×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

PIRATE Act Introduced in Congress

michael posted more than 10 years ago | from the shiver-me-timbers dept.

United States 1049

certron writes "Xeni Jardin has written a story for Wired about the "Protecting Intellectual Rights Against Theft and Expropriation Act of 2004" aka the PIRATE Act. It and another related bill are designed to criminalize P2P filesharing by lowering the burden of proof for law enforcement and proposing jail terms of up to 10 years. The bill was introduced by Sens. Orrin Hatch and Patrick Leahy, both of whom received large contributions from the entertainment industries. Under the bill, even sharing a single file (if a judge decides the value is over $10,000) could land a user in jail. Read the full text of Orrin Hatch's remarks."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Poll Troll Toll (-1, Troll)

LBArrettAnderson (655246) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692523)

Who's the hottest editor?

Cum Taco [calcgames.org]
Michael [calcgames.org]
Timothy [calcgames.org]
CowboyNeal [calcgames.org]
Other [calcgames.org]

Re:Poll Troll Toll (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692550)

Your polls are very gay.

plz fix. kthx

Re:Poll Troll Toll (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692580)

Rusty's [kuro5hin.org] wife naked [malefactor.org]

pirate (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692526)

pirate pirate fp pirates

EARLY POST (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692528)

Death to all kikes!

This post has been brought to you by the one and only Ralph JewHater nader!

My wish (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692698)

I wish Orrin Hatch would die. This is not an off the cuff response, I really wish he was dead. I think things would be a lot better if maggots were burrowing through his flesh. That is all.

Excuse me while I smash my head into the wall. (5, Interesting)

The I Shing (700142) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692530)

A bunch of college kids are sharing copyrighted corporate products (music and maybe movies), so we have to put them in prison because people who share music and movies online are a bunch of child molesters and terrorists. Yeah, makes sense to me.

This is the kind of thing that Frank Zappa warned us was going to happen.

Sure, we say it all the time, "Corporations are running the country," meaning that corporations have undue influence over lawmakers; but it's getting to the point that we're going to have to find a stronger statement, like "Corporations are completely and utterly in charge of every aspect of our daily lives, using the government and their nearly exclusive control of all media content to keep it that way." Or something shorter if we can think of it.

Mein Gott, what can we do?

Re:Excuse me while I smash my head into the wall. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692559)

Rusty's [kuro5hin.org] wife naked [malefactor.org]

Something shorter? (4, Funny)

LionKimbro (200000) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692571)

...you mean, like...

ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO US! ..?

You mean something like that?

Re:Excuse me while I smash my head into the wall. (4, Interesting)

turnstyle (588788) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692588)

"This is the kind of thing that Frank Zappa warned us was going to happen."

Well, Frank's widdow protects [yahoo.com] her copyright interests in Frank's works...

Re:Excuse me while I smash my head into the wall. (5, Insightful)

The I Shing (700142) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692644)

You're right, she does. Gail Zappa goes after cover bands who use Frank Zappa's name, forcing them to take all references and photos of him off of their websites and their flyers. The most they can do is say something like 'Performing the music of FZ" or "...the music of a guy named Frank," and the whole thing starts to look ridiculous.

Really, to smother Frank Zappa's name and image under a mountain of lawyers like that seems kind of odd, especially considering how much disdain the man himself had for the music industry's choke-hold on everything.

Oh, well.

Re:Excuse me while I smash my head into the wall. (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692680)

Well, if you were the widow (or offspring) of a popular artist, and the government gave you this kind of power, wouldn't you milk it for all it's worth? It beats working for a living, that's for sure.

Re:Excuse me while I smash my head into the wall. (1)

IEEEMonkey (669772) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692616)

I know that the corporations seem to have a strangle hold on a lot of things, but the fact remains that many of the artists have slept in vans, eaten Mac and Cheese three meals a day, and worked very hard to make the music. Forget about the greedy people and think about those who have worked so hard to produce that which is being stolen. I agree that fat cats are just that, but file sharing also takes away from the band. File sharing if it really helps to sell the records is a great thing... if it stops people from buying them then it is unfair and should be stopped.

