U.S. Declares War on Intellectual Property Theft 643
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."
And legality? (Score:5, Interesting)
Sue a kid in China or India for it? Unlikely, I think.
Re:And legality? (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:And legality? (Score:5, Funny)
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:5, Funny)
Re:And legality? (Score:3, Interesting)
songs, movies and software programs
They just look at Maya, etc. and "assume" those are downloaded my every P2P-user and multiply the result with their earlier assumptions.
Re:And legality? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:And legality? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:And legality? (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:And legality? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:And legality? (Score:3, Interesting)
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)
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)
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)
Oh right. War on communism. Religious fanatics were better than communism, so the U.S. put the Taliban in charge.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:And legality? (Score:5, Informative)
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.
Re:And legality? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:And legality? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:And legality? (Score:3, Funny)
So what your'e saying is it was no worse than an election in Chicago ?
To put it another way, it was slightly better than a Florida election.
Re:And legality? (Score:5, Funny)
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)
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.
Re:And legality? (Score:3, Funny)
I mean, is this a popularity contest or what? I say nuke everyone that isn't the US! We are the only ones that matter anyway. I can't understand why anyone would not like us!
Re:And legality? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:And legality? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:And legality? (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't know about you, but I can make a distinction between an isolated act of terrorism on US soil but a party as yet unproven, and the mass invasion of countries and genocide that was being undertaken by Germany.
Re:And legality? (Score:5, Insightful)
Then you speak about their relationship with the outside, now it sounds like you are talking about the US, nowadays. The only difference with Germany is that the US has now actually more power to kill than every other nation combined, and that is why they don't get the same treatment, because in this story the US are the crazed bastards killing everybody in their way, but there's noone able to stop them.
Re:And legality? (Score:3, Informative)
The US change at their will the governors of countries for people frienldy to them, and even CIA agents, as was the case with Noriega, who attained his power with US support, or most of LatinAmerica, where US troops trained in Panama the military death squads that killed civilians in Argentina, Uruguay, Chile, and most of South America in the 60's, the 70's and the 80's.
Those they can't control, the
Re:And legality? (Score:4, Insightful)
That would be the best solution
Re:And legality? (Score:5, Insightful)
Because the problems prohibition creates are often worst than any problems that the drugs create. The US gave up on alcohol prohibition for this reason.
Re:And legality? (Score:3, Interesting)
I was hoping someone would bring up that point.
Re:And legality? (Score:3, Interesting)
What you're talking about here is people who are addicted to the substance. This doesn't apply at all to casual users. Now, just because you personally haven't met a casual user, doesn't mean there aren't any. I can personally think of a half dozen people who have all casually used these drugs and are
Re:And legality? (Score:5, Insightful)
If you've ever met a real cocaine or heroin addict (there is no such thing as a casual cocaine/heroin "user", only "addicts")
This I doubt. I've seen a lot of studies that show cocaine users as being mostly casual (including our prezodent, so the rumours go), with a smaller core of hardcore addicts.
At any rate, the current witchhunt isn't helping anybody. If it were cheapa to get, then at least the addicts could blow their brains out in peace instead of dying in police raids, hanging out in prisons getting cornholed and robbing people for their next fix. Yeah, that's cold, but it makes sense from a least-harm perspective. Maybe you don't need to legalize Cocaine all the way, but it doesn't need to be this illegal - make it a $100 fine for possession and sell it at the pharmacy to addicts with a script for $2/gram. That way I don't have to worry about the DEA serving a warrant on the wrong house.
Re:And legality? (Score:5, Insightful)
Incidentally, opiate addiction is far less dangerous than alcohol addiction: there are few, if any long term negative consequences to an opiate addiction (as clearly evidenced by the rampant use of opiates amongst artists in the UK, many of who consumed astoundingly high levels of opiates daily and managed to live healthy, productive lives well into their 70s). Unlike alcohol, opiate withdrawal cannot kill. Unlike alcohol, opiates do not cause extreme liver and brain damage with possible dementia.
I won't speak on drugs like crack and methamphetamines, because I'm not remotely interested in them. I think that they're dangerous, but I support people's right to use them if they so choose. If education is given, people will understand the dangers associated with these drugs, and if they decide to consume them anyways, they're playing with fire. Many people partake in many dangerous and silly activities on a daily basis, but we support their right to do so (e.g. car racing?).
