Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Congress May Outlaw 'Attempted Piracy'

Posted by Zonk on Tue May 15, 2007 10:03 AM
from the i-see-what-you-were-trying-to-do-there dept.
cnet-declan writes "Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is asking Congress to make 'attempted' copyright infringement a federal crime. The text of the legislation as well as the official press-release is available online. Rep. Lamar Smith, a key House Republican, said he 'applauds' the idea, and his Democratic counterpart is probably on board too. In addition, the so-called Intellectual Property Protection Act of 2007 would create a new crime of life imprisonment for using pirated software in some circumstances, expand the DMCA with civil asset forfeiture, and authorize wiretaps in investigations of Americans who are 'attempting' to infringe copyrights. Does this go too far?"
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Yes. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Concern (819622) * on Tuesday May 15 2007, @10:05AM (#19129391) Journal
    Does this go too far?

    Yes, this goes too far.

    I promise vehement grass roots activism to defeat any elected official, Republican, Democrat, or Independent, who gets anywhere near voting for this. Full stop.

    This will not sneak by in the dead of night. We are watching. You are either against this violent insanity, or you are against the voters.
    • Re:Yes. (Score:5, Informative)

      I wouldn't lose any sleep over this bill. It's basically the Intellectual Property Protection Act of 2006 [wikipedia.org] (text [publicknowledge.org]) reincarnated as the Intellectual Property Protection Act of 2007. Don't you see how much better the new version is? It's got 2007 in the name! Congress, therefore, MUST pass it this time! :-/

      As far as I can tell, Congress didn't even care to look at, much less vote on it. The only difference this time is that the Attorney General is attempting to submit the law himself to give it more credibility. (It was previously backed by Rep. Lamar S. Smith (R) of Texas.) My hope is that it will end up in the same dustbin as the last attempt.
    • Re:Yes. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by NeoPaladin394 (1044484) on Tuesday May 15 2007, @10:21AM (#19129681)
      Why is this guy still in office? Is he trying to pass as much law for his puppet masters as he can before the angry mobs get to him? This is ridiculous! I'm not surprised at all that the President backs this.

      FTA:

      "Currently certain copyright crimes require someone to commit the "distribution, including by electronic means, during any 180-day period, of at least 10 copies" valued at over $2,500. The [Intellectual Property Protection Act of 2007] would insert a new prohibition: actions that were 'intended to consist of' distribution."

      So not only are we going to punish thought crime and what big brother thinks you're going to do, but this bill would even require Homeland Security to inform the RIAA and associated companies if one of us imports discs with "unauthorized fixations of the sounds or sounds and images of a live musical performance." Why don't we just reorganize the RIAA as another extension of the federal government? They're practically there anyway, and they'd be able to add an RIAA Piracy tax to our paychecks.

      This does not bode well. This does not bode well at all. It would be interesting to see how current presidential candidates handle this proposition, but am I too jaded if I think it will never reach any debate podiums?
  • Life in prison? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jshriverWVU (810740) on Tuesday May 15 2007, @10:07AM (#19129415)
    Yet murderers and rapist get out in less than 5-10. WTF is wrong with our society.
    • Re:Life in prison? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Turn-X Alphonse (789240) on Tuesday May 15 2007, @10:11AM (#19129479) Journal
      Murder victims tend to lack the money and legal bribery to get laws made in their favour. Money speaks and dead people don't :)
    • They didn't say life in prison, so much as they said that they want to trigger repeat offender status [e.g. three strikes]. I'm sure if you were convicted of murder a third time you'd definitely get life.

      That said, I agree that it's absurd that we can even think of locking people up for life for copying bits. There are easier and more humane ways to go about this. For example, probation, being forbidden to own/operate a computer, etc.

      You can still be a totally productive member of society without a computer. Being locked up in a cell is hardly productive.

      Tom
  • This is brilliant! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dudeman2 (88399) on Tuesday May 15 2007, @10:08AM (#19129425) Homepage
    Once life imprisonment for piracy is passed, the only safe software to use will be Free/Open Source.
    • by CastrTroy (595695) on Tuesday May 15 2007, @10:13AM (#19129521) Homepage
      This is more true than most people think. Do you keep receipts for all the software you buy? Can you prove you have a license? The only safe software will be Open Source and Free. Anything else could land you in jail, because you can't prove that you actuallly have a license. This is why I think more businesses should be using open source software. It makes it a lot easier to keep track of licenses.
    • except (Score:5, Insightful)

      by nanosquid (1074949) on Tuesday May 15 2007, @10:27AM (#19129763)
      Except that Microsoft and other companies are trying to create the presumption that any and all open source software violates someone's copyrights or patents.

