Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
United States Government Politics

U.S. Declares War on Intellectual Property Theft 643

Posted by samzenpus
from the go-get-them dept.
bblazer writes "Reuters is running a story about a new US effort to stop intellectual property theft. From the article "The U.S. Justice Department on Tuesday outlined what it called its most sweeping crackdown on bootleg DVDs, fake designer goods, illegal music downloads and counterfeit drugs." It also goes on to say that media (movies and music) is highly affected, but so are products like batteries, baby food and Viagra."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

U.S. Declares War on Intellectual Property Theft

Comments Filter:
  • And legality? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by metlin (258108) * on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:02AM (#10522424) Journal
    RIAA estimates that $2.6 billion worth of revenues are lost and the like through file-sharing - so what are they going to do about it?

    Sue a kid in China or India for it? Unlikely, I think.

    • Re:And legality? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by CountBrass (590228) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:05AM (#10522449)

      The War on Drugs. Yep that worked.

      The War on Terror. Yep that's working: so far two countried fucked up and Iran's next.

      So how can we deal with counterfeiting? I know: we'll declare war on it, that always works.

      The US Government: the world's leading terror organisation for the last 50 years.

      • by metlin (258108) * on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:09AM (#10522479) Journal
        And oh, I was wrong about the figures.

        He said the Motion Picture Association of America estimates that 2.6 billion songs, movies and software programs are illegally distributed over the Internet every month.

        Hah! I'm sure that puts it at a much higher number than what I put up there.

        Hmm, cost of 2.6 billion movie downloads? $260 billion

        Cost of 1 nuke? $50 billion

        Watching the US Nuke a country for RIAA? Priceless!

      • Re:And legality? (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Dillusionary (675442)
        You are exactly right. This has nothing to do with the benefit of others; this has everything to do with control and jobs for all the other dumbasses that can't get a job some where else. Why is it 67% of the prison population are drug related? Obviously this shit isn't working. Most likely someone up high got a hand out and no doing what the hand out required. Doesn't it seem more and more we are, we as in the US, are just as corrupt as IRAQ/N. Korea, except the fact that we have this illusion of freedo
      • Re:And legality? (Score:3, Insightful)

        by FlopEJoe (784551)
        Add to that list the War on Poverty.
      • Re:And legality? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by mpe (36238) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:28AM (#10522611)
        The War on Drugs. Yep that worked.

        If it ended think of all those poor DEA agents having to get proper jobs.

        The War on Terror. Yep that's working: so far two countried fucked up and Iran's next.

        Unless Iran actually has WMDs, in which case Syria is most likely next in line.

        So how can we deal with counterfeiting? I know: we'll declare war on it, that always works.

        Except that kind of copyright infringement which a fuss is being made about isn't counterfeting in the first place.

        The US Government: the world's leading terror organisation for the last 50 years.

        Whilst the US Government may have made the "top 10" since 1954 it may not have been number one for each of those 50 years. The US Government faces stiff competition from Israel, Britain, Russia and France.
        • by sepluv (641107)
          ...and Skull and Bones [google.com]...oh sorry...you already mentioned the US government.
        • Re:And legality? (Score:3, Interesting)

          by dcam (615646)
          The US Government faces stiff competition from Israel, Britain, Russia and France.

          I'd agree with the other two, but I think you have made a mistake on Britian and France. I can't think of anything WRT to Britian, and for France the only things that come to mind are Algeria and Indo-China (later Vietnam and Cambodia). This doesn't quite compare to Russia, Isreal and the US.
      • Re:And legality? (Score:3, Insightful)

        by TummyX (84871)

        The War on Terror. Yep that's working: so far two countried fucked up and Iran's next


        Hmm. Afghanistan 4 years ago: Taliban run, Alqueda haven, woman oppressed (some not even allowed to leave home).

        Afghanistan today: Most of the people are feeling optimistic about their future after decades of war and oppression. First person to vote in the first ever democratic elections was a 19 year old woman.

        Hmm...doesn't sound too fucked up to me. Oh wait, the US was responsible for it. Yep, Afghnistan is comp
        • Re:And legality? (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Pig Hogger (10379) <pig.hogger@gmai l . c om> on Thursday October 14, 2004 @09:31AM (#10523151) Journal
          Hmm. Afghanistan 4 years ago: Taliban run, Alqueda haven, woman oppressed (some not even allowed to leave home).
          Yeah, right.

          Like if the US cared about woman being oppressed. (If so, they would invade most muslim countries and India and everywhere else women are oppressed).

