How Copyright Industries Con Congress

[Jacoba 55]

Since piracy and copywrite issues are a common topic among FS forums, especially add on developers... I thought this article might interest some here.http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/how-copyright-industries-con-congress/

[Fielder 3,676]

If piracy losses in America are only $1 per year, and only one job is lost, that is one dollar and one job stolen from an honest citizen.Thank God congress might do something about the crooks in our world.There is nothing worse than a thief!Democratic Nat. Cmte chair Schultz is a major supporter of the Stop Online Piracy Act.As a Republican I say, "Thank you Ms. Schultz!".

[mgh 89]

It could equally well be titled How Pirates conned the Cato Institute.It concludes:

It’s a good reason to look for appropriately tailored ways to reduce piracy, so that the market devotes resources to production of new creativity and innovationvalued by consumers, rather than to other, less efficient purposes. Indeed, it’s a good reason to look for ways of doing this that, unlike SOPA, might actually work.

That is, if your products have new creativity and innovation valued by consumers they won't be pirated.That's why PMDG and Eaglesoft products aren't pirated? Edited January 19, 2012 by mgh

[hcornea 4]

If people can not be reasonable and honest, then unreasonable measures start to be implemented.The "Pirates" have brought this on us all. Without their activities, no-one would even be considering measures of this scope - they wouldn't be justifiable or necessary.When you notice that the FIRST entries for a product are almost always illegal torrents in a Google search suggests something needs to be done.What is shocking, is what people will do when they feel they are beyond the reach of the law. Now, maybe someone won't be.(Note also that it is copyright and not copywrite -- a moot difference, which also belies a relevant difference in meaning.)

Edited January 19, 2012 by hcornea

[ZachLW 37]

If people can not be reasonable and honest, then unreasonable measures start to be implemented.The "Pirates" have brought this on us all. Without their activities, no-one would even be considering measures of this scope - they wouldn't be justifiable or necessary.When you notice that the FIRST entries for a product are almost always illegal torrents in a Google search suggests something needs to be done.What is shocking, is what people will do when they feel they are beyond the reach of the law. Now, maybe someone won't be.(Note also that it is copyright and not copywrite -- a moot difference, which also belies a relevant difference in meaning.)

So you're saying that unreasonable measures are warranted because of the actions of pirates? That companies like Facebook, Google, Yahoo, etc. should be solely responsible for the enforcement of copyright. That start up search providers and other internet businesses should suffer from the extreme "unreasonable" measures legislation is taking? Oh and a provider can be sued by sniveling lawyers because I put a link to copyright material on their site?Wake up, man. Things are taking a turn for the worst in this country. All in the name of capitalism. And don't get me started on the National Defense Authorization Act. That makes my skin crawl. Edited January 19, 2012 by ZachLW

[mgh 89]

Wikipedia’s own description of the bill is:

The bill would authorize the U.S. Department of Justice to seek court orders against websites outside U.S. jurisdiction accused of infringing on copyrights, or of enabling or facilitating copyright infringement. After delivering a court order, the U.S. Attorney General could require US-directed Internet service providers, ad networks, and payment processors to suspend conducting business with sites found to infringe on federal criminal intellectual property laws. The Attorney General could also bar search engines from displaying links to the sites.The bill also establishes a two-step process for intellectual property-rights holders to seek relief if they have been harmed by a site dedicated to infringement. The rights holder must first notify, in writing, related payment facilitators and ad networks of the identity of the website, who, in turn, must then forward that notification and suspend services to that identified website, unless that site provides a counter notification explaining how it is not in violation. The rights holder can then sue for limited injunctive relief against the site operator, if such a counter notification is provided, orif the payment or advertising services fail to suspend service in the absence of a counter notification.

[Mean Aerodynamic Chord 269]

I will miss Megaupload, for sure. For now, it's all on MediaFire. :(RIP Megaupload.

[ZachLW 37]

Not so fast. The bill has lost a lot of momentum.

[Mean Aerodynamic Chord 269]

Not so fast. The bill has lost a lot of momentum.

Ok, but Megaupload is gone.

[ZachLW 37]

Ok, but Megaupload is gone.

Witch hunt.

[hcornea 4]

So you're saying that unreasonable measures are warranted because of the actions of pirates? That companies like Facebook, Google, Yahoo, etc. should be solely responsible for the enforcement of copyright. That start up search providers and other internet businesses should suffer from the extreme "unreasonable" measures legislation is taking? Oh and a provider can be sued by sniveling lawyers because I put a link to copyright material on their site?Wake up, man. Things are taking a turn for the worst in this country. All in the name of capitalism. And don't get me started on the National Defense Authorization Act. That makes my skin crawl.

Not quite.Firstly, not everyone is in "this country". There is a whole world out there; worth remembering. We do have to put up with some of the impact of your laws, but the republican nomination drive is entertaining enough to make it all worthwhile! But I digress .....The ONLY reason that something this draconian gets ANY traction at all, is because pirates continue their activity outside the reach of the law. It is the same mentality that sees looting in the wake of a disaster.People do this .. because they can get away with it, and they feel the law can't stop them.If people exercised a modicum of "self-legislation", then none of this would even be considered. It is ONLY considered because pirates continue to brazenly loot whatever they can get their hands on.I don't think I said this was "warranted". What I said is that the persistant, blatant looting that piracy is, has brought it on all of us. Without it, people would simply say .. this is outrageous.I also intimated that when you spend 18 months developing a product, and then Google the name of your product only to find the first three entries are illegal download sites, then you do wonder whether Google could do more. (They are certainly capable of sorting their listings for their OWN needs -- viz advertising)In this world, it seems that ethical behaviour is only implemented if legislated for, or litigated for. To me, that is indeed a more depressing backdrop than this law.

[Jacoba 55]

If people can not be reasonable and honest, then unreasonable measures start to be implemented.The "Pirates" have brought this on us all. Without their activities, no-one would even be considering measures of this scope - they wouldn't be justifiable or necessary.When you notice that the FIRST entries for a product are almost always illegal torrents in a Google search suggests something needs to be done.What is shocking, is what people will do when they feel they are beyond the reach of the law. Now, maybe someone won't be.(Note also that it is copyright and not copywrite -- a moot difference, which also belies a relevant difference in meaning.)

Right, punish everyone for the actions of a few... that's smart.

[hcornea 4]

I don't think anyone said it was "smart" (with the possible exception of the motion picture industry and record companies)If you can find a better way to make people behave honestly, then it might be time for you to lobby congress.That will avoid a draconian law being considered.Alternatively, if you are the owner of a torrent site and you are reading this, then do the world a favour and shut yourself down.Personally, I think if all states would upheld copyright laws responsibly, then that would be more effective, and measured.Unfortunately, that has not eventuated. So perhaps we need to lobby those countries/states that allow this to happen, and drop them off the internet if they fail to comply.

Edited January 20, 2012 by hcornea

[mgh 89]

Right, punish everyone for the actions of a few... that's smart.

Every one is punished because of theft. I have pay for locks to protect my property against theft: I have to pay insurane to cover myself against theft: I have to pay taxes to meet the costs of police, courts, prisons to deal with thieves.

[hcornea 4]

Yes. And now you are being "punished" because of theft again.(Except that the bill seems to be losing momentum, last time I checked)Actually, the biggest issue of the bill is the potential for it to be subverted for other means.First you clamp down on "illegal" activity .. then you alter the definition of "illegal" to mean everything you don't like. No government has a right to this sort of power.