      Microsoft is almost certainly already lobbying for laws that will place strong legal burdens and liabilities on open source software, with the intent of making it impossible for any serious business to run open source software.
  • Crazy (Score:5, Informative)

    by Judg3 (88435) <jeremy@noSPAM.pavleck.com> on Tuesday May 15 2007, @10:09AM (#19129439) Homepage Journal
    If you aren't yet a member of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, now would be a real good time to start. http://www.eff.org/ [eff.org]
  • by LoaTao (826152) on Tuesday May 15 2007, @10:10AM (#19129457)
    Attempted copyright infringement? When we can't get our elected officials charged with real, already committed and documented crimes? What is going on in this country!?!
  • by RichMan (8097) on Tuesday May 15 2007, @10:11AM (#19129469)
    FTA: Require Homeland Security to alert the Recording Industry Association of America.

    Sure that is what everyone intended the anti-terrorism money to go to.

  • Wait, what? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by LordPhantom (763327) on Tuesday May 15 2007, @10:11AM (#19129473)
    All considerations about copyright infringement aside (legal, illegal, etc), this just makes my blood boil:

    " Require Homeland Security to alert the Recording Industry Association of America. That would happen when compact discs with "unauthorized fixations of the sounds or sounds and images of a live musical performance" are attempted to be imported. Neither the Motion Picture Association of America nor the Business Software Alliance (nor any other copyright holder such as photographers, playwrights, or news organizations, for that matter) would qualify for this kind of special treatment."

    Since when did Copyright Infringement become an issue for Homeland Security to work directly with a specific corporation?
     
        Why give only the RIAA this treatment? Do they notify Tropicana when off-brand OJ is smuggled in from Mexico?

  • "probably?" (Score:5, Informative)

    by Richard (5962) on Tuesday May 15 2007, @10:11AM (#19129475)
    "his Democratic counterpart is probably on board too"

    Would it be too much to ask that you find out Rep. John Conyer's position - hell, even his name would be an improvement, and perhaps understanding why Rep. Smith is considered "key" (hint: check the committees) - before you start tarring him with the same brush as Rep. Lamar Smith?

    -Richard Campbell.
  • by zappepcs (820751) on Tuesday May 15 2007, @10:11AM (#19129491) Journal
    this legislative effort and *ALL* those who support it:

    (The Justice Department's summary of the legislation says: "It is a general tenet of the criminal law that those who attempt to commit a crime but do not complete it are as morally culpable as those who succeed in doing so.")
    You cannot and SHALL not legislate morality. Thought police should be shot on the basic premise that they cannot stop themselves from breaking the laws the are supposed to uphold. Witness so many big pulpit preachers that can't stay away from young men, drugs, prostitutes etc. If you look at all the crimes committed by elected leaders it will make you wonder how the US government can even operate. Thought crimes cannot be punished. Morality cannot be legislated.

    If this is to pass, what immoral act would next be prosecuted? Being gay? Being obese? Being lazy?

    This is clearly an admission by those who support it that they are UNABLE to enforce current laws, and even that they are trying to enforce laws that are thought to be bad laws by enough people that they can't possibly get 100% compliance.
  • by arkham6 (24514) on Tuesday May 15 2007, @10:14AM (#19129553)
    If this law passes, I see the following.

    (mp/ri)aa will flood the various file sharing networks with dummy files, aka 'master_of_puppets.mp3' that are actualy null files of a certain size.

    Random user tries to download file from *aa over the network.

    *aa records IP address of user

    *aa submits IP information to DoJ

    Random user goes to jail for attempted piracy and *aa also files a civil suit.

    PROFIT!
  • Death to tyrants (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Dog-Cow (21281) on Tuesday May 15 2007, @10:26AM (#19129751)
    Not even 250 years ago, the founders of this country willingly committed treason and went to war over laws such as this. Life imprisonment sounds a lot worse than taxation without representation to me. The general population of the United States are not served by this law. We are not being represented. Now, we can't even get the offenders voted out of office. Never mind trying to incite a revolution.

    The only good politician is tortured and dead.
    • "would create a new crime of life imprisonment for using pirated software in some circumstances"

      I dont know what circunstances are those, but yeah right any judge would sentence that.


      RTFA

      The proposal increases the maximum penalties for 5 2320 offenses from 10 to 20 years imprisonment where the defendant knowingly or recklessly causes or attempts to cause serious bodily injury, and increases the maximum penalty to life imprisonment where the defendant knowingly or recklessly causes or attempts to cause death.


      And exactly how is someone going to cause death while committing criminal copyright infringement?