SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
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.
(Score: 5, Informative) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Thursday August 01 2019, @10:15PM (7 children)
High confidence that this was rhetorical, but... can't.... help........ myself!
As to the supporters... https://copyrightalliance.org/news-events/copyright-news-newsletters/copyright-small-claims/ [copyrightalliance.org] (and one should easily figure out who might be in support of a bill which subverts the justice system for copyright enforcement....)
This is a recurring bill and one of the links above links over to the 2017-2018 version of the bill so I'll start there....
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/3945 [congress.gov]
Sponsor: Rep. Jeffries, Hakeem S. [D-NY-8] (Introduced 10/04/2017)
Cosponsor Date Cosponsored
Rep. Marino, Tom [R-PA-10]* 10/04/2017
Rep. Collins, Doug [R-GA-9]* 10/04/2017
Rep. Smith, Lamar [R-TX-21]* 10/04/2017
Rep. Chu, Judy [D-CA-27]* 10/04/2017
Rep. Lieu, Ted [D-CA-33]* 10/04/2017
Rep. Nadler, Jerrold [D-NY-10] 01/29/2018
Rep. Cicilline, David N. [D-RI-1] 01/29/2018
Rep. Cohen, Steve [D-TN-9] 04/09/2018
Rep. Cramer, Kevin [R-ND-At Large] 04/09/2018
Rep. Deutch, Theodore E. [D-FL-22] 05/09/2018
Rep. Napolitano, Grace F. [D-CA-32] 05/09/2018
Rep. Poliquin, Bruce [R-ME-2] 06/01/2018
Rep. DeFazio, Peter A. [D-OR-4] 06/08/2018
Rep. Moore, Gwen [D-WI-4] 06/20/2018
Rep. Jayapal, Pramila [D-WA-7] 10/26/2018
Rep. Fitzpatrick, Brian K. [R-PA-8] 10/26/2018
Now over to the current version, also introduced by Rep. Hakeem Jeffries but the cosponsor list has grown.....
https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/2426 [congress.gov]
Cosponsor Date Cosponsored
Rep. Collins, Doug [R-GA-9]* 05/01/2019
Rep. Nadler, Jerrold [D-NY-10]* 05/01/2019
Rep. Roby, Martha [R-AL-2]* 05/01/2019
Rep. Johnson, Henry C. "Hank," Jr. [D-GA-4]* 05/01/2019
Rep. Cline, Ben [R-VA-6]* 05/01/2019
Rep. Chu, Judy [D-CA-27]* 05/01/2019
Rep. Lieu, Ted [D-CA-33]* 05/01/2019
Rep. Fitzpatrick, Brian K. [R-PA-1]* 05/01/2019
Rep. Budd, Ted [R-NC-13] 05/10/2019
Rep. Thompson, Bennie G. [D-MS-2] 05/10/2019
Rep. Cohen, Steve [D-TN-9] 05/16/2019
Rep. Marchant, Kenny [R-TX-24] 05/16/2019
Rep. Demings, Val Butler [D-FL-10] 05/23/2019
Rep. McBath, Lucy [D-GA-6] 05/23/2019
Rep. Schiff, Adam B. [D-CA-28] 05/23/2019
Rep. Chabot, Steve [R-OH-1] 05/23/2019
Rep. Ferguson, A. Drew, IV [R-GA-3] 06/04/2019
Rep. DesJarlais, Scott [R-TN-4] 06/04/2019
Rep. Rouda, Harley [D-CA-48] 06/04/2019
Rep. Stanton, Greg [D-AZ-9] 06/04/2019
Rep. Bacon, Don [R-NE-2] 06/04/2019
Rep. Cicilline, David N. [D-RI-1] 06/04/2019
Rep. Soto, Darren [D-FL-9] 06/04/2019