Re:Excuse me while I smash my head into the wall. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692635)

The artists that people won't buy from are the ones that are large enough to not really matter about. If an unknown goes from 10 fans to 1000 thanks to file sharing but loses about $100 in CD sales, that more than makes up for it come concert time.

Re:Excuse me while I smash my head into the wall. (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692684)

Artists make very little percentage off of CD sales when they are signed by major labels. Artists make there real money off of touring live, thats why every group does it, alot. Basically CD's are just a way to advertise there concert. Which in all reality, sending songs over the internet is more effective at that. The only people who really care about CD sales and song downloads enough to sue people and put them in jail are the corporations and record labels who make all of their money off of CD sales.

Personally, I could care less about about the major record labels and would rather them go bankrupt.

Re:Excuse me while I smash my head into the wall. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692621)

Reduce the power of government so corporations can't abuse it like this.

Regarding the issue of control... (4, Insightful)

Faust7 (314817) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692626)

"Corporations are completely and utterly in charge of every aspect of our daily lives,

Well, in some sense they always will be. We're consumers, the objects of our consumption need an origin, and corporations are that origin. How they choose to design products, manufacture products, market products, and lobby for legislation regarding products will always exert an incredible level of completely transparent control over our lives.

It's up to individual consumers to render that control opaque -- but total opacity is very, very, very difficult.

Re:Regarding the issue of control... (4, Insightful)

AmigaAvenger (210519) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692681)

we USED to be consumers, that is the old model of thinking at least. The current trend is that once a industry has a stranglehold on the consumer, we become the enemy, the opponent, since no natural opponent no longer exists.

think of all the current examples of the huge media conglomerates which are doing things to screw the consumer. what is stopping them... nothing. consumer backlash no longer means anything.

Re:Regarding the issue of control... (-1, Flamebait)

geekee (591277) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692720)

You are being irrational. Companies bow down and kiss the asses of consumers. Consumers run this country ultimately, since companies give them what they want.

Re:Excuse me while I smash my head into the wall. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692700)

You fucking mron. What part of copyright infringement don't you understand. Companys don't run the country. The basic rights of those that run companies are under attack and have been since the beginning of the 20th century. Socialist love to spout your rhetoric, but it's just tyranny disguised as altruism. Let companies have the rights the constitution entitles them.

RWN! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692533)

Rusty's [kuro5hin.org] wife naked [malefactor.org]

alright the acronym is ridiculous (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692536)

sometimes it is just so blatantly obvious that people will go to great lengths to contrive clever acronyms despite the obvious redundancies within the actual expanded title.

come on now.

Re:alright the acronym is ridiculous (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692598)

Rusty's [kuro5hin.org] wife naked [malefactor.org]

Re:alright the acronym is ridiculous (1)

willpall (632050) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692697)

I propose congress pass a bill that would be dubbed the NO ACRONYMS Act of 2004. This would prohibit legislative bodies from naming every bill with a silly acronym. Now I leave it to you to come up with what the N.O. A.C.R.O.N.Y.M.S. act's name would stand for. (And no recursive's! That's cheating)

Glad I'm not the only one (0)

the_twisted_pair (741815) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692716)

who finds this kind of thing disingenuous.

Example, most cinemas in the UK now have the usual pre-screening stills preceeded by a dire anti-taping warning headed FACT - allegedly the 'Federation Against Copyright Theft'.

Come on guys, you're not convincing anyone. Trying to co-opt language smacks of desperation, not moral right.

WHAT?! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692537)

first post! mod me! weeee!

Best legal system money can buy.. (2, Redundant)

grub (11606) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692539)


Hatch and Leahy get loads of money from the media moguls to make millions of people criminals while guys like OJ can walk the streets. What an awesome legal system!

