File Trading Law Would Include 'Willing' Traders 582
mgessner writes "From InfoWorld comes a story on the U.S. House's approval of a new, tough law against trading files online. 'The bill expands the definition of file traders eligible for criminal penalties from individuals who 'willingly' distribute copyright files to those who 'knowingly' do so, an escalation that could result in jail time for file swappers.'" (The bill has yet to go through the Senate.)
Well (Score:5, Funny)
In Bush's America (Score:3, Funny)
[/would be funny if it weren't true]
Exactly (Score:3, Insightful)
"Land of the Free" is the biggest bullshit line I've ever heard/read.
Re:and more Exactly (Score:5, Insightful)
Can you imagine how boring sports would be if there were only two teams? They'd each tailor their offense against the one other team's defense. There would be only slight innovation as each reacted to counter the other.
Now look at the two party system. What gets argued about? Big vs. really big government, higher vs. much higher taxes, barely distinguishable environmental policies, ad nauseum. They keep the voters focused on issues that polarize them but aren't much acted upon in the end (or are very similar in position).
If you're in a swing state, by all means vote Kerry rather than your preferred candidate, as I absolutely agree that while Kerry is bad, Bush is far, far worse and vastly more dangerous.
However, if you're not in a swing state, vote however you want, for more than the presidency is determined by your vote. Votes for third parties increase their campaign funding, ballot access and perceived credibility.
how do they determine which it is (Score:5, Insightful)
Insightful, perhaps... but with a flaw. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Insightful, perhaps... but with a flaw. (Score:5, Insightful)
Do they have to deliver the warning with a "Process server" in order for it to count in court?
Re:Insightful, perhaps... but with a flaw. (Score:5, Insightful)
simple. Registered mail. It has a signature and verification of delivery.
or better yet a supeona.
They want to make it legally sticking, then they need to pay for it. Registerd mail or someone to track down and hand deliver something is expensive.
if the law allows an email then they might as well have written in that everyone is guilty by default.
Re:Insightful, perhaps... but with a flaw. (Score:4, Insightful)
Do they have to deliver the warning with a "Process server" in order for it to count in court?
Official, legal, warnings are generally done in person with varification of compliance.
Re:Insightful, perhaps... but with a flaw. (Score:5, Insightful)
1. The don't know how to share less files
2. Users trust the software they install
3. A popular /. complaint- they don't know any better.
Just for kicks I search for .pst every now and then, and am amazed at the number of people who are sharing their entire outlook file.
Wrong analogy (Score:3, Interesting)
The right analogy would be "But officer, I didn't know I was selling heroin to second graders. The wholesaler told me that this white powder was sugar and I believed him."
Re:Insightful, perhaps... but with a flaw. (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't want MY tax dollars to be wasted with this nonsense.
I don't want that money wasted prosecuting swappers.
I don't want that money wasted imprisoning swappers.
I don't care to bear the social costs of ruining the lives of swappers.
Time and money are both limited, and far to value to waste on this crap.
Also, California has enough of it's own congressmen to push this crap without the Texas delegation contributing.
Re:Insightful, perhaps... but with a flaw. (Score:3, Interesting)
Newsflash: Corporations pay taxes too. Ever stop and think that maybe its their taxes that are funding these prosecutions?
I don't want that money wasted prosecuting swappers.
I believe the ??AA themselves are the ones doing the prosecuting, and thus, paying for the litigation. I suppose public dollars may be going towards the defendants' legal bills, but public defenders are relatively cheap, and these are people who, after all, broke the la
Re:Insightful, perhaps... but with a flaw. (Score:3, Insightful)
Newsflash: not if they don't want to. Research how much in taxes the biggest corps pay. Ready? They not only don't pay taxes, they get rebates on taxes they didn't even pay. Microsoft, for instance, doesn't pay income tax. They have no income.
Really.
Re:Insightful, perhaps... but with a flaw. (Score:3, Insightful)
Would BitTorrent even have been created if it wasn't for the problems inherent in Kazaa?
It seems that postal mail, ftp, or http downloads were going strong for passing along legal content until Napster came along.
Re:Insightful, perhaps... but with a flaw. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Insightful, perhaps... but with a flaw. (Score:5, Insightful)
Max
Re:how do they determine which it is (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:how do they determine which it is (Score:5, Insightful)
Thus simply participating in the network constitutes "knowingly" distributing copyright material.
Of course precisely the same could be said for telephone networks - they run their services knowing (for certain) that on any given day, many people are using the phone network to break laws, from violations of the national "do not call" list to planning terrorist attacks.