The only drugs that I support to be fully controlled are antibiotics, because antibiotic abuse is the only abuse where it's clear beyond the shadow of a doubt that the long-term damage caused by overconsumption will harm society as a whole instead of just the individual.
Re:And legality? (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm not saying that heroin is not addictive. Where did I make such a claim? Opiates can be quite addictive, and heroin is one of the most addictive drugs in this category. However, historically speaking, it is factual that in China, opium (raw opium being a mixture of opiates, primarily morphine but with significant quantities of codeine and thebaine) use paralleled the alcohol use of Great Britian. There was actually a British government study done way back that expected vastly different results, but came to this conclusion.
And *grins*... I assure you that I've never sold a single drug in my life. However, I can tell you that I've used both alcohol and opiates / opioids (morphine, meperidine, codeine, oxycodone) extensively in the past, and while I never got addicted to opiates / opioids and prefer them to alcohol, I have had problems with alcohol addiction.
I really don't understand where you get your figures in your "Let me put it plain and simple for you" paragraph. It strikes me that you made those up, but I may be wrong. I, personally, know no heroin users, but a friend of mine knows many, and the majority of them use very infrequently, and not intravenously (this would be akin to, say, funneling huge quantities of alcohol). Because of the illegality of heroin, you're unlikely to be aware of such responsible use - these people, because of the stigma attached to heroin use, are likely to keep a low profile and you'll likely never know it if you meet one of them.
Personally, I wouldn't touch the stuff, but I support everyone's right to make that decision for themselves. And I completely fail to see how I mentioned that it's okay to get addicted to heroin; I never said anything remotely resembling that. May I kindly suggest you read my posts more carefully in the future instead of blindly jumping to conclusions? I simply pointed out that many people in the past have lived their lives with roaring opiate / opioid addictions (largely laudanum, which, IIRC, is alcohol and opium or morphine) and functioned well. There are also alcoholics who function well; however, there are many more long term, dangerous, and irreversible consequences to alcohol abuse than there are to opiate abuse.
Re:And legality? (Score:5, Interesting)
It's not. The vast majority of people who try heroin never become addicted. If you think that it is, provide some evidence to back it up.
http://www.users.on.net/~rmc/drugs.htm
"Research made unwillingly by the U.S. Army on its Vietnam War veterans showed that nearly half used heroin (95% pure), 7% of those stayed on it on return to the U.S.A. with only 1% of these being addicted. The research was forced on the U.S. Army because many soldiers claimed disability pensions on the grounds that heroin addiction is permanent and disqualifies the user from any sort of productive life. Originally the heroin was smoked until Authority clamped down and it became more cost-effective to inject.
The addiction rate for social ALCOHOL drinkers is 10% with another 5% "at risk". ("Addiction" is when stopping taking the drug leads to withdrawal symptoms not present before taking it. e.g. alcohol "Dependence" is when cessation means just returning to the previous status quo e.g. insulin.)"
>Let me put it plain and simple for you: if you try heroin once, you probably have a 75% chance of trying it a second time...
Honestly, are you getting your facts from a DARE bumper sticker, or what?
Re:And legality? (Score:5, Insightful)
You're either joking or are painfully naive. A person is no more likely to become addicted to either of the above than they are to alcohol, and less likely than tobacco.
http://www.ccguide.org.uk/addicts.html
>It takes over your life. It creates a dysfunctional circumstance in which the person quickly loses the ability to carry on a normal life, hold a steady job, and maintain a loving relationship with family.
Oh god, you've swallowed the propaganda whole. Poor thing.
Re:And legality? (Score:3, Funny)
I agree with your side of the argument, but you really didn't help it by mentioning that case study of the effects of drugs.
Re:And legality? (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, the US government should stop doing this. It should do what its already doing with the Drug Barons of the World [elililly.com] and regulate the industry.
I mean, the US is already a nation of drug slaves. I don't mean street-drugs, either, I mean 'legitimate, socially accepted drugs'. 3/4's of the U.S. is high, daily, anyway.
So, get rid of the crime factor, make it legal to smoke pot and stick yourself with hero
Re:And legality? (Score:3, Insightful)
You have a fascinating statistic, but unless you're talking about some unholy combined count of antidepression medications and caffeine, I have serious doubts as to its accuracy. Do you have any lies^W damned lies^W^W statistics to point me to that you may back up your view?