        • Re:And legality? (Score:5, Insightful)

          by amalcon (472105) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @09:34AM (#10523196)
          And why was the Taliban there in the first place?

          Oh right. War on communism. Religious fanatics were better than communism, so the U.S. put the Taliban in charge.
          • uh... no. (Score:3, Informative)

            by mrbrown1602 (536940)
            Hey Mr. Wanna-be History Major, wake up! The U.S. did not put the Taliban in power. In fact, the Taliban were not in power until 1996. Afghanistan had a democratic government after the Soviet Union left, and then in the 90s, the country went into a state of civil war, and when conditions were right - the Taliban sneaked in the door. As for U.S. support of the Taliban, there wasn't any. Carter and Reagan supported the mujahadeen in their war against the USSR. Most mujahadeen were not radicals - they were j
        • Re:And legality? (Score:5, Informative)

          by Fulcrum of Evil (560260) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @09:44AM (#10523331)

          Afghanistan today: Most of the people are feeling optimistic about their future after decades of war and oppression. First person to vote in the first ever democratic elections was a 19 year old woman.

          That's the official line. What I've heard is that people are afraid to vote, as they expect to be killed for cooperating with the americans, Opium production is something like 70% of the world supply, and the fundie religous types (like the Taliban) are gaining power again. Call me when they're sovereign and at least halfway friendly.

      • by TummyX (84871) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @09:04AM (#10522915)

        The War on Terror. Yep that's working: so far two countried fucked up


        HOW DARE THEY remove Uncle Saddam's Utopia and the Uncle Osama's paradise and replace them with eeevil capatalistic and prosperous liberal democracies! They've ruin those countries just like they ruined Japan, Germany and South Korea (luckily Uncle Kim's Eden has thus far survived).

        FUCKING TERRORISTS!
        • Re:And legality? (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Queer Boy (451309) <dragon.76@mac . c om> on Thursday October 14, 2004 @10:18AM (#10523764)
          There's no evidence that the US government has replaced anything. There has been an election in Afghanistan without the final results and there is still an absence of a traditional government.

          G Dub has declared war on the UN. We are not friends with the world right now. I for one do not welcome my warmongering overlords. No one has a right to invade another country without going through the UN. We did just that and I can't believe it didn't have further extending repercussions.

          I am more worried about North Korea and their very real WMDs than I am of the make-believe boogeyman Bush is conjuring up.

          Trust me, with all the oil being found in Russia and Russians being the new rich, it won't be long before we are at war with THEM.

          Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia.

    • "War on Intellectual Property Theft: Criminal raided, found hiding in the basement of an american family."
      • by apt142 (574425) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:30AM (#10522624) Homepage Journal
        The report says he's been living there for years feeding off of left overs at the dinner table and putting up with comments from fellow family member about how he should finally move out.

        When asked why he did it, he simply responded. "I had to drown out the noise of my two sisters upstairs who were playing Britney Spears 24-7."

        His lawyer in a press relief thinks that he'll be acquitted on charges of self preservation.
    • Re:And legality? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by mpe (36238) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:15AM (#10522523)
      RIAA estimates that $2.6 billion worth of revenues are lost and the like through file-sharing - so what are they going to do about it?

      Most likely spend several times that amount of money a year in "enforcement" and making sure that the "enforcers" have a job for life.
  • That's funny... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TheCaptain (17554) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:02AM (#10522425)
    I don't see anyone but Al-Reuters calling it a 'declaration of war'. The headline alone is going to cause a flame war.
    • Re:That's funny... (Score:5, Informative)

      by Albanach (527650) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:09AM (#10522475) Homepage
      I don't see anyone but Al-Reuters calling it a 'declaration of war'. The headline alone is going to cause a flame war.

      It's a fair point, but these headlines usually reflect the way it was spun by the government. You have to know how press teams work - they send out the press releases to Reuters etc, then they'll call the individual journalists and put their spin on it. Because they're then first to answer any questions the journalist might have they can influence the story.

      Picture the conversation like this:

      Journalist: so is this a real crackdown? WIll there be resources to back it up?

      Apparatchik: Sure. Think of it like our war on IP theft.

      Journalist: Thanks.

  • by Gene Ray (819051) <gene.rayNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:03AM (#10522429) Homepage
    When will the US stop trying to "declare war" on abstract concepts like "terrorism," "drugs" and "intellectual property theft"? (Recent) history has shown that things like this just do not work.
    • by mpe (36238) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:12AM (#10522498)
      When will the US stop trying to "declare war"

      Most likely when the rest of the planet says "enough is enough"...

      on abstract concepts like "terrorism," "drugs" and "intellectual property theft"? (Recent) history has shown that things like this just do not work.

