Lamest copyright infringement legislation yet

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-07-26 12:06pm

The Senate Judiciary Committee will consider a bill Thursday that would hold technology companies liable for any product they make that encourages people to steal copyright materials.

Critics say the bill would effectively outlaw peer-to-peer networks and prohibit the development of new technologies, including devices like the iPod. The Inducing Infringement of Copyrights Act (S. 2560) was introduced last month by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), head of the Senate Judiciary Committee. The legislation would hold a company liable that "intentionally induces" a person to infringe copyright.

"We think this is a recipe for disaster for the Internet," said Markham Erickson, general counsel for NetCoalition, a public policy group that represents Internet companies like Google, Yahoo and Internet service providers. "The bill as it is currently drafted is extremely broad and not entirely clear. It would, at a minimum, undermine the Sony Betamax decision."

In the Betamax decision, the Supreme Court ruled that any technology that people use for legal purposes would be legal -- even if the device could be used for illegal purposes, like content piracy. Because of the ruling, the consumer electronics industry and Hollywood went on to develop a thriving market in home video and DVDs.

"This takes an objective standard and replaces it with a subjective one that allows a copyright holder to try and determine the intent of a company when producing a product," Erickson said. "It's not outside the realm of possibility that you would be placing the entertainment industry in charge of technological innovation if this law were passed."

It's the biggest threat to technology in 20 years, said Jeff Joseph, a spokesman for the Consumer Electronics Association. The organization's president will testify before the committee.

The judiciary committee will also hear testimony from Register of Copyrights Marybeth Peters and the heads of the Business Software Alliance and the Recording Industry Association of America. A representative from the IEEE-USA's intellectual-property committee and the director of NetCoalition will also testify.

One supporter of the bill, RIAA chief Mitch Bainwol, is expected to include information about the music trade group's recent settlement with iMesh, a company that makes file-trading software, in his testimony. On Tuesday, the RIAA announced that iMesh agreed to pay record companies $4.1 million for copyright infringement. The company also said it will modify its business to prevent consumers from illegally sharing or downloading songs.

Critics said the bill is the wrong fix for the piracy problem.

"This bill really creates a huge risk that people won't bring new products to market because they will be afraid to be sued out of existence," said Mike Godwin, legal director of Public Knowledge, which is opposed to the bill and is submitting written testimony to the committee. "We keep asking, 'What's the rush?' It's not clear that everything has to be wrapped up in the summer of 2004."

Godwin said Senate judiciary staff are eager to get the legislation moving because they are worried that a federal appeals court in California will uphold an April 2003 court decision that did not hold peer-to-peer companies liable for their users' copyright infringement. The so-called Grokster case was argued before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in February, and a decision is expected soon.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2004-07-26 12:12pm

wow. . .what a load of bullshit. i have a feeling this'll never pass. if it does then people could start fining VCR manufacturers and copy machine manufacturers. potentially anything can be used to violate copyrights.

Mayabird · Post by **Mayabird** » 2004-07-26 01:03pm

The Inducing Infringement of Copyrights Act (S. 2560) was introduced last month by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), head of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Surprise, surprise, Orrin is at it again. Destroying technology with ridiculous laws seems to be his pet project.

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2004-07-26 01:16pm

So the fact that computers are used for mp3s and stuff makes computer companies liable? Great.

Mr Flibble · Post by **Mr Flibble** » 2004-07-26 01:18pm

I think something like this was posted before (sorry to lazy to do a search) This is however rediculous legislation and it is dountful it could pass due to the silly ramifications. If it considers iPods inducing copyright breaches(as the article sugeests) then not just VCRs or copy machine manufactures could be fined, but computer manufactures, cd burner manufacturers and a whole score of other things. The legislation seems to be way to broad and open to interpretation, theoretically it could be used against paper and pencil manufacturers, if you stretched it far enough. Only any idiot would propose such worthless legislation.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2004-07-26 01:21pm

This obviously won't pass for good reason.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2004-07-26 02:03pm

And if it does pass I give it a couple months before the Supreme Court strikes it down. Passing laws that specifically contradict their rulings doesn't go over well for Congress.

