U.S. Govt joins piracy fight

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by dmaul1114

Again, they already enforce laws about copy right infringement...

All that stuff is not criminal law.

You believe that the federal government investigates and prosecutes civil IP law?

And yes it was the typical anti piracy rant as this site is full of pirates, so I expect this thread to be all up in arms against the government trying to protect peoples intellectual property because people here have some sense of entitlement to be able to get things free, or pirate things not available in their country.

Well, that pretty much sums up the value in any continuation to this discussion.

[delphidb96]

Originally Posted by dmaul1114

Again, they already enforce laws about copy right infringement, patent disputes etc. which are very similar to intellectual property laws. Lots of patents are for inventions--and thus are a persons intellectual property.

Inventing a gadget or medicine etc. and getting a patent to protect it and make money off of it is no different than an artist making music or an author writing a book. It's their copyrighted intellectual property.

All that stuff is not criminal law. I just don't see this as any different than other types of patents/copyrights. People just see it different for some stupid reason since the product is electronic vs. being a physical CD or book. Property is property. Pay for it or do with out it unless the owner is giving it away.

And yes it was the typical anti piracy rant as this site is full of pirates, so I expect this thread to be all up in arms against the government trying to protect peoples intellectual property because people here have some sense of entitlement to be able to get things free, or pirate things not available in their country.

There's no excuse for break laws, criminal or civil. If you don't like a law, work to change it. Boycott the products, write publishers. Don't break the law, steal someones intellectual property and whine when governments take steps to crack down on piracy.

But in any case, I've said my piece and will bow out of this thread now.

If I listen to an author's 'reading' of his/her latest book, I'm 'stealing' from his as I get the enjoyment of it without having to pay. Oh well, I'm a criminal again! D'Oh!

Derek

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by TGS

I think I've understood what you're saying - I just don't understand why you would be saying it.

It's easier to post anti-piracy nonsense than to actually understand copyright.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by dmaul1114

But in any case, I've said my piece and will bow out of this thread now.

In other words, trolling accomplished, time to move on.

[zerospinboson]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

It's easier to post anti-piracy nonsense than to actually understand copyright.

*shrug* If it were only about the law, that would be one thing.. The problem is that it's about the interpretation of laws by judges who feel/think/believe that IPRs are needed to "protect innovation". Which means that nothing will happen to "damage" them, because economics and politics are what makes the world go round, and the justice system is just around to protect the establishment.

[CyGuy]

Originally Posted by thename

Well, shop lifters are violating the law just as those who violate our copyright/IP laws (like you, me, and pretty much anyone who does things like strip DRM, rip DVDs, etc.) are.

There is a big difference between shoplifting and stripping DRM or making a DVD copy of a movie you own. Shoplifting is a crime (there is an actual victim). Removing DRM or making a DVD copy is unlawful.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by zerospinboson

*shrug* If it were only about the law, that would be one thing.. The problem is that it's about the interpretation of laws by judges who feel/think/believe that IPRs are needed to "protect innovation". Which means that nothing will happen to "damage" them, because economics and politics are what makes the world go round, and the justice system is just around to protect the establishment.

What's a little different with this story is that we're not talking about judges in this case, we're talking about federal prosecutors. That and quite a few of the statements in the article are downright hysterical.

Investigating/prosecuting copyright is a matter of public safety?

The attendees of this meeting were members of the cabinet and executives from each of the big commercial content industries. Gee, big surprise.

The BSA claims that a 10% reduction in piracy would create a $24 billion increase in tax revenue?

[zerospinboson]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

What's a little different with this story is that we're not talking about judges in this case, we're talking about federal prosecutors. That and quite a few of the statements in the article are downright hysterical.

Investigating/prosecuting copyright is a matter of public safety?

The attendees of this meeting were members of the cabinet and executives from each of the big commercial content industries. Gee, big surprise.

The BSA claims that a 10% reduction in piracy would create a $24 billion increase in tax revenue?

Of course they claim this, and of course the government trusts them blindly on these figures - after all, who would suspect they were biased?
And yes, thanks to Biden the DoJ employs quite a few RIAA lawyers/employees.
The Future?

[Daithi]

An Intellectual Property Task Force headed by the Attorney General of the United States is desperately needed. Don't you people understand?

