Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Thursday August 01 2019, @06:31PM   Printer-friendly
from the just-turn-off-the-internet dept.

The Senate Judiciary Committee intends to vote on the CASE Act, legislation that would create a brand new quasi-court for copyright infringement claims. We have expressed numerous concerns with the legislation, and serious problems inherent with the bill have not been remedied by Congress before moving it forward. In short, the bill would supercharge a “copyright troll” industry dedicated to filing as many “small claims” on as many Internet users as possible in order to make money through the bill’s statutory damages provisions. Every single person who uses the Internet and regularly interacts with copyrighted works (that’s everyone) should contact their Senators to oppose this bill.

Making it so easy to sue Internet users for allegedly infringing a copyrighted work that an infringement claim comes to resemble a traffic ticket is a terrible idea. This bill creates a situation where Internet users could easily be on the hook for multiple $5,000 copyright infringement judgments without many of the traditional legal safeguards or rights of appeal our justice system provides.

The legislation would allow the Copyright Office to create a “determination” process for claims seeking up to $5,000 in damages:

Regulations For Smaller Claims.—The Register of Copyrights shall establish regulations to provide for the consideration and determination, by at least one Copyright Claims Officer, of any claim under this chapter in which total damages sought do not exceed $5,000 (exclusive of attorneys’ fees and costs). A determination issued under this subsection shall have the same effect as a determination issued by the entire Copyright Claims Board.

This could be read as permission for the Copyright Office to dispense with even the meager procedural protections provided elsewhere in the bill when a rightsholder asks for $5000 or less. In essence, what this means is any Internet user who uploads a copyrighted work could find themselves subject to a largely unappealable $5,000 penalty without anything resembling a trial or evidentiary hearing. Ever share a meme, share a photo that isn’t yours, or download a photo you didn’t create? Under this legislation, you could easily find yourself stuck with a $5,000 judgment debt following the most trivial nod towards due process.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 01 2019, @08:44PM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 01 2019, @08:44PM (#874235)

    Per: https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/2426/cosponsors?q=%7Bsearch:[CASE+act]%7D&s=1&r=2&overview=closed#tabs [congress.gov]

    Sponsor: Rep. Jeffries, Hakeem S. [D-NY-8]

    See that letter "D" by the name. It means Democrat. How did you get Republican out of this?

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 01 2019, @10:51PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 01 2019, @10:51PM (#874335)

    Nothing stopping a Democrat from being a shithead too, but you're fooling yourself if you think the two parties have the same levels of corruption and unethical behavior.

    • (Score: 3, Informative) by HiThere on Thursday August 01 2019, @11:13PM

      by HiThere (866) Subscriber Badge on Thursday August 01 2019, @11:13PM (#874344) Journal

      The levels of corruption are similar, but they tend to focus on different areas. Democrats are more inclined towards copyright corruption, though the degree of difference may currently be minor.

      That said, the Democrats occasionally sponsor socially compassionate legislation. But they've also historically started more wars. And been better about balancing the budget. This doesn't match their public image, of course, but it's still true.

      --
      Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.