      Actually it appears to work quite well. Assuming the aim is to keep various people busy and well funded. N.B. the funding goes to "both ends". So odds on the US Government is now funding "intellectual property theft". The whole idea of these "wars" is top ensure that they cannot be "won".
    • "The war on drugs to me is absolutely phoney, its so obviously phoney, ok? It's a war against our civil rights, that's all it is. They're using it to make us afraid to go out at night, afraid of each other, so that we lock ourselves in our homes and they get suspending our rights one by one."
      Bill Hicks
    • (Recent) history has shown that things like this just do not work.
      That depends what the "wars" are trying to achieve.

      If they're about reducing the threat of terrorism, the spread of illicit drugs and the black market, then you're right and they don't work at all.

      On the other hand, if they're about manipulating the public opinion with official doublespeak and a distinct lack of factual logical basis, I reckon they've worked pretty well. Just not for you.

    • When will the US stop trying to "declare war"

      When it fails to be profitable for those in power. In other words, never.

  • Oh sure (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Megaweapon (25185) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:03AM (#10522430) Homepage
    He said the Motion Picture Association of America estimates that 2.6 billion songs, movies and software programs are illegally distributed over the Internet every month.

    Because we all know how accurate their numbers are...
  • by muntumbomoklik (806936) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:03AM (#10522431)
    I can't tell you how many.... problems... I've had with my imitation Viagra. Luckily, my imitation woman is still holding up pretty good.
  • by antifoidulus (807088) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:03AM (#10522434) Homepage Journal
    Oh no! They aren't going to crack down on my favorite Duraking batteries. Or maybe Dinacell?!
    (For those of you unfamiliar with cheap batteries, those are real, and they are all made to look like duracell batteries)
  • So (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Timesprout (579035) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:04AM (#10522438)
    Is there anything or anyone the US is not actually at war with at the moment?
    • Re:So (Score:5, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:10AM (#10522482)
      Don't seem to be waging a war on war at the moment...
    • Re:So (Score:5, Insightful)

      by mbbac (568880) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:27AM (#10522599)
      No.

      War on drugs? Check.

      War on terrorism? Check.

      War on third world countries that don't pose a threat? Check.

      War on the UN? Check.

      War on intellectual property infringement? Check.

      War on its citizens? Check.

      • Re:So (Score:3, Insightful)

        The fundamental problem with these and all the other "war" metaphors the government has thrown around at various times (poverty, cancer, etc., as other posters have pointed out) is that war is a lousy metaphor for anything except, well, war actually.

        Governments are very very good at fighting wars; the US government has had a couple of centuries of experience, and government as a social institution has had several millennia of experience, at assembling armies to go fight other governments' armies. It sucks
    • Re:So (Score:3, Funny)

      by apt142 (574425)
      Polland. Don't forget Polland.
    • Re:So (Score:5, Insightful)

      by lxs (131946) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:50AM (#10522799)
      Is there anything or anyone the US is not actually at war with at the moment?

      Halliburton?
    • by jeti (105266)
      Is the US economically able to not be at war for a prolonged time?
  • Yup, good timing (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Gentoo Fan (643403) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:04AM (#10522441) Homepage
    Just in time for the elections. "Hey Hollywood, us government types are doing the job you want us to! How about some more 'donations'!?"
  • by lottameez (816335) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:05AM (#10522448)
    The Recording Industry Association of America welcomed the report. RIAA chairman Mitch Bainwol said the "commitment of focus, energy and resources outlined in this report is music to our ears."

    FWEEET! Up against the wall! - did you pay for that song you're playing in your head?
  • War against $FOO (Score:5, Insightful)

    by fforw (116415) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:06AM (#10522456) Homepage
    Seeing how the "war against drugs" and the "war against terror" went I would be quite worried if I was an american.
    • Don't forget the War on Poverty.

      I can't wait for the war on violence.
    • What, you mean their utter ineffectiveness?

      Wouldn't that be reason to NOT be worried?
    • by hackstraw (262471) *
      Seeing how the "war against drugs" and the "war against terror" went I would be quite worried if I was an american.

      Yeah, especially since we are really the only ones tha suffer the casualties of these wars. Its nuts to consider that Apartheid was maintained with as many or fewer of South Africa's population in jail or prison.

