Stiffer Penalties for Copyright Violations 502
smallfries writes "US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has proposed much harsher punishments for copyright violations, including jail time. The Intellectual Property Protection Act [PDF Warning] doesn't appear to change the fundamentals of US copyright law but does allow more leeway for the police when investigating suspected crimes, and harsher punishments for those convicted. A response with a link to one site's look at the bill is up on Linux Electrons. Now that attempting the crime has such severe consequences, who will be the first to go to jail for running a p2p client?"
BitTorrent (Score:5, Funny)
Re:BitTorrent (Score:2, Interesting)
But why would I buy legal CD's when you have people like Sony installing illegal software on computers?
Re:BitTorrent (Score:5, Funny)
Re:BitTorrent (Score:5, Insightful)
The central notion of copyright is that the act of making copies was difficult, and therefore served as a kind of chokepoint to control distribution and make sure someone got paid. The justification for legal sanction is more complex, though I like the American version, that encouraging creativity is beneficial for the society.
The copyright premise of difficult copying is totally broken. Staying with BitTorrent as an example, it was trival to distribute thousands of 75 MB copies of OpenOffice 2 in a few days. It could have been millions, and it would have made no difference from the usage perspective. When I got my download, it quickly maxed out my connection. More copies simply make it easier to do so.
Since the foundation has crumbled to sand, it doesn't matter what sort of reinforcements they try to use. Gonzales is just being a typical BushCo idiot and is trying to steer by looking backwards. We need to rethink the entire notion of copyright and how to compensate creativity, not focus on "new" ways to keep a dying publishing industry on life support.
Re:BitTorrent (Score:3, Insightful)
"BitTorrent and related technologies have broken the copyright system"
No Napster, FastTrack, and now BitTorrent have not broken the copyright system. The problems with the copyright system stem from its moral flaws and not from the fact that technology now exists that can subvert the system. In short the system was always broken Napster and its children mearly exposed it as existing in that state.
For example, imagine that there is a serious flaw in ssh or some other such secure protocal. In that case ss
Re:BitTorrent (Score:3, Insightful)
The protections it grants give me, as an author, the potential (not the right) to profit from those creations. If the "free market" you expouse decides my work is successful, and it's well received, those profits allow me the time and opportunity to create new works, thus f
Re:BitTorrent (Score:3, Informative)
Currently, 70 years plus life of author is effectively forever as most people would be dead before the copyright expires on anything created today. This is contrary to the original intent. I believe the original intent is laudable, and the current regime of copyright control is draconian, and actually prevents the creation of new and interesting works in many cases-- Remix works, where pe
Re:BitTorrent (Score:3)
Anyway, if copyright is so important for the creation of artworks, how do you propose it should work for people who invest an enormous amount of time in worthy works which have very limited markets (as one example: medical encyclopedias in narrow specialities)? Copyright depends entirely on remuneratio
Misunderstanding the Republicans (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:BitTorrent (Score:3, Informative)
Amazingly enough, they can now sue you for derivative works--and even though Mickey Mouse was a derivative work in the first place.
Re:Doesn't the White House have anything better to (Score:3, Insightful)
Now that Osama is in custody . . . (Score:2, Interesting)
It seems to me ... (Score:5, Interesting)
Good bye civil liberties! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It seems to me ... (Score:2)
Where the hell does this end?
When everyone is in jail.
Re:It seems to me ... (Score:5, Insightful)
No - when everyone can be put in jail as and when needed. Criticising the government or protesting a war may remain legal, but they can go through the list and find something else to arrest you for as and when needed.
Re:It seems to me ... (Score:5, Insightful)
One thing that I really hate about conservatives (and I am one) is that we get these insane ideas that jail is the right solution for every problem. But this is just really, really stupid. Should we jail people for speeding? It is, after all, a crime. I'd be more than willing to bet (which, by the way, is also illegal where I live) that more people are killed each year by excessive speed than by excessive downloading.
Re:It seems to me ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Fixed that for you.
Re:It seems to me ... (Score:2)
Well, I suspect there's a third category - people who could get away with almost anything and still not go to jail. Knowing who's in this category (and what might cause them to leave it) is one of the more interesting bits of information on how a country's run.
Re:It seems to me ... (Score:3, Interesting)
However, there have been two apparently unrelated changes to the law:
Re:It seems to me ... (Score:3, Insightful)
Then our society will be divided into two classes: (1) those in jail, and (2) those who aren't in jail yet.
