Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
United States Patents Government Politics Your Rights Online

U.S. to Get New IP Czar 320

tetraminoe writes "Reuters is reporting that Congress's latest spending bill provides for the creation of a federal copyright enforcement czar. According to the article, 'Under the program, the president can appoint a copyright law enforcement officer whose job is to coordinate law enforcement efforts aimed at stopping international copyright infringement and to oversee a federal umbrella agency responsible for administering intellectual property law.' It also gives $2 million to the National Intellectual Property Law Enforcement Coordination Council (NIPLAC), created in the '90s and never funded. NIPLAC will work to protect American IP overseas and oversee enforcement."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

U.S. to Get New IP Czar

Comments Filter:
  • Am I the only one (Score:2, Insightful)

    by phaze3000 ( 204500 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @10:10AM (#10908527) Homepage
    Was it just me who read the title of the article and thought IANA was being replaced?

    This is news for nerds, IP should mean Internet Protocol, not some copyright sillyness.

  • Finally (Score:5, Insightful)

    by btwIANAL ( 763061 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @10:10AM (#10908530)
    I am just glad they found a cause better than education to give money to. I was affraid my kids might get an educaion. Everyone knows we cant have that.
  • by mordors9 ( 665662 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @10:11AM (#10908548)
    I feel so much better knowing my tax money is going to help fund the enforcement efforts of the RIAA and MPAA. Obviously that is much more important than the fact our borders are wide open, that security screeners at the airport are more concerned about searching 78 year old black men and 18 year old young ladies than some more obvious candidates. Sorry for the rant.
  • big deal (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SubtleNuance ( 184325 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @10:11AM (#10908549) Journal
    Im sure the war on CopyrightAbuse will be as affective as the War on Drugs and the The War on Terra.
  • Imagine! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tkrotchko ( 124118 ) * on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @10:13AM (#10908558) Homepage
    Its comforting to know that a government agency will be responsible for ensuring the MPAA and RIAA are profitable.

    And we get to pay for it both on the enforcement and higher prices caused by inefficient distribution systems.

    What a warm way to start this holiday.
  • Canada Eh? (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @10:13AM (#10908564)
    And I thought I could avoid the US copyright insanity by living in Canada!
  • The real question (Score:3, Insightful)

    by nametaken ( 610866 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @10:13AM (#10908565)
    Will they also be responsible for sifting through and cutting short spurious IP claims?
  • Re:Finally (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Ironsides ( 739422 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @10:14AM (#10908574) Homepage Journal
    It's a meazley $2 million. If you distribute that evenly thats less than a dollar for every kid in school. Not like it would do anything if assigned to education. Besides, cracking down on conterfit goods should increase revenues, which will raise the amount of taxes colelcted which pays for things such as Education, Roads and Security. Besides, the Federal Government doesn't contribute that much to Education in the first place. It's mainly the states and local jurisdictions that pay for it.
  • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @10:14AM (#10908576)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • I for one... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ravenspear ( 756059 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @10:15AM (#10908581)
    welcome our new Gov. enforcing, brutally regulating, fiercely punishing, justice mutilating, freedom curtailing, property upholding, paradigm shattering, useless blathering IP overlords.
  • by Anita Coney ( 648748 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @10:16AM (#10908603) Homepage
    ... the copyright industry lacks sufficient funds to sue infringers on their own. Poor Disney. Poor Sony. Poor Universal. These guys really need a break!

  • Huh? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Safety Cap ( 253500 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @10:17AM (#10908610) Homepage Journal
    Obviously that is much more important than the fact our borders are wide open, that security screeners at the airport are more concerned about searching 78 year old black men and 18 year old young ladies than some more obvious candidates.
    Airport and border security have always been a joke. The point of the TSA is to con you into thinking you're "safe" so you'll go about your life instead of cowering in fear.
    I feel so much better knowing my tax money is going to help fund the enforcement efforts of the RIAA and MPAA.

    As for being the enforcement arm of the *AA, this country's core creed is "the protection of capital" even to the point of propping up failed business models (hey, it works for Amtrak and the Big Three Airlines). Ignore that at your peril.

