Tech Dirt is pondering The Return Of SOPA.
You'd think that the IP Section of the ABA would understand things like fair use and copyfraud, but apparently not. Anyway, the document itself weighs in at a hefty 133 pages, and you can go through the whole thing, but it's basically setting the stage for trying to make internet companies copyright cops again, just as in SOPA.
There's much more in the paper, and it's well worth reading, to get a sense of what the ABA IP Section (a lot of entertainment industry lawyers are in there) are thinking about how to get a SOPA-like law through in the future (probably during the comprehensive copyright reform effort). To be fair, the paper is fairly comprehensive in its thinking, and at least mentions people being opposed to its reasoning and why (it even cites Techdirt multiple times...). It also pays some lip service to actually paying attention to those concerns, but nearly all of the actual recommendations bring back SOPA-like ideas. It's troubling to see that the overall lesson of SOPA was clearly not learned, and they're clearly planning to try, try again.
Even some of the comments are insightful "One possible positive outcome for the big internet companies like Google and Facebook if this or something like it passes is to offer the content companies a choice: indemnify us from this law you've passed or 100% of your content (legal or not) disappears from search, streaming, YouTube, social media, cloud storage, you name it. "
A Call For Action For Online Piracy And Counterfeiting Legislation (pdf) I should warn you that, according to the genius intellectual property experts at the ABA's IP Section, clicking on that link may be a violation of their copyright. It's not, of course, but that doesn't stop them from claiming it is at the beginning of the paper.
So here we are with SOPA whack-a-mole again. Aside from what the Bard advised how do we defeat this vampire again?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by BsAtHome on Tuesday July 15 2014, @10:51AM
The suggestion that you can indemnify by blackmail is an exceptionally bad suggestion.
What happens is that the "large" companies will be indemnified and all others, including the innocent bystander, will be dogfood. That is the uttermost pinnacle of injustice. The mere suggestion should send shivers through every one's spine.
(Score: 3) by SpockLogic on Tuesday July 15 2014, @01:14PM
From the US Constitution :-
Media companies with a failed business model buying statutory discrimination against their customers, aided and abetted by corrupt politicians. Disgusting.
Overreacting is one thing, sticking your head up your ass hoping the problem goes away is another - edIII
(Score: 4, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 15 2014, @02:04PM
Well, you're not reading the constitution like a media executive: The constitution clearly limits the time only for authors and inventors, not for the middlemen!
(Score: 3) by Nerdfest on Tuesday July 15 2014, @04:01PM
In fact, I think the internet and most of the related technologies grew as fast as they did because of all the *open* technologies, formats, and protocols. Where do you think we'd be if people had to 'licence' HTTP or their network stacks. How about if there were no free OSs available? People couldn't afford large server farms. This is one of the reasons I get annoyed with people throwing money at Apple who are too fond of ensuring that formats and protocols work only with Apple devices. We got where we are because of openness, and I don't want to see the internet turn into a collection of cells with velvet curtains. If people can't play well with others, don't reward them, punish them.
Getting rid of net neutrality is horrendous for the same reasons.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Tuesday July 15 2014, @09:40PM
Who cares what the Constitution says? It's just an obsolete piece of paper.
There's another part of it, called the 4th Amendment. It hasn't been in effect for quite some time, thanks to the Drug War. So why should any other part of the Constitution be of interest? It's not legally binding.
(Score: 2) by tathra on Wednesday July 16 2014, @03:23AM
- Mary Bono
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Darth Turbogeek on Tuesday July 15 2014, @10:57AM
Jail all politicans? That really is the only way to stop it - if you dont then it will always come back.
I know some would think change the system but lets face it, politcians will just change it back so their snouts are in the trough of money, hookers and blow.
(Score: 3, Funny) by BsAtHome on Tuesday July 15 2014, @11:10AM
We need to construct a B-Ark for lawyers, politicians, big-corp leaders and the rest of the 1%'ers. That'll rid us from the endless debate how to further an agenda that will only benefit said group to be boarding the ark.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 15 2014, @12:23PM
Won't anyone think of the poor cavemen on the planet they'll crash onto?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Alfred on Tuesday July 15 2014, @03:30PM
Who said send it to a planet? How about the Sun?
(Score: 3, Funny) by Nerdfest on Tuesday July 15 2014, @05:05PM
Who the hell modded this *funny*?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Alfred on Tuesday July 15 2014, @03:19PM
To quote a different "bard" of sorts, who was just quoting someone else. From "Get Over It" by the Eagles:
A lot of these types that are causing problems are lawyers ya know.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Thexalon on Tuesday July 15 2014, @12:00PM
As long as legislation can be bought, the only thing lobbyists will do when they lose a vote is increase the bribes and try again next year.