Re:Best legal system money can buy.. (2, Funny)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692608)

Well, and there's also the fact that Orrin Hatch thinks he's a
really great singer [edgecity.net] , and therefore likes to say of himself that he has a personal stake in seeing file sharing criminalized. Of course, anybody who's heard his music knows his musical "hits" aren't very likely to get swapped like crazy, and so the truth is that he has rigorously no risk of losing any money from P2P whatsoever...

Re:Best legal system money can buy.. (1)

Tom Dunne (320684) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692623)

OJ was tried in a criminal court and a jury of 12 citizens found him innocent. If that's not good enough, what would you propose?

Re:Best legal system money can buy.. (1)

A Bugg (115871) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692702)

and yet he was found liable for their deaths in civil court.

Re:Best legal system money can buy.. (4, Interesting)

turnstyle (588788) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692636)

Hmmm, doesn't anybody remember when the EFF used to argue that we shouldn't hold P2P tech accountable for how some may misuse it? And that they themselves suggestted suing infringers [com.com] rather than the technology?

Re:Best legal system money can buy.. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692666)

I've been saying that for years, they are commiting a crime, but that's not the point. The problem here is that the punishment far outweighs the crime.

Re:Best legal system money can buy.. (3, Insightful)

iminplaya (723125) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692718)

Suing is one thing. Jail is quite another. Current copyright law protects the industry at the expense of the artist, and is worthy of nothing but contempt. As long as these kinds of laws remain on the books, all law becomes contemptable.

Scary (4, Funny)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692542)

Under the bill, even sharing a single file (if a judge decides the value is over $10,000) could land a user in jail

Given the strength of the dollar these days, that's like the price of a single Anne Murray CD...

Re:Scary (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692563)

That probably has more to do with the RIAA's pricing, eh?

Re:Scary (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692629)

Rusty's [kuro5hin.org] wife naked [malefactor.org]

Re:Scary (4, Funny)

bfg9000 (726447) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692689)

If you're pirating Anne Murray, you have already suffered enough.

So what is this going to do? (5, Insightful)

xactoguy (555443) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692545)

Honestly, the prisons are full enough as it is with petty criminals, if they even attempt to enforce these they are going to fill them up even faster. And, who wants to put in jail? If this gets passed and starts getting actively enforced, hopefully someone is going to stand up against this. I hope you've all donated to EFF lately...

Re:So what is this going to do? (-1, Troll)

Djarum (250450) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692573)

Nonono, you see they are going to start KILLING us soon. You downloaded a Jay-Z song? Off to the gas chamber you evil monster!

Re:So what is this going to do? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692605)

If this gets passed and starts getting actively enforced, hopefully someone is going to stand up against this.

It's your constitutional right to own guns so government can't stomp all over you.

Aim well.

Re:So what is this going to do? (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692620)

What we are going to do is use Freenet ( http://freenet.sourceforge.net/ ) and Mute-net ( http://mute-net.sourceforge.net/ ) anonymous P2P applications to exchange files now.

Upload some music and make a music webpage, im in the middle of making an emulator and book webpage.

See you soon :)

Re:So what is this going to do? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692713)

Hey, cool. Haven't heard of Mute-Net before, thanks a bunch! :)

Re:So what is this going to do? (1)

iminplaya (723125) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692667)

The prison industry needs more "customers" to make a profit. They need the prisons to be full, and then they can build and fill more prisons. They could be behind this as much as the entertainment industry. After they put enough geeks in jail, America might not need to outsource their IT jobs overseas anymore. It doesn't matter if the crime is petty or not. Just fill the jail.

Prison is a big business (4, Interesting)

MacFury (659201) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692679)

and, who wants to put in jail?

I think you meant to ask, "who wants to put everyone in jail?"

Prison is a booming industry. People make massive amounts of money keeping others locked up. Prison's even have lobbyists to help guide harsher laws.

