Time to expand the DMCA? [LWN.net]

Since it was enacted, the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) has stifled security research, led to the arrest of visiting programmers, shut down fair use, prohibited the creation of free DVD players for Linux, and facilitated anti-competitive moves by manufacturers of printer cartridges and garage door openers, among others. The EFF and others have been pushing for a reform of the DMCA for some time, and the occasional member of Congress has tried to bring that about. The DMCA is a law which clearly needs fixing.

Now, there is a new attempt to amend the DMCA in the works; a copy of the DMCA with the proposed changes highlighted [PDF] is available for those who are interested. This proposal, however, would have the effect of making the DMCA significantly worse. Here are a few highlights:

No longer content with criminalizing copyright infringement, the new law would make even attempted infringement illegal - with the same penalties. There would be no need to actually copy anything to violate the new DMCA.
The new law authorizes the impounding of "records documenting the manufacture, sale, or receipt of items involved in such violation" Such records certainly will include Internet service provider logs.
The penalty for copyright infringement will be raised to a maximum of ten years in prison - twenty for repeat offenses. In the future, rational criminals will not copy CDs; the potential penalty for simply stealing them will be lower. The new ten-year penalty will apply to those committing the heinous crime of recording a live concert as well.
The use of wiretapping and similar techniques is authorized for investigations into criminal copyright infringement or recording of live performances.
Criminal and civil forfeiture powers would be available to law enforcement agencies dealing with copyright cases.

The addition of forfeiture powers is, perhaps, the scariest part of this whole proposal. Civil forfeiture has long been a part of the U.S. "drug war," with the result that many law enforcement actions - often against innocent people - have been motivated primarily by the prospect of seizing valuable property. If this law goes through, any music player, laptop, or server deemed to have somehow participated in copyright infringement will be subject to seizure by the police - along with the houses they are found in. Anybody who thinks this power would not be abused has not been paying much attention.

As of this writing, the proposed legislation has not yet been formally introduced for consideration, but has been circulated among some members of the House of Representatives.

A different bill which, according to the EFF has been introduced is the "PERFORM act." This law can be thought of as a sort of broadcast flag for the net; it would require those broadcasting copyrighted material on the net to use DRM-afflicted formats. No more Vorbis or Theora streams - or even MP3. And, obviously, no way to tune into such streams using free software.

These bills make it clear that the powers behind the expansion of "intellectual property rights" are not yet satisfied and want more. This sort of thing will keep coming, and not just in the U.S. If we value our freedom, we must be prepared to keep fighting - and to work to push the pendulum in the other direction.

(Log in to post comments)

Time to expand the DMCA?

Posted Apr 27, 2006 4:20 UTC (Thu) by kirkengaard (subscriber, #15022) [Link]

You're nuts. No sane individual with a care for user rights would draft such a plausible and innocuous-seeming addition as the former (it's only truly heinous when you think about it in connection to the DMCA abuses, which I guarantee won't come up unless you tell your congress(wo)man to bring it up), and the latter is too blatantly similar to previous attempts at the same.

Time to expand the DMCA?

Posted Apr 27, 2006 11:18 UTC (Thu) by smitty_one_each (subscriber, #28989) [Link]

No, really. Take these ugly ideas and drive them off a cliff. At high speed.
Appeals to common sense aren't helping. Appeal to absurdity instead.

Time to expand the DMCA?

Posted Apr 27, 2006 17:46 UTC (Thu) by iabervon (subscriber, #722) [Link]

It seems to me like Spitzer should announce that he intends to investigate Sony/BMG for copyright infringement if he gets this new law, starting by seizing all Sony/BMG recordings from stores in the area and all Sony/BMG corporate property available, and arresting anybody involved with the company. There's ample evidence of major labels failing to abide by their requirements to give royalties to artists, and a history of infringement of songwriters' copyrights, so it should be easy to meet the minimal standards of proof necessary to justify wiping out the corporation under this bill.

Time to expand the DMCA?

Posted Apr 27, 2006 19:50 UTC (Thu) by oak (subscriber, #2786) [Link]

If a law officer would be wiretapping my copyrighted "live speech concert"
in the phone, is he entitled to max. 10 years in prison and confiscation
of all the wiretapping recordings and related material?

Time to expand the DMCA?

Posted Apr 28, 2006 7:01 UTC (Fri) by Ross (subscriber, #4065) [Link]

Not if it was part of his job. The state only submits to its own laws when it specifically allows it, and an employee of the state performing their job is not personally liable. IANAL.

Time to expand the DMCA?

Posted Apr 27, 2006 20:05 UTC (Thu) by emkey (guest, #144) [Link]

This is a pretty good example of why I get frustrated when people waste time jumping all over companies like linspire for not being pure enough. Linspire and those of us who don't mind using the occasional piece of commercial software with Linux are a very very small issue in comparison to the DMCA and related legislation. We should not let ourselves be distracted and fragmented when the real problems are so large and pervasive. And as this proposed legislation clearly shows, the problems are not going away. They are if anything getting worse.

Time to expand the DMCA?

Posted Apr 28, 2006 11:07 UTC (Fri) by droundy (subscriber, #4559) [Link]

(Note: I normally don't jump all over companies like linspire, but...)

It is the existence of companies like linspire and the attitude that supports them that could allow this sort of legislation to go through. Not that nonfree distributions currently have sufficient marketshare, but seriously, this legislation poses no threat to companies like linspire, and would give them a serious commercial advantage, since they'd be able to bundle internet radio players, dvd players, etc, while users of free distributions would at best be able to install illegal software that could lead to their computer and home being confiscated, should they wish to watch a legally purchased DVD. Thus it's the supporters of free software who have the strong motivation to oppose this sort of legislation, not those who are satisfied with a mix including proprietary software.