Rep. Scanlon, Mary Gay [D-PA-5] 06/04/2019
Rep. Ratcliffe, John [R-TX-4] 06/11/2019
Rep. Deutch, Theodore E. [D-FL-22] 06/11/2019
Rep. Case, Ed [D-HI-1] 06/11/2019
Rep. Johnson, Mike [R-LA-4] 06/11/2019
Rep. Sensenbrenner, F. James, Jr. [R-WI-5] 06/11/2019
Rep. Walker, Mark [R-NC-6] 06/11/2019
Rep. Mucarsel-Powell, Debbie [D-FL-26] 06/14/2019
Rep. Reschenthaler, Guy [R-PA-14] 06/14/2019
Rep. Correa, J. Luis [D-CA-46] 06/14/2019
Rep. Lesko, Debbie [R-AZ-8] 06/14/2019
Rep. Dean, Madeleine [D-PA-4] 06/20/2019
Rep. Richmond, Cedric L. [D-LA-2] 06/20/2019
Rep. Jackson Lee, Sheila [D-TX-18] 06/24/2019
Rep. Cox, TJ [D-CA-21] 07/02/2019
Rep. Gonzalez, Vicente [D-TX-15] 07/02/2019
Rep. Harder, Josh [D-CA-10] 07/02/2019
Rep. Cardenas, Tony [D-CA-29] 07/02/2019
Rep. Yoho, Ted S. [R-FL-3] 07/09/2019
Rep. Bonamici, Suzanne [D-OR-1] 07/09/2019
Rep. DeFazio, Peter A. [D-OR-4] 07/10/2019
Rep. Maloney, Sean Patrick [D-NY-18] 07/10/2019
Rep. Biggs, Andy [R-AZ-5] 07/10/2019
Rep. Lee, Susie [D-NV-3] 07/10/2019
Rep. Wittman, Robert J. [R-VA-1] 07/15/2019
Rep. Steube, W. Gregory [R-FL-17] 07/15/2019
Rep. Meadows, Mark [R-NC-11] 07/15/2019
Rep. Velazquez, Nydia M. [D-NY-7] 07/15/2019
Rep. Haaland, Debra A. [D-NM-1] 07/15/2019
Rep. Rose, Max [D-NY-11] 07/18/2019
Rep. Watkins, Steve [R-KS-2] 07/18/2019
Rep. Raskin, Jamie [D-MD-8] 07/22/2019
Rep. McClintock, Tom [R-CA-4] 07/22/2019
Rep. Suozzi, Thomas R. [D-NY-3] 07/25/2019
Rep. Sanchez, Linda T. [D-CA-38] 07/25/2019
Rep. Curtis, John R. [R-UT-3] 07/25/2019
Rep. Davis, Rodney [R-IL-13] 07/25/2019
Rep. Delgado, Antonio [D-NY-19] 07/25/2019
Rep. Brown, Anthony G. [D-MD-4] 07/25/2019
Rep. Taylor, Van [R-TX-3] 07/30/2019
Rep. Meng, Grace [D-NY-6] 07/30/2019
Rep. Cuellar, Henry [D-TX-28] 07/30/2019
On the Senate side, the Bill's sponsor was: Sen. Kennedy, John [R-LA] (Introduced 05/01/2019)
https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/1273 [congress.gov]
Cosponsors:
Cosponsor Date Cosponsored
Sen. Durbin, Richard J. [D-IL]* 05/01/2019
Sen. Tillis, Thom [R-NC]* 05/01/2019
Sen. Hirono, Mazie K. [D-HI]* 05/01/2019
Sen. Blackburn, Marsha [R-TN] 05/21/2019
Sen. Shaheen, Jeanne [D-NH] 06/04/2019
Sen. Udall, Tom [D-NM] 07/09/2019
Sen. Cramer, Kevin [R-ND] 07/16/2019
Sen. Coons, Christopher A. [D-DE] 07/16/2019
Sen. Leahy, Patrick J. [D-VT] 07/17/2019
Sen. Feinstein, Dianne [D-CA] 07/18/2019
Sen. Cornyn, John [R-TX] 07/18/2019
Sen. Cruz, Ted [R-TX] 07/18/2019
Sen. Blumenthal, Richard [D-CT] 07/18/2019
Sen. Heinrich, Martin [D-NM] 07/18/2019
This sig for rent.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 01 2019, @10:27PM (2 children)
So it's a bipartisan issue :)
More seriously, those R and those D don't work for for the people who elected them...