The only defense in the long run is an equal and opposite lobby, but on issues like this one where it's an industry versus the peasants, the industry will win sooner or later.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by redneckmother on Tuesday July 15 2014, @07:02PM
Respectfully, I must disagree with an opposing lobby. In the 1970s, AT&T had a slogan reading "The System is the Solution". An AT&T employee informed me then that "The System is the Problem".
Somehow, some way, we must get the big money out of the US political system. Putting more money in doesn't seem feasible, to me.
Mas cerveza por favor.
(Score: 3) by fliptop on Tuesday July 15 2014, @09:13PM
"We're in the dirty end of the field now. That's where I play." - King Benny, Sleepers [imdb.com].
I don't think it's possible. While putting in more money does seem reprehensible, the only way to play is to get dirty.
The question I have is, does it take getting dirty for a while before you have enough votes to clean it up?
Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
(Score: 2) by redneckmother on Wednesday July 16 2014, @04:35AM
I worry that we (the proles) can't possibly win a money game. After all, the 1% have much, much more money to flop on the table, so we can't possibly compete within the current "system".
Mas cerveza por favor.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by lgsoynews on Tuesday July 15 2014, @12:11PM
If you read the document, on page 'x' (3rd part of the introduction), you can read (emphasis mine):
Given that they start their discourse with such biased nonsense, you don't need to read further to understand where they are going...
They very conveniently forget all the abuses & problems created by the excessive IP laws. I would myself claim that those excesses have in fact hindered the spread of knowledge & information.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by physicsmajor on Tuesday July 15 2014, @12:31PM
We can't stop this by attempting to play whack-a-mole, because our opponents insist on controlling the debate. They repeatedly put forth best-of-two-evil choices amounting to "would you like to give us your car, or $20k? You decide!" The majority of the public fails to realize other choices are perfectly valid, including not giving them anything at all - or even demanding the return of what they've extorted.
We must go on the offensive.
We need to create a SuperPAC or similar whose entire role is educating the public about the historical origins of copyright and patents, and how they have been twisted beyond recognition far outside their Constitutional scope. We must use their tactics against them, framing the debate deliberately so the choice is more along the lines of "Would you prefer 5 years of copyright with a single extension, or 9?" Anything involving lifetime or double digit years shall not be permitted a voice in the debate. The sole question of any merit is "How will this policy benefit the public domain?" - for that is the purpose of these institutions. Five years with one extension would have let J.K. Rowling make money off the first Harry Potter until after the 7th was released. That's plenty of time. This will encourage creators to create more, as their mini-monopolies will expire within their lifetimes, enriching the public domain. This would be copyright working as intended.
These institutions in their current forms objectively harm the public domain, society, and our culture. Their current forms are null and void. Rather than looking at new treaties a la ACTA or additional laws a la SOPA, we must withdraw from the Berne convention and unwind all copyright extensions back to the original Acts.
There is no other way to reclaim our society and culture. The majority of people under 40 are receptive to these arguments, they just never actually see them espoused.
And, lastly, it's on us as the actual informed and rational parties to educate our friends and family. Get a brief speech about the history of copyright prepared and practice it at social gatherings. Once people have their eyes opened, encourage them to pass the message on likewise. If you want a quotable quote, go with this: "In the age of costless copying, there is no place for generational ownership of ideas."
I send and fully support this message as an artist and performer in several mediums.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 15 2014, @02:09PM
Well, the problem is international treaties: As soon as a length is included in an international treaty, it cannot be reduced any more by a single government, since that government would then violate the treaty. So as soon as anything gets into a treaty, the only way to get it changes is to first get the treaty changed, which is much harder. Which is exactly why they try to put such things in treaties to begin with.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Thexalon on Tuesday July 15 2014, @02:11PM
The basic problems with that plan:
1. The RIAA types can easily match your SuperPAC dollar for dollar. Based on earning reports and BLS estimates, Disney alone makes about as much money as all professional musicians in the United States combined.
2. The ~5 big media conglomerates control all major news networks. If you were planning on releasing issue-based TV ads to get your message out, think about who is going to be willing to air those ads. If forced by law to air them at all, you can be sure that they will air between 1 and 5 AM.