Re:how do they determine which it is (Score:3, Insightful)
"Knowingly" simply means that you caused it and knew you were causing it, regardless of whether you desired the result or just knew it was an inevitable byproduct of your actions.
It's pretty rare that someone gets off for a crime because they "knew" but didn't "will" the result. But it's an open argument with file-trading, because a lot of programs share files by default. So if this bill were the la
Re:how do they determine which it is (Score:3, Interesting)
-nB
The GPL is a copyright (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:The GPL is a copyright (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The GPL is a copyright (Score:2, Insightful)
Wrong - it would just make it illegal to distribute any copyright material online.
Tell me, who is sponsoring all these anti-file-trading laws? Oh yes, the RIAA and MPAA.
Now, tell me, which two majo
Re:The GPL is a copyright (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:The GPL is a copyright (Score:3, Informative)
Re:The GPL is a copyright (Score:3, Informative)
Piracy Deterrence and Education Act of 2004 (Score:5, Informative)
Index [loc.gov]
Summary [loc.gov]
Text of legislation [loc.gov]
This could be great news... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:This could be great news...a new revolution (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:This could be great news... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:This could be great news... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:This could be great news... (Score:5, Insightful)
Lots of things are different between the US and the UK. For instance the UK is banning fox hunting, while my state (MN) consideres hunting a legal right that is now part of the constitution. UK bans many more guns than the US. The UK has more cameras watching their streets than any other country. (Though the US is trying to catch up)
In short: there is plenty wrong with every country. I don't like the Induce act, but it isn't enough to make me exchange the rights violated in the US for the rights violated in the UK.
Re:This could be great news... (Score:3, Informative)
I don't think I ever saw a gun in England as a kid. In the 90's I saw my first Policeman with gun in Central London and that kinda freaked me a bit. Very few people in England feel their "rights" are being trodden on by not owning a gun. It just makes sense.
Whilst over here, being brought up in a culture where guns are everywhere, it's jus
Re:This could be great news... (Score:5, Insightful)
A number of others are living in border states and are working on getting to know the Canadian technology world so that if they have to, they can emigrate quickly. In Canada, we take privacy seriously; there is a strict Federal Privacy act that all governmental institutions have to answer to, and at the beginning of this year, a new business privacy act went into place as well, protecting individuals from shoddy business handling of information.
Slashdot has covered our copyright laws and trials enough that I won't get into that side of things. The UK probably hasn't given the US emigration possibility a huge amount of thought, but believe me, in many Canadian provinces, it has been a major item of consideration when modifying our IT-related laws.
Re:This could be great news... (Score:3, Insightful)
I agree that is act is a bad idea. Consumers/voters clearly don't want it. It only serves to protect an industry that has been ripping consumers and the majority of artists off with its sudo monopolistic behavior. At this point there is ZERO chance of going back to the old paradigm. We are better off embracing P2P as the tool that it is and let liaise fair capitalism find a way to adapt as it always has in the past.
However, as to this causing a mass exodus from the US, that's not going to
While we're at it (Score:5, Insightful)
people who illegally photocopy books go to jail
people who illegally perform plays and musical pieces go to jail
people who plagiarize or don't cite references go to jail
Hell let's just have anyone who says anything in a non-free speech zone go to jail.
Re:While we're at it (Score:4, Funny)
Re:While we're at it (Score:2, Funny)
people who plagiarize or don't cite references go to jail
Imagine the difficulties this would place high school teachers in...
"Excellent work Bobby. You failed to cite sources correctly though, so I must deduct 10% from your final mark and send the police to your house."
Re:While we're at it (Score:4, Funny)
Great! So my buddy who can't carry a tune but insists on singing... I can finally have put away?
Re:While we're at it (Score:3, Funny)
Only Public Property (Score:3, Insightful)
Real (as opposed to personal...i.e. land ownership) property rights are what should trump everything else.
Unfortunatly these rights are bein
Isn't this just semantics??? (Score:2, Insightful)
Does this apply to people who KNOW that they share files, but don't WANT to???
I'm confused!!!
Intellectual Property (No Trespassing) (Score:2, Interesting)
That being said, I feel it's important to note that what needs evaluating isn't the violation of copyright, rather, the purpose and effect of copyright itself.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Intellectual Property (No Trespassing) (Score:4, Insightful)
I thought they still have huge sentences for selling marijuana. So, I suppose, they still think that solved that problem:-).
Re:Intellectual Property (No Trespassing) (Score:3, Funny)
I can't speak for your country, but here in the US marijuana becomes the problem the moment they find it on you.
Advice to "The music biz" from TheReg. (Score:4, Interesting)
A good read for those interested.
