Better just shoplift it, then

April 26, 2006 8:07 AM

The new DMCA: the Intellectual Property Protection Act of 2006 The 24-page bill is a far-reaching medley of different proposals cobbled together. One would, for instance, create a new federal crime of just trying to commit copyright infringement. Such willful attempts at piracy, even if they fail, could be punished by up to 10 years in prison.
posted by beth (36 comments total)

Does anyone else want to just turn off all electrical devices for about 10 years and see if these assholes disappear? I mean seriously, if they really think their content is that fscking valuable, let's see how much it's worth when no one is consuming it.

I'm growing extremely tired of reading about this situation getting worse and worse everyday. Someone needs to stop this horseshit.
posted by bobjohnsonmilw at 8:22 AM on April 26, 2006

The Inq has an interesting article about how the revised penalities stack up against crimes like child porn....

So in other words if you copy a Disney CD and sell it you will be in the same league as a paedophile who is distributing pictures of sexual attacks on children.
posted by SirOmega at 8:24 AM on April 26, 2006

I think the idea is to make just about everyone a criminal, then you can terrorize people at will with the threat of prosecution. Works really well if you specifically target people who tend to disrespect and criticize the government.

/paranoid
posted by beth at 8:26 AM on April 26, 2006

I broke this story (Mefi-wise) back in November when Alberto Gonzales proposed it in a speech. I rule.
posted by ND¢ at 8:36 AM on April 26, 2006

No, I think the idea is to nullify the tools necessary to create content and distribute it, because they are identical to the tools necessary to pirate content.

Essentially the wet dream of the media conglomerates is to turn the internet into television and radio with perhaps some tightly controlled chatting here and there.

Produce your own content? That's terr.
posted by fleetmouse at 8:38 AM on April 26, 2006

I for one welcome our new media industry overlords.
posted by illovich at 8:42 AM on April 26, 2006

The other ugly head to this hydra is the copy protection programs like StarForce which can negatively impact your computer's performance. Luckily, enraged consumers still have a voice to effect change.
posted by NationalKato at 8:44 AM on April 26, 2006

bobjohnsonmilw:
You have summed up my thinking exactly.

Next question:
Who do we scream at to stop this? Senators? Congressmen? Is there any sort of organized effort to shut this down?
posted by cows of industry at 8:45 AM on April 26, 2006

Hey you can get double the jail time of the cops in this thread. Brilliant.
posted by fungible at 8:46 AM on April 26, 2006

cows of industry: I'm from milw, obviously; I find that the more I hear about this absurdity the more I hear the name Jim Sensenbrenner. That man has got to be one of the worst offenders in this clearly corporately influenced bill-mongering. The question of whom to yell at: I'm truly unable to believe that our gov't is capable of correcting itself at this point. I feel as though facism has finally won, and we're the unfortunate generation that has to witness it firsthand.

<TINFOILHAT status="on">
Someday our children will say to us, what was life like before the Nazis won? </TINFOILHAT>
posted by bobjohnsonmilw at 8:50 AM on April 26, 2006

We are becoming a corpocracy - Governance by corporations. And as such, the only rights we'll retain are those which don't negatively effect the corporate bottomline.
posted by y6y6y6 at 8:52 AM on April 26, 2006

Who do we scream at to stop this? Senators? Congressmen? Is there any sort of organized effort to shut this down?

I checked EFF's site today and didn't see any news alerts on it yet, but I'd imagine they'll organize something about it soon.

There's this image in my head, of a snake being held in place on the ground by a forked stick. You know, Y-shaped, with the snake's neck under the forked part. Pinned there, can't do a damn thing. It can writhe like mad, but it ain't going anywhere. Anyway, I feel like that these days.
posted by beth at 9:00 AM on April 26, 2006

This is why I don't buy any digital media. No movies, no CDs, no games. These bastards won't see a red cent from me until they stop suing/prosecuting their patrons.

RIAA/DMCA need to wise up to the fact that they are operating an outdated business model. If you put out content in an easy reproducible, easily transmittable form - the customers criminals will do just that.
posted by i_am_a_Jedi at 9:03 AM on April 26, 2006

RIAA/DMCA need to wise up to the fact that they are operating an outdated business model.

