INDUCE Act is Free Speech Killer (Copyfight) [LWN.net]

Here's a Copyfight column on Orrin Hatch's "INDUCE" act, apparently about to be introduced into the U.S. Senate. INDUCE stands for, believe it or not, "Inducement Devolves into Unlawful Child Exploitation Act of 2004," but the intent of the law is to penalize any "inducement" to copyright infringement. As noted in the column, this is a rather large expansion of copyright law which would doubtless be used against those who develop tools which might be used for copyright infringement, or, conceivably, even those who are simply critical of current copyright law.

to post comments

INDUCE Act is Free Speech Killer (Copyfight)

Posted Jun 17, 2004 14:50 UTC (Thu) by ccchips (subscriber, #3222) [Link] (5 responses)

This from a guy who wants the FDA to keep its hands off Utah's lucrative "dietary supplement" business?

The guy is sick and greedy. What else can I say?

Orrin

Posted Jun 17, 2004 15:49 UTC (Thu) by ccyoung (guest, #16340) [Link] (3 responses)

but he's also very self-righteous.

in any case, it seem all of our [sic] representatives are falling over themselves to give big corporations big breaks - big contributions, seats on boards for friends, more of the same.

Orrin

Posted Jun 17, 2004 17:07 UTC (Thu) by ccchips (subscriber, #3222) [Link] (2 responses)

I'm starting to see this kind of thing as the decline and fall of American society. Corrupt leaders making kiss-up decisions which benefit their friends, to the tune of selling one right after another from the Bill of Rights.

We are being sold into slavery by our own leaders. How about that?

Orrin

Posted Jun 17, 2004 21:17 UTC (Thu) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

We are being sold into slavery by our own leaders. How about that?

Historically, this is by far the common case :(

Wag the Dog

Posted Jun 18, 2004 13:22 UTC (Fri) by penguinwarrior (guest, #20672) [Link]

read "wag the dog" as per george bush sr. and the gulf war, then re-read it as per george bush jr. and the gulf war 2 / 911 events and you can see how much ass/kiss-upping really goes on.

the first thing i thought of when those planes slammed into the twin towers was "what has george bush done......."

next thing you know the terrorist link has come full-turn back into saddam-ville.

corruption.

absolute power corrupts absolutely.

the cia killed jfk, and brought down the twin towers. george bush sr. headed the cia at one time.

INDUCE Act is Free Speech Killer (Copyfight)

Posted Jun 18, 2004 0:32 UTC (Fri) by jensend (guest, #1385) [Link]

He's not sick and greedy. He's senile. He served my state well for many years, but sometime in the past 3-5 years he went off his rocker (maybe about the time he really became a lyricist rather than a statesman). People can't bear to get rid of him, it seems- both because of his seniority advantages and the memory of better times gone by- but we really need to.

INDUCE Act is Free Speech Killer (Copyfight)

Posted Jun 17, 2004 15:40 UTC (Thu) by Felix.Braun (guest, #3032) [Link] (1 responses)

Wow! Recursive acronyms in the legislature. The geeks are taking over :-)

Ouch!

Posted Jun 17, 2004 21:12 UTC (Thu) by jre (guest, #2807) [Link]

I know you're kidding, but let's state three things for the record:

1) Geek sensibility rebels at the ugly, broken recursion resulting from the use of "inducement" for "induce."

2) Any self-respecting geek would be expected to assign enough brain cells to the task that the acronym would not need two initial letters from one word, while ignoring another.

3) Many geeks actually know the meaning of the word devolve.

INDUCE Act is Free Speech Killer (Copyfight)

Posted Jun 17, 2004 17:47 UTC (Thu) by Soruk (guest, #2722) [Link]

How long before they outlaw 'tar' and 'cp'?!

INDUCE Act is Free Speech Killer (Copyfight)

Posted Jun 17, 2004 18:33 UTC (Thu) by scripter (subscriber, #2654) [Link] (8 responses)

Unfortunately, Orrin Hatch is my senator. He's out of touch with the people he represents. He's been in office too long. He does have a lot of power to get things done, but often, they're not the right things.

Senator Hatch writes lyrics to music. He doesn't want anyone to make even one illegal copy -- never mind that a few copies here and there might get his works more exposure and actually increase his sales.

Once he asked if it were possible to destroy people's computer if they violate copyright. He's interested in absolute control of the consumer. He is not interested in fair use.

No, I don't vote for Hatch. I'm suprised anyone does.

INDUCE Act is Free Speech Killer (Copyfight)

Posted Jun 17, 2004 18:37 UTC (Thu) by ccchips (subscriber, #3222) [Link] (6 responses)

Well, we didn't actually *vote* for Bush, either. So how come he's the "President?"

I do not trust wealthy people to talk out of only one side of their mouths. It has been a long time since I had any respect for their use of American politics as their whore.

