Sure, mod me down this is unlikely to be a popular VP on/.
Last time I looked 'we' stronly believe in copyright enforcement when / as it applies to GPL or other FOSS licensed material. But when the shoe's on the other foot, suddenly people who go to a fair bit of trouble to steal a copyright work are *victims*? I think not.
Many of the comments here run along the lines of 'ohh look at those really harsh penalties, compare them to (white-collar-crime, violent crime...).
Kindly observe that this is *federal* legislation (and that are some states have enacted laws). That means that what's prosecuted under this is most likely going to be the 'theatre employee runs a showing off-hours explicitly to do a video rip' instances. *Hence* the stiffer penalties.
The pentalties for copyright theft are already out there, this isn't new - it's addressing a specific instance.
Sure we don't like DMCA, RIAA et al and I heartily agree that there are some 1st class morons in "the Industry" lobbying etc.
However in fact technology is making copyright theft easier and with the bar lowered there are going to be laws passed (DMCA etc) to try to address that.
Deal. And if the best way you can think of 'dealing' is to cry wolf about how people without respect for others property are 'victims'... well you can expect more of the same kind of legislation.
The problem with this law is that it adds criminal penalties for what was formerly a civil offense. The civil penalties were in line with severity of a crime. This law has mandatory 10-year penalties for repeat offenders - those that have already spent 10-20 years in prison under this law.
That's more than serial rapists, murderers, or people who embezzle billions. That's more than most drug-related crime laws.
The problem isn't the enforcement but, rather, that the penalty is hideously out of whack with the severity of the crime.
Yes, *cough* BULLSHIT *cough* is appropriate for your post. The likelihood of this law being applied rather than a plea agreement happening in virtually all the cases is non-existent. And, repeat offenders probably should do jail time for being so damn stupid.
But the bottom-line it this: it's really a non-issue if you understand that it is wrong, illegal, and stupid to pirate a film with a video cam. Perhaps if this is too hard for you to grasp, you need to be culled from the herd as a benefit to everyone
How likely it is to be applied is IRRELEVANT. Its like the FCC to "just trust us" when it comes to enforcing decency regulations. The fact is that they are rediculous penalties for the offense involved, which *is already covered under existing laws*.
Kindly observe that this is *federal* legislation (and that are some states have enacted laws). That means that what's prosecuted under this is most likely going to be the 'theatre employee runs a showing off-hours explicitly to do a video rip' instances. *Hence* the stiffer penalties.
What does the fact that this is federal legislation have to do with anything?
Federal legislation just means it is in a different jurisdiction, not that it is necessarily stronger (or smarter!).
The point I was trying to make is that people equate Federal law with "more serious" exclusively. Federal law has very limited jurisdiction, and that is the important thing to get. It is very likely that the jurisdictional limits of this law are going to be ignored, resulting in unconstitutional enforcement.
Have you seen the PIRATE Act? This is GREAT for enforcement of every penny annie little bullshit copyright violation.
Instead of emailing Linksys (now Cisco) legal about copyright infringement of Open Source code, we can just call up the Feds and have them bust their asses. This is great! Also, you remember that snippet of Javascript you stole to make your homepage slightly more annoying? Guess what?! The Feds are on your ass now!
The Senate has no idea how much copyright violation goes on in this country
In so far as I'm a good enough coder to not *need* to lift other people's work, (and wouldn't be caught dead dicking around with JS) and on those instances where I do use other's code I license / attribute appropriately....
Of course they should be prosecuted. However, 3 years of prison for $20 worth of crime is ridiculous and just an extra stupid burden on our justice system.
Last time I looked 'we' stronly believe in copyright enforcement when / as it applies to GPL or other FOSS licensed material. But when the shoe's on the other foot, suddenly people who go to a fair bit of trouble to steal a copyright work are *victims*? I think not.
Yes, "we" strongly believe in copyright enforcement ("we" in the reasonable-headed group of/.ers). That means living up to the agreement of the licence that the material was given out with. That means that if you break the agreement, you remedy it (by a number of means, including replacing offending code with new code, GPL'ing the application, cross-licencing the code from the author, or stop distributing the product). None of these involve criminal prosecution in any way, nor is it appropriate.
I seriously doubt that many here really think that jail time is appropriate punishment for the lazy coder at some corporation who inserted a module from GPL'ed sources to save himself some work. Or even for the management at said corporation who encouraged the practice to reduce development costs. Yet that is what we have for the copiers of "IP" belonging to big media.
if the best way you can think of 'dealing' is to cry wolf about how people without respect for others property are 'victims'... well you can expect more of the same kind of legislation.
The best way to deal with this offence is in line with deed done: financially. Charging the offender for actual damages (likely about $20) plus appropriate punitive damages (a couple thousand at most) is the sane way to deal with this "crime". Taking a violation of civil law and making the punishment a criminal offence, with such rediculously small impact (please show me a credible study that proves any financial losses from shitty camcorder movies), is just stupid.
When stories like this get posted, I wonder how far I'll have to read before some self-important idiot accuses Slashdot and its readership of hipocracy. Well I hate to wipe the smug, shit-eating expression off your face, but I would like to point out that there is no hipocracy in complaining about companies who violate the GPL and throwing people in jail for taping movies.
Do you have any idea what the hell you are talking about? How the fuck is violating a software license and throwing people in prison f
I wonder how far I'll have to read before some self-important idiot ... defends the/. herd's POV?
