'Pirate Act' Would Shift Copyright Civil Suits To DoJ 440
mammothboy writes "News.com.com has a story about the new so-called Pirate Act, which seeks to allow federal prosecuters to file civil suits against file swappers. These lawsuits can reach hundreds of thousands of dollars, and if you guessed that the RIAA is lobbying for it, you're right. What's scary is how fast and how quiet its march through the legislative process has been. In '97, the No Electronic Theft Act allowed for criminal lawsuits, but none have been filed, so isn't it clear that the Justice Department has better stuff to deal with?" There actually have been some prosecutions filed under the NET Act, but not many. Update: 05/26 18:51 GMT by T : Declan McCullagh (author of the linked News.com story) writes to clarify: "FYI there have been prosecutions under the NET Act, as you say. But
there have not been any of P2P users. That's why the Senate is doing this."
burden of proof differs... (Score:5, Interesting)
a criminal suit is beyond reasonable doubt.
civil suit is *much* easier to 'win'
that's how the bastar^h^h^h^hlawyers are getting rich...
So, this is saying... (Score:5, Interesting)
Nothing wrong with charging criminals (Score:1, Interesting)
Interesting (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Hey, wait a second... (Score:5, Interesting)
More Gvmt Spending - What does the taxpayer get? (Score:5, Interesting)
Question About the RIAA Lawsuits (Score:5, Interesting)
Oh Wonderful =\ (Score:4, Interesting)
For a criminal trial, the prosecution has to prove to a jury that you stole music beyond a reasonable doubt.
In a civil trial, all you have to prove is that it's possible and probable that you did it.
So it's basically taking out all the expenses that a criminal trial would have needed. There's no need to do any computer forensics, deep investigating, etc. All they would need to do (basically) is get your ISP records and show you have used *file sharing program*.
So it's very possible that you might have installed Kazaa, et al, to download a new game demo, OSS, independent 'free' music, etc - but if you have a NOFX mp3 on your drive that alone is enough to get some money out of you. If this thing flies, I fear the power RIAA will have. They will truly become a company to fear.
Re:your tax dollars at work... (Score:5, Interesting)
The problem here is that the less people pay the RIAA, despite how blindingly obvious a boycott is, the higher the losses variable in the piracy #s go. Wanna send the RIAA a message? Pick a day, buy a bunch of new albums, and on the next day return them unopened and in resalable condition. When a million dollars is made, and lost the next day, it's hard for the retailers not to notice. Suddenly we have a powerful ally...
Can it be balanced? (Score:1, Interesting)
How about this: anyone (read: company) who makes campaign contributions has to foot their own bill in any court cases. I mean, paying for the judge's time, etc, instead of the government. After all, if they're rich enough to pay off the politicians to write the rules for them, they can afford to pay to use the system they've manipulated.
Is that fair? Would a system like this stand up or is there a problem that I'm missing?
1000th post, write to your Senators (Score:3, Interesting)
So anyway, if you're in the U.S., write to your Senators. Tell them about your concerns about having your taxes spent on government officials pursuing civil suits on behalf of the RIAA. Point out the unconstitutionality of double jeopardy.
And while we're talking about senators, does anyone else think it would be a good idea to have senators in federal congress be the party leaders from the state congress? That would be a big step in going back to a republic of states (Assuming you're a propponent of states rights). It'd be kinda neat to replace the house that way too, but I can't think of a good way to do it with the current representation by population that we currently have in the house (which I think is a good thing). Something where voters elect our state government, and the president, and the federal congressional reps are a subset of the elected state reps. I think that would be really cool.
There's other worms... (Score:3, Interesting)
I know this guy who took his "exams" (in quotes because I don't know what to call them) in Germany and "they" pinned him as a fuckup. Well, he moved to the U.S. and became a kick-ass programmer and then a kick-ass C.I.O.!
My point, the European way of doing things has their own set of problems! - as explained by my Irish friend.
Re:Hey, wait a second... (Score:5, Interesting)
If he so wishes, under this new law, Ashcroft can prosecute at will. If he wants to be a dick about it, he can do it without bothering to consult with the copyright holder. Hell, even if the holder decides to release the disputed work into the public domain, Ashcroft could still prosecute the "thief" under the "the Law is the Law" clause of reactionary lore -- the work was copyrighted at the time of the "crime", so the wishes of the holder would be irrelevant.
This is the final stage in the criminalization of what once was a civil offense, if it was an offense at all -- copying a musical work. It used to be criminal if it were done for profit. Now it will be criminal whenever the AG wants to nail someone.