While this is true, it's not the argument that really continues to point out that the very people who are suing "innocent" people are no angels themselves. Basically think about they way they take advantage of the horseshit the media creates: I want to be a rockstar, I'll do anything to be a rockstar, even sell my mother. Well, I've worked really hard on my music, put my soul into this. Now these guys are telling me they'll produce my music, but I have to sign over all rights. Whatever, they're giving me a $30K advance. Shit! That's a lot of money! Where do I sign!?!?!?

Well, that small investment (with the right band) just netted the record company millions. Band tours in a shitty bus or van, eeks out a living all at the same time those record pricks are driving their huge car to the hamptons. I say fuck that, and fuck those people.

Cutting out the middleman is the key. Enabling artists to exist and produce their own music with an infrastructure built that enables sharing but not to ridiculous levels. Many models are popping up all over the board, it's just that the "popular" horseshit that "You've just got to hear!!!" is what is being pirated.

So the moral of the story: buy local, go to shows, support the artists that support fair use and cut off the hands of those who support suing children. How about that?
posted by bobjohnsonmilw at 9:13 AM on April 26, 2006

Such changes are necessary because new technology is "encouraging large-scale criminal enterprises to get involved in intellectual-property theft," Gonzales said, adding that proceeds from the illicit businesses are used, "quite frankly, to fund terrorism activities."

M.I.A. and Diplo were right!
posted by ab3 at 9:22 AM on April 26, 2006

bobjohnsonmilw has it spot on. This sort of legislation is a desparate move by middle-men who's role is in grave danger of disappearing.

I hope, I sincerely hope, that once artists start using more open channels to distribute their music, legislators will start to understand that access is far more important for content creators than controll.

Those open channels will probably end up being controlled by litigious monopolies as well, unfortunately *cough* iTunes *cough*
posted by Popular Ethics at 9:28 AM on April 26, 2006

Meanwhile from Canada, I find this all totally hilarious.

/goes back to downloading the daily show
posted by freedryk at 9:40 AM on April 26, 2006

legislators will start to understand

Legislators do understand. They understand very clearly.

Artists don't give them money for reelection campaigns. The publisher do. Therefore, they're going to pass the laws the publishers want.

Those who have the gold make the rules, and those with the gold say you get 3-5 years for torturing a suspect for nearly two hours in attempt to get him to sign away his 4th amendment rights, yet you'll get 10 years for duplicating a Disney movie.

Disney has the money. You don't. Thus, you're opinions are unimportant.
posted by eriko at 9:40 AM on April 26, 2006

Meanwhile from Canada, I find this all totally hilarious.

Laugh all you want while the US pressures Canada to harmonize its laws.
posted by MikeKD at 9:56 AM on April 26, 2006

freedryk, you must think these corporations only care about the piracy in America, huh? Ignorance can be bliss, I suppose.
posted by NationalKato at 10:05 AM on April 26, 2006

adding that proceeds from the illicit businesses are used, "quite frankly, to fund terrorism activities."

If they had this information -- which you can be quite sure they don't -- it sure would be interesting to compare the ratio of "terrist" funds that come from IP piracy vs. oil revenues. And then of course apply the same logic.
posted by George_Spiggott at 10:24 AM on April 26, 2006

Did you just say 'logic,' George_Spiggott?
posted by NationalKato at 10:27 AM on April 26, 2006

I'm sorry, I don't know what came over me.

These laws are becoming parodies of themselves, and pretty much serve to drive any reasonable person in the opposite direction, to wit: You should never legitimately purchase any copyrighted material, because your untrained mind is incapable of knowing if some use you put it to is infringing, and in any event if an illegal copy is discovered in the wild, you will be on record as having purchased it and therefore subject to having your door smashed in.

Far safer to obtain such things via anonymous and untraceable means -- purchasing it is just too risky.
posted by George_Spiggott at 11:03 AM on April 26, 2006

Forget those tshirts with the DeCCs code on them.
I'm making a tshirt that says:
step 1- insert blank vhs tape into your vcr
step 2- set channel to FOX
step 3- press record

oooh! naughty me!
posted by TechnoLustLuddite at 11:05 AM on April 26, 2006

Meanwhile from Canada, I find this all totally hilarious.