How the music biz can live forever, get even richer, and be loved [theregister.co.uk]
Re:Intellectual Property (No Trespassing) (Score:3, Insightful)
As righteous as a bill like this may seem at the first glance, it bothers me that there are those who think that copyright is a God-given law, and not something some fat-walleted corporate assholes came up with fairly recently, around a 100 years ago. I really don't see any reason why copyright law shouldn
Re:Intellectual Property (No Trespassing) (Score:3, Insightful)
What bothers me more is a bunch of greedy privateers who rob us of the culture we all helped to create. Getting people to pay toll for every piece of art/music/writing for 150 years is insane.
If the copyright expired after 28 years, we would be less likely to to pass things around for free.
Who exactly am I harming when I share recordings of Charlie Parker
Re:Intellectual Property (No Trespassing) (Score:5, Insightful)
The music executives. And the people they bribe. And maybe their investors. That is who you are hurting. You are easily knocking them down to the top 2% of the wealthy instead of the top 1%. You greedy bastard.
Got a GREAT idea.... (Score:5, Funny)
We'll ban all contraband and make sure we run them through a series of tests before letting them out.
Oh wait, I've done my time, it was called University!
Yo Grark
but it's worthless (Score:2)
Not worthless; It will happen (Score:2, Insightful)
Actually, it almost certainly will happen, since it will be on the taxpayer's dime rather than the RIAAs. There is no disincentive to the RIAA asking for and eating up millions in taxpayer funds chasing down those using p2p networks.
In my opinion, laws like this should be to defend those without the resources from those with the resources. This is the other way around (using rich gove
From now on (Score:2)
Congress Outlaws internet (Score:3, Insightful)
Sonny Bono must be hitting that tree again and again and again
'willing' vs 'knowing'? (Score:5, Interesting)
Detractors of the legislation claim that the measure would not stop the trading of copyright files and will not help the entertainment industry find a way to ensure artists get paid for the distribution of their works.
Well, what law has ever stopped a crime. Laws (theoretically) just reduce crime (but, obviously not in all cases).
Also, from the article:
"Putting downloaders behind bars, or decimating their college funds with civil lawsuits, won't put the genie of peer-to-peer technology back in the bottle or put real money in the pockets of real artists," P2P United's Eisgrau said in an e-mail interview with IDG News Service earlier this week.
This is the smartest thing I've read about file sharing in general to date.
P.S.: What is the difference between knowingly and willingly?
Re:'willing' vs 'knowing'? (Score:2)
Re:'willing' vs 'knowing'? (Score:5, Insightful)
The 21st ammendment.
Let them pass this bill (Score:2, Informative)
Regardless of who becomes president for the next four years, we are still going to see more stupid laws like these in the future.
Yet another reason... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Yet another reason... (Score:3, Insightful)
At least the US doesn't have cameras on every screet corner and doesn't though people in jail for encrypting their email. The US may be moving in that direction, but you guys are ALREADY THERE!
"Knowingly" vs "Willingly" (Score:3, Interesting)
To me, "knowingly" implies that a file is being shared with the user's knowledge. Whereas "willingly" implies the user made a conscious choice to share the file.
What's the difference, legally speaking?
Wrong title! (Score:2)
It's "File Trading Law Would Include 'Knowing' Traders".
So how did the congresscritters vote? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:So how did the congresscritters vote? (Score:4, Informative)
Full bill details with summary and status info: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:H.R.4 077: [loc.gov]
Anyone with a virus could be prosecuted. (Score:3, Informative)
Filesharing is killing music (Score:2)
Just like the days of cassettte [cafepress.com]
You know its right!
Taking the mens rea out of it?! (Score:2)
If there was any copyright law for all sides to agree on opposing this is it. This is more of a thought police law than a copyright law.
uhh (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:3, Funny)
Sponsor of the Bill, Representative Lamar Smith (Score:5, Informative)
A few of his noted yes/no votes can shed a lot of light on where he stands on the issues:
(1)Voted YES on allowing school prayer during the War on Terror - Yes praying as a collective does help in cleansing terrorism.
(2)Voted YES on giving federal aid only to schools allowing voluntary prayer
(3)Voted NO on raising CAFE standards; incentives for alternative fuels - Wants to rely on Oil and dont want the Automobile industry to answer to better environmental standards.
(4)Voted NO on prohibiting oil drilling & development in ANWR. - Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, enough said!
(5)Voted YES on speeding up approval of forest thinning projects - Apparently want the rest of the US start looking like Texas (no offense).
(6)Voted YES on Permanent Normal Trade Relations with China - Yes, Cuba - BAD, China - GOOD!!
