Attempted Piracy To Become A Crime

[Dubh Aingeal]

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is asking Congress to make 'attempted' copyright infringement a federal crime. The text of the legislation (PDF) as well as the official press-release (TXT) is available online. Rep. Lamar Smith, a key House Republican, said he 'applauds' the idea, and his Democratic counterpart is probably on board too. In addition, the so-called Intellectual Property Protection Act of 2007 would create a new crime of life imprisonment for using pirated software in some circumstances, expand the DMCA with civil asset forfeiture, and authorize wiretaps in investigations of Americans who are 'attempting' to infringe copyrights.

[Scary Guy]

Wow, I could go stab someone in the face multiple times and get less time in jail than for pirating software.

[Destroit]

Wow...that's horrible. I guess the book 1984 is really starting to pan out, huh? I mean for downloading a song they can actually fucking seize your house and all of your assets now (which they have been doing with suspected drug traffickers for years), which to me is a violation of our constitutional rights. You know the one about cruel and/or excessive punishment? Yeeeeah...seems a bit much to me personally.

[Marblez]

Me thinks you guys are overreacting just a tad bit.

Wow, I could go stab someone in the face multiple times and get less time in jail than for pirating software.

Wow...that's horrible. I guess the book 1984 is really starting to pan out, huh? I mean for downloading a song they can actually fucking seize your house and all of your assets now (which they have been doing with suspected drug traffickers for years), which to me is a violation of our constitutional rights. You know the one about cruel and/or excessive punishment? Yeeeeah...seems a bit much to me personally.

* Create a new crime of life imprisonment for using pirated software. Anyone using counterfeit products who "recklessly causes or attempts to cause death" can be imprisoned for life. During a conference call, Justice Department officials gave the example of a hospital using pirated software instead of paying for it.

* Permit more wiretaps for piracy investigations. Wiretaps would be authorized for investigations of Americans who are "attempting" to infringe copyrights.

* Allow computers to be seized more readily. Specifically, property such as a PC "intended to be used in any manner" to commit a copyright crime would be subject to forfeiture, including civil asset forfeiture. Civil asset forfeiture has become popular among police agencies in drug cases as a way to gain additional revenue, and it is problematic and controversial.

[Destroit]

* Allow computers to be seized more readily. Specifically, property such as a PC "intended to be used in any manner" to commit a copyright crime would be subject to forfeiture, including civil asset forfeiture. Civil asset forfeiture has become popular among police agencies in drug cases as a way to gain additional revenue, and it is problematic and controversial.

Well no...I mean that IS excessive. What they mean by "civil asset forfeiture" is that they can take EVERYTHING you own if caught with a certain amt of drugs in your home (and now copyrighted material) no questions asked. I know because I have had friends who have had this happen. A friend of mine had everything they ever owned taken from them no questions asked because they had a certain amt of weed in their house. Then the government takes that and just adds it to THEIR revenue and lines their pockets? I dunno, to me it seems like they're the pirates, it seems a little overboard is all I'm saying...

[Hellion]

This joke of a country is going to crash harder than the Roman Empire,Nuke a city get slapped on the wrist,

Pedophiles get less time than someone steeling a pack of gum.

Saying the president is an asshole,and you could end up in prison for life.

I wonder whats next.don't want to know.

[Marblez]

Well no...I mean that IS excessive. What they mean by "civil asset forfeiture" is that they can take EVERYTHING you own if caught with a certain amt of drugs in your home (and now copyrighted material) no questions asked. I know because I have had friends who have had this happen. A friend of mine had everything they ever owned taken from them no questions asked because they had a certain amt of weed in their house. Then the government takes that and just adds it to THEIR revenue and lines their pockets? I dunno, to me it seems like they're the pirates, it seems a little overboard is all I'm saying...

The government is not going to take your house if you illegally download a song or two.

I do agree that some of the current forfeiture that occurs for other crimes is not exactly the most just punishment. I don't agree with forfeiture of ones property at the will of the police department, that should be the court's option. If the fines owed for a large scale indiscretion are not payable by any other means than forfeiting the equity that you may have in your property...well perhaps you should have been aware of the consequences. And your house/car note should be no longer your responsibility if the gov't is going to assume the property.

My uncle had to forfeit his family car for a second DUI offense. Stupid and wrong of him, right? Yes. His family (I believe) is already on gov't assistance, and now his wife doesn't even have a vehicle to go where she needs to in order to make them more independant from tax payers payroll.

[BrassFusion]

Erf. "Attempted" piracy would be pretty hard to prove in many cases. I don't like the power this bill would give.

[Scales]

I think this is an o.k. punishment as long as they get a nice laptop and Wi-fi while in prison.

[Scary Guy]

I think this is an o.k. punishment as long as they get a nice laptop and Wi-fi while in prison.

That totally makes the forced anal violation worth it.

[Troy Spiral (13)]

Its such a rampant "Crime" and so difficult to enforce, that making the penalty more and more severe is the only realistic way to make it have any effect. At least thats the theory.

If you cant realistically enforce something , but you want the law to have an effect , one of the alternatives is to make that punishment very severe. That way the possibility of getting caught, regardless of how slight carries more weight.