  • by Le Marteau ( 206396 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @10:21AM (#10908636) Journal
    'Czar'? Weren't czar's, like, emperors who had ultimate rule in a non-free society?

    Is that what it's come down to in 21st century America? 'Czar's?

    At least the US gubment is going out in the open about it. No more of this pussy footing about the real intent here: screw freedom. Drug Czars, IP Czars, what next?

  • by petersam ( 754644 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @10:25AM (#10908672)
    Now the creation of someone to coordinate the United States' efforts to enforce international copyright law would be a good thing; who here thinks that its a good thing that you can buy "Oceans 12" or "Half Life 2" on the streets of Hong Kong today for 50 cents? With the WTO making the rules these days and our jobs being outsourced, I'm all for leveling the playing field and making sure that US companies and artists get compensated for their work.

    The bad news is that the other posters are right - this czar will probably focus more on coordinating the RIAA/MPAA legal fights and forcing computer makers to build in DRM so that I can't even legally backup copies of my own CDs/DVDs/etc.

    It frustrates me to see people who *share* content getting more persecuted/prosecuted than those who try to profit from stolen content - the real pirates.

  • by FunWithHeadlines ( 644929 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @10:27AM (#10908694) Homepage
    "While congressional aides said there was a lot of support for the program, its inclusion still raised some eyebrows as there have been questions about the government's involvement in protecting a private, for-profit enterprise. A recent congressional attempt to approve legislation known as the "Pirate Act," which would allow the Justice Department to file civil lawsuits, was turned back over complaints that it would advance Hollywood's interest at taxpayer expense.

    "This isn't the Pirate Act, but I think the taxpayers would be surprised that there's money being spent for copyright enforcement when terrorists and criminals still roam the streets," said Gigi Sohn, president of the nonprofit fair-use advocacy group Public Knowledge. "When every dollar is being counted for education, health care and homeland security, it seems like a strange priority."

    Indeed, it's funny how certain industries always seem to get government help when they need it. Must be nice. "Lesse, my business is suffering because of competitors who won't play by my rules. I could try to out market them, or out produce them, or enforce my own rules, or, wait a minute! I know! I'll just cut a check to my congresscritter and get them to do my job for me! Whee! Ain't America grand!"

    Maybe that's why the article began this way:

    "Buried inside the massive $388 billion spending bill Congress approved last weekend is a program that creates a federal copyright enforcement czar. "

    Yeah, better not let this one see too much of the light of day. Just bury it in the spending bill that has to pass.

  • by gcaseye6677 ( 694805 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @10:36AM (#10908762)
    Exactly. They've scared congress with enough tales of financial ruin that there will be even more heavy handed legislation and most importantly for them, federal enforcement. The civil copyright infringement remedies, which have traditionally relied on the owner for enforcement, have now been transferred to the taxpayers. But somehow I doubt the government would be nearly as responsive if some smalltime software developer asked for federal help to stop illegal distribution of his applications.
  • by nurb432 ( 527695 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @10:40AM (#10908789) Homepage Journal
    its nice to know that all the terrorists have been eradicated so they are no longer a concern.

    Its nice to know that there are no more starving children in the country, or neglected. or abused.

    All other *real* crime has been removed from our land.. so now we can waste resources on meaningless things like this.. and have the feds invade farther into our lives, what should be civil issues?

    Don't we all just feel so much safer now?
  • I do (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @10:41AM (#10908803)
    "who here thinks that its a good thing that you can buy "Oceans 12" or "Half Life 2" on the streets of Hong Kong today for 50 cents?"

    Piracy is the only check we have on the price of games, movies, and CD's.

    CD prices have dropped recently. Why? Because the competition (i.e. "free") forced it down.

    There is a myth that if there was perfect copy protection, prices would decrease because of "less losses from piracy".

    In fact, prices go up in this situation, because there is no competition.