Re:And legality? (Score:3, Interesting)
Alcohol is legal, and is still the cause of a very large amount of crime. Drunk driving, assault, domestic violence, the list goes on. Drunk people are a huge hassle for police. Ask any cop, they'll tell you that crime drops off dramatically in the winter, and on rainy days, because fewer people go out drinking during those times.
If your l
Re:And legality? (Score:3, Interesting)
I recently returned to Canada after having lived for four months in the US (Washington, DC), and I can say that my impressions were dramatically different from yours.
Safety and security, in my mind, don't equate to seeing cops standing on major intersections with assault rifles because of possible terrorism threats. In light of the PATR
CNN headlines.. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:CNN headlines.. (Score:4, Funny)
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)
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)
Re:That's funny... (Score:5, Informative)
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.
War on abstract concepts (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:War on abstract concepts (Score:5, Insightful)
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".
Re:War on abstract concepts (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:War on abstract concepts (Score:4, Insightful)
It scares me.
War on drugs - Bill Hicks (Score:2, Informative)
Bill Hicks
Re:War on abstract concepts (Score:2)
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.
Re:War on abstract concepts (Score:3, Insightful)
When it fails to be profitable for those in power. In other words, never.
Oh sure (Score:5, Insightful)
Because we all know how accurate their numbers are...
Re:Oh sure (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Oh sure (Score:5, Funny)
Darned Imitation Viagra! (Score:4, Funny)
products like batteries (Score:4, Informative)
(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)
Re:So (Score:5, Funny)
Re:So (Score:5, Insightful)
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)
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, Insightful)
War on poverty, while the US as one of the richest countries has a relatively large population of really poor people (compared to, say, western europe) and no improvement in sight?
Have you considered that maybe the very system that makes them very rich and advanced is also what creates a sub-population of really poor people?
Re:So (Score:3, Funny)
Re:So (Score:5, Insightful)
Halliburton?
More important question (Score:3, Insightful)
Yup, good timing (Score:5, Insightful)
heah come de fuzz (Score:5, Funny)
FWEEET! Up against the wall! - did you pay for that song you're playing in your head?
War against $FOO (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:War against $FOO (Score:2)
I can't wait for the war on violence.
Re:War against $FOO (Score:2)
Wouldn't that be reason to NOT be worried?
Re:War against $FOO (Score:2, Insightful)
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)
Who's Rights? (Score:5, Insightful)
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?
Certainly not the artist's (Score:3, Informative)
The labels only have these rights because the artists assign them, and I have no sympathy
Label: "If you don't assign your rights to us, we'll sue you for subconscious copyright infringement of songs that we control." Given Bright Tunes v. Harrisongs and the combinatorics of western music [slashdot.org], one would think that songwriters face a situation almost like that of software patents.
The rich will get even richer (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The rich will get even richer (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:The rich will get even richer (Score:2, Interesting)
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
So stop making them rich, the legal way. (Score:3, Interesting)
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
Re:The rich will get even richer (Score:3, Insightful)
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?
It Will Never Work, And Here's Why (Score:5, Insightful)
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
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.
Re:It Will Never Work, And Here's Why (Score:5, Interesting)
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!
Re:It Will Never Work, And Here's Why (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Re:It Will Never Work, And Here's Why (Score:5, Interesting)
When there are so many people breaking a law, isn't it time to revise the law, rather than futilely try to enforce it?
Re:It Will Never Work, And Here's Why (Score:5, Funny)
War on piracy! (Score:2, Insightful)
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)
Maybe in a few years, prisons will be even more overcrowed...
"What're ya' in for?"
"Downloading Britney, you?"
"N'Sync"
What a joke.
Re:Let's hope (Score:5, Funny)
Unfortunately, having extremely bad taste isn't illegal.
Re:Let's hope (Score:3, Funny)
Defendent: Oops, I did it again.
Dear US Govt, (Score:5, Funny)
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.
You promised us a Drug Free America! (Score:3, Funny)
this is always exciting. (Score:3, Insightful)
Those who do not learn from history... (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Those who do not learn from history... (Score:3, Insightful)
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)
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.
Open letter to the **AA (Score:3, Funny)
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.
What a relief (Score:5, Funny)
Criminal Intellectual Property Laws (Score:3, Informative)
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)
Stop this sort of thing. Call your Senator today. (Score:3, Interesting)
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)
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).