More accurately:
An added benefit of this structure is that it makes it very easy to move an individual from class (2) to class (1). Plus Wal-Mart will have a whole new market to branch out into, and something to add to their Superstores.
Downloading does kill people! (Score:5, Funny)
You are wrong. Considering that downloaders are nothing but communists, and communism killed 170 million people [hawaii.edu], downloading is a far more dangerous crime than speeding.
Re:It seems to me ... (Score:3, Funny)
Yes, but because of that, we also have the safest country on the planet, with the lowest rates of murder, drug use, theft and violent crime.
Wait a minute, we don't? Never mind.
Re:It seems to me ... (Score:5, Insightful)
About the same point the "donations" do.
Re:It seems to me ... (Score:3, Interesting)
About the same point the "donations" do.
Put an end to the "pass our evil laws and we'll give you money for campaign advertisements" status quo, and it'll just be replaced with "pass our evil laws and we'll publish our own advertisements for your campaign" - same effect, except that anyone who can't afford to buy a whole TV commercial will be out of the loop. Put an end to that, and it'll be replaced with "pass our evil laws and we'll publish 'news' stories that might as well be
Re:It seems to me ... (Score:5, Insightful)
And the people in charge get more powerful. Everybody wins!
I totally can't wait for a world government to make this process even more efficient.
How about more of the same ... (Score:2)
As long as they are on a roll, I'd like to see them do the same with corporate and political corruption. Let's see some political investigations actually get off the ground for a change. Let's see the corporations investigated rather than ignored. Make hightened security something for everyone, not just the rich and/or powerfull.
Re:It seems to me ... (Score:5, Funny)
1. Copying CDs
2. Disabling, deleting or avoiding XXAA spyware/zombification tools
3. Informing others or the press about the time you were taken to Turkey to be tortured.
4. Knowing the reason why you were taken to Turkey to be tortured.
5. Abortion
6. Masturbation
7. Using condoms or any other means of birth control
8. Teaching evolution
Re:It seems to me ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It seems to me ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Are we talking about Canada or the United States?
You realize that the Clinton health-care plan, which thankfully never got past the talking stages, was going to be based on a single-payer plan system modeled after the Canadian system?
The Canadian plan also results in lower healthcare costs and better healthcare, so modeling ours on theirs is probably a good idea. That doesn't mean that we have to outlaw private health insurance along with it! You understand what "modeling" means, do you not?
You realize that one of the most prominent left-leaning advocacy groups is called "Socialist Alternative" and that it calls for the seizure of the 500 biggest American companies and the replacement of their owners and management with committees of citizens?
Prominent by whose definition? You do understand that when one says "left" in the United States, we're talking about leftist relative to the American mainstream, not what would be considered leftist internationally. In the US, the proper term for groups like "socialist alternative" would be "socialist". We aren't talking about socialists here.
You realize that this prominent group calls for making the taking of "excessive profit" a crime, and that their leaders have been running editorials in the nation's opinion pages for years now?
Again, prominent by whose definition?
Name one. Seriously. Name one. I've given you concrete examples. Name one.
The Human Life Amendment. [all.org] And don't give me any crap about it being intended to merely allow states to criminalize abortion, not force them to. Criminalization of abortion is precisely what they want. See also Operation Rescue/Operation Save America.
Do you know the difference between overturning Roe and criminalizing abortion?
There is a reasonable argument that Roe v. Wade is a bad precedent not on the basis of the abortion debate, but on the merits on which it was argued. With some caveats, I actually buy this argument. That doesn't change the fact that the vast majority of people working towards overturning. Roe v. Wade are not working in favor of reason in law, but because they want to see the criminalization of abortion. There is a war in this country between those who support abortion and those who want to see it become illegal. Roe v. Wade is an icon in that war. Those who oppose Roe v. Wade on principle, but not abortion per se, are simply find themselves on the wrong side of a debate that only has two sides.
Re:It seems to me ... (Score:3, Interesting)
What they should and what they do are different things. The US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is the same one that advocates use of torture, and claims that the Geneva Conventions are "obsolete". With an US Attorney General that is all too willing to violate human rights, no one should be surprised that he now propose ha
Re:It seems to me ... (Score:5, Insightful)
By the way, once they declare war on you, they're not terrorists anymore. Especially not once you declare war on them. "War on terrorism" is an oxymoron. The Geneva convention also covers more than just prisoners of war... it also outlines what you can and can't do to civilians. So if you toss the Geneva conventions the "terrorists" haven't really done anything wrong. They declared war then used a tried and tested (by the US and Britain during WWII) method of attack -- bombing a major population centre.