I agree, as a musician, that copyrights are far out of whack. Heck, I'd throw some cash towards that SuperPAC. But I don't think that's the path to victory. What I believe will really make a difference is great artistic works truly independent of the big media conglomerates, sold direct from whoever created those works to the people who appreciate them and/or released into the Creative Commons or public domain.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Cactus on Tuesday July 15 2014, @04:04PM
I know there are plenty of web platforms that try and get media published outside of the big companies, and even a few that push artists/authors towards self-publication. Perhaps create an organization to bring the offerings of those platforms to one central place. Be a Google Play, or iTunes, but create a central area for people to purchase indie games, music, movies, books, etc.
The real mission of such an organization would be to alter public perception of IP laws. Be clear on what % of income is going to the artists. Offer the media DRM-free. After 5 years, release the works into the public domain. If you can make a pretty Android + iPhone app + desktop client (or create a decent API and let other people make the clients) then you might actually get a good segment of the market. But, that all depends on if you can attract indie artists with those terms.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by bzipitidoo on Tuesday July 15 2014, @02:20PM
I agree. But I want to go even further and abolish copyrights and patents. We can fund art and science in other, better ways.
I really think we need nothing less than an amendment to the US Constitution. Freedom of speech and religion are in the 1st Amendment. I think knowledge deserves the same level of protection. Make a Freedom of Knowledge Amendment (FoKA). Just pushing this idea would scare the crap out of them, and if it actually got some traction, they would quickly roll out the concessions, try to whip up anything to justify arguments that we really do not need this protection after all. That's a great way to stop these constant attempts to extend copyright and patents. Better, however, if FoKA is ratified.
If politicians from the Pirate Party started winning significant numbers of votes, that would scare them too. It need not happen in the US. Can't anyway, our election system is too biased.
I drafted some text for FoKA. It says that the government will no longer grant or enforce monopoly protection to copyrights and patents. I think it's important especially to stress that word "monopoly". You can still have copyrights, but they will not be enforceable. That effectively kills them. Then it empowers Congress to create a competitive environment for patronage, perhaps by setting up quasi governmental organizations to hand out funding based on various criteria, in order to support art and science. The rest of FoKA basically says no bullcrap. No attempting to twist Trademark protection to make it work like copyright used to, no more of this licensing of the use of products on a temporary and revokable basis rather than sales of products, to dodge around the First-sale doctrine. EULAs are null and void. No Hollywood Accounting. No Payola. Yes to photography, yes to recording videos especially of police at work. Yes to remakes like what the Star Wars kid did. No more trying to fool the public by lying about what isn't allowed and waving around scary looking FBI badges at the start of a DVD or end of a sports broadcast. No chilling by forcing users to figure out how much to pay and who to pay. No turning of third parties into informants or enforcers. And of course, it forbids restrictions on legal documents and proceedings. No more copyrighting of laws, no more secret negotiations of treaties. Big Pharma gets told no confiscation of prescription drugs, no stopping of the production and sales of generic drugs. And for the likes of Monsanto, no restrictions on crops. For telecoms, no more squashing of local government efforts to provide Internet service to their communities.
You realize just how much crap has been pulled when you try to list it all. In short, no redefining of terminology and meaning to bring back copyrights and patents under some other name. Fundamentally, I want the system to change from a default of "no" to a default of "yes". Won't have to ask for anyone's permission to do anything you like to any art you want. Won't have to worry about the artists starving either, they can collect from funds set up for the purpose of compensating them.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Phoenix666 on Tuesday July 15 2014, @03:26PM
bzipitidoo, I think your suggestion is excellent. We need other amendments to the Constitution as well. It has been 200 years since the first Constitutional Convention, and we need another to assess how well the first set worked and adjust. We have many technologies and implications from those technologies that the Founding Fathers could not have imagined. They did know that we needed a system that was flexible enough to adjust and account for new discoveries.
Unfortunately, the current system has been gamed and sabotaged by interested parties to the point of breakdown. It can no longer adjust as it was meant to. So rather than a tool in the project for human advancement it has devolved into a network of chains meant to enslave us to the status quo.
I would add to your suggestion the observation that the US system was designed with Checks and Balances to prevent any one branch of government gaining absolute power over the whole. Separation of Church and State was also instituted to avoid the centuries of religious persecution and strife that had plagued Europe. But multi-national corporations with the ability to buy entire countries did not exist then, so they put nothing in our foundational documents about limiting that sort of power. But what we have today are corporations undermining every other sort of power in our world. We urgently need to change that. So I propose we abolish corporate personhood, make officers of companies personally criminally liable for the actions of the organizations under their care, and absolutely bar them from having the right to lobby.
