MPAA Dismisses COICA Free Speech Concerns 300
An anonymous reader writes "The EFF has gone into detail about why it opposes 'The Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act,' or COICA. It has the potential to give the Department of Justice the power to shut down any domestic website, or block any foreign website it so chooses, setting the stage for Internet censorship in the United States. Addressing the free speech concerns, MPAA chief Bob Pisano dismissed the First Amendment issues, saying '...the First Amendment was not intended as a shield for those who steal, irrespective of the means.'"
You can't steal from corporations (Score:5, Interesting)
You can't steal from corporations.
They aren't people.
They can't be drafted.
They can't be executed.
They never serve a day in jail.
Thus, stealing only occurs when you steal from people.
No matter what the Supreme Court says.
P.S.: Revert to the original patents and copyrights in the original Constitution if you want us to respect them.
Re:Of course they'd say that (Score:4, Interesting)
Assembly? For online stuff? Come on, it's not like you could use something like twitter to tell the outside world about how things are going in your country.
Not to mention the Internet as a place to assemble, as in meet like-minded people. And unlike demonstrations and other mass gatherings that they have some semi-legitimate grounds of public safety, rioting and so on to regulate it, there's very few excuses to stop people from "assembling" online. True, many of these "sign this" or "join this" don't amount to much by themselves but it makes people realize they are many and maybe could force change.
Re:You can't steal from corporations (Score:5, Interesting)
More importantly, as not all copyright holders are corporations, violation of copyright protections is not theft. It is not stealing. It is not burglary, it is not piracy.
It is violating copyright protections.
And as far as that goes, neither the Copyright Acts or 'The Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act' are permitted to run contrary to the First Amendment, regardless of it's purpose.
Re:Mr. Bob, (Score:3, Interesting)
Please take note that the first word of the amendment is Congress and is followed by the absolute term "...shall make no law..." This means just what it states.
Actually, thanks to the Supreme Court, it doesn't mean just what it says.
It now applies to the states and local governments as well, not just to Congress.
Re:hmmm (Score:4, Interesting)
If they rolled back copyright length, they there'd be much less likely hood any site would need to be blocked.
No, it's Off-Topic (Score:4, Interesting)
I know grammar/spelling/composition critique is a time-honored /. pastime, but I definitely consider all such posts categorically off-topic. Boring at best, and a premeditated attempt to derail discussion with minutiae at worst.
Comment removed (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Mr. Bob, (Score:4, Interesting)
The evidence does not support this theory. Read Government by Judiciary [amazon.com] by (liberal) Raoul Berger [wikipedia.org]. In it you'll learn that the purpose of the Equal Protection Clause is to give freedmen the right to enter contracts, to own property, and to sue. The Supreme Court may have twisted the meaning to suit their own purposes, but the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of Berger.
"Theft"? "Stealing"? No. (Score:5, Interesting)
I think what is really needed is legislation that outlaws this sort of attempted perversion of the words "theft" and "stealing".
Once we've put a stop to that perversion, the rest of Big Media's FUD campaigns will abruptly end. Since digital media by its very nature can be replicated endlessly with virtually no material cost, exactly what is being "stolen" here? NOTHING! Sure, packaging has material costs, but the "pirates" (infringers) aren't getting that packaging, are they? The cost of producing the "art" contained in the digital file was incurred ONCE, and the expectation of recouping those expenses is SPECULATIVE; the price of the packaging is a guesstimate, based on a hoped sales volume to result in some net profit. What if simply no one actually buys the package, even in the absence of "piracy"? There would have been no "theft" by this perverted definition, yet they still lose their shirts and don't get the desired profit. There's not a shred of certainty that denying people the ability to copy digital media will guarantee an equivalent increase in actual PACKAGING sales, so that argument is also FUD.
Re:You can't steal from corporations (Score:0, Interesting)
If you've ever used the phrases
then you've acknowledged that stealing does not necessitate an act of appropriation of physical property. Stealing has many definitions, but is usually used to mean theft - however not all other meanings are equally bad, or illegal, or even necessarily wrong.
Oh. And don't reply to say that you haven't used the above phrases. I don't care.
Re:Jack said it best ... (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, it is the role of the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) to decide what the Founding Fathers intended.
Their self-appointed role, which just happens to be a major conflict of interest. In what other area would anyone permit an agreement as important as the U.S. Constitution to be interpreted entirely by one side—and worse yet, the side whose powers that document was specifically intended to strictly circumscribe? Separation of powers or not, in the long run that effectively amounts to handing the federal government a blank check.
Re:Bloodsucker (Score:4, Interesting)
Why would I ever buy a DVD? The last one I bought had a new idiotic 'mangled index' DRM scheme requiring me to get a patched dvd player to play it....
Until I get a workable online distribution system for movies I'll just spend my time doing something else.. Like playing games or *gasp* borrowing dvds from friends. Hell, here in Norway I'm legally allowed to make copies of media for close friends and family. DRM doesnt matter, I'm allowed to break it :D
So... fuck you RIAA and MPAA, I'm not giving you any more money until you cut this shit out.