SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
On October 22nd, H.R. 2426 passed the House, as the EFF explains:
The House of Representatives has just voted in favor of the Copyright Alternative in Small-Claims Enforcement Act (CASE Act) by 410-6 (with 16 members not voting), moving forward a bill that Congress has had no hearings and no debates on so far this session. That means that there has been no public consideration of the serious harm the bill could do to regular Internet users and their expression online.
The CASE Act creates a new body in the Copyright Office which will receive copyright complaints, notify the person being sued, and then decide if money is owed and how much. This new Copyright Claims Board will be able to fine people up to $30,000 per proceeding. Worse, if you get one of these notices (maybe an email, maybe a letter—the law actually does not specify) and accidentally ignore it, you're on the hook for the money with a very limited ability to appeal. $30,000 could bankrupt or otherwise ruin the lives of many Americans.
The CASE Act also has bad changes to copyright rules, would let sophisticated bad actors get away with trolling and infringement, and might even be unconstitutional. It fails to help the artists it's supposed to serve and will put a lot of people at risk.
The EFF also criticized the bill in a previous article, pointing out its potential for abuse.
The president of the American Bar Association wrote in support of the bill:
While the CASE Act will provide more cost-effective protection for plaintiffs, copyright defendants will also benefit from the proposed legislation. Currently, defendants can be burdened with significant legal costs and drawn out suits, even where their use is a fair use or otherwise lawful. Participation in a small claims proceeding would cap their damages and likely provide a faster resolution of the dispute.
Participation in the program would be entirely voluntary, and parties could proceed with or without attorneys. Proceedings could be held through phone or videoconferences. Lawyers well-versed in copyright and alternative dispute resolution would decide the claims.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by jmichaelhudsondotnet on Wednesday November 06 2019, @03:33PM
This will be used like a weapon by powerful people against their less powerful ideological opponents and will effectively enforce a very fear-based pulbic forum.
Wow it is awful. I bet they will have a way to pull it right out of the bank too. Poor people who move, anyone who doesn't have a lawyer, will just be a target or a victim, no defense possible. Might as well give every Eric Trump a bat to hit every poor person he doesn't like with.
And like I write elsewhere, this will give the people who are rent seeking, who do no work, make no art, just camp stacks of paper and mail angry letters with legal threats, collect money.
It is truly amazing for a system that claims to reward work and punish laziness, for law after law like this to come out empowering people who do not work and just cause problems.
I have proven you can write and record even 5(or so) albums of music and not get any money for it at all, and that is after learning to play the instruments also. The system says this is not work. I am not a musician even because I don't make enough money as a musician.
Meanwhile a guy can inherit a sheet of paper that says he owns the beatles Yellow Submarine and he never has to work a day in his life while the song Yellow Submarine plays over advertisements for everything the beatles hated.
And this guy will have 3 girlfriends and a yacht, call himself a producer, have 5 kids he claims aren't his, 5 lawyers to sue 5 people a week until the end of time. Probably also steals 5 melodies a month from 5 different 'un-signed' artists on soundcloud for use in 5 jingles.
There are good guys and bad guys in this, pick a side. Some people are literally being paid to burn our civilization to the ground.
https://jmichaelhudson.net/my-memes/ [jmichaelhudson.net] (scroll down for the ones with green background that will explain some of the dark pattern behind this 'law')