|
seize computers, boost penalties, spend money
Source
By Nate Anderson | Published: December 06, 2007 - 01:16PM CT
A bipartisan group of Congressmen (and one woman) yesterday introduced a major bill aimed at boosting US intellectual property laws and the penalties that go along with them. While much of the legislation targets industrial counterfeiting and knockoff drugs, it also allows the government to seize people's computers.
The Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual Property (PRO IP... groan) Act of 2007 has the backing of many of the most powerful politicians on the House Judiciary Committee, including John Conyers (D-MI), Lamar Smith (R-TX), and "Hollywood" Howard Berman (D-CA).
In addition to strengthening both civil and criminal penalties for copyright and trademark infringement, the big development here is the proposed creation of the Office of the United States Intellectual Property Enforcement Representative (USIPER). This is a new executive branch office tasked with coordinating IP enforcement at the national and international level. To do this work internationally, the bill also authorizes US intellectual property officers to be sent to other countries in order to assist with crackdowns there. In addition, the Department of Justice gets additional funding and a new unit to help prosecute IP crimes.
The bill, which will have a committee hearing soon, is supposed to kick-start the copyright reform process talked about for so long. But copyright reform means one thing to the PRO IP sponsors and another to the consumer groups that have been advocating for it.
Gigi Sohn, president of Public Knowledge, said in a statement, "seizing expensive manufacturing equipment used for large-scale infringement from a commercial pirate may be appropriate. Seizing a family's general-purpose computer in a download case, as this bill would allow, is not appropriate."
In addition, she protests the increase in "already extraordinary copyright damages" and calls for damages to be linked more closely to actual harm suffered by copyright holders.
The Digital Freedom Campaign, backed by the EFF, Public Knowledge, and the Consumer Electronics Association, was more muted in its criticism, instead choosing to praise the legislation for launching a "conversation" about copyright reform. The Digital Freedom Campaign's Maura Corbett said that meaningful copyright reform "must include limits on statutory damages and the codification of the vital principles of fair use," and she hopes that PRO IP "will serve as a catalyst to larger, more meaningful reform."
Fortunately, at least some members of the Judiciary Committee are at least aware that the consumer groups have legitimate points to make. Berman, who chairs the Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet and Intellectual Property, announced that his subcommittee would hold a hearing next week on the issue.
"As a cosponsor, I obviously feel very strongly that we must strengthen enforcement efforts to fight piracy and counterfeiting," Berman said. "At the hearing, we will be hearing testimony from both industry experts and from labor and consumer advocates to make sure that in doing so, we don't deny appropriate access to America's intellectual property."
Who is thrilled with the bill? The MPAA, for one. MPAA head Dan Glickman, in a statement praising the new bill, said that "films left costs foreign and domestic distributors, retailers and others $18 billion a year," a significant increase from the $6 billion it allegedly costs the studios.
User Comments
(These do not necessarily reflect the beliefs of this site)
|
CopyrightLaw...
|
Date: December 7, 2007 @ 1:38 PM
Any copyright reform that does not include shortening the terms of copyrights will not lead to any meaningful reform. It will only lead to fattening the wallets of the rich. |
|
CopyrightLaw...
|
Date: December 7, 2007 @ 1:38 PM
Dan Glickman is a moron. |
|
Twarrior
|
Date: December 8, 2007 @ 5:10 PM
The RIAA should rename their group to the RIANP (Recording Industry Association of the Nazi Party).
Viel Wohlstand für die Musik Von Empire Faschistische Idioten! *rolls eyes*
-Dave |
|
Twarrior
|
Date: December 8, 2007 @ 5:11 PM
Hrmm... Google should have translated "Empire" to "Reich" or whatever. Hrmph. Wish I would have caught that before sitting the post button. lol ... oh well.
-Dave |
|
Twarrior
|
Date: December 8, 2007 @ 5:12 PM
hitting the post button... hey, Firefox has a spell checker. Wonderful! Now hows about a grammar checker? lol
-Dave |
|
Rattlehead
|
Date: December 9, 2007 @ 6:24 PM
This has Orrin Hatch written all over it. |
|
ChillinBuzz
|
Date: December 9, 2007 @ 6:54 PM
Glickman isn't just a moron, he can't add up either.
"...the bill also authorizes US intellectual property officers to be sent to other countries in order to assist with crackdowns there."
Going to assume this will be with those countries' permission, of course... Probably a bad assumption given the various departments of the US govt and its corporate gestapo pigs have a hard job staying out of anyone's country. |
|
CodeWarrior
|
Date: December 10, 2007 @ 12:01 PM
"Intellectual property" is an idiotic term.
No property has been intellectual since slavery was outlawed.
It's "virtual" or "intangible" property in my way of thinking.
Congress..what a waste of taxpayer money.
Except for his stance on abortion, I would vote for Ron Paul. |
|
CodeWarrior
|
Date: December 10, 2007 @ 12:04 PM
Intellectual property has the shelf life of a banana. - Bill Gates |
|
independentm...
|
Date: December 11, 2007 @ 4:14 PM
I like a lot of Ron Paul too, (but there is a lot of crazy that goes with him as with many libertarians.)
I guess if I had to choose a Republican who is running, then I'd pick Ron Paul,
...and, I'd pick him over Hillary. (Even tho she is s'posed to be a "liberal democrat")
*sigh*
AT THIS TIME,
out of the realistic choices we as Americans have got who have a chance, I think I like either Obama or Edwards (Biden too would be among my choices if he had a chance.)
------------
But you know what? I'd even settle for one of the Republicans JUST SO LONG AS that idiot Bush gets gone for good! |
|
esmith512
|
Date: December 12, 2007 @ 3:02 PM
One of the biggest problems is this civil asset forfeiture legislation completely ignores Constitutional protections for due process of law (being actually adjucated guilty of an accusation) and right from warrantless search and seizure (right to property)--in defense (or social offensiveness) of a private company's business case. Law already has protection for copyright holders, but some basic civil rights are being abridged here over an increasingly amorphous and overreaching expansion of "copyright". My worry isn't really about people copying sound or video recordings (even for legal fair-use), but how some vague and highly arguable "copyright violation" false-accusation alone can be misused to deny civil rights. |
|
pessimist
|
Date: December 13, 2007 @ 3:16 AM
I'm with you on that perspective.
|
|
pessimist
|
Date: December 13, 2007 @ 3:18 AM
I'm also hoping Ron Paul gets more support.
|
|
PerilousTimes
|
Date: December 13, 2007 @ 11:06 PM
"Except for his stance on abortion, I would vote for Ron Paul."
Huh? What's wrong with supporting the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?
Rep. Paul's position is one of opposition to federal funding of abortion.
I could add that the right to life trumps the privilege of convenience.
|
|
PerilousTimes
|
Date: December 14, 2007 @ 3:03 PM
P.S.
We can take note of the order, priority-wise, of "the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Having an abortion falls under the pursuit of happiness or convenience, but is trumped by the basic higher right (to life) that ought not to be pre-empted.
|
|
|