(Score: 3, Insightful) by stretch611 on Friday August 02 2019, @02:21AM (1 child)
As long as I have been alive, they have been working for the groups that
pay them offmake huge campaign donations, not voters.Now with 5 covid vaccine shots/boosters altering my DNA :P
(Score: 2) by Pslytely Psycho on Friday August 02 2019, @10:52PM
"When 'our people' get to the point where they can do us some good, they stop being 'our people.' "
--M. Stanton Evans
Alex Jones lawyer inspires new TV series: CSI Moron Division.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by PartTimeZombie on Thursday August 01 2019, @11:37PM (2 children)
Wow. Thanks for the comprehensive reply.
Does that mean all those people had a hand in writing the bill? Or is it another one of those industry written things?
(Score: 4, Interesting) by AthanasiusKircher on Friday August 02 2019, @03:45AM
No, a sponsor (sometimes called a "primary sponsor") of a bill is required to introduce potential legislation in Congress. A co-sponsor is merely someone who wants to sign on his/her name to be affiliated with the bill. Frequently bills originate with multiple cosponsors (also known as "original cosponsors," who are usually involved in negotiating the initial draft), though a primary sponsor must sign his/her name on the original to get the thing going.
Later on, other reps can add (or delete) their names as cosponsors. They usually do so when they want to be publicly seen as supporting legislation. Some may take a role in drafting or revising the bill actively, but cosponsors are not required to. I'm guessing not to many of the cosponsors here are responding to a general will of their constituents in favor of it. Rather, they probably want to be seen by "friends in the industry" as taking copyright seriously.
The fact that this list is so long for a bill so horrific and ignorant in its construction is not surprising to me, though depressing nonetheless.
As for who drafts bills? Mostly random aides and such (either aides to a sponsor/cosponsor or aides to a committee when the bill is proposed by committee), sometimes with input from industry when lobbyists get their hands in. The actual legislators (to my knowledge) usually tend to only be involved in "high-level" decisions about the big ideas and then negotiations with other reps. The legalese is worked out by the grunts.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Friday August 02 2019, @03:24PM
As AthanasiusKircher said, although as you note legislation can actually be drafted by industry as well and slipped to aides to be inserted. Not saying that's what happened here. In the end it is the legislator who puts his name on the bill as the sponsor and primary co-sponsors and it is those legislators who should bear the credit or blame for what the bills say and do even if they haven't read it themselves.
Basicallly any legislator in the lists above are saying they support this legislation's passage enough to attach their name to it in support. In the ideal world of federal republican discourse all citizens would pay attention to which bills their Representatives and Senators both support and vote for (and don't as well!) in order to become informed as to what the person actually does. We even have the bonus of having the Internet to help us figure that out and the data coming straight from Congress. But in practice I'd rather doubt the average voter knows much beyond what campaign ads they were last exposed to and what somebody they respect is also doing.
This sig for rent.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Pslytely Psycho on Friday August 02 2019, @09:58PM
Ah, your reply was by far better researched than mine. I only listed the initial sponsors of the bill.
Yours is a comprehensive list of "who NOT to vote for."
Of course, that just means a new batch of evildoers is elected.....
"There are two parties in Washington, the stupid party and the evil party. Though most often at odds with each other, occasionally they get together and do something that is both stupid and evil and the press heralds it as a bipartisan accomplishment."
--attributed to several different people primarily Everett Dirksen or M. Stanton Evans.
Alex Jones lawyer inspires new TV series: CSI Moron Division.