Since it was November 11th yesterday I think it's a particularly appropriate time to note that people should think for a minute before dismissing as quaint lessons learned the hard way in the worst conflicts in human history.
Hate to burst your bubble (Score:5, Informative)
Where does it end? (Score:2)
Re:It seems to me ... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:It seems to me ... (Score:3)
Why does this bullshit get modded up? Give me some examples of these corporate donors "ignoring" copyright law - by which I assume you mean infringing.
Why? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why? (Score:3, Insightful)
Conversely, artists who are thrilled to have fans at all seem to take the opposite tack, and don't mind harmless sharing; indeed, they recognise that exposure is cheap advertising and ultimately leads to a larger paying fanbase.
In
Is it time yet? (Score:4, Funny)
Guessing (Score:5, Funny)
I hope it will be US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales's daughter. THAT would be real fun.
Re:Guessing (Score:2)
I hope it will be US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales's daughter. THAT would be real fun.
Nah, more likely it'll be an 80 year old grandmother...
Re:Guessing (Score:3, Interesting)
I hope it will be US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales's daughter. THAT would be real fun.
I want to know why this HASN'T happened yet! In Sept 2003 when the RIAA started sueing people, they were immediately lambasted by the press for the people they sued...grandmonthers running Macs and 12-year-olds in the projects.
Since then, despite the thousands of people they've sued, they haven't sued someone able to make a major stink by who
Re:Guessing (Score:3, Insightful)
and
2. If you're famous, maybe you settle out of court. RIAA will be happy to settle, cause they can just take that money and use it to make an example of someone else who won't.
Copyslaughter (Score:5, Funny)
Stupid RIAA (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Stupid RIAA (Score:5, Insightful)
The actual artists aren't so lucky.
We can relax now (Score:3, Insightful)
What now (Score:5, Funny)
Stealing a slice of Pizza : life
Murder : life or death penalty
Copyright infringement : Life , then the death penalty , then your family are sold into slavery
Re:What now (Score:2)
Next will be charging the parents when this "crime" is committed by their children. That way they can go after children without going after the children.
Re:What now (Score:2)
Re:What now (Score:2)
and you have the right to bear arms, so go ahead!
And in tomorrow's news... (Score:5, Insightful)
President Bush is pleased to introduce the Protect Democracy Act which would ensure the death penalty and forfeiture of all assets for singing a song written in the past 500 years without written permission from the copyright holder.
The nation's test case is already in the pipeline, with an entire boy scout troop under indictment for singing The Star Spangled Banner before playing a game of wiffle ball.
It is hoped that these new regulations make the world safe, in our continuing war on terror.
Re:And in tomorrow's news... (Score:2)
http://w3.rz-berlin.mpg.de/cmp/josquin.html [rz-berlin.mpg.de]
Spyware Sony seems to breach copyright (Score:5, Interesting)
It turns out that the rootkit contains pieces of code that are identical to LAME, an open source mp3-encoder, and thereby breach the license
http://dewinter.com/modules.php?name=News&file=ar
Sony rootkit violating GPL?, Seems to include parts of LAME?
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?sho
Re:Spyware Sony seems to breach copyright (Score:3, Insightful)
Publish something and waive copyright (Score:2, Insightful)
Please write a book that will become wildly popular. Then publish that book and waive all copyright protections. It might take a year to write that book with no income coming in but that would be a small price to pay to make your point.
You see friends, we already live in a world where copyright is a matter of choice. You don't have to participate in the universe of copyright protection. As a consumer you
Re:Publish something and waive copyright (Score:5, Insightful)
I think we SHOULD still be paying john lennon and many other dead artists royalties despite the fact that when they recorded the songs the copyright limits were much shorter. Because I agree that all artists need to know that they will be compensated 20 or more years -after they are dead- in order to encourage them to write a song, paint a movie, or write a book.
---
Heard the latest? they are now going after royalties on resales of USED books.
Re:Publish something and waive copyright (Score:3, Insightful)
1) You have a valid point.
2) It didn't apply to any artist before today. Already dead artists got nothing extra when the walt disney protection act was passed and extended copyright. And most if not all living artists got nothing extra- it was just gravy for the corporations.
3) If we extend the copyright forward over all time, the amount of money would be infinite, so clearly there is some copyright time limit for which the original artists would not be compensated.
