Congress wants to make streaming copyrighted media a FELONY
http://act.demandprogress.org/sign/ten_strikes/?source=fb
Tell Congress to oppose S. 978, the new "Ten Strikes" bill
Here they go again: Big business's lobbyists are launching another attack on Internet freedom. Senators are considering a "Ten Strikes" bill to make it a felony to stream copyrighted content -- like music in the background of a Youtube video -- more than ten times.
As the writers at TechDirt point out, under this bill you could go to jail for posting video of your friends singing karaoke:
The entertainment industry is freaking out about sites that embed and stream infringing content, and want law enforcement to put people in jail over it, rather than filing civil lawsuits.... We already pointed to one possibility: that people embedding YouTube videos could face five years in jail. Now, others are pointing out that it could also put kids who lip sync to popular songs, and post the resulting videos on YouTube, in jail as well.
That's right: Ten strikes and you could get jail time.
Less than a month ago, the Hollywood industry magazine, Variety, reported, "Industry lobbyists pressed House members on Wednesday to pass legislation that would make illegal streaming of movies, TV shows and other types of content a felony...."
Only a few weeks later, the MPAA is getting its wish.
Will you email your lawmakers and tell them to vote against the Ten Strikes Bill?
Just add your info at right to automatically send this note to them, under your name and from your address. (You can edit the letter if you'd like to.)
Just sign on at right and we'll send an email to your lawmakers.
Replies
In all honesty I hardly listen to older music or even newer music after about 10-20 plays, music Is not that big of a deal anymore this isn't the Napster days... old people.
You're missing the point a bit here, it would be illegal, for someone who does not own the copyright. Bands/publisher posting official videos... They own the rights to the music, they are free to do whatever they want.
This is just getting to stupid proportions. This is not what the founders of the constitution intended when they granted congress the power to, "in order to promote the progress of the useful sciences and arts", create copyright and patent law. This is so beyond the point of reason, you can't see the light back to reason. This is wrong, just wrong.
Since when did infringement become a higher crime than assault and battery?
You're all aware this is happening with many facets of every day human life, right? And has been for many years? I.e. pot?
Yes and it's sick. Protests are pushed into the dark corners where nobody will see them by so-called "free speech zones", the TSA assumes we're all carrying bombs (including our children) so they have to irradiate, humiliate, and grope us (and our children) to maintain the illusion that they're protecting us from each other. Cops are making up bullshit charges to use on people filming their questionable actions in public or arresting people for dancing silently in the Jefferson memorial (Jefferson, a staunch supporter of freedom of expression would be appalled). 200 miles within the US national borders are "constitution free zones" where your rights supposedly don't exist because they have to stop the 'terrists and those illegal aliens that tuk ur jerbz! Liberties are being eroded for the sake of "security". Truthfully, you're better off with a criminal than a cop. At least when a mugger gets your wallet and/or mobile phone, they'll leave you alone in most cases. If you piss off a cop, he'll beat your ass and drag you to jail whether he had just cause or not. They don't like it when you shatter their illusion of unquestioned authority.
Our societal system is broken. Bottom line.
Oh and did I mention this kid is FUCKED!
[ame]
Yeah, sorry. Civil rights violations kinda hit a nerve with me.
I can see it now: Some crazed drug offender gets early paroled and then goes on a killing rampage on a crowded school bus. Then we find out the only reason he was paroled was to make space in prison for some kid who was unlucky enough to be caught watching some youtube videos.
The lawmakers and big industry in this country are so out of touch with reality it's not funny anymore
It was never funny, but I get your meaning.
Granted it has no chance of passing (I hope), but still the fact that some idiot(s) taking industry bribes (campaign contributions heh) is planning to put this forward to a vote... all while the soldiers need to come home, the economy needs fixing, and the budget needs balancing.
Whoever it is that is wasting the countries time and money on this needs to be banned from politics and law for life!
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s112-978
Who are these people!? Ah here we go:
Klobuchar, Amy - (D - MN) Class I
302 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3244
http://klobuchar.senate.gov/emailamy.cfm
Coons, Christopher A. - (D - DE) Class II
127A RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5042
http://coons.senate.gov/contact/
Cornyn, John - (R - TX) Class II
517 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2934
http://cornyn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=ContactForm
No need to apologize.
