Copyright Infringement In the News 697
Lots of newsbits about copyright infringement today - let's mash them all together with some egg whites and breadcrumbs and see what we get. marklyon writes "The DOJ announced that they are planning to prosecute filesharers under the The No Electronic Theft ("NET") Act. John Malcolm, a deputy assistant attorney general, made the pronouncement at the Progress and Freedom Foundation's annual technology and politics summit Tuesday. Cnet has extended coverage." Reader M_Talon writes "According to this article on ZDNET the RIAA is using one of the DMCA's more nasty clauses...the right to subpoena an ISP for a suspected pirate's personal information. They want to force Verizon to reveal the customer's information, and Verizon is refusing on the grounds that the pirated material isn't on their servers." Reader MattW writes "Apparently some theaters are consenting to run anti-piracy ads before movies. After all, these are not a bunch of fat cats we're talking about -- piracy now threatens the livelihood of the rank and file workers of Hollywood. After all, the movie studios are having a terrible year,
right?" Finally, the Washington Post (probably one of the last articles we post from their site, as they go registration-required) discovers spoofed files on Gnutella, and public radio is reporting that the RIAA will drop their suit against listen4ever.com, since it's, uh, gone.
The RIAA will never get it... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:I hate this -- why are we letting it happen? (Score:2, Informative)
As a matter of fact, it's not. It's a Democratic Republic. Which means that the majority of our elected representative's views become law and are enforced, for worse and for worser, by the executive branch.
If you want this to stop, vote for statesmen instead of lawyers and politicians. Voice disgust over the evident usurping of legislative power by John Ashcroft and his Assistant Attorneys General. Creative enforcement of questionable code of law is NOT what the executive branch is charged with.
People are too damn lazy anymore. Speak up and be heard... the first step may have to be convincing the businessmen and special interest lobbyists who buy the politicians to see things our way (think EFF), while slowly replacing the politicians with real statespeople who have a freaking clue and are not swayed by their payola, but instead genuinely represent the interests of their constituency.
True, but (Score:3, Informative)
Copyright laws were put in place purely and simply for the good of the public.
Lord Macaulay, in his famous 1841 speech before the house of commons, succinctly summarized the reasoning behind copyright laws in the English speaking world:
The advantages arising from a system of copyright are obvious. It is desirable that we should have a supply of good books; we cannot have such a supply unless men of letters are liberally remunerated; and the least objectionable way of remunerating them is by means of copyright.
The preamble of Article 1, Section 8 of the US constitution also states the purpose of the copyright and patent powers (if not their scope):
To 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;
Copyright does not protect authors, it creates a bargain between the public and authors whereby the public refrains for a period from unlicensed copying his works in return for his producing those works. The idea of natural rights to intellectual property have been around for some time, but they are not the basis of copyright, nor have they ever carried much weight until now.
Re:Hehe. My Plan (Score:3, Informative)
Re:from the anti-piracy ad article (Score:2, Informative)