First off, get a clue about the rules. 'We' don't get a say in sentencing. That is the sole purview of *judges*, subject to minimum sentences and established guidelines, so what 'we' might or might not seek in terms of settlements / enforcements is pretty much out of context.
Second, the effective arm of 'we' wrt the GPL is Eben Moglen who is quite clear in his discussion of strategy which is to have FSF wo
"Be there. Aloha."
-- Steve McGarret, _Hawaii Five-Oh_
* "Victims of this new bill" * (Score:5, Interesting)
Last time I looked 'we' stronly believe in copyright enforcement when / as it applies to GPL or other FOSS licensed material. But when the shoe's on the other foot, suddenly people who go to a fair bit of trouble to steal a copyright work are *victims*? I think not.
Many of the comments here run along the lines of 'ohh look at those really harsh penalties, compare them to (white-collar-crime, violent crime ...).
Kindly observe that this is *federal* legislation (and that are some states have enacted laws). That means that what's prosecuted under this is most likely going to be the 'theatre employee runs a showing off-hours explicitly to do a video rip' instances. *Hence* the stiffer penalties.
The pentalties for copyright theft are already out there, this isn't new - it's addressing a specific instance.
Sure we don't like DMCA, RIAA et al and I heartily agree that there are some 1st class morons in "the Industry" lobbying etc.
However in fact technology is making copyright theft easier and with the bar lowered there are going to be laws passed (DMCA etc) to try to address that.
Deal. And if the best way you can think of 'dealing' is to cry wolf about how people without respect for others property are 'victims' ... well you can expect more of the same kind of legislation.
Re:* "Victims of this new bill" * (Score:5, Insightful)
*cough* BULLSHIT *cough*
The problem with this law is that it adds criminal penalties for what was formerly a civil offense. The civil penalties were in line with severity of a crime. This law has mandatory 10-year penalties for repeat offenders - those that have already spent 10-20 years in prison under this law.
That's more than serial rapists, murderers, or people who embezzle billions. That's more than most drug-related crime laws.
The problem isn't the enforcement but, rather, that the penalty is hideously out of whack with the severity of the crime.
Re:* "Victims of this new bill" * (Score:3)
But the bottom-line it this: it's really a non-issue if you understand that it is wrong, illegal, and stupid to pirate a film with a video cam. Perhaps if this is too hard for you to grasp, you need to be culled from the herd as a benefit to everyone
no, *you* bullshit (Score:1)
Re:* "Victims of this new bill" * (Score:1)
Perhaps if this is too hard for you to grasp, you need to be culled from the herd as a benefit to everyone else.
Exactly - we can't just sit around and leave all these serious thought crimes unpunished.
Re:* "Victims of this new bill" * (Score:2)
So yes criminal offence was already part of coyright law.
What exactly did you think the DOD warez group was prosecuted for? (I've met MIT econ dept admin who is now doing 33months in the federal slam).
Re:* "Victims of this new bill" * (Score:1)
What does the fact that this is federal legislation have to do with anything? Federal legislation just means it is in a different jurisdiction, not that it is necessarily stronger (or smarter!).
Re:* "Victims of this new bill" * (Score:2)
Federal jurisdistion is an entirely different ballgame, ask the former MIT admin who's doign 33 months federal time for his DOD involvement.
Re:* "Victims of this new bill" * (Score:1)
Federal law has very limited jurisdiction, and that is the important thing to get. It is very likely that the jurisdictional limits of this law are going to be ignored, resulting in unconstitutional enforcement.
Look at the PIRATE Act (Score:2)
Instead of emailing Linksys (now Cisco) legal about copyright infringement of Open Source code, we can just call up the Feds and have them bust their asses. This is great! Also, you remember that snippet of Javascript you stole to make your homepage slightly more annoying? Guess what?! The Feds are on your ass now!
The Senate has no idea how much copyright violation goes on in this country
Re:Look at the PIRATE Act (Score:2)
So no I'm not personally worried about this
Re:* "Victims of this new bill" * (Score:1)
Re:* "Victims of this new bill" * (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, "we" strongly believe in copyright enforcement ("we" in the reasonable-headed group of
I seriously doubt that many here really think that jail time is appropriate punishment for the lazy coder at some corporation who inserted a module from GPL'ed sources to save himself some work. Or even for the management at said corporation who encouraged the practice to reduce development costs. Yet that is what we have for the copiers of "IP" belonging to big media.
if the best way you can think of 'dealing' is to cry wolf about how people without respect for others property are 'victims'
The best way to deal with this offence is in line with deed done: financially. Charging the offender for actual damages (likely about $20) plus appropriate punitive damages (a couple thousand at most) is the sane way to deal with this "crime". Taking a violation of civil law and making the punishment a criminal offence, with such rediculously small impact (please show me a credible study that proves any financial losses from shitty camcorder movies), is just stupid.
no inconsistency here (Score:1)
Do you have any idea what the hell you are talking about? How the fuck is violating a software license and throwing people in prison f
Hmm moron (Score:2)
First off, get a clue about the rules. 'We' don't get a say in sentencing. That is the sole purview of *judges*, subject to minimum sentences and established guidelines, so what 'we' might or might not seek in terms of settlements / enforcements is pretty much out of context.
Second, the effective arm of 'we' wrt the GPL is Eben Moglen who is quite clear in his discussion of strategy which is to have FSF wo