DPDarkPrimus · Post by **DPDarkPrimus** » 2004-07-26 03:00pm

Stormbringer wrote:And if it does pass I give it a couple months before the Supreme Court strikes it down. Passing laws that specifically contradict their rulings doesn't go over well for Congress.

Damn activist courts.

Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi · Post by **Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi** » 2004-07-26 03:28pm

I'm sure that this proposal will go the way of Orrin Hatch's scheme to blow up computers that share files. Once it gets struck down, they'll all go back trying to link filesharing to AIDS.

sketerpot · Post by **sketerpot** » 2004-07-26 07:08pm

Wasn't Orrin Hatch the guy who used pirated software on his official web site?

Post by **Gandalf** » 2004-07-27 05:47am

By this logic, you could imprison much of the manufacturing industry. What about the people who run printing presses?

I'm glad this stuff doesn't happen much in Australia. Though today at the cinema I saw an anti downloading ad.

Faqa · Post by **Faqa** » 2004-07-27 07:00am

Let's see:

Pens - You can copy out books with em'. Stop selling pens!

Copy Machines - Ditto.

Scanners - Ditto.

Tape Recorder - Vicious pirates record songs off radios. Arr, matey, a threat to the Republic.

CD Burner - oh, crap, they're already screwing this up, as anyone who recalls NWN's SecureRom fiasco knows. Here's a hint - backups are a GOOD thing, morons!

Seat in Congress - used for theft, fraud, murder, etc. Sue the U.S goverment!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Here's a hint - stop making the artists your bitches, start selling regularly on a song-by-song basis and stop inflating prices to upgrade to 22-inch rims on your Benzes and you MIGHT get more sales....

A guy who should know something about artists and copyrights speaks

Mayabird · Post by **Mayabird** » 2004-07-27 09:09am

sketerpot wrote:Wasn't Orrin Hatch the guy who used pirated software on his official web site?

Bwahahahaha!

I should've seen that one coming. If he got caught he'd probably try to reword his legislation to only get people who pirate music and videos. Because, you know, companies lose a lot more money when some fifteen year old fileshares a couple crappy pop songs instead of buying a $15 CD than when senators steal $900 software.

Vertigo1 · Post by **Vertigo1** » 2004-07-27 06:07pm

Mayabird wrote:
The Inducing Infringement of Copyrights Act (S. 2560) was introduced last month by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), head of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Surprise, surprise, Orrin is at it again. Destroying technology with ridiculous laws seems to be his pet project.

Little fucker just won't give up will he? I think its kinda ironic that the very technology he wants to do away with, he's using to promote his bullshit!

Einhander Sn0m4n · Post by **Einhander Sn0m4n** » 2004-07-27 06:48pm

A theory I've heard about these extremist anti-copy bills is that they're specifically so overbroad and draconian because they're designed to be 'sacrifice plays' in order to build up a tolerance in Congress so that bills just slightly less draconian but just as bad in effect have a higher chance of passing. Fortunately for sane people, these bills make an extremely negative impression on people toward the Congresspeople who've been corrupted by the Dark Side. Here's hoping it backfires on them to the point the Voters oust these whores in Congress from office.

Viva La Revolucion, May Freedom Triumph.

Jalinth · Post by **Jalinth** » 2004-07-27 07:27pm

Einhander Sn0m4n wrote:A theory I've heard about these extremist anti-copy bills is that they're specifically so overbroad and draconian because they're designed to be 'sacrifice plays' in order to build up a tolerance in Congress so that bills just slightly less draconian but just as bad in effect have a higher chance of passing. Fortunately for sane people, these bills make an extremely negative impression on people toward the Congresspeople who've been corrupted by the Dark Side. Here's hoping it backfires on them to the point the Voters oust these whores in Congress from office.

Viva La Revolucion, May Freedom Triumph.

If you're dealing with an incumbent, they are damn hard to get out of office unless they've committed criminal offenses, slept with someone (hopefully same sex), or pissed off the special interest groups.