And finally,as others hav
Re:Publish something and waive copyright (Score:5, Insightful)
Just so you know, there are maybe 3 people whose attention you've just reached. The rest of us believe in limited and reasonable copyright protection, for a finite, purely innovation-driving amount of time--which, if you notice, is just what the Constitution calls for. Our current system of copyright is nowhere near this.
Honestly, very very few of us would dream of pronouncing that we are 'against copyright.' While it might be easy to respond to some sort of anarchist straw man, please take a little more time and thought to respond to the much more complicated reality. As it is, you're wasting everyone's time.
Re:Publish something and waive copyright (Score:3, Interesting)
No. It is not hard. At least not in the way you imply. Artists (true artists, not product placement fabrications) create because they are driven to by whatever force it is that gives most of us some small measure of creativity and a select few an over-abundance. I'm nothing saying that its effortless, but they certainly don't view it as work . The artist is compelled to create, it is his or her r
need more slave labor (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:need more slave labor (Score:3, Insightful)
Throughout history... (Score:5, Insightful)
It is a natural reaction to make the laws tougher when people start to defy the law in droves but I urge people to ignore that reflex because often it is more instructive to look at root causes. Why do people pirate? Because the CDs are overpriced. Your average individual actually prefers the boxed CD to an MP3 but is not prepared to spend £15 on it. If you priced your CDs to reflect this desire then you could reverse the decline in CD sales.
Often, real change does not come from politics but from the sound of a million feet. Politicans still believe that people want the artist to be compensated to the tune of £15 for a crappy manufactured album. The people do not. In the end the people will win; they always do. The question is how much political capital are they willing to spend fighting this change?
The Internet has changed everything. I was working a project for a band a fairly high profile band in the UK who have totally ditched their record label in favour of a web-based approach. I can't blame them! Why get 1% of the CD record sales when I can get 100% and make more money than the labels were are paying?
Another thing, They REFUSED to use DRM. Saying that DRM protects the artist is rubbish. It protects the label's reveune stream, that's all. This band understands the internet. They're saying they want you to copy because it's a bonus to them just to get heard by that one new fan. That one new fan might spend £50 on a ticket to see you at a concert. They may even by the tracks off the site just to support you. It builds loyalty when you trust your fans rather than hold them in contempt.
The future is just getting started and we're about to see the big labels get their wing clipped.
Simon.
Re:Throughout history... (Score:2)
Re:Throughout history... (Score:3, Interesting)
Here's an example from my own life: a few years ago I tripped over an artist on the old mp3.com, liked the first download, pulled a few more MP3s, liked those even better, so I downloaded the entire set.
Since then I've been in contact with the artist, and he's even emailed me one of his new MP3s.
Now he's got a CD for sale on cdbaby.com, and even tho it's priced at the high end ($17) and doesn't include most of my favourites, I'm going to buy a copy, because not only do I like his music, he's earn
Sigh... (Score:5, Insightful)
* Tape a TV show for a friend
* Play the new White Stripes CD at your office party
* Forward an interesting email rumor
* Make a cool picture you found on the web into your desktop background image
These are all things that people frequently do without any sense of transgression. Are we as a society going to start sending grandmothers, middle school students and so on to jail? Are we prepared to start using web browsers without "save" functions, email programs without "forward" functions, software that reports on us if we're doing anything possibly illegal? The illegalization of non-DRM'ed mpg, avi, txt and mp3 files? Because that is where we're heading unless we put a stop to it.
A dual edged sword (Score:5, Informative)
The proposed law adds a new weapon against someone who violate Linux' EULA - and now makes it a criminal action to even try to violate it.
Think of the law a giant real world RPG - you need to understand teh rules and bend them to your ends.
Loaded Gun (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Loaded Gun (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Loaded Gun (Score:5, Interesting)
I can see this being extended to a form of unreasonable search and seizure: Wandering the net, you find yourself on a filesharing site. You nose around a bit, then leave without downloading anything. A week later, the copyright nazis arrive at your door (armed with a warrant) and inform you that since your IP address was seen on a P2P site, you are automatically a suspect. They arrest you, confiscate your computer, and march the lot off to detention. Now it's up to you to prove your innocence.
But... you've got a few ripped MP3s on your computer, from a CD you legally "own" (well, that you licensed from the record label) which in itself goes to show intent to distribute, as does possession of the tools to rip said MP3s.
Now you're in REAL shit.
Oh, and if you're a resident of a country where the DRM laws prohibit even discussing circumvention (frex, Finland if a current bill passes) you can't complain to anyone about this treatment, not even your lawyer.
