Gonzales proposes new crime: "Attempted" copyright infringement

CNet News Blog ^ | May 15, 2007 | Declan McCullagh

[dayglored]

Gonzales proposes new crime: "Attempted" copyright infringement

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is pressing the U.S. Congress to enact a sweeping intellectual property bill that would increase criminal penalties for copyright infringement, including "attempts" to commit piracy.

"To meet the global challenges of IP crime, our criminal laws must be kept updated," Gonzales said during a speech before the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in Washington on Monday.

The Bush administration is throwing its support behind a proposal called the Intellectual Property Protection Act of 2007, which is likely to receive the enthusiastic support of the movie and music industries and would represent the most dramatic rewrite of copyright law since a 2005 measure dealing with pre-release piracy.

...

• Criminalize "attempting" to infringe copyright...
• Create a new crime of life imprisonment for using pirated software...
• Permit more wiretaps for piracy investigations...
• Allow computers to be seized more readily...
• Increase penalties for violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's anti-circumvention regulations...
• Add penalties for "intended" copyright crimes...
• Require Homeland Security to alert the Recording Industry Association of America...

...

[dayglored]

> I’m sure this will be applied equally to everyone, including the communist chinese, right?

Nah, that would require work. American citizens are closer at hand, and easier to imprison...

[dayglored]

>> The Democraps will love it ...

> But yet it is a Republican administration proposing it.

We are in Bizarro World.

[Political Junkie Too]

One question that I've always had is, how does copyright work when a talk-radio host reads someone's column on the air? How is that different from playing someone's recorded music on the air? Wouldn't having a column read on the air deprive the newspaper, and the author, of sales and royalties?

I assumed that when one purchases a copy of a newspaper, that one is purchasing the right to read the material in the paper, not purchasing the rights to the material in the paper. So, if someone reads a column on the air, wouldn't that also be a violation of copyright?

Could something like this also be used to silence talk-radio?

-PJ

[Grut]

OK, before we get too excited, are we absolutely sure CNet didn't fall for an 'Onion' item?

[surely_you_jest]

Gonzalez is a buffoon. He needs to be gone. Yesterday.

[dayglored]

>> Implement broad forfeiture reforms to ensure the ability to forfeit property derived from or used in the commission of criminal intellectual property offenses;...

> In other words, if you download a song, they could theoretically take your house.

"Theoretically" my arse. The RIAA/MPAA can already litigate you into bankruptcy, AND BE MISTAKEN ABOUT THE CHARGE, and still not even have to say as much as "Sorry about that".

This WILL happen, in time.

[Sgt_Schultze]

If you are afraid of fighting criminals and you need to inflate your crime-fighting numbers, it is necessary to create new criminals. It is a smart plan to create non-violent criminals because the police too prefer to go after them than the real bad guys (witness the popularity of speed traps).

Soon, we'll all be able to be charged with violating some law and the government will have supreme power.

[Señor Zorro]

Unfortunately, you are correct. We keep geeting the same caliber of politician no matter what we do.

Actually, it's the result of choosing "moderate" Republicans. Remember, Bush was the moderate Republican in 2000. What is needed are real conservatives, something that Bush either isn't or might as well not be.

[niki]

The Democraps will love it...

And so will the Republicans.

[dayglored]

> OK, before we get too excited, are we absolutely sure CNet didn't fall for an 'Onion' item?

See post #72, and this:

http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2007/May/07_ag_353.html

YOUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK

[misterrob]

How does RIAA have the power to take someone’s life savings?

[dayglored]

> Soon, we'll all be able to be charged with violating some law and the government will have supreme power.

See my post #103. Great minds obviously think alike...

[misterrob]

And for that matter so aren’t the general public’s attitude about copyrights.

[caver]

“Soon, we’ll all be able to be charged with violating some law and the government will have supreme power.”

I think it’s been said that the average citizen goes through life each day and breaks a number of laws and not even know it.

[snowsislander]

OK, before we get too excited, are we absolutely sure CNet didn't fall for an 'Onion' item?

Check posting #72, it is a quote directly from the Department of Justice website.

[longtermmemmory]

This is Gonzalez trying to save his butt by listening to lobbyists who curry favor with democrats.

This is just as specific at thought crime.

How about “attempted causing bad feeeeeelings” .

[caver]

“Actually, it’s the result of choosing “moderate” Republicans. Remember, Bush was the moderate Republican in 2000. What is needed are real conservatives, something that Bush either isn’t or might as well not be.”

I’m guilty of that. I thought Bush was a conservative when I voted for him.

[jpsb]

Perhaps, if the copyright laws were moral and fair, like say the patent laws, the “people” might respect them. But since they are a cash cow shame for shyster lawyers the “people” have zero respect for them.

[Duke Nukum]

The more I look at his picture at the DOJ website, the more he looks like Janet Reno. It’s an uncanny resemblance!

[longtermmemmory]

They want to be able to reach INTO your computer via spyware and damage your OS if THEY think you have something THEY THINK you should not.

Gonzalez’s going for this shows he is too incompetent to be AG.