Of course, rich people seldom go to jail. Congressmen and high ranking government officials are rich and abstracted from the common man. They could care less about you. You're just dollar signs to them.

Re:So what is this going to do? (5, Insightful)

maeka (518272) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692691)

If you would read the linked articles you could see past the hype and realize that this proposed law is an attempt to punish file sharers through fines not jail time.

From Sen. Hatch's comments: (emphasis mine)

It is critical that we bring the moral force of the government to bear against those who knowingly violate the federal copyrights enshrined in our Constitution.
But many of us remain concerned that using criminal law enforcement remedies to act against these infringers could have an overly-harsh effect, perhaps, for example, putting thousands of otherwise law-abiding teenagers and college students in jail and branding them with the lifelong stigma of a felony criminal conviction.

The bill I join Senator Leahy in sponsoring today will allow the Department of Justice to supplement its existing criminal-enforcement powers through the new civil-enforcement mechanism. As a result, the Department will be able to impose stiff penalties for violating copyrights, but can avoid criminal action when warranted.


I'm not going to use the T word (theft), but let me just say that the casual breech of copyright is getting out of hand, and getting more and more government attention. Shouldn't we (American) Slashdotters be glad that Congress is discussing a law that increases civil penalties instead of making copyright infringement a criminal offense? With the MPAA and RIAA's tactics increasingly blurring that line between civil and criminal offense, I find that this law actually makes a sane and calm attempt to address the problem.

Re:So what is this going to do? (1)

wrmrxxx (696969) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692721)

It seems surprising that the music distribution industry would really want jail sentences for copiers. I would have thought that they'd prefer to continue using file sharing as a way to extract money from their victims by suing (or just by threatening to sue), and to excuse themselves from any competitive pressure that might require them to provide value for money.

Maybe their very cunning plan is to get this law passed, and invest heavily in the private prison business.

This needs to get nipped in the bud NOW (0)

Djarum (250450) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692546)

Sweet jesus, they just won't stop until all of our rights are taken away and the US government controls the internet and the rest of the world.

Butt Pirates! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692555)

AHAHAHAHAHA

Oh good... (4, Insightful)

Quaoar (614366) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692558)

So now the prison system will be keeping DANGEROUS FILE SHARERS off the streets, while at the same time Los Angeles is releasing thousands of prisoners early becuase of a lack of funding. I'm sure glad that John Q. Empeethree won't be hassling our celebrities anymore! Whew!

Re:Oh good... (1)

ziggy_zero (462010) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692653)

Yeah, but they're releasing (according to Arnold) non-violent criminals only. We're talking potheads that got busted after getting pulled over or something. And they'll still be on probation after they're released of course.

This whole mess is still silly, but not that silly. Murderers aren't being let free to make room for file-sharers.

Ways around this (1, Troll)

CyborgWarrior (633205) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692561)

Just put a clause in the Kazaa EULA that says that the person using the program or the network is not associated with or working for the Recording Industry and that any information that is gathered from the Kazaa network is to be kept confidential. I'm not a lawyer, but it sounds feasible to me...

Re:Ways around this (3, Insightful)

DRUNK_BEAR (645868) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692593)

Hello, this is your wake up call to reality. Do you really think a clause will stop law enforcement from finding criminals? Then commit a crime and put a clause on your doorstep that no law enforcement is to enter your home. Stay inside your home and get someone to do your stuff for you (groceries, etc). You should then be able to get away with free crimes!! Right???

Re:Ways around this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692651)

"Do you really think a clause will stop law enforcement from finding criminals?"

Well, then let's change the copyright rules and length so these people are no longer 'criminals'. It also has the benefit of allowing stupid morons who scream 'criminal!' a way out who do not understand that legality and morality are seperate things.