    I view a small amount of piracy as a healthy thing for the consumer, because it forces the producer to compete with *something*.
  • by truthsearch ( 249536 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @10:46AM (#10908839) Homepage Journal
    As mentioned repeatedly on slashdot, IP law is now critical to nerds. No one can write software and put it out there for the public to use without having to consider IP law (even deciding to put it in the public domain is a decision in IP law). Back in the day, when nerds were all in the basements and few people had a computer no one cared about IP. But with more than half of the US licensing software IP law is more and more a part of everyday lives. And if you're a nerd who programs or even just tinkers it's an important part of your hobby.

    You can personally choose to ignore it, but it's at your own expense. If you don't fight to keep IP laws fair you'll one day find it's illegal or too expensive to be a nerd.
  • Re:Finally (Score:5, Insightful)

    by hype7 ( 239530 ) <u3295110&anu,edu,au> on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @10:49AM (#10908864) Journal
    They are getting an education in how government operates and where its priorities are.


    Copyright law, as intended, has certainly jumped the shark and needs to be completely re-writen or eliminated (which, while not ideal would be a better situation than we are heading toward)


    You'd have thought the lawsuits would have done that [theregister.co.uk] for most of the kids.

    Maybe it's me, but the US seems to be heading down a deeper and deeper spiral, with the Government losing sight of the fact it exists for the people, by the people. Instead, it's for the corps, by the corps. Even wars are seen in economic terms.

    Until all the political donations by artificial entities are eliminated, things are going to get a lot worse.

    -- james
  • by gmuslera ( 3436 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @10:52AM (#10908886) Homepage Journal
    ... is a single point of failure, one that can be bribed, could not be objective, could follow the pressures of RIAA/MPAA/etc instead of what is fair/freedom of speech/logic/etc, and will validate whatever atrocity is done in that matter ("the czar said so, bow and agree, or else.."). Even worse, will enforce the madness involved in IP/patents? where i can patent i.e. "thinking"?

    In the other hand, "international copyright infringements"... what about US infringements about international copyrights? US laws/view of the problem always seems to be "i am the right one, the other countries just copy what is done here" even when its not, same with the "fair trade" US definition (accept our products, lets see if I accept yours)

  • Re:big deal (Score:3, Insightful)

    by cgenman ( 325138 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @10:53AM (#10908894) Homepage
    Highly effective. Why, millions of dollars have already been diverted away from valuable programs like our pathetically underfunded education system, so it must be working. Otherwise why waste the money, right? I mean, with all of the students turning to drugs and violence because they're the intellectual inferior of an H1-B immigrant from Calcutta who barely speaks english, then the war on drugs and terror must be tremendously effective to have any sort of net gain.

    Trust your government: they're here to help. ...someone. ...we think.

  • by Tackhead ( 54550 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @11:00AM (#10908949)
    > 'Czar'? Weren't czar's, like, emperors who had ultimate rule in a non-free society?
    >
    >Is that what it's come down to in 21st century America? 'Czar's?
    >
    >At least the US gubment is going out in the open about it. No more of this pussy footing about the real intent here: screw freedom. Drug Czars, IP Czars, what next?

    In Tsarist Russia, Soviet Russia came next.

    You know the grand experiment in freedom has ended when Yakov Smirnoff jokes start sounding like a cross between Cold War era history textbooks and tonight's evening news.

  • by GaelenBurns ( 716462 ) <gaelenb@assuranc ... es.com minus bsd> on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @11:06AM (#10909007) Homepage Journal
    Having the GOP control the entire government is bad on so many levels - and one of the worst is the constant shilling they do for corporations at the expense of individuals. The normality of our nerd lives is continually threatened by the Republican party.
  • Re:Finally (Score:2, Insightful)

    by neoform ( 551705 ) <djneoform@gmail.com> on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @11:08AM (#10909021) Homepage
    Copyright law, as intended, has certainly jumped the shark and needs to be completely re-writen or eliminated
    that's true.. but..
    aimed at stopping international copyright infringement
    ..at what point did US law become International law?
  • Re:Finally (Score:3, Insightful)

    by miu ( 626917 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @11:28AM (#10909189) Homepage Journal
    It's a meazley $2 million.