The irony of our failure after Osama specifically proclaimed he intended to bleed us of our wealth, along with the passage of the Patriot Act are perfect reasons to be furious, at the least.
Ahahahah. Does anyone pay attention to politics anymore?
302 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3244"
Man, one of my senators is in on this? This will not do!
Jail is a walk in the park these days. You get TV in your cells, game consoles, books, free college....
Clearly someone needs to watch Hard Time on Nat Geo.
What are you in Jail for? Murder? Armed Robbery? Abuse? Narcotics?...No I made a Dragon Ball Z music video with a Hanna Montana song 10 times!
I was appalled by this whole thread up until I realized that he would be put in jail...
Now I see the upside.
Unfortunately, they've been trying all they can to kill fair use. They don't care that they're destroying people's ability to make beneficial use of content, they just can't stand the idea of people using content in ways that don't make money for them.
I doubt they will get the result that they want, but its the only way they will learn.
are you willing to be one of the innocent people who has to go to prison and get a felony on their record just so those fat fucks can "learn a lesson"?
Most popular music is utter trash, anyway.
Don't think he was saying that. It's unlikely that this'll end up in their favor, even if it passes. It's more likely that people adjust and rebel, while these people who seek a monopoly on culture lose money.
No, but I dont for one second think it would go that far, there would be outrage from the media and general populus at the first felony. Then there would be backtracking and the usual we made a mistake.
Even the idea of implementing it is so stupidly unfeasible, what with the structures already in place and the populations perception.
I think it probably should pass, actually. It'll open up the doors for many independent people to break into music by doing things independently. Since it's just corporations attempting to maintain their power in a partially free society, the tighter they lock the hands the more consumers will slip through.
Originally, I got the gist that ANY "Let's Play" stuff, music, ingame audio, snippets and everything was essentially being folded in under the parent company. Meaning if we did something with said stuff, we would be liable to a fine or payment, once we reached the 10 strike count.
Lets say if someone wanted to make another Portal joke, in a video, like "Chell's mind", they would have to contact Valve to get the rights to do so.
I found this stupid, because I really doubt that Valve has lawyers and assistants waiting on communication devices 24/7 replying to every email, hell, I don't think Ubisoft, EA and Activision combined together with Sony, Nintendo and MS would be able to tackle this issue, the huge piles of letters that must line up their boxes with people asking the right to show video X,Y,Z. Plus, with Duke Nukem's recent PR issue, companies could very well close any video that don't like.
Plus, it would require some investment on behalf of the users to get some paperwork done as well a decent backing of the law, bigger companies can pull this off easily, especially reviewers, but anyone else?
However, upon further looking up on said issue, I don't get the following things about it. So I'll break it down more.
The person committing infringement in question has to upload 10 of said 'items' within a time period of 180 days, meaning the person who is performing the uploading of said material is being charged on this point, plus they also have to make 2,500$ from said act.
If said video was used under fair license, they would need to pass the 5000$ mark inorder to get fined. In either case, pending on the severity, the prison time should be less then 5 years.
Now, people are saying it's a 10 strike count for the WATCHER and the UPLOADER depending certain variables, but I yet have to hear those.
To top it off, again, this is what the internet is yelling at me: The company must specifically state at the beginning if something be reproduced with Authorization or not, and this can goes back to being tackled with my first set of paragraphs about amount of money being made when it should be free.
I'm confused...each point seems to be there to contradict or confuse another point. I understand that this is need to stop uploading of full fledged movies and episodes online, but the larger context of the bill is too vague for comfort, so it really breaks more areas then fixes them.
Illustrating my point:
Epic Rap Battle (Lincoln vs Norris):
http://www.youtube.com/user/nicepeter#p/u/5/zj2Zf9tlg2Y
Used this song independent song, rather than something very well known, yet it got millions of views.
http://www.youtube.com/hitmansbest#p/u/0/ssHqdNnpkhg
though i don't think it will have a huge effect since how many people make money by posting content on YT, so i doubt someone will make 5k on copyrighted material.
stuff like this would prolly have the biggest effect on mash-up artists who sell songs or videos
Squeeze harder.