Re:Ways around this (2, Interesting)

mroch (715318) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692672)

Hello, this is your wake up call to reality. The RIAA is NOT law enforcement! Obviously, Kazaa cannot keep the POLICE from conducting an investigation through their EULA, but they have every right to keep certain private individuals from using their products. If the RIAA can't use Kazaa, they can't find IPs (unless they use other software, which violates the Kazaa EULA too [read: Kazaa Lite]), they can't file John Doe lawsuits and subpoena contact information.

Re:Ways around this (1)

mroch (715318) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692641)

The RIAA would just funnel money into other RIAA-friendly, info-gathering, lawsuit-filing organizations in less obvious ways than hiring them, like Microsoft did for SCO.

Also, what is the penalty for violating the EULA? I can't imagine that it is more severe than the proposed penalties under the PIRATE Act. And finally, is evidence gathered in violation of an EULA (illegally?) admisible in court?

Obviously, IANAL.

Re:Ways around this (5, Informative)

nertz_oi (596157) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692660)

are you joking?

read this [snopes.com] please.

Does anybody else remember... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692567)

when bills weren't all named with almost-witty acronyms?

Same coin, different sides (5, Insightful)

aynrandfan (687181) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692569)

This is from Hatch's own site . . .

- Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah), Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, today joined Ranking Democrat Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) in introducing the "Protecting Intellectual Rights Against Theft and Expropriation Act" (the "PIRATE Act") to allow the Department of Justice to exercise its existing enforcement powers through a civil, rather than criminal, enforcement proceeding.

Does anyone need more proof that the Republicans and Dems have become just two sides of the same coin? After this, I don't trust them to do much of anything right. *sigh*

Re:Same coin, different sides (1)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692630)

The fact you thought there were two "sides" of the coin to begin with is just troubling on its own.

Last I checked the only premier of Ontario to not totally lie through their teeth and misappropriate money to their friendly "sponsors" was almost thrown out for doing what they promised to [Mike Harris if you're wondering...].

A good voter knows their vote doesn't count but uses the vote as an excuse to duck out of work earlier....

So stop being such a pansy and play along

Tom ;-)

Couldn't help but notice... (4, Insightful)

Faust7 (314817) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692570)

Tens of thousands of continuing civil enforcement actions might be needed to generate the necessary deterrence.

I'll be damned if that doesn't sound just a bit like SCO.

Patrick Leahy?!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692572)

Not Senator Leahy! Oh man, this is truly a dark day. He was one of the few decent holdouts against the right-wing estalishment, and the only congress critter that I ever wrote a letter just to thank him for being cool to. Hopes... shattered...

Good Thing DVD's are less than $30 each (3, Interesting)

PaK_Phoenix (445224) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692574)

The fact that they sell the 'intellectual property' in question for far less than $10000, could go quite a ways toward minimizing the worth of said content.

Re:Good Thing DVD's are less than $30 each (3, Insightful)

gilmet (601408) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692655)

True, but they'll make the case that you made it available for 493,563,221 downloads for a total intellectual property value of $10,000,000,000 or so.

Re:Good Thing DVD's are less than $30 each (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692659)

IANAL, but you can't use that CD to broadcast on the radio or to a large crowd (legally, anyway). That $10000 might be more realistic than you'd think.

Yet another gun control law... (5, Insightful)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692582)

Last I checked copyright infringement was still illegal. Does society need more laws that state copyright infringement with P2P is now illegal? ... I mean honestly P2P development is strict freedom of speech. Not to mention the good that comes from it [e.g. BitTorrent].

Laws like this make me proud to live in a backwards country such as Canada.

Tom

Re:Yet another gun control law... (5, Interesting)

grub (11606) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692643)


Laws like this make me proud to live in a backwards country such as Canada.

I hear ya man..

I think there will soon be a market in junkets to Canada for Americans that will want to (smoke pot|buy cheap prescription drugs|download movies and music)

I have 2 spare bedrooms for rent!

Re:Yet another gun control law... (1)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692654)

You got room to rent? Mind if you email the location/cost/etc? Cuz I still live at the parents home and need a place to move out too ;-)

[and yes, I'm serious...]