Try not to confuse my above commentary with agreement of this new legislation , im just trying to point out the thinking of (seemingly) overly severe punishments.

"Let the punishment fit the crime" is a useful spirit but its not always realistic.

[BrassFusion]

Piracy isn't going anywhere, regardless what draconian punishments they try to assign it. We're better off revising our intellectual property system.

Look at it this way: what do the record companies do to deserve the ridiculous amount of money they make on album sales? What service do they really provide? Hell, even musicians don't deserve all that money just because random jackholes are listening to a recording of their song.

I'm frugal, I always have been. Before I got cable internet, I didn't download shit illegally, but I also didn't buy CDs. I listened to the radio. If there was a band that I really supported and I knew I loved their material, I bought it. I still do.

OK, that was a non-sequitur. My larger point is that the music industry is a capricious one and in order to REALLY be a musician you have to work. You have to write, and you have to practice, and you have to gig, not just sit on your ass and bitch about people enjoying your craft without paying for it. It's ART. Christ. I play for people because I enjoy it, not because I get paid (ok, sometimes because I get paid, but I haven't sold a single fucking CD ever. I get paid for LIVE PERFORMANCES, Metallica).

[Troy Spiral (13)]

Piracy isn't going anywhere, regardless what draconian punishments they try to assign it. We're better off revising our intellectual property system.

Look at it this way: what do the record companies do to deserve the ridiculous amount of money they make on album sales? What service do they really provide? Hell, even musicians don't deserve all that money just because random jackholes are listening to a recording of their song.

I'm frugal, I always have been. Before I got cable internet, I didn't download shit illegally, but I also didn't buy CDs. I listened to the radio. If there was a band that I really supported and I knew I loved their material, I bought it. I still do.

OK, that was a non-sequitur. My larger point is that the music industry is a capricious one and in order to REALLY be a musician you have to work. You have to write, and you have to practice, and you have to gig, not just sit on your ass and bitch about people enjoying your craft without paying for it. It's ART. Christ. I play for people because I enjoy it, not because I get paid (ok, sometimes because I get paid, but I haven't sold a single fucking CD ever. I get paid for LIVE PERFORMANCES, Metallica).

Deserve Profits: The market , not ethics/morality decide the monetary price of something in a market economy. That doest mean that it intrinsically has value, its just the monetary price.

I think because we live in a money driven society we can inadvertently confuse dollar compensation with cultural/ethical "value".

Do i personally think that the money-changers and the product distributors are probably overly compensated or their work in relation to the cultural value of what they do? In a lot of cases yes. But the actual dollar amount put on something is the same as its "cultural value" lets say. Something could cost or pay $1000 dollars an hour, it doesn't mean that philosophically its worth any more or less than something that is free.

In a more specific sense.... having been an Art fanatic in various forms from 6th grade until about age 28 or so, I've spent a lot of time thinking about various aspects of such things, and really, Art is no more or less a "commodity" to be bought/sold than anything else. I dont think it degrades the underlying value of such art , as monetary value and ethical/cultural value should be i think separate ideas.

[BrassFusion]

Deserve Profits: The market , not ethics/morality decide the monetary price of something in a market economy. That doest mean that it intrinsically has value, its just the monetary price.

since piracy has virtually eliminated the market for prerecorded music... hah.

ok i know it's counterintutive to have my opinion as a musician, but music will always exist. it won't always be the same but it's ALWAYS going to be there whether fuckups like dashboard confessional get paid or not. the teachers and professors and live performers are still getting paid, and that's good enough for me.

[Scary Guy]

Oh yeah, just found out that they want to make it a criminal offense too instead of civil.

[Marblez]

I thought stealing was always a criminal offense?

[BrassFusion]

music isn't a tangible finite resource, so it's debatable whether it can be "stolen."

[Scary Guy]

Oh yeah, just found out that they want to make it a criminal offense too instead of civil.

Falls under "Copyright infringement" which is civil. It's all the difference between the RIAA suing you and the government throwing you in jail.

[Der Nister]

My question is, how the hell do you prove someone attempted to commit piracy?

So could you say because I put a cd in my stereo and that my stereo has a tape recorder built in and has the ability to record "pirate" a copy of that disc that I'm attempting to commit a crime?

Or do they mean if you do actually illegally copy something that you are breaking the law?

Correct me if I'm wrong (which I know I'm not) - there have already been laws on the books for decades about this issue, right?

Piracy will not go away - making more laws is only our governments way of making themselves bigger and is a wasted effort.

It would be nice if more people would actually read the history on this subject and more than nice if our 'lawmakers' actually did their home work. I guess what I'm saying is - this is typical of the way things work in this country. Either throw money at a problem or just make more laws for the books which have little to no effect on the outcome.

The RIAA fought against allowing home stereos to have built in tape recorders because they said people would record music off the radio and their business would suffer as a result - fast forward a few years and we found out - that wasn't true.

The movie industry fought to keep VCR's out of America because of the same claims - piracy would hurt ticket sales at the box office - fast forward again and we find that that didn't happen either.

We don't need more laws - period. The RIAA is obviously has our government in the pocket book.

The music industry needs to change if they want to stay in the game - making more laws and filling up prisons with people that simply made a copy of something is ludichrist at best.