The Church of Scientology is turning cartwheels right now. This has been their pet evil project since the early ninties. They will get to file FEDERAL CRIMINAL CHARGES against people who quote Hubbard's works about the great galactic federation and the atom bombs and the volcanoes. (Hell, I can't even say the "X" word, because the owners of Slashdot will pull my post if the COS says "boo!") This isn't a digression: they have instigated this crusade from '91 to the present day, ever since their flying saucer religion got outed on anon.penet.fi and up to the present day.
And as for Ashcroft and the Justice Department: what an incredible tool for harrassment. Political enemy? Check the ISP logs, see if the Enemy of the State or a member of his family ever downloaded music. Break his financial back, put him or his own in prison. How many people have downloaded tunes? How many are eligible for Club Fed if this law gets passed? If you ever hose some public official, you can spend years dreading the email summoning you to years of court-run hell because you hosted some Guess Who tracks in '02.
Damn, if only we could take over a country somewhere and declare freedom from the Berne Convention...
Don't they have anything better to do? (Score:5, Interesting)
Ok, first Ashcroft wants to tackle porn (link [slashdot.org]), then they want the DOJ to go after file swappers?
This is one of the biggest reasons Bush's continued 9/11 references make me ill. I could deal with it if they were actually working to fight terror. Instead, every time somebody waves the bloody shirt, all we get is some tired propaganda for drilling in the Arctic, a Federal Marriage Amendment, tax cuts for the wealthy, or some other thing we have to do to keep the terrorists from winning. Meanwhile, Homeland Security isn't getting the funds it needs for simple, basic port (seaport, not computer port) scanners: link [businessweek.com] (found on Instapundit [instapundit.com]).
I'm a hawk on security, folks. A hard-core, let's get them before they get us, serious hawk. And I'm voting against Bush and his idiots for precisely that reason.
(Sorry for the rant, but I just couldn't take it any more. Feel free to mod this down.)
Ammend the constitution or... (Score:4, Interesting)
For all those people posting copyrighted material that they know full well is illegal to post which alternative is better? Criminal prosecution or civil liability? I think this makes the punishment far closer fit the crime.
Why Justice? Because that's the law enforcement arm of the federal government. This is an improvement to the NET act, not an extension.
American Whoredom (Score:5, Interesting)
Why is it that conservatives stop being conservative when large corporations want things to go their way in defiance of the wishes of the marketplace (such as file sharing)? Someone help me out here.
priority multitasking and limited resource use. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:your tax dollars at work... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:your tax dollars at work... (Score:5, Interesting)
Here's the problem: People will download stuff, legit or not. The people who do say "I will not buy stuff that funds the RIAA" even though they're not downloading anything will not be recognized. It will just be assumed that they're downloading the music anyway. (Convenient for the RIAA, isn't it?)
That's why a message has to be sent. The idea I cooked up here is about attaching a price to our beliefs. "Here is a million dollars you could have had, but since you're not listening..." The catch is, it has to be done in such a way that a retailer doesn't lose a million dollars. They're not the enemy. That's why I made the special point about the CDs being resalable.
Funny thing is, Slashdot has the power to pull it off.
Re:your tax dollars at work... (Score:4, Interesting)
From Merriam-Webster [m-w.com]:
Doesn't say a think about "refuse to use" and exactly describes getting music through non-RIAA sources. I think you are confusing refusing to deal with the RIAA with refusing to use music. They aren't the same thing.
Re:your tax dollars at work... (Score:5, Interesting)
Additionally, you cannot return an unsatisfactory CD. You open it, it plays, you bought it. Who's stealing from whom? Suddenly the reason why people'd put their own time and energy into music sharing comes into sharp focus.
This could be a good thing... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:And so we move to anonymous networks... eg.Free (Score:3, Interesting)
All you need to do in a civil trial is prove that it's probable that the person commited an illegal act. So if it's possible to prove that FreeNet is mostly used for pirating copyrighted works, and that someone has used FreeNet to transfer xMB worth of material, wouldn't it be possible to sue them in a civil suit?
I'm not sure FreeNet is really a 100% safe solution. Simply using it may be enough to allow you to be sued for probably infringing on copyright, since it doesn't need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt in a civil suit.
Then again, IANAL, so I have no idea if this would have any weight in court.
THIS IS AN ELECTION YEAR! (Score:5, Interesting)
Spend a couple of hours (or a few dollars) supporting a politician who isn't (or won't be) voting for these stinking bills. Make sure that they know why you're donating your money and time. Make it an election issue when they have callins and/or town hall meetings.
If you live in/near Hatch, then make sure to spend some time supportint his rival. If you don't feel free to send money.
Look for innovative ways to support an anti-RIAA politician.
It won't just affect the RIIA. It's a really good way to generate good contacts for other issues -- It's also a good way to meet people (including of the romantic persuasion -- I've actualy ended up going out with a couple of people I'v met thru my political work, and I consider myself pretty clueless at that game.)