      For those of you that don't know almost 1% of the human population is incarcerated, its over 1% when you consider those who are on probation and parole. Land of the free and home o
    • Re:War against $FOO (Score:3, Interesting)

      by RoLi (141856)
      Exactly, I think for the US, the war has become an end and is no longer a means.
  • Who's Rights? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by marktaw.com (816752) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:06AM (#10522457) Homepage

    Ashcroft said the FBI also would increase the number of agents assigned to investigations, and develop youth information programs to encourage respect for artists' rights.

    Who's rights? The IP owner in this case is the record labels and movie companies, no the artists. When's the last time you looked at the copyright label on a CD or DVD?

  • by master_p (608214) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:08AM (#10522467)
    As if the people behind this move are not rich enough, they want to extract the last drop of milk from us. Don't they understand that they are rich because we are the customers?
    • And they get even richer by sucking all the money out of you pockets in return for not going to jail.
    • They do understand this, but they also understand that in affluent societies, prices of luxury goods (such as CDs and DVDs) have a fair amount of elasticity, and thus, can be kept higher, netting them even *more* money. That is what they realise.
      Government won't do too much to stop them, as higher revenues look better for the economy in general, and help keep the nation's growth looking healthy, which in turn prevents it from being eclipsed by other rising powers, and subsequently outgunned.
      This is what
    • they want to extract the last drop of milk from us.

      They are welcome to, as long as there's no underhanded tactics going on. In turn, you are free to deny them their wealth by not buying their products. But piracy, or whatever you want to call it, is wrong.

      I don't see anything intrinsically wrong with a 'war on IP theft'. However, as usual, there's the question of:
      - priorities... is this really the thing that law enforcement agencies should be focussing on?
      - rights: are they just applying a little

    • Don't they understand that they are rich because we are the customers?

      Sure they do. It's the executives getting ready to retire in a few years that don't care about fucking it up for everyone else.

      Short-term thinking is the new watchword in American business, dontcha know? Why build a business when you can take your cut now?

  • by syberanarchy (683968) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:13AM (#10522506) Journal
    And like drugs and terror, you'll never stop it.

    And unlike drugs and terror, the politicians will never get the support they need from the masses to continue their latest favor crusade to the big cartels.

    The war on terror is working because the majority of McWalmart Americans are convinced that them dirty a-rabs are just tootin' to bring their hoity toity core-anne over here and shove it down our capitalist lovin', god-fearin' country's throat.

    The war on drugs worked because well-to-do soccer moms were and are scared that their Harvard-bound princesses will end up giving blowjobs for coke, or that their sons will end up slanging yayo in the hood.

    What's going to be the hook for Joe Sixpack to endorse the "War on Piracy?" The fact that CD prices may rise even more? That Regal and AMC might up the price from 8.50 to 9 bucks?

    Unlike the terror and drug "wars," the middle class constituents that these piggish fucks in DC need to support their endeavors will not see the importance of "waging war" on something that they do not percieve as a threat. They will not see the justice in their sons and daughters becoming someone's bitch in a maximum security prison for what amounts to petty "theft" (and yes, I know it's not really theft. But we must keep it simple for the simpletons, both on /, and in the real world).

    The 60 million people who file swap "illegally" in this country cannot all be put in prison. If they try, they'll be met with protest and the backlash from the public. Becausse file swapping is such a part of our culture now that all the laws in the world won't make any difference. They've lost, rightly or wrongly.
    • by syberanarchy (683968) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:21AM (#10522556) Journal
      Something I didn't think of before, but really illustrates my point:

      These "IP" laws have really become like the speed laws. Your driver instructor tells you that yes, you can get fined, etc. for going 5 over the speed limit, or for putting the hood of your car over the white stop bar at traffic lights. But in reality, how much does this happen? (and spare me your "I live in a hick town where the one cop in town has a vendetta against my family so yes it happens" tales.)

      Likewise, who ever gets sued for downloading a single mp3? How long will it take them to sue everyone? How long will it take them to sue enough folks to make anyone care? Will anyone care? The way I see it, I have about 8000 songs on my PC. Assuming I were a dirty pirate, and assuming they were all illegally aquired, if the RIAA came after me and demanded a 5000 dolalr settlement, I'd actually view myself as getting a pretty cheap deal, as opposed as to if I had gone through iTunes, etc.