I think you've forgotten whom we've just elected.
posted by Jairus at 11:27 AM on April 26, 2006

Just think of the pleasure that publishing execs get when they hear a congresscritter bite off the phrase "ten years in prison for attempted piracy". All those 50K a plate dinners, all those checks to the "committee's to re-elect" finally paying off. Not to mention those long phone calls with the senator himself getting this bill fleshed out. Man, makes you feel powerful after a while!

This bill will pass. It's bought and paid for. Any congresscritter who says one damn thing against it will find himself the subject of any number of embarrasing page-1 or "headline news" story leads.

Ah, democracy.
posted by telstar at 11:39 AM on April 26, 2006

Just more money for the Mafia.

Seriously.
posted by sonofsamiam at 11:41 AM on April 26, 2006

Time to write your congresscritter a strongly worded letter. DO NOT email it. Emails & faxes get tossed.
Get a pen, some paper, and write a letter. Write it on some toilet paper if you feel so inclined.

Might not do a damn bit of good, but you might feel a little bit better after tossing the letter in the mail.
posted by drstein at 11:48 AM on April 26, 2006

When technological change threatened factory workers' livelihoods, they were told to big up, retrain and move with the times.

Now technological change threatens a part of big media's business model. What should we be telling them?
posted by George_Spiggott at 12:17 PM on April 26, 2006

Meanwhile from Canada, I find this all totally hilarious.

I think you've forgotten whom we've just elected.

Not to mention who we just voted out... At least the conservatives haven't said one way or another yet whether they want to ratify the WIPO treaties.
posted by magwich at 1:24 PM on April 26, 2006

Well, the new Heritage Minister said "Copyright legislation has to be amended to make our copyright laws [compliant] and ratify the international treaties", and while there's some wiggle room there, it certainly seems like they're gearing up for WIPO ratification.
posted by Jairus at 2:07 PM on April 26, 2006

yeah, I've lost interest in buying media because of this kind of shit. I still buy something from time to time (only stuff I can own of course), but generally my money goes elsewhere these days.

I think I'm much better off because of it - much more of my time now goes into learning and doing, instead of viewing and fantasizing.
posted by -harlequin- at 7:11 PM on April 26, 2006

YouTube and the like is interesting here. If media was more important in my life, I suspect I'd be spending more time connected to that than connected to TV stations or movie theatres. This gives me some hope that DRM will ultimately be rendered a liability in the marketplace, however that's cold comfort since laws like the DMCA are and will continue to be routinely abused for all sorts of purposes that have nothing to do with copyright, such as creating and enforcing trade barriers, anti-competitive behaviour, silencing financially damaging speech, etc etc, long after the marketplace has sufficiently punished content owners for trying to put their viewers in straightjackets.
posted by -harlequin- at 7:20 PM on April 26, 2006

... adding that proceeds from the illicit businesses are used, "quite frankly, to fund terrorism activities."
Yeah, I knew the T word had to get in there somewhere. You do realise that America is becoming the laughing stock of the world because of things like this, don't you?
posted by dg at 2:30 AM on April 27, 2006

let's see how much it's worth when no one is consuming it.

While an individual can do this (I have), look at how on slashdot.org the drooling goes on when 'Spiderman II' or some other movie is released.

Good luck on getting the masses to not want to watch their latest circus.

: I'm from milw, obviously; I find that the more I hear about this absurdity the more I hear the name Jim Sensenbrenner.

VS the son of Gween Moore who just got nailed for making holes in tires on election day.

Yea...all winners!

America is becoming the laughing stock of the world

Yes. The joke WILL be on America when the rest of the world opts to stop using the US Dollar as its reserve currency.

Personally, I'll be asking my congress kritters to have the IP owners step forward and use the laws they already have.
posted by rough ashlar at 6:11 AM on April 27, 2006

rough ashlar: do I know you? Your speech pattern matches someone i know... Hmm. Sneaky sneaky. Am I mis-underestimating your sneakiness?
posted by bobjohnsonmilw at 2:48 PM on April 28, 2006