If everybody on slashdot spent 3 hours (or $100) on this, it would make the Rifle Association look like chicken scratch.
It's a little bit of time and/or resources that could make a big difference in the next few years -- especially given that these people are still looking at passing this legislation.
Re:Oh Wonderful =\ (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes, a porn publisher has sued (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't know about movies, but regarding pictures, you can read the story of Playboy v. Sanfilippo [gigalaw.com].
Re:Hey, wait a second... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Can it be balanced? (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes, you are missing something - something that many Slashdotters are missing: Cash donations are not what politics and power are all about.
People in power are in power because they know how to manipulate the system. They do favors for each other. You manipulate the system so that my risky investment pays off and I'll do the same for you. They trade favors, not cash.Sure, they like to talk about campaign reform and limiting cash contributions, but this is mostly a ruse to show that they're on the side Goodness and Fairness and Honesty in Politics. They know that their ~real~ trading stock, favors, will not be touched.
Doubt it? Look at your local town council. How many Council members are involved in real estate or construction or own a local business? Why do you think that is? Because those are the people who would have something to gain by manipultating local taxes, zoning ordinances and building codes. The guy who just bought several hundred acres of farmland just outside of town will abstain from the vote to annex the property as part of the city because that would be a conflict of interest. But his buddy-to-his-left will support the annexation because our Honest Councilman voted last month for a tax abatement for buddy's business (which buddy-to-the-left abstained from for obvious reasons.) Once the property is annexed, the city will run water and sewer lines out to it and it can be rezoned "residential" or "commercial" (in trade for some other favors) and our Honest Councilman can sell it to a developer for a handsome profit. No cash has traded hands and strictly speaking, no conflict of interest ethics have been violated.No, the ideas of "follow the money" and "track the cash flow" are naive suggestions to catch any but the most stupid of politicians.
Re:Potential entrapment situation? (Score:1, Interesting)
He had put up his music on his website for preview purposes. But he put up DRM'd
I've saved a copy at http://www.noneinc.com/RIAAEM/
The song was called "Freedom", btw.
Re:Here's an idea... (Score:1, Interesting)
Yah, I am a freeloader. Call me whatever you want. I will continue to download music. And once the revolution comes, I will make sure I point your sanctimonious capitalist pig name to the guillotine squads.
Bah.
Re:American Whoredom (Score:1, Interesting)
While the argument can be made that "I downloaded it, but it does not matter because I would not have bought it anyhow..", that only shows the lack of respect that is becoming more and more pervasive. Fine, you don't want to buy it, have the decency not to download it....
Its interesting to me that this issue should really be addressed as a condemnation of the consumer instead of all this bashing of the government and the publishers. If you guys really stepped up to the plate and admitted that the efforts of someone else need to be respected, and stopped the piracy then the big bad government bear and evil corporation would not have a case and would go their own way.... But its more fun to transfer the blame and responsibility away from ourselves.
Re:your tax dollars at work... (Score:3, Interesting)
This Bill has First Amendment Implications (Score:2, Interesting)
Stripped to its essentials, an administration that wanted to squelch any author, musician, periodical, book publisher, or media outlet could go after them for copyright infringement. They would not have to target the speech they dislike. They would not even have to win. The cost of a defense against all the financial resources of the federal government would to crush all but the very deep-pocketed.
You can read the entire argument at:
Free Speech [inklingbooks.com]
--Mike Perry, Inkling Books, Seattle
Freenet (Score:3, Interesting)
Freenet is an encrypted P2P network where information is not stored at fixed locations: nodes exchange "keys" (information bits) all the time, and in this way "popular" information stays alive while non-used information gradually fades away.
Since every connection between a different pair of nodes is encrypted using different keys, it would be very hard to use traffic-analysis to find out what somebody is sending. To make matters even better: even you don't know what your node stores; it's all encrypted. This makes legal defense rather easy: it seems the only thing they can charge you with is participation in a P2P network or something alike.
Now, when using Freenet, you download the node-software (see my original post) and run it. This spawns the communication software, and a "virtual web proxy" at port 8888. This proxy interfaces you webbrowser to the Freenet. Browsing thus is a matter of directing your browser to your local host at port 8888 [localhost].
As for searching: Now this is still a bit of a problem; since information is decentral, there also cannot be a Google-like central database that you can search. However, there are many "spider"-sites (remember the web in the beginning, especially Yahoo before they implemented a real search-database?) that you can use to find info. The most important ones for starting are The Freedom Engine (TFE) and Find Is Not Dolphin (FIND). Links to both are hardcoded into your local freenet proxy.
On the other hand, things are becoming better: The I2P project [i2p.net] will be providing fully anonymous IP (IP over ann I2P interface!). Once that's done, you can run anything you like on I2P, even central search engines and the like.