      They can't slap casual swappers with the "max fines" they advertise (250k per work,) because it would cause outrage. They're damned if they do, damned if they don't. I don't envy the RIAA at this point!
    • by Lumpy (12016) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:32AM (#10522641) Homepage
      problem is that the RIAA and MPAA are too unbelieveably stupid to embrace and extend.

      they could have quadrupled their profits by embracing the file trading scene. and offering right away, better than CD quality singles at less than $0.75 a track as well as gobs of "freebies" at the lower 128 kbps quality. seeding the P2P networks with their latest releases by making it look like a "unreleased bootleg" of Anton Mazumba's country styled gansta rap hit the streets, when it's simply a prerelease single from his new album "smackin' my bitches with my pickup truck".

      The music people would have ate that crap up, it would have driven sales of CD's and new money churning artists higher than before.

      instead they do the absolute stupidest and hairbrained thing, do everything in their power to piss off the costomers. Metallica is still hated by ex-metallica loving fans because of the backfire of that trick.

      Until the MPAA and RIAA get rid of all the dead-wood that is it's leadership and replace them witrh real businesspeople that can see a trend and use it to their advantage, they will continue their current stupidity.
    • by Vicsun (812730) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:41AM (#10522719)
      60 million people are a lot of people, but as many large numbers it's hard to conceptualize. To put it in contrast, in 2000 George 'Dubya' Bush got 50,456,002 votes (source: Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] ). Does that mean there are more criminals walking the streets than people who voted for the president?
      When there are so many people breaking a law, isn't it time to revise the law, rather than futilely try to enforce it?
    • by Motherfucking Shit (636021) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:46AM (#10522769) Journal
      The war on drugs worked because well-to-do soccer moms were and are scared that their Harvard-bound princesses will end up giving blowjobs for coke, or that their sons will end up slanging yayo in the hood.
      Meanwhile, people like me are getting blowjobs from Harvard princesses and buying yayo at record low rates from their brothers. Vive le guerre!
  • War on piracy! (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    That's how America operates, isn't it? We don't solve problems, we declare war on them. Problems with poverty? A war on hunger. Don't like narcotics? A war on drugs. Not much reason at all? A war in Iraq. And now, a war on piracy.

    Solving problems... hard. Declaring war, good soundbite.

    And people wonder why our homicide rate is so high. Every day you get to see the most horrific death scenes on network TV, but god forbid the children might see a breast, it's like they never breast fed? Huh?

    Sorr
  • Let's hope (Score:5, Funny)

    by w.p.richardson (218394) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:15AM (#10522521) Homepage
    that it's as successful as the war on drugs.

    Maybe in a few years, prisons will be even more overcrowed...

    "What're ya' in for?"
    "Downloading Britney, you?"
    "N'Sync"

    What a joke.

  • by LiquidCoooled (634315) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:16AM (#10522529) Homepage Journal
    I am writing this letter in the hope that you can take affermative action against my local drug dealer.

    He has been selling counterfeit drugs for the last few months. The quality of his wares have been steadily dropping now, and I demand action.

    When I go out onto the street, I can reasonably expect to purchase high quality original drugs.

    Sincerely,
    A. Concerned Addict.
  • by Exter-C (310390) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:20AM (#10522552) Homepage
    There is always a catch 22 when dealing with this type of issue. By researching how to make the drug or tool utility music or whatever it maybe it costs money and time. But you make money at the end of the tunnel. The profit margins are always dropped when there are counerfiet/fake clones etc around. BUT if the initial product was cheaper more people could afford the goods and there would be less demand for clone/fake items and the cycle wouldnt be as dramatic.

  • by ControlFreal (661231) * <niek@ber[ ]er.net ['gbo' in gap]> on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:27AM (#10522603) Journal

    Sigh... When the US tried to stop the use of alcohol early in the 20th century, did that actually stop the use of alcohol? No! And in addition, there was a lot of crime, because people tend to go to great lengths for what they want.

    When the US declared the War On Drugs, did that stop the use of drugs? No! And in addition, there was a lot of crime, because people tend to go to great lengths for what they want.

    When the US declares a War on Copyright Infringement (not: theft!), will that stop the infrigement of copyright? No! And there will be a lot of crime, because people tend to go to great lengths for what they want.

    Waging a war on something does not solve the issue. Never by itself. An issue can only be solved by looking for the motives that people have for doing things.

    Ask yourself: Why do people use alcohol, why do people use drugs, why do people download material from the net? Only when you know people's motives, you can start to change things, because if you don't understand the motives, and just wage a war, you deny people something that they want...

    ... and there will be a lot of crime because people tend to go to great lengths for something they want.

    • Of course what you're missing here is the unspoken war that has been waged for decades, and that is the war on intelligent thought.