This IP piracy is very dangerous and has the potential to bring down the entire U.S. financial system. Just ask yourselves what role IP piracy played in destabilizing our current economy. I'm telling you right now, if it had not been for the stimulus package and the Obama administration, IP piracy may have taken down the entire U.S. Government. You just think about that.

Have you seen YouTube and Hulu lately? They are full of illegally obtained IP. [Edit: Apparently the takedown notices are working.] A U.S. cultural icon -- the artist known as Prince, then formally known as Prince, then known as Prince again -- has had his hard work used without compensation as background music for a dancing baby. This unconscionable misappropriation of Intellectual Property must stop, and now it will with the full weight of U.S. government authority assisting artists and the companies that own back them. The multinational corporations that back these artists simply cannot be expected to fight these nefarious pirates on their own -- they just don't have the resources.

Yes, it is true that a company that violates another company's patent (or other IP) is usually sued in civil court. However, after top officials of the music, publishing, movie, and software industries met with government officials it was decided that the government could just do more.

Lastly, consider the word "piracy." Might there be National Security concerns? Is there a possible link between Somalian Pirates and IP Pirates? Well, these are issues our government needs to fully vet for the safety of this nation.

[thename]

Originally Posted by CyGuy

There is a big difference between shoplifting and stripping DRM or making a DVD copy of a movie you own. Shoplifting is a crime (there is an actual victim). Removing DRM or making a DVD copy is unlawful.

While I agree with your intentions (fair use, ownership, etc.), the letter of the law says the latter is a violation and is--by most accepted definitions of the word--illegal and, therefore, a crime regardless of whether it's victimless or not. Now, it's entirely possible there's an esoteric definition of "crime" that demands a "victim" but the RIAA proved (and a judge, unfortunately, affirmed) that copying a CD is "a nice way of saying 'steals just one copy'" under the current state of affairs.

So the unfortunate state of affairs is that our current legal system does not seem to make the same distinction you do--wrong or right (I believe it's the former).

Like I said before: time to change the laws.

[thename]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

Besides, how often is shoplifting a felony?

I can think of a few cases (for instance, any time one shoplifts more than $1500 of merchandise in Texas or when you've been caught 3 times in CA) off the top of my head.

I do, however, appreciate your point and do believe there's a difference between the two. The government, though, appears to disagree.

[Ben Thornton]

Originally Posted by dmaul1114

There's no excuse for break laws, criminal or civil. If you don't like a law, work to change it.

Do you really mean that there is never an excuse to break laws, or simply that for copyright law in particular, one should not break it?

It's an unusual position for someone to have that nobody should break the law. Didn't declaring the US as a republic break the law? Or suffragettes, civil rights campaigners, etc.? eBooks are not an issue of equivalent importance, granted, but I find the idea of unquestioning civil obedience pretty terrifying.

It's normal for the law to lag behind the social consensus - sometimes a long way behind, particularly where moneyed interests are involved.

[DawnFalcon]

Originally Posted by dmaul1114

Anyway, I'm fine with it as I'm 100% supportive authors and other owners of intellectual property get the money they deserve for their work.

The effect will be a net reduction in the amount of properly licensed material bought. It's been the effect every time there's been an upswing in "enforcement". More people simply stop buying ANY entertainment material.

Of course, that's the perfect soloution, making the market smaller rather than actually giving people what they want, and the vast vast majority will purchase.

I myself don't buy any music and mostly second hand books because I don't want to fund the sort of nonsense big media companies are pulling. I'm also selective with games.

And no, stripping the DRM is just as, if not more, illegal under the IP laws they'll be enforcing than downloading from the darknets. Do you want to place a bet on someone getting into trouble for stripping DRM (and not distributing the file in any way) inside the next 2 years?


Also, I'm sure you can't see the difference in government involvement in dealing with IP disputes between business and the - different - issue of IP disputes between a business and an end user, but I certainly can!

And...er... <sarcasm> if this site is full of people who hijack ships, I'd suggest you report them to the appropriate authorities. Indeed, I believe under US law you have an obligation to do so.


</sarcasm>

[Ervserver]

will be dismantled as soon as Obama is out of office

[DawnFalcon]

Dismantled? Heh. What a utopian view.