JPF Home Page Forums General Messages General Message Forum Occupy Congress today!

What would be really cool is if the entertainment industry took the millions of dollars it spends lobbying Congress and used it to build spin-off companies that would compete with companies like Google and Apple.

It's funny, when Obama dropped his support of these bills, he also said that the tech industry should help figure out how to solve the piracy problem. I think that's a fair challenge to rise to. The entertainment and tech industries should be partners, not enemies, because there's a LOT of money to be made together.

Bill,
I just read that this bill has been pulled. Agreed that a Bill needs to be written to where us "Peons" can understand it. However Lawyers that do understand things like this do understand it. As stated, this law was written to gain a remedy of copyright infringment in countries that haven't signed the Berne Agreement. In those cases blocking or taking down those sites is the only remedy. Kind like elimanating a whiskey still. Busting it up with a bulldozer.

And there are certain bodies of influance out there that wants to elimante copyright law all together. And they probably don't care about copyright law, even tho they understand it.

Interesting penalty Bill

The guy who killed Michael Jackson gets 4 years. The guy who sells his music without permission gets 10

BTW, I claim no ownership of this analogy which appeared in a commentary I read that attributed it to a blog the author read. I only claim copyright to the exact phrasing of the analogy, and anyone who copies it verbatim should go to jail for at least 10 years plus pay a fine of everything they own

YouTube is owned by google, one of the most cash infused companies on the planet. YouTube can track the times a song is played and I think it should be their responsibility to block the copyright abusers. Copyright Infringement implies there is a law already in existence that spells out what infringement is. The law's already in existence, YouTube is breaking the law. The person who posts the material is like the hooker and YouTube is like the pimp.

The performing rights societies (at least BMI) give out awards for songs that have been played a million times. It is relatively rare to be a song that gets played a million times. You wind up with some big money when you reach that level. YouTube however, can get a million plays and from what I hear the money is comparatively miniscule to the amount that comes from the PRO.

I find it interesting that defenders say the intent of the legislation is to go after foreign companies but then use domestic companies as examples of why SOPA and PIPA are good legislation


Again...I have no issue going after those who violate copyright. Just don't make the "general population" the police on pain of punishment...or make the "general population" pay a price for the actions of the few.


By illustration, that current legislation works reasonably well is exemplified by the Megaupload takedown. That it still has holes is exemplified by the fact that shutting down Megaupload has also affected legal users of the site who now have no access to their own and other legal material. This is also an issue with SOPA and PIPA...it made no distinction between legal and illegal...just shut everything down...punish everyone for the actions of the few.


And Sausage...please elaborate on "and from what I hear the money is comparatively miniscule to the amount that comes from the PRO". You've made some pretty strong statements, then you end it on unsupported hearsay where you don't even give us a number.

And ScottAndrew...THAT is an insightful comment. I think of the millions and millions wasted on patent disputes. We know current patent law and practice stifles innovation and encourages the practice of patent trolling...and takes resources away from the business...

If they actually harnessed the technology they are trying to shut down...claims that Megavideo made its owners (megavideo is a megaupload owned entity) tens of millions of dollars tells me it works as a commercial distribution model.

Just checked some of the other gross violators of copyright...seems very little is available via the link sites like fastpass, sidereel etc...and stuff at the upload sites, like videobb, have also taken down material, either by the host or by the uploader.

Guess the Megaupload bust has caused quite a ripple affect.

Not really John
The enabler got 4 years. The guy who killed Michael Jackson is dead.

I didn't understand the bill but I seriously doubt I will go to Jail for including your post in my post without paying royalties to you and the other person you took the quote from. I don't recall the word Plagiarism in there. We are talking about Copyrighted material. Legally copyrighted material. The United States Copyright Office.

To suggest MJ killed himself is totally off base Bill...it is very clear and has been legally proven that the doctor prescribed and supplied the drugs. MJ trusted the doctor to look after his health

For info about Copyright Cases you can go to http://www.copyrightguru.com

Not to get off on a tangent I have to disagree.

I spent a few years picking up the bodies of drug addicts who "didn't" kill themselves.
You can blame it on the drug dealers if you want but the addicts are the ones killing themselves.
And it is well documented that Michael Jackson was addicted to drugs. Michael Jackson "Trusted" the doctor to enable him to take the drugs he wanted.
And The doctor who was supplying the drugs was no better than any other drug dealer or doctor who hands out "Legal" drugs to addicted persons who die from the overdoses of the drugs they take.

And I think of this internet Piracy thing the same way.

Google is the Doctor who enables the Pirates to sell the Material and the people who steal the Copyrighted material are the addicts.
Punish Google for allowing it
Punish the dealers who enable it
Punish the addicts for stealing it.

But like drugs if you cut off the supply you stop the use. Problem is the users don't want it stopped.

I've never seen so many people in the music creation business so hopping mad at each other before, but this issue seems to do the trick. Those who support the law as written are painted as moneygrubbing censorship-lovers and those who want a rewrite are portrayed as moneygrubbing copyright-infringers.

Kinda like a typical internet thread about any political topic, I guess...

This is what I'm interested, the assertion that a company like Wikipedia isn't allowed to state an opinion or call to action regarding something political. I understand there are limits on campaign donations/lobbying, but that's not what we're talking about here. I would be very interested in hearing from a corporate lawyer on this topic. I don't see why JPF couldn't espouse views on a particular product or law. It would be more problematic if Wikipedia was taking out ads against a particular candidate or actually lobbying.

As for the self-interest part, to what end is Wikipedia doing this? Isn't it possible that they're actually concerned with freedom of speech and the general well-being of the Internet? Likewise with Google? There's a reason why tons of independent tech professionals, authors and professors all agree with their position. Because Google/Wiki et al are all right on this issue.

Humm,
For the life of me I can't make the connection between Tech Companies and Copyright Violaters. Unless it is because Tech writers think their Software will not sell somewhere. Or it is being used in countries that have remedys/laws in place to Proscuate Copyright Violaters. The Law would protect those Tech Companies as well as Copyright owners where there is a remedy written in Law. The problem is where there is no ability to seek a remedy in countries that host violaters. I doubt anyone would be Prosocuted for having an opinion, even if it's wrong.

The people that operated megaupload may be extridited to the U.S. But they will get due process, something that isn't avaliable in countries that haven't signed the Berne Agreement.