We need to convene a second Constitutional Convention and bar any of the beneficiaries of the status quo from participation--they would only sabotage its outcomes. Then we need to put it to the American people. I believe it's the only way to peacefully avoid the Second American Revolution that's right around the corner.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 3) by tangomargarine on Tuesday July 15 2014, @03:33PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_East_India_Company [wikipedia.org]
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 1) by NickM on Tuesday July 15 2014, @09:21PM
I a master of typographic, grammatical and miscellaneous errors !
(Score: 1) by bzipitidoo on Wednesday July 16 2014, @03:36PM
Don't know about specific companies, but Thomas Jefferson is a good source for writings on corporations in general. He noted that there already were corporations that had grown big and powerful enough to defy governments and ignore laws.
Ironically, the first link I turned up for his papers is paywalled.
(Score: 3) by tangomargarine on Tuesday July 15 2014, @03:31PM
Good luck ever getting that thing anywhere close to passed.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by Blackmoore on Tuesday July 15 2014, @03:43PM
Well, start with a SuperPAC, and work from there. You aren't getting an amendment through this government right now - but if we can change the debate and pay enough of the rats we might just get a chance someday.
(Score: 1) by bzipitidoo on Wednesday July 16 2014, @04:45PM
Yes, FoKA is just a pipe dream now. I don't know about the super PAC route, not at all sure that would get anywhere. I have also thought of ideas like setting up a mutual fund for the express purpose of buying out the RIAA members. I don't think that would work either.
Once the fund gained controlling interest in an RIAA member, it would release their entire catalog under copyleft licenses, and perhaps also into the public domain. It would also make some rules changes, renegotiate their existing contracts to make sure future work is also released under copyleft licenses. Then maybe it could be sold, for whatever its shares might still be worth, if anything, or it could be shut down, or kept and used to vote on RIAA policy. Would like to do Disney as well, but Disney is worth a lot more than the RIAA members. The idea has a lot of problems. Mainly, it's playing by rules that they made, playing their game.
A big problem and maybe the place to start is convincing those wannabe artists among the people that copyright is not the ticket to wealth that they think. I know people like that. Most will never make a living off of copyright, but they still dream of doing so and believe copyright is necessary, and support strong copyright laws, DRM, and the idea that copying is stealing. There are a lot of those people. I don't know what it will take to convince them that they're being strung along, and are stringing themselves along, but I suspect money would do it, and is doing it. If they see that they can do better on Kickstarter, Indiegogo, Humble Bundle, and other such organizations, they may have a change of heart. We need more of that. The main difference between the publishing industry and a Nigerian scam is that they let a few people win. Poster artists like Metallica and J. K. Rowling and her rags to riches story are very useful to the publishing industry.
At least scientists get it. We've operated under a patronage system for decades. These thieves of the publishing industry (Elsevier) take our work for free, and try to lock it away, and charge for access. They pay for none of it. They don't pay for the research, and they don't pay the authors anything at all for whatever sales of copies they manage to trick others into paying for. Aaron Swartz understood this.
(Score: 2) by Blackmoore on Wednesday July 16 2014, @06:52PM
You might want to talk with people closer to the music industry, but as I understand it the RIAA contract (which music is commercially distributed) claims to TRUMP any other license you attempt to publish under; or exemptions you (the original rights holder) may provide.
If we want to cut the lawyers of the industry down, you have to find a way to stop their influence on congress. that's a SuperPAC, and possibly getting like minded people into local and federal positions.
(Score: 2) by redneckmother on Tuesday July 15 2014, @06:39PM
Wow! Thanks for the quote. I've added it to my "fortune" style auto generated email sigs (with attribution to your handle on SN).
Mas cerveza por favor.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 15 2014, @12:57PM
As far as I'm concerned, the American entertainment industry can do what they like. Tighten the screws. Bribe the congresscum. Send in the SWAT teams to terrorize anybody who copied that floppy, or that DVD, or that BluRay. Go ahead.
I'm already out. You see, I simply don't want any of their products anymore. I don't go to the movies. I don't buy their DVDs, or their BluRays, or their CDs anymore -- nor do I download them (neither legally nor illegally), or stream them, or rent them. I don't even borrow them from friends or the library. I'm out.
Since most of my time is spent desperately trying to keep my job in this depression here in the U.S., I have at most about one hour a day where I can spend on "entertainment". Usually I'm reading a book, or I'll watch some anime (usually streaming with ads). Those few dollars I can spare I use to buy the anime I enjoyed when (if) it comes out here in licensed form for North America.
