Congress Asks Universities To Curb Piracy

The Illegal Subset of the Integers writes "According to Ars Technica, Congress has sent letters to 19 universities identified by the RIAA and MPAA as havens for copyright infringement. In it, they not only seek to discover what these universities are doing to dissuade students from infringing activities, but give the implied threat. House Judiciary Committee member Lamar Smith (R-TX) was quoted as saying, 'If we do not receive acceptable answers, Congress will be forced to act.' One wonders, though, what the universities are supposed to do when international disrespect for imaginary property rights is so widespread that there are currently over two million hits on Google for a certain oft-posted illegal number, up from the three hundred thousand hits from sometime yesterday."

Who sent the lettters?

[DragonWriter]

TFA isn't clear if the letters were sent by Congress as a whole (unlikely, that would take a joint resolution of both houses), by a particular Committee, or by a handful of members of Congress. The only member clearly involved is a member of the minority party who isn't even in the minority leadership on the Committee mentioned, who is also, apparently, the source of threats of action.

Ugh.

[Spazntwich]

While congress ensures that the rich don't stop getting richer anytime soon, we still have pressing social issues with which to deal.

The fact that copyright infringement, no matter how widespread, seems to regularly top news feeds lately is just further evidence we as a society are losing sight of our real threats: Further absolution of previously vaunted personal liberties, the lower class continuing their gradual attempts to topple society, and every special interest group out there with their pet right they're trying to get removed.

Thank you congress, for accomplishing nothing beyond the placation of your idiot single-issue voter bases and largest campaign contributors.

Just for the record...

[Tokimasa]

I attend one of these universities. I don't think I should name which one, but I like their anti-piracy policy.

The university does not monitor student activity. If the RIAA or MPAA determines that a student's activities are possibly illegal, they must formally request the information from my university. Following this, the university will begin an internal investigation to ensure that wrong-doing was going on. If it was, only then will anything be turned over.

It's not the job of a university to police its students. The job of the university is to educate.

Re:Proof that RIAA bribes Congressmen

[TheGratefulNet]

there are thousands dying in an UNJUST war.

yet our congresscritters spend their time on bullying students on behalf of a mega-evil corp cluster.

I wish we (as a people) could fix the REAL problems first before worrying about payola and crap like that. PEOPLE ARE DYING and yet we care more about ensuring fatcats get their unfair cut.

if there is a hell, congress and its sponsors are most surely going there. (I just wish I believed in such a thing)

Re:"Please don't download"

[garcia]

Irregardless copyright infringement isn't theft and thus isn't criminal. Illegal drugs and underage consumption, regardless of our personal feelings on the subject, are criminal and are handled in criminal court. *That* is the big difference and why they shouldn't be compared.

Lamar Smith (R-RIAA)

[rsborg]

Isn't this the same Asshat who was involved in creating a NEW DMCA type bill? Oh yeah, He was. [slashdot.org]. If that's the case, why does the story say "Congress" and not more specifically "Republican Congressman" or "Lamar Asshat"?

That said, I think the Military Industrial Complex [wikipedia.org] is a far more insidious and dangerous entity and poses a much stronger threat to Democracy in the United States. The problem is that they have infested many of the congressional districts and states so that no lawmaker will deny their spending (as it means jobs and constituent happyness for the politico).

Re:"Imaginary property rights"?

[X-rated Ouroboros]

I think he means the imaginary rights to imaginary property.

Re:"Imaginary property rights"?

[digitrev]

Actually, the difference is facility and complete duplication. In taping music from the radio, and recording TV programs, you get a tape or VHS of reduced quality than the original. However, in downloading a song, you get a complete bit to bit transcription of the original song. Not only that, it's considerably easier, as you can do it remotely while someone else hosts it. All you have to do is download it. Compare that to the method of waiting for a good song to come on the radio, hitting the Play + Record button, and then hoping that you got a good selection. Or even doing it via VHS. However, that isn't to say I disagree with you. Until the music / movie industries are willing to accept the fact that people are going to download, and they try and charge people more for a broken product, people will continue to download. And yes, DRM is broken. You're giving the user the locked chest and the key. Even if you tell people they can only unlock it for reasons a, b, and c, people will still unlock it for d - z, simply because they can.

Re:Proof that RIAA bribes Congressmen

[geekoid]

Most, if not all, copyright extentions and increase come from Republicans.

Re:Proof that RIAA bribes Congressmen

[unity100]

Republicans are much more enthusiastic about the matter.

Re:"Imaginary property rights"?

[Anonymous Coward]

Err according to the RIAAs own site.
"""
In the United States, the principle took hold during the Constitutional Convention of 1787 when James Madison suggested that the Constitution include language "to secure to literary authors their copyrights for a limited time." The provision passed unanimously. It is found in Article I, Section 8, of the U.S. Constitution. It states...

The Congress shall have Power . . . 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 . . .
"""

Copy right has existed in the US since the beginning what happened in the 70s is the respect for the phrase "limited Times to Authors and Inventors " started to disappar when congress allowed companies to take over and extended that time again and again. Removeing the whole purpose of copyright. This was originally created to move more stuff into the public domain by creating incentive to generate that material.

Re:"Imaginary property rights"?

[multisync]

Recording radioshows and TV via VCR are indeed not leagal.

The only reason you are allowed to do the later is due to court cases that found the supplier of VCRs is not liable for you breaking the law and recording copy right content.

You seem to be partially correct. The court did rule in SONY CORP. v. UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS, INC., 464 U.S. 417 (1984) [findlaw.com] that manufacturers of VCRs could not be held accountable for copyright infringement due to the actions of their customers.

But this was included in the ruling as well:

Private, noncommercial time-shifting in the home satisfies this standard of noninfringing uses both because respondents have no right to prevent other copyright holders from authorizing such time-shifting for their programs, and because the District Court's findings reveal that even the unauthorized home time-shifting of respondents' programs is legitimate fair use.

Recording programmes for the purposes of time-shifting qualifies as fair use in the United States according to this decision.