But its turning blue and stopped breathing.
That means its working! KEEP SQUEEZING!
That's how my phallus and testicles feels most nights...
*ba-dum-tish*
- the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
- the nature of the copyrighted work;
- the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
- the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.[1]I highly doubt they'll get any money from people in lawsuits that cost the companies more than what they'd actually get back.
It has everything to do with companies wanting to control the spread of their content, for good and for bad.
Expand fair use I say, mashups and creations on youtube is a wonderful thing that can even help the further spread of the content of these companies. However I have nothing against stopping unlicensed streaming of full movies or series on different places.
It's a bit of a gray area. If someone gains extreme popularity from doing things that would fall under some kind of fair use, then they could gain money from either ads, donations or extended services.
There are shitty abusive people on both ends of the IP struggle, no one is reasonable.
how the hell do the US gov, hope to enforce something like this?
the cost of obtaining subpoenas from courts in order to gain address/personal information from ISP's regarding specific IP addresses, and then sending billy bob the policeman to go and get that person, will be high enough.
not to mention, the internet is a global freeway... and since i live in england i can (and will if the bill passes) say "FUCK YOU AMERICA", and start streaming every single one of my music and video files.
Doesn't mean the law is good but it helps to keep things in perspective instead of pretending like every kid on youtube is going to be a convicted felon after this passes. Odds are in 99% of the cases no one will even try to enforce this on them. Again though, that doesn't mean it's alright.
Fortunately I highly doubt this is ever going to actually pass.
Campaign contributions mostly. We're at a point where being a politician has become a career choice and not a public service, politicians are constantly raising money for their next election so that they can stay in office.
http://maplight.org/us-congress/bill/112-s-978/954321/total-contributions?sort=asc&order=%24+From+Interest+Groups%3Cbr+%2F%3EThat+Support
So far 86 million dollars has been 'contributed' by interest groups supporting this bill.
They won't pursue legal action unless it's at the request of a copyright holder. The only situation I could see law enforcement trying to enforce this on their own is if they're already charging you with something and want additional leverage.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8289
Really? Has anyone been paying attention?
Bingo. That's why we have drug laws in the US in the first place. It puts the dirty brown people in jail so the uppity white people don't have to afraid of them (the preceding was an exaggerated stereotype, I'm not racist). As much as drugs disgust me, I don't want to see them outlawed. It just creates a market for criminals and the prison industry to make lots of money without doing a damn to stop it and the violence is creates.
It's about creating a demand where there is none, and getting people to constantly need you services when they are grossly unnecessary.
DynCorp makes huge amounts of money off of the war, then pays off politicians to help perpetuate the cycle. The politicians later become lobbyists and enter the "private sector" when their masquerade in the public service has exhausted its purposes.
Anyway, http://www.drugwarrant.com/articles/why-is-marijuana-illegal/
Yeah. There are tons of people who just torrent anything and everything they can just because it's free. It is abusive, and a problem, but jail is for violent people who cannot operate within society.
Companies would do better to adapt, and like someone else mentioned in a similar thread months ago, make it more of a pain in the ass to torrent/pirate stuff, than it is to buy it for cheap.
The way you've interpreted it is exactly what they want and exactly why trash like this gets anywhere at all. They put a tiny bit of legitimacy into the bill to hide the actual intent. This is how most bills are written and why most bills are written.
Kids on youtube are the people who are being targetted because it's a scare tactic and scare tactics don't work for normal people unless you target other normal people. The theory is that if a bunch of kids on youtube hear that some other kid on youtube got sent to jail for 5 years for watching some videos, the rest of them will not want to take the risk.
Of course, this doesn't work at all (again, history says hi) but the People With Money don't like thinking so they just keep trying the same ineffective trick rather than making any attempt to adapt whatsoever. The politicians profit, the lawyers profit, the lobbyists profit, the internet gets to rage (yay!) and nothing changes.
Big media wants absolute control over how, when, and on what device you enjoy your content so that they can pinch every penny out of every different use of the same content. It's like charging extra because you read the newspaper while drinking your coffee instead of gargling a mouthful of their reproductive fluids. That's dramatic, I know. Though it is getting to feel that way.