(7)Voted NO on $156M to IMF for 3rd-world debt reduction - Handouts are good when its to your automobile industry cronies and to big corporations, bad idea when its to third world countries.
(8)Voted NO on campaign finance reform banning soft-money contributions - No Finance Reform!! Period!
(9)Voted YES on decreasing gun waiting period from 3 days to 1 - By God! Yes, we all know how excruciatingly painful it is to wait 3 days for appropriate checks to be made..
(10)Voted NO on allowing reimportation of prescription drugs - We really believe you should pay 20$ for that tylenol pill instead of 30 cents if you were importing it from Canada.
What pisses me off is that even if Kerry wins this November, the senate and the house under Republican control will end up making him an acting president and not a real one. Not that I think a Democrat controlled house and senate is any better. I just want politicians to really understand the bills they sign and talk to people who these laws ultimately affect.
Re:Sponsor of the Bill, Representative Lamar Smith (Score:3, Insightful)
What part of the above did you not comprehend? The bill punishes schools that do not allow voluntary prayer. The bill favors FINANCIALLY ones who do. Which part of your brain shut down when you read that? If this is not coercion or strong arming schools in to allowing prayer, then I dont know what to tell ya.
I have no problem against religion, just state sponsored ones. The Govt should stay the fuck out of my religion, my sexualit
Re:Sponsor of the Bill, Representative Lamar Smith (Score:3, Funny)
An Unjust Responsibility Shift (Score:5, Insightful)
It's perfectly within reason that copyright holders can sue, , in civil suits, to stop the unauthorized distribution of their works. Copyright violation is a matter between two parties: the copyright holder and the violator.
But with a law like this, the onus to police copyright matters falls on the government, and not the copyright holder.
What we're seeing is a push by big business, through legislation, to reduce their attorney fees. When copyright matters are criminal cases, not civil actions, the violators are punished-- justly or not-- at the expense of government, rather than at the expense of the corporation.
No More Room! (Score:5, Funny)
Culpability levels... (Score:3, Informative)
Different laws (criminal and civil) punish actors differently based on not just the act itself, but also the actor's state of mind.
Generally, commiting the same act intentionally as opposed to recklessly or negligently will bring on a harsher penalty. Intentionally aiming a rifle at someone and shooting is punished more harshly than if the gun goes off accidentally and kills them. The victim is just as dead in both cases, but the first actor will probably be punished more severely than the second.
In this case, the House seems to have lowered the bar to include both intentional and willful conduct (there is probably a subtle difference between the two) but not negligent or reckless conduct. All of these terms are (or will be) defined elsewhere in the Act or in the U.S. Code. Without knowing what the devil Congress means by these qualifiers, it's hard to say what exactly has been passed. Odds are though, it's not good.
My guess is that if one is found to be sharing more than X number of files (or transferring X amount of copyrighted data) the law will provide that the requisite level of intent has been met.
Ayn Rand on "making crime" as a tool of the tyrant (Score:5, Insightful)
Bill needs exception (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,59305
In America , property rights trump all others (Score:3, Insightful)
I guess we take them seriously here.
YOU can make file sharing legal (Score:5, Informative)
In Change the Law [goingware.com] I point out that while the Constitution allows for Congress to enact copyright laws, it doesn't actually require it to do so. Copyright could be repealed tomorrow if we could get enough votes in Congress to do so.
If you don't think this could happen, consider that there are more Americans sharing files via peer-to-peer networks than voted for George Bush in 2000.
In my article I detail a number of steps you can take to bring about much needed copyright reform. My suggestions are that you:
-
Speak Out
[goingware.com]
-
Vote [goingware.com]
-
Write to Your Elected Representatives [goingware.com]
-
Donate Money to Political Campaigns [goingware.com]
-
Support Campaign Finance Reform [goingware.com]
-
Join the Electronic Frontier Foundation [goingware.com]
-
Practice Civil Disobedience [goingware.com]
If you feel as I do that more people need to read my article, you can help by linking to it from your website, weblog, or from other message boards.If you're a US citizen and 18 years of age or over, you can vote in November. But to do that, you must be registered to vote in your state. The voter registration deadline for most states is just a few days away, October 2nd for most states. So register today! Rock the Vote [rockthevote.com] can help you with registration.
If you're a US citizen residing in a foreign country like me (I live in Canada), you can register to vote with the form you can obtain from the Federal Voting Assistance Program [fvap.gov]. You can register to vote in the last state you resided in in the US. But again, your registration must be received by your state by the deadline, so either express your application, or fax it, if a fax number is available.