Japanese anime and manga culture produces things I'm interested in, and they're sane enough to realize that not cracking down on fansubbing led to licensed streaming in other countries which brought them money, and that many people like me who see their products for free will buy the physical products when they come out. This is in contrast to the insane American culture where every unpaid viewing is regarded as the act of a heretic who is worthy of burning at the stake.
If screws get tightened so I can't get anime or manga anymore, well hell, there are thousands of libraries in the country filled with books I haven't read yet. I'll get by.
The way to fight these types of things is to stop giving American producers either your money or your eyeballs. They only have power if you give it to them. But not enough people will stop watching to make a difference, so the screws will be put, if not this time, then the next one, or the next. At least it's kind of interesting to watch a culture die, from inside of it.
(Score: 5, Funny) by Immerman on Tuesday July 15 2014, @01:40PM
Bad news - according to the Copyright Reform Act of 2017 all residents are presumed to partake of at least $5,000 worth of copyrighted material per year, and if you don't have the receipts to prove you purchased at least that much you are clearly acquiring your content illegally and will be fined 10x that amount in punitive damages to be distributed among the RIAA, MPAA, etc.
(Score: 4, Funny) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Tuesday July 15 2014, @03:17PM
> if you don't have the receipts to prove you purchased at least that much you are clearly acquiring your content illegally
This is a common misconception. It's not that you must have acquired them illegally, it's that that $5K you spent on other things - eating out, sports activities, food etc - is money that you COULD have spent on media, in some parallel universe where your spending priorities are different. Therefore it represents a lost sale to the media industry, and they are legally entitled to recoup all lost sales revenue.
(Score: 5, Funny) by acid andy on Tuesday July 15 2014, @06:42PM
Yep. That lost sale is theft. Repeat after me:
THRIFT IS THEFT!
THRIFT IS THEFT!
THRIFT IS THEFT!
If a cat has kittens, does a rat have rittens, a bat bittens and a mat mittens?
(Score: 2) by redneckmother on Tuesday July 15 2014, @06:48PM
Now, if we could only get the MAFIAA to go after the restaurants, and leave us out of the whole mess...
Mas cerveza por favor.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 15 2014, @02:14PM
And what if the screws get tightened even more, so those libraries have to close as well?
(Score: 2) by middlemen on Tuesday July 15 2014, @03:19PM
Then he will just sit and jerk off for that "one hour" of entertainment time he has.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Tuesday July 15 2014, @03:36PM
while staring at the wall and fantasizing about the grisly murders of said media company execs
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 1) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 15 2014, @08:37PM
This is the only solution, kudos pal. And all the rest of us should follow this example.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Tuesday July 15 2014, @09:44PM
That might work OK if you're a single male and don't date and are happy to just watch anime streams or read old books from the library. If you have any higher ambition in life, it won't.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday July 16 2014, @02:15PM
There is a different outlet for free time that predates the entire age of mass media. It's called, "Going Outside." And outside, there are so many wonderful and entertaining things to do that don't involve giving money to anyone. If you have allergies or are an agoraphobe, there are many other free activities inside like "Interacting with people around you."
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Wednesday July 16 2014, @07:36PM
Good luck finding an American girlfriend who never wants to watch movies or TV or listen to any music from a music label.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 17 2014, @08:54AM
There are 150 million females in the United States alone. You only need to find one with a heart and a brain.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday July 16 2014, @02:24PM
What you're talking about is what we all can do now that the corporations and powers-that-be have so fundamentally violated our common social contract: opt out. Vote with your feet and your dollars. And I think it's a great way to send a message. But I would add that just dropping out does not send the message effectively enough. You also need to tell those you know what you're doing and why you're doing it. Maybe some of them will say, "Huh, never thought about it that way before. You're right! I'm going to opt out, too." Of course you can make a website or build an app or that sort of thing, too, but study after study shows we are most influenced by the people around us. So at least tell your social circle.
I would also add that we all need to do this across every sector. Make your house energy independent, buy an EV that you recharge with your solar panels & wind turbine, and stop giving money to electricity, coal, natural gas, and oil companies. Stop buying crap you don't need. Start a vegetable garden in your back yard so supplement or replace your grocery store purchases to take a bite out of Archer-Daniels Midland and Monsanto. Move your savings to a credit union and take the wind out of the sales of the banks.
If we all striving toward independence and freedom and teaching each other how, it will very quickly bring a close to the 19th-century, paternalistic, command-and-control system and its misdeeds.
Washington DC delenda est.