    I'm gonna call BS on that right now. The low dollar cost projects SETI, PBS, and NEA have been favorite points of attack for the dems and pubes in their little budget battles for years - any government funding of this sort of philosophical project is an endorsement of it by the recognized rules of engagement.

  • Plethora of Czars (Score:2, Insightful)

    by discordare ( 713735 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @11:33AM (#10909224)
    Thirty years ago or more Nixon appointed an Energy Czar to make us more energy independent. Since then we're ever more dependent on the Saudis & their ilk.

    Every administration since at least Reagan has appointed a Drug Czar. He has had absolutely no effect on the availability of drugs in this country.

    Before creating the Department of Homeland Insecurity, Bush appointed Tom Ridge to be his Homeland Security Czar. Far from making everyone feel more secure, he's spent the last three years or so scaring the bejezus out of us.

    So now that we're going to have an IP Czar, file traders everywhere should be breathing a sigh of relief. It means the government isn't really serious about the "problem" and is just going through the motions.
  • Re:big deal (Score:4, Insightful)

    by ratamacue ( 593855 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @11:34AM (#10909229)
    Effective as in creating the first prerequisite for organized crime (a black market), providing justification for more expansion of government powers? Or effective as in fostering hatred and resent around the world, providing justification for more expansion of government powers? If government is lucky, it will be both.

    Any way you look at it, government wins, at the expense of the individual.

    Ending or "winning" the war on drugs, or the war on terror, or poverty, or copyright abuse, is the last thing government wants to do. These programs are set up not to succeed, but to provide a steady stream of revenue and justification for expansion of government powers.

  • Re:Finally (Score:3, Insightful)

    by prell ( 584580 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @11:34AM (#10909239) Homepage
    The government controls money.
    The government controls the military.
    The government controls the law.
    The government controls the prisons.

    I dunno.. somehow, I don't feel comfortable with the government also controlling the schools.
  • Re:Huh? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by prell ( 584580 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @11:37AM (#10909262) Homepage
    I think we do have a problem in trying to maintain businesses indefinitely, and many times we blatantly reference the size and age of the businesses as arguments as to why they should be helped. If a business is ailing, let it die. Procuring money and maintaining failed business models creates a very perverse and greedy economy that is no longer based on trade.
  • Re:big deal (Score:3, Insightful)

    by antiMStroll ( 664213 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @11:39AM (#10909281)
    The rights and liberties of American citizens saw the greatest curtailment in generations over those two wars. I'm afraid you're right.
  • by ratamacue ( 593855 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @11:42AM (#10909301)
    It's marketing. "Czar" just sounds so much more "secret spy movie star" than "program director". Just like "war on terror" sounds much more righteous than "military conquest".
  • Historical note (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Lifewish ( 724999 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @01:23PM (#10910082) Homepage Journal
    Read some Machiavelli. Wars have historically almost always been seen in economical and political terms. At the moment, the US is powerful enough and self-confident enough not to worry about the political, hence the economic factors will tend to take precedence.
  • by mutterc ( 828335 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @01:29PM (#10910177)
    ... past which power will inexorably slide away from the people towards the corporations? Has it already been passed?

    If so, then everything we try to do to get consumer-friendly laws pass will be thwarted, and all we will be able to do is to watch as current trends move towards their logical conclusion, where there's a small number of ultra-rich corps/people, and the rest of the world lives like Bangladeshi farmers do today.

    Have a pleasant holiday!

  • by Trizor ( 797662 ) <trizor@gmail.com> on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @01:36PM (#10910280)
    More like the entire political system. Corporations have gotten so close to politicians that the interest conflict is worse than the Cold War. We need to separate corporation and state, and church and state, because religion is weeding its way back in.
  • Re:Finally (Score:2, Insightful)

    by learn fast ( 824724 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @01:55PM (#10910532)
    with the Government losing sight of the fact it exists for the people.