(If you've never lived in the US, but one of your parents was a US citizen, then you're a US citizen too and you can register in the last state your parent resided in.)
If you want to make a campaign donation, a good choice would be Representative Rick Boucher [boucherforcongress.com]. Rick Boucher has worked tirelessly for copyright reform, as you can see from his article Time to rewrite the DMCA [com.com].
anonymous p2p (Score:3, Insightful)
But it's also time to move on. It's not the responsiblity of the content distributors to enforce copyright laws. So in that sense, this bill makes some sense - if there are laws to enforce, it's the government that should be enforcing them.
The problem is that it's way to easy to get in trouble without even realizing what you are doing - sort of like driving a car that has no speedometer - better yet, driving a car that has no windshield so you can't see who you are running over. Anonymous p2p is going to solve this problem in the future. It is going to 1) further free speech, freedom of expression, and create a forum where artists and fans can share and learn and experience new things; 2) protect unwitting, inexperienced computer users from breaking harsh laws unknowningly. It may also protect parents from their kid's evil friends, and roommates from each other.
Furthermore, I don't see how you can pass a bill that places the enforcement of a three-year or greater felony in the hands of minimum-wage movie theater employees. Someone is bound to get hurt.
Home Wifi + windows exploits (Score:3, Insightful)
Hard to prove it wasnt intended.. ( ie: 'willing' )
And before you say ' people should know better and be responsible for their actions' , most average people cant figure out how to put files on a floppy.. you cant expect them to secure their 'network'..
can I still do my research for the government (Score:3, Interesting)
The answer is that I should probably quit using a computer in order to preserve my status as a non-felon.
Re:Down with this bill (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Down with this bill (Score:3, Funny)
Freenet? Blech! (Score:3, Interesting)
Concerning Freenet, countless times I've read that once you've been online for a while you will find that you achieve downloads more quickly, and you will have a better experience. However, after a couple of weeks of continuous use, my Freenet experience is no better than at the beginning - awful. It's slow. It's impossible to browse around at random to get the feel of the place. It's extremely difficult to find anything. Unless I'm mis
Re:Freenet? Blech! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Down with this bill (Score:5, Insightful)
That said, how long until Europe decides to follow suit, well, if not Europe, England (who have their own version of the DMCA, have tried very hard to keep their copyright laws in step with the US etc etc)?
Re:Down with this bill (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Perhaps because... (Score:3, Interesting)
How can you trust anything they say? Let alone a statistic that they're spouting off to make themselves feel important?
Do you remember the news article of how a couple people were arrested for running a "monstrous CD pirate factory"? It was written that they had about 50 CD Burners running non-stop. Turns out it was only 6 CD burners, but they multiplied it by a factor of X, because cd burners are X times faster than they used to be.
So the movie industry is trying to tell Congress how importan
Re:Because we all know that... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Because we all know that... (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, you don't do time when you are caught speeding. Which is even more psychotic because driving dangerously can actually get people killed whereas pirating music could potentially lose someone a tiny amount of money.
Re:Because we all know that... (Score:2, Insightful)
possesion
with intent to distribute
and any other bogus charge that will get you sent to jail to do hard time for something that really doesn't harm anyone.
Think of all those people who are doing hard time for just having one joint!
Re:Because we all know that... (Score:5, Insightful)
-
Because we all know that passing laws to make, say, speeding in cars, murder, fraud etc. illegal has put an end to all those activities.
And regular lawsuits against multiple people trading files online, including 12yo girls and grandparents who didn't even know that their grandkids had installed the software have worked too. But yep, a law will do the trick, heaven knows people won't break a law but are happy to risk financial ruin.What do we expect though? It seems that one business or another owns every member of Congress, "We the people" is now "We the corporations" as far as representation in Congress goes. *sigh*
Absolutism at work (Score:3, Insightful)
Fraud is, and has always been a huge problem. It seems that we find fraud less abhorrent to murder. For example, if you were talking to a guy in a bar, and he told you he'd got out of jail for [murder|frau
Re:Those who vote... (Score:5, Interesting)
Mod Parent Up! (Score:3, Interesting)
They insist that the GPL is a valid lisense and (rightfully) insist that it be respected and enforced. However they sing a very different tune (no pun intended) when it comes to copyrighted music.
The average Slashbot just doesn't want to pay for music, and will make any (other) argument to justify violating copyright law.
Re:Mod Parent Up! (Score:3, Interesting)
If I download a song I never plan on buying because I want to listen to it 10 times or add it to my playlist, it is no different than listening to the radio. It's just on my terms instea
Re:I don't see any problems with this (Score:3, Informative)