Yeah, right now this scenario seems an hallucination induced by a too-snug tinfoil hat. But it's certainly the direction things are headed.
And given all that, out of sheer self-preservation it would behoove folk to buy ONLY those materials produced by bands and studios that specifically ALLOW free redistribution of ripped copies. (Or cloned copies if the artist so allows.)
Note that I specified "ripped copies" and "free redistribution", NOT unauthorized hardcopies (ie. counterfeits intended for sale without payment to the artist), and NOT pay-to-download without paying the artists (PTD with micropayments to the artist should naturally be encouraged). Those activities should indeed be prosecuted, as they would be for any other counterfeit goods.
extrapolate from mp3.com (Score:5, Interesting)
At the very least, it makes putting a copyright file on a network riskier, even if you have no intention of letting anyone else know about it. An easy and common example would be sharing music with yourself by sftp. They could claim it's an attempt to share with others.
The real endgame is to make the internet look like broadcast TV. Only a few will have the power to share anything. Running a server is already forbidden by your ISP, despite the fact that many commercial applications do just that and would not work otherwise. The big publishers are closer to getting their way every day and it makes me sick. So much for free press in this country.
soon... (Score:4, Funny)
PDF Warning! (Score:2)
...... couldn't have just printed [PDF] as an added curteousy for those that don't regularly check the status bar before clicking links. I might have put a similar suggestion there for a baby-boomer that is afraid of breaking their computer hardware through mis-use of a software program
.
-shpoffo
More Jail for All (Score:2, Insightful)
Stiffer penalties won't change a thing (Score:5, Insightful)
Good I say.. (Score:2, Interesting)
Hmm.. (Score:2)
Re:Hmm.. (Score:2)
Kind of a “live by the sword, die by the sword” sort of thing?
Soooouuuuu (Score:3, Interesting)
Is there any hard, researched, evidence that harder punishments decrease rate of whatever they're punishing?
WTF is wrong with you? (Score:2)
ScuttleMonkey. What is wrong with you? Do you get paid to take the facts and re-write them?
Please look up the definition of the word PROPOSED in the dictionary. I do not think that word means what you think it does.
You cant then go on and say that now that the penalties ARE more severe, who will be the first one to go to jail.
Please mod up if you believe this editor needs to go! At least someone get him an internship with his intellectual peers. Perhaps at the Rush Limbaugh show?
Does this include Sony? (Score:2, Troll)
So does this include going into Sony/BMG offices and confiscate their mail servers and backup tapes to find out who authorized the alteration of the Windows operating system in obvious violation of the copyright that does not give anyone but Microsoft the authority to do so? Or perhaps to enforce the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act section 1030?
Or is just to extend the "To Serve and Collect" mentality?
Government of the people... (Score:2)
Woopidy Do... (Score:2)
-Bandit, Smokey and the Bandit
Corrupt System (Score:5, Informative)
If you follow the trail it looks like most of this kind of legislation is bought and paid for by the very people it benefits.
Re:Corrupt System (Score:5, Interesting)
What would happen if each of us made a personal contribution to our elected representatives, along with a letter explaining that if they vote intelligently on certain important issues, there will be more where that came from. Maybe if four or five hundred thousand technjocks start putting their money where their mouth is, we could eliminate the entertainment industry influence entirely. Sure, I know about campaign finance laws, but if a given representative or senator got all he could legally receive directly from his constituents before the first RIAA lobbyist showed up at his door, it would go a long way to restoring a little balance.
And even if he has to give it back, the sight of a half-million small white envelopes, each containing ten or twenty dollars of actual cash might make him think a little. I mean things such as logic, reason, "doing the right thing", Truth, Justice and/or the American Way just doesn't seem to be enough anymore. So maybe we need to provide a little incentive.
Getting tough doesn't work (Score:4, Insightful)
Never mind terrorism, the war on drugs, and corporate theft. Let's divert federal resources to go after those pornographers and college kids trading music! They've either got their priorities totally hosed up or they have WAY more people than they need and this is Justice Department busy work.
Ignorance and incompetence rivaled only by those who continue to support a corrupt, ineffective and incompetent administration. Usually justifying their misplaced and hypocritical loyalty by whining that the Democrats aren't any better. Well, it's time to face the facts: The Democrats ARE better. They may not be the ideal but the worst of them could do better than this bunch of corrupt losers.