Re:Yet another gun control law... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692669)

done

Re:Yet another gun control law... (3, Interesting)

_KiTA_ (241027) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692676)

Laws like this make me proud to live in a backwards country such as Canada.

Make room. If Bush 2.0 gets in again I have every intent of booking it to Canada or England as soon as I can, before he starts up the draft to fund the manpower portion of his neo-con wetdream wars. I won't be alone, either.

I'm sure both Canada and England have their problems but at least they aren't being ran by corporations in the background under an increasingly thinly veiled guise of Democractic Republic-ness.

Re:Yet another gun control law... (5, Funny)

VValdo (10446) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692687)

Last I checked copyright infringement was still illegal.

Yeah, but now it's illegaler.

W

Re:Yet another gun control law... (2, Funny)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692707)

"illegaler".

Touche. I can just imagine the senate now... "my bill is bigger than yours! Yeah well my lobbying can beat up your lobbying!"

[in the middle of the floor, two tall senators and one short citizen in the middle]

Tall1: Keep away, keep away!
Tall2: Hey hey, hehehe come get it, whoop missed!
citizen: Hey gimme my rights back!!! ;-)

Tom

Bad idea... (4, Insightful)

ameoba (173803) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692586)

Any law that simultaniously lowers the burdens of proof while raising penalties seems like a fundamnentaly bad idea.

Tho, I guess after the War on Drugs put a generation of poor & minority youth in prision, they have to do something that has the same effect on whites & the middle class, lest they look racist (not an easy trick for a Republican from Utah to pull off).

Re:Bad idea... (1)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692683)

What.... are you trying to say jail time for civil offences is cruel and unusual?

SHAME ON YOU!

The THOUGHT POLICE will visit you soon....

That and personally I would be like "hey senator oppressive, you're not getting voted back in for this one!"

But of course the sheep, er, masses, will vote randomly and they'll most likely keep their chairs...

Tom

It's time (4, Funny)

ericdano (113424) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692590)

It's time to start outsource all that file sharing......just like all these companies are outsourcing jobs......

We all know this is unreasonable (5, Insightful)

bigberk (547360) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692600)

DMCA... PIRATE... Who do you think owns your country? I don't mean to offend you geeks in the US and EU, but your governments perpetually place the interests of large corporations above citizens. Your government is not acting in your best interest. Tell your elected officials that you disagree with what they are supporting, and command them to stop.

Re:We all know this is unreasonable (2, Informative)

Zed2K (313037) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692696)

"Tell your elected officials that you disagree with what they are supporting, and command them to stop."

Yeah I already tried that, got a letter back basically saying I am wrong and he is right and because he is an elected official he knows what's best for me. They are all the same, the elected ones, the ones running for election, all of them.

Nobody will need broadband if this passes :-) (3, Insightful)

OneInEveryCrowd (62120) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692601)

Heck, I'll just cancel my dsl and join a health club or something. If I just wanted to surf I could use the computer at the San Jose public library or at work.

Hopefully the Japanese companies don't go after the fansubbers if this happens.

Acronyms (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692604)

Why must Congress place dumb acronyms with all of their pieces of legislation?

PATRIOT Act.
CAN-SPAM Act.
PIRATE Act.

Yo ho, yo ho, a pirate's life for me.

"Enshrined in our Constitution." (5, Insightful)

LionKimbro (200000) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692619)

"It is critical that we bring the moral force of the government to bear against those who knowingly violate the federal copyrights enshrined in our Constitution."

Yeah. I'll feel guilty about it, when the fed actually proves that copyrights exist in order to [wikipedia.org] "promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries."

It sure doesn't feel like limited times.

You've heard it before. And you'll hear it many times over again.

Re:"Enshrined in our Constitution." (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692647)

Rusty's [kuro5hin.org] wife naked [malefactor.org]

Re:"Enshrined in our Constitution." (1)

The I Shing (700142) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692699)

I'm not a very relgious man, but AMEN, BROTHER!

