understanding of the effort that went into it.
In my case it was extremely stressful I worked 60 hrs a week and more, no pay for several years. I drove around in a broken down car and ended up close to $500,000 in debt before I finally hit it.
This is the starving artist effect of the process. I may have not made it in the end and would not have done if I thought it was just going to be taken from me. This is probably one of the purer forms of capitalism.
How most people can express a socialist right to somebody’s else property is beyond me. You are stealing somebody’s best effort,sacrifices and labors. Go ahead write a hit song or the next Harry Potter novel or invent the next greatest latest invention. Make a million or just have it taken from you for the public good
I believe the changes in the law are recommended because the old laws were not working People/companies were still brazenly stealing other peoples ideas. Faced with jail time people might think twice. IMHO
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.