      It takes intelligent thought to as the "why" questions you point out as being central to these silly "wars". It's not in the governments or corporations interests for people to ask why.

      Intelligent thought has not been stamped out, the same as alcohol, drugs, and copyright infringement haven't been stamped out, and it never will be. It is also an unwinnable "war". However li
  • The new drug war? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anita Coney (648748) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:39AM (#10522696) Homepage
    There is a Burger King/AOL advertisement about kids getting pulled over by a cop. They were essentially asked if the music they were listening to was stolen.

    Will this be our future? Will an MP3 player in a car give probable cause to search for more stolen goods?!

    I've always thought the real intent of drug laws were to give the government the ability to arrest anyone for any reason at any time. That's because there is no victim to testify against the person, only the cop who says he saw the person with drugs. And because it allegedly happens directly in front of the cop, the government doesn't have to worry about the person coming up with any alibi defense.

    I think that copyright enforcement will become the new "victimless" crime of choice.

  • by hypnotik (11190) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:51AM (#10522808) Homepage
    Dear RIAA, MPAA

    The world has changed. Move On. Stop trying to recoup the costs of creation and promotion by building it into the cost of creation. Find some other way to profit from the works of others, for the method you are using now is nearing the end of its usefulness. You can sue every single person that copies a movie or song over the net, but how can you sue those that do not use the net as their means of transport? As large hardisks become more plentiful, your battle becomes harder. And this is a battle you will ultimately lose - the more you fight, the more costly it will become. For the people you are fighting are your reason for exisiting. If you put them in jail, take all of their savings, or alienate them, you might as well disappear - for they will never purchase your products again.

    Welcome to the new world.
  • by blueforce (192332) <clannagael@nOSpAm.gmail.com> on Thursday October 14, 2004 @08:54AM (#10522842) Homepage Journal
    I can't stand to lose any more of my intellect.
  • by Mstrgeek (820200) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @09:00AM (#10522888)
    I have found a great Link to some great information dealing with Intellectual Property Laws

    http://www.cybercrime.gov/iplaws.htm

    This site brings up some good points hope you find it as informative as I did

  • Hmm.... (Score:4, Funny)

    by MADCOWbeserk (515545) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @09:26AM (#10523092)
    When the fake viagra fails to work you can buy your girlfriend some fake duracells.
  • by thisissilly (676875) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @10:27AM (#10523863)
    This is bad. This a prelude to the RIAA and the MPAA no longer having to pay lawyers to sue their customers, instead getting the US Taxpayers foot the bill and the DOJ to be the 'bad guys'. The DOJ gets to claim to be "tough on crime" and call for more money for more agents.

    Are you aware of the so-called "CREATE" and "PIRATE" acts currently in the Senate? They create "a civil enforcement authority" in the DOJ. This is very very scary. Tell Your Senator to Oppose H.R. 4077 and H.R. 2391 [publicknowledge.org]. Seriously.

  • Imitations Vs fakes (Score:3, Interesting)

    by phorm (591458) on Thursday October 14, 2004 @11:12AM (#10524394) Journal
    There are "imitations," and then there are fakes. Many imitations are legal and look like the more expensive competition, but don't claim to be the same: sunglasses, jeans, cologne, etc. Dynacell batteries, etc

    Then there are fakes, products that are make to look like the real thing, and labelled as the real thing, but are often vastly inferior quality. In many cases they are also dangerous: there have been reports of some powered products being subject to shock/fire, and even things such as children's teddy-bears which have been found stuffed with rubber bands and a bandage.

    Oh, and FYI I'm Canadian, but we get the same crap sneaking in at the docks. The government here isn't declaring a "war" on the fakes, but has been paying closer attention to them.

    Now, the illegitimate copy/rip of an anime movie that you can ordered off eBay is also under fire because many consumers think they're getting the real thing. In fact, the packages look real, the disks are realistic (I know people who come back from China with bootlegs that look very authentic, complete with DVD movies etc), but sometimes they turn out to be cheap VCD's or DVD's that don't play well in all machines.

    Prescription drugs, well we can see where this can go bad. Not only the viagara that doesn't work, but perhaps when somebody depends on a medication and finds that it's only sugar pills (or the wrong medications).

    My primary fear here, however, is that they aren't really going to crack down so much on the physical fakes, but just focus more on the movies/music filesharing, and put more legislation in place to block drugs order from places like Canada (which may be 100% legit pharmacuticals, but are busting the profits of US companies because they are regulated and much cheaper).

If at first you don't succeed, you must be a programmer.

Working...