Unless you're a friggin' vampire or a god, 95 years ain't a "limited time" by any standard.

Re:"Enshrined in our Constitution." (1)

KD5YPT (714783) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692719)

I think the 90 years limitation OR 15 years after the artist death (is it 15? or something else, I forgot) is designed because in the past, creating a very good piece of artistic work is VERY hard. That and the limitation in an essence means the artists OWNS his own work for the rest of his life (kinda like buying something, it's yours, until you sell it).

Another excuse for throwing your enemies in jail. (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692628)

Million and millions of Americans take part in the sharing of illegal programs/music/movies on the internet, often without their knowledge. At the risk of sounding hackneyed, this kind of law makes it even easier for "Big Brother" to throw potential troublemakers in jail.

one solution.. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692633)

refuse to vote. voting only encourages them.

Re:one solution.. (4, Insightful)

ewhac (5844) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692706)

Apart from armed rebellion, voting is the only meaningful feedback mechanism you have, and is considerably less messy, so I suggest you use it.

The press has been bought off. Shame is obsolete. Overt corruption has somehow morphed into an asset. Bald-faced lying to the public no longer surprises anyone, much less gets anyone in hot water. And, if you're not careful, voting will become just another CBS/Gallump/Diebold opinion poll, with every bit as much scientific and moral validity.

Don't give up the last lever you have.

Schwab

Definately the wrong answer... (5, Insightful)

gaijin99 (143693) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692637)

Prison sentences for non-violent crimes seem like a bad idea from every angle I look at them. Prison sentences for stealing a single copy of the new Madonna song sound incredibly stupid.

"Sharing" music on a P2P network is stealing, yes, but under what odd twisting of logic can it be worse than shoplifting the CD?

We are seeing the music industry going steadily more insane every day, and when something with that much money goes mad life gets interesting. Piracy isn't right, but it is inevitable during the transition between the RIAA and whatever distribution/compensation model we invent to replace it. Draconian laws with punishments as inappropriate as this one wants are definately not the solution to theft of music.

I find it especially ironic that the same congress that can't seem to punish the aristocrats who steal millions from their employees wants to send people to jail for up to ten years for stealing a little music...

Re:Definately the wrong answer... (4, Informative)

Paddyish (612430) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692656)

"Sharing" music on a P2P network is stealing, yes, but under what odd twisting of logic can it be worse than shoplifting the CD?

Sharing on a P2P network is not stealing. Copyright infringement is a completely different issue. Jail time is definately the wrong "solution".

Re:Definately the wrong answer... (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692728)

"Sharing" music on a P2P network is stealing, yes

Well, the record companies would like it if everyone thought that way, so they attempt to make a simplistic analogy between information and physical objects. Our intuitions and ideas about whether it is wrong to take an object away from someone else don't directly apply to merely making a copy of something. There's a good reason we have separate laws for theft and copyright infringment. I strongly urge you not to fall into the habit of treating them as the same thing.

Anyway, the REASON they hate copying more than simply walking into a store and taking a cd out with you is that they can can control the latter, not the former. Control is their game, and they're dead scared their "business model" will go the way of the dodo at any moment. Instead of adapting to the market they are treating millions of good Americans like criminals.

Aint Slashdotting great (3, Funny)

Aczlan (636310) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692645)

Less than 30 comments and the server running Orrin Hatch's Senate page is slashdotted..... Well now we know where the budget is not being spent

boy, they have balls... (5, Insightful)

Roger Keith Barrett (712843) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692646)

...the P2P companies are trying to ransom the entertainment industries into accepting their networks as a distribution channel and source of revenue.

This is HILARIOUS! They're accusing P2P "companies" of trying to get a monopoly on music distribution? Isn't that a little like Napoleon accusing Hitler of being a dictator? Holy tamoly, these guys got balls.