Gonzales says its about "terrorism" (Score:5, Insightful)
Gonzales said the new laws are needed because evolving technology is "encouraging large-scale criminal enterprises to get involved in intellectual-property theft." He added that proceeds from copyright piracy is used, "quite frankly, to fund terrorism activities." [Emphasis added]
There you have it folks. The US Attorney General says that this technology is funding terrorism, presumably with zero-dollar bills. I don't know about you, but I'd say 99% of the intellectual property "theft" (his words, not mine) are going on TOTALLY FOR FREE.
In fact, if they did succeed in shutting down these new technologies for the common man, you can bet that would be the only time the criminals started making massive money on this. Gonzales's plans will actually encourage criminal profits and, therefore by his logic, encourage terrorism. Gonzales is actually taking steps to put the money into this for terrorism and crime lords, not the other way around!
So if you ever wanted damning evidence that our AG both doesn't understand the issues, and is in the back pocket of the content corporations (RIAA, etc.), and that he wants to play the "terrorism" card (like they did about Drugs)... there you go.
Re:Gonzales says its about "terrorism" (Score:3, Interesting)
1. Copyright infringement == terroist support
2. Jail time for copyright infringement
3. Enemy combatants (terroists) == no due process
4. Torture == Ok for terroists
Obviously, the next steps are:
5. ?? == Torture copyright infringers
6. Profit!
Directors Cuts (Score:2)
Alberto Gonzales vs. Porn (Score:5, Informative)
And I'm speaking as a moderate conservative. This guy scares the shit outa me.
Compromise! (Score:5, Insightful)
1. Every jury is composed of a truly random selection of my peers -- people from my community who know me and can judge if I am a criminal
2. Every jury is notified of their right to jury nullification. They can judge not only the defendant, but the law.
3. Every arrest is preceded by the charge of two witnesses, and the idea of "the People versus" goes away.
4. The penalties for any crimes are tripled for any employee of any government branch.
Re:Compromise! (Score:3, Insightful)
2. Every jury is notified of their right to jury nullification. They can judge not only the defendant, but the law.
The problem with this is that it would lead to many more cases of the jury judging the victim, rather than the defendant or the law. We've had this happen before, such as when white juries would acquit white people accused of crimes against black people in the South, because the victim was black.
Do you really want a system where peo
Re:Compromise! (Score:3, Interesting)
The problem with this is that it would lead to many more cases of the jury judging the victim, rather than the defendant or the law. We've had this happen before, such as when white juries would acquit white people accused of crimes against black people in the South, because the victim was black.
The solution to that would be to find less baised jurors, not to deny jury nullification. Besides it goes both ways, without jurry nullification, jurors may be compelled to uphold and enforce racist laws. One of
Sueing their customers (Score:3, Funny)
So myabe putting them in jail will, that'll be sure to make everyone buy more CDs!
I'd expect this from The Onion or the Daily Show, not the US Atorney General's office... *sigh*
Harsher punishement (Score:3, Insightful)
Think this is stupid ? Well compare the crimes above with copyright infrigement, and compare their negative impact on the citizen... And ince copyright infrigement cam be made worst by the number of copy shared , why not the crime above ?
Yes I am fantasming here. Actualy maybe make the crime for copyrighrt infrigement worst. First offense cut a hand. Second offense : cut second hand. etc... Maybe "citizen" will tehn start reacting.
Startling trend in modern America (Score:5, Interesting)
Recently, Denver became the first city to pass legislation that totally legalizes the possession of up to an ounce of marijuana by adults 21 years and older. This happened because anti-WoD organizations got the bill up for public consideration, and finally, the citizens voted in favor of it.
Of course, possession is still illegal in the state, and also on the federal law, so it's still not really 'legal'. What bothered me so much about the news is the psychotic response from the government, saying "We will still jail you under state law!" in a very draconian tone.
The big point here is that this is supposed to be a government by the people, for the people.
The people have fucking spoken, and you've openly told them that you're going to ignore their will?
Anyone have any statistics on this so-called P2P epedemic? It seems to me that with the excessively large number of Americans (hell, people WORLD WIDE) that actively participate in P2P, it's the system of content distribution that needs to change -- not the further criminalization of the practice!
Re:They need to make up their mind (Score:2, Interesting)
The financial penalties already are, as they can sue you for downloading a copy, but I'm relatively sure they haven't sued anyone for stealing a cd.
Re: It's Time For Yanks to Move to Canada ;) (Score:3, Insightful)
Crime (Score:3, Informative)