Congress readies broad new digital copyright bill (News.com) [LWN.net]

Here's a News.com report on the latest attempt to expand copyright law in the U.S. "Jessica Litman, who teaches copyright law at Wayne State University, views the DMCA expansion as more than just a minor change. 'If Sony had decided to stand on its rights and either McAfee or Norton Antivirus had tried to remove the rootkit from my hard drive, we'd all be violating this expanded definition,' Litman said." The law would also bring civil forfeiture to copyright enforcement.

to post comments

Congress readies broad new digital copyright bill (News.com)

Posted Apr 24, 2006 16:28 UTC (Mon) by mightyduck (guest, #23760) [Link] (3 responses)

This is outright ridiculous. Now, if you're downloading a pirated movie
you're funding terrorism? I can tell you how you're funding terrorism, by
buying gas at the pump YOU'RE FUNDING TERRORISM! Not by downloading
movies.

Then?

Posted Apr 24, 2006 18:51 UTC (Mon) by man_ls (guest, #15091) [Link] (2 responses)

Right, so are you US citizens going to swallow this load of bullshit? My god, what do you need to start doing something?

Then?

Posted Apr 27, 2006 17:57 UTC (Thu) by grouch (guest, #27289) [Link] (1 responses)

Like what? Move? The same mega-corporations pulling the strings in the U.S. are working diligently to export their control of governments and citizens to other nations.

We're in a death spiral. The power to create laws has been sold to the highest bidders. The two-party system is a one-party system: those bidders. Regardless of who is voted for, the bidders in the background win. There are no "checks and balances" left because those checks and balances depend on the electorate controlling government, not corporate bidders. Our supreme court simply rubber-stamps our congress, which defers to lobbyists. Our executive branch caters to the high bidders, going so far as to violate our Constitution to spy on citizens without due process. Our "free" press is owned by the same bidders, so the electorate is informed only so far as the bidders want them to be.

I've been voting against whoever is in office for years, just to limit the damage they can do. The only way that can work is for enough voters to get fed up with enough harm and corruption that they repeatedly vote the bastards out, election after election, until finally some get the message that they're temp workers and not working for [x], Inc. The only hope I see of that happening is when we're near a complete collapse of the system, or when all jails are overfilled with people who just hummed a tune without paying the RIAA's pound of flesh.

The little militia groups and survivalist cults are wrong: It's not armed revolution that we face. Eisenhower had the right warnings, even if he saw the influence coming from a different direction:

"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist."
[...]
"The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded."
-- Dwight D. Eisenhower, Military-Industrial Complex Speech, 1961.

Then do something

Posted Apr 27, 2006 22:29 UTC (Thu) by man_ls (guest, #15091) [Link]

Come on, don't dispair so fast. People in worse conditions than you are have faced much worse situations, and they have won. India against England, the people vs Ceaucescu...

I don't know the particularities of your democratic process as well as I should, so it's difficult to help with the specifics; but just saying "we have been sold; we can only vote them out regularly to see if they get the message" is probably not enough.

We might compare it with our situation in Europe. We fought software patents, we did what we could (thousands of websites campaigning, of people writing their representatives, of companies testifying), we convinced the Parliament, and we won. Not a complete victory, and we will have to keep watching; but we won.

So your efforts will not be in vain; something can be done. Keep telling the truth, sometimes people will hear it; in the end you will win. If you need to put a geek in the White House, or at least as governor in some State, try it. But do something, organize and fight. If they make you believe in invisible powers and invincible conspirations, and have you trust forces of Nature like "the free market", you have lost.

Congress readies broad new digital copyright bill (News.com)

Posted Apr 24, 2006 16:43 UTC (Mon) by malefic (subscriber, #37306) [Link]

They are saying that it's a 'battle against terrorism', while it's a battle against OUR RIGHTS. Every unpopular gov trick lobbied by corporations is now explained as a new achievment in battling mysterious enemies.

Congress readies broad new digital copyright bill (News.com)

Posted Apr 24, 2006 17:13 UTC (Mon) by Thalience (subscriber, #4217) [Link] (1 responses)

The idea of allowing civil forfeiture to be used in cases of copyright infringment is very scary. With civil forfeiture, the normal due process protections for the accused are missing. The burden of proof is on the accused to defend their property, but at the same time (because it is not a ciminal trial) the accused has no right to a public defender if they are poor (which they usually are after their house, car and bank account have all been taken).

One would think it is obvious that allowing law enforcement agencies to take a person's property and sell it for their own profit without charging that person with any crime would be an obvious invitation for massive police corruption. Indeed, this is exactly what we have seen with the use of civil fofeiture in the drug war. The power of forfeiture is not used to snatch the resources of the "kingpin", but rather those of average americans whos involvemnt with drugs is often minor or even nonexistant. Many police departments and special task forces now get a large portion (or even all) of their budget through forfeiture revenues. This makes it incubent upon them to continue to take property, even if there are no real criminals to take it from.

The F.E.A.R website has more information about forfeiture and its current application.

Congress readies broad new digital copyright bill (News.com)

Posted Apr 24, 2006 17:22 UTC (Mon) by smitty_one_each (subscriber, #28989) [Link]

Nead a non-Demmican/Republocrat politician to make an election issue of this.