Secondly... the fact that they use "companies" shows once again that they don't get it. Computer networks don't have to be sponsored by companies! These lawmakers are so deluded that they not only do they allow corporations to overrun the country, they refuse to acknowledge that indviduals even exist anymore.

It gets worse every day...

Consituents speak out (5, Informative)

plankers (27660) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692668)

The way to stop this sort of thing is to be a constituent of Hatch or Leahy. If you are one, make it clear to them that they will not get re-elected with behaviour like this. And then tell your neighbors, friends, coworkers, etc. what these two guys are up to, and ask them outright to never vote for them again.

The rest of the country cannot get these two corrupt, entertainment industry pawns out of office. Only Vermont and Utah residents can. Do not re-elect these two. While it might seem they are doing good, they are doing long-term damage to the country, including your states.

Send a message to Leahy [senate.gov]

Send a message to Hatch [senate.gov]

Please do it now before these two turn the U.S. citizens into entertainment industry criminals and slaves, and infect every other nation with these ideas.

Orrin Hatch (1)

CdnShaggy (683274) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692673)

If memeory serves me correctly, Sen. Hatch a few years ago, was involved in some controversy. His state of D.C. had voted in favour of passing a medical marijuana bill. He passed legislation saying that those votes couldnt be counted. This sort of thing doesnt surprise me.

Re:Orrin Hatch (1)

johnthorensen (539527) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692714)

Orrin Hatch is a senator from Utah, not the District of Columbia.

And I have a hard time believing the Latter Day Saints would elect a guy in favor of any sort of marijuana...

:)

-JT

A serious question. (5, Interesting)

mcc (14761) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692677)

Out of curiousity.

Some time ago on Slashdot the possibility of a "geek PAC" was discussed.

This is a quesiton somewhat along the same lines. Essentially:

Exactly how much money would it require to do whatever necessary to* remove Mr. Orrin Hatch from a position of legislative power in the United States government?

I think you could find a variety of private citizens, from a number of corners, who would be ecstatic to donate to such a cause, due to the probable benefit it would have in terms of protecting the civil rights, artistic expression, and technological progress of this nation. Slashdotters annoyed at his attempts to introduce increasingly violent anti-file-sharing bills are just the tip of the iceberg.

* legally

"priracy" "children" "human shields" "pornography" (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692685)

I started to count the usage of each of these words or phrases in the speech but couldn't finish because of nausea.

It seems that he'd like us to believe that we must have this bill to protect children from pornography - although no place does he suggest protecting the IP rights of pornographers from file sharing children. I wonder why not?

Read carefully the paragraph where he justifies government intervention if 1) the level of file sharing becomes particularly egregious; or, 2) public health and safety are put at risk; or, 3) private civil remedies fail to deter illegal conduct. Pay particular attention to each of these - any one of which he claims justifies government action.

"Particularly egregious"? Legally defined as exactly what level of file sharing?

"Public health and safety"? The public well being is threatened by sharing music how?

Author? (2)

Amorpheus_MMS (653095) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692693)

I wonder if it was the MPAA or the RIAA that wrote this one. ;)

What if... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692705)

What if you just put '.jpg' on the end of all your songs rather than '.mp3'?

Support the EFF (0)

morelife (213920) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692715)

The EFF knows how to fight this crap and is doing so. Oh, and, let's vote the Bush administration out of office too. Before we have a police state.

Yay us! (5, Funny)

Spad (470073) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692723)

Slashdotting the US Senate webserver - that's got to be a new high point for /.

amazing,, (4, Insightful)

Roger Keith Barrett (712843) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692724)

It's really amazing...

When jobs are oursourced overseas or we bring people in with H1 visas they tell us "let the free market decide" and that we shouldn't be "protectionist."

But when one of their corporate buddies starts to have a problem, they pull out the guns. It goes for music as well as drug companies (not allowing us to reimport drugs from Canada is definitely protectionist).

Boy... how long can any of us hold out faith in our government?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?