    "The government" is not an intelligent entity. This is, despite all appearances to the contrary, still a democracy, and if the lawmakers get away with doing things like this it's because the people don't care.

    Stuff like this doesn't happen because "the government" is big, and bad, and evil, it's because the people stopped paying attention. Stuff like IP law doesn't show up on literally 99.7% of the population's radar screens. And that's how they're going to get away with it.
  • by Atario ( 673917 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @04:12PM (#10911946) Homepage
    You hit the nail on the head. "Of the people, by the people, for the people" became "of the corporations, by the corporations, for the corporations" bit by bit as corporate personhood [wikipedia.org] became the norm in the US. Since corporations are immortal and made of the labor of many people, however, they have a distinct advantage over the rest of us poor slobs.
  • by meringuoid ( 568297 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @05:10PM (#10912588)
    ... past which power will inexorably slide away from the people towards the corporations? Has it already been passed?

    Possibly, but things have been worse than this before. The monopolists of the early 20th century USA were far worse than today's breed, and you're probably aware of the bloody awful lot the workers had in 19th century Britain.

    The great problem right now is that the corporations are beginning to surpass the governments in power. There are only a few countries in the world that are much wealthier than the largest corporations, and since they're mostly democracies that means that their leaders can be easily bought. If you have a single socialist bone in your body then this is a nightmare - the government, representative of the workers, should protect our rights from the capitalist barons, but they're selling us out. It's beginning to look almost like feudalism.

    But as I said, we've seen worse before and come back from it. We probably need the left to get over the fall of the USSR and develop a post-Marxist philosophy; perhaps left-wing libertarianism along the Dutch model. Unfortunately, for socialism of any kind to have a fighting chance would probably need a really serious recession to damage the credibility of the ultra-capitalist model; this would be No Fun At All.

  • by Curunir_wolf ( 588405 ) on Wednesday November 24, 2004 @06:35PM (#10913493) Homepage Journal
    Are you trying to imply that the RIAA is somehow not justified in its claims that downloaders on p2p services are hurting them?

    I'll imply it. In fact, I'll come right out and say it: The RIAA is not justified in its claims that downloaders on p2p services are hurting them. Primarily this is because their claims are overblown and are used by RIAA as the SOLE culprit in their revenue loss, when in fact it is only a small portion of the blame.

    Let me explain the simple math for you: if you have a choice between "paying" and "not paying" for music, which will you do? Speak for yourself. Since you seem to have no regard for the law, I suppose you will do anything you can get away with. Personally, I don't care for the crap the RIAA label put out these days, and I don't buy it, and I don't listen to it (other than occasionally on radio and tv, or at a bar - I do have friends and family).

    Artists (even bad ones) should have some way of being compensated, if that's what they care about. But the RIAA model of stealing from artists, controlling the broadcasters, and ripping off the public is old and dying and deserves no respect. And using the government to protect their dying business model is plain evil.

    So yess[sic], the RIAA has 100% legit claims of financial ruin.

    So, along with the airline industry, the auto industry, etc., etc., I suppose you think it's ok for MY tax dollars to be stolen from me (at gunpoint) to bail out the music industry? Well, then, fuck you.

  • by Zhe Mappel ( 607548 ) on Friday November 26, 2004 @12:29AM (#10922120)
    So, along with the airline industry, the auto industry, etc., etc., I suppose you think it's ok for MY tax dollars to be stolen from me (at gunpoint) to bail out the music industry? Well, then, fuck you.
    You raise in your good post an important point about fairness in America: life is unfair for the majority, but it always must be made fair for our masters.

    In practice, this plays out through the operation of two seemingly diametrical systems. The laissez-faire economy is operated for the poor and working classes, who must either sink or swim, while a kind of socialism is provided for the rich. They are entitled to sink all they like. Their political servants--the US government--will always be on hand at poolside to revive them, pump their waterlogged bellies, and towel down the poor dears while delivering fulsome praise for their bravery and daring in plunging to the bottom.

The hardest part of climbing the ladder of success is getting through the crowd at the bottom.

Working...