INDUCE Act is Free Speech Killer (Copyfight)

Posted Jun 18, 2004 16:14 UTC (Fri) by rogblake (guest, #18258) [Link] (5 responses)

Well, it's back to civics 101. The President is not elected by the popular vote, and for good reason. This is not supposed to be a Democracy (mob rule). It is supposed to be a Constitutional Republic with checks and balances against the rise of dictators as well against as the tyranny of the majority.

I don't trust anyone. "The wealthy" typically have their own agenda. (Sometimes it coincides with my own interests, sometimes it does not.) "The poor" want their hands in my pockets and everyone else's who has ten cents more than they do, via power-hungry politicians. I don't trust any of them any further than I could comfortably spit out a medium-sized rat.

INDUCE Act is Free Speech Killer (Copyfight)

Posted Jun 18, 2004 16:48 UTC (Fri) by Ross (guest, #4065) [Link] (4 responses)

Explain how the electoral college helps. To me it seems like a left-over
from times when counting all individual votes would be impractical. In most
states the college can't vote differently than the population so it only
adds quantization error. How is that a key part of being a republic?

INDUCE Act is Free Speech Killer (Copyfight)

Posted Jun 18, 2004 19:47 UTC (Fri) by Max.Hyre (subscriber, #1054) [Link] (3 responses)

Think of it as damage-control compartmentalization.

If you thought 2000's election was bad, just wait till the Electoral College is junked, and we have to have a recount of every vote cast in the nation.

It would be an act of profound stupidity to ditch the EC. I believe this even though I execrate George W. Bush, and wouldn't have to put up with him if the Presidency had been decided by popular vote.

A lesser advantage is the added leverage it gives to smaller states. It helps prevent ``the tyranny of the majority''.

INDUCE Act is Free Speech Killer (Copyfight)

Posted Jun 18, 2004 22:52 UTC (Fri) by rogblake (guest, #18258) [Link] (1 responses)

That "lesser advantage" was one of the primary reasons for the Electoral College. Without it, "flyover country" today would have little say in who is elected.

Another benefit is that it provides an additional hurdle before a truly despotic tyrant is elected. (If anyone believes George W. Bush fits this description, I suggest you speak with someone who has experienced *real* tyranny.) A far out example (which could of course never occur in the real world) might be if a leader arose to inflame the passions of the masses to the point where, say, they agreed to having all of the Jews shipped to camps around the country via cattle cars where they would not have to be seen again. The Electoral College could at least in theory block the election of such a person. (Of course there is no guarantee, it is simply another in what is supposed to be a long list of checks and balances against the rise of tyrants.)

IMHO direct election of Senators (the 17th Amendment) was a mistake. Senators were supposed to represent the interests of the member states of the Union, not be beholden to every gutter bum that can be rousted out to the polls.

INDUCE Act is Free Speech Killer (Copyfight)

Posted Jun 21, 2004 20:40 UTC (Mon) by Ross (guest, #4065) [Link]

But correct me if I'm wrong... I thought many (most?) states force the
electoral votes to be the same as the popular votes otherwise the
appointed voter would face criminal charges. In those states we are saying
that we will allow a different candidate to be voted for if they are
willing to break the law. That's a strange message.

Also, we don't vote for the electoral representatives but for the party
which selects them. So we really don't know who will be representing us.
That's a strange way for a republic to work.

INDUCE Act is Free Speech Killer (Copyfight)

Posted Jun 21, 2004 17:33 UTC (Mon) by Ross (guest, #4065) [Link]

Yes, the compartmentalization is a feature, but it isn't related to
avoiding "mob rule" which is what robblake was talking about. Also, we
don't really need representatives to vote for us to achieve the two
features you discuss.

Orrin

Posted Jun 17, 2004 21:36 UTC (Thu) by ccyoung (guest, #16340) [Link]

you're from Utah? wasn't he one of the leaders for term limits? btw, what ever happened to that phrase?

INDUCE Act is Free Speech Killer (Copyfight)

Posted Jun 17, 2004 21:59 UTC (Thu) by iabervon (subscriber, #722) [Link] (1 responses)

Doesn't the title of this bill imply that it promotes crime? I'm not clear what "inducement" is supposed to mean in context, but the obvious guess would be that it's whatever the INDUCE Act does.

INDUCE Act is Free Speech Killer (Copyfight)

Posted Jun 24, 2004 8:46 UTC (Thu) by ekj (guest, #1524) [Link]

kdict induce

     v 1: cause to arise; "induce a crisis" [syn: bring on]
     2: cause to do; cause to act in a specified manner; "The ads
        induced me to buy a VCR"; "My children finally got me to
        buy a computer"; "My wife made me buy a new sofa" [syn: stimulate,
         cause, have, get, make]
     3: cause to occur rapidly; "the infection precipitated a high
        fever and allergic reactions" [syn: stimulate, rush, hasten]
     4: reason or establish by induction
     5:  produce electric current by electrostatic or magnetic
        processes [syn: induct]

Stupid question time...

Posted Jun 18, 2004 13:23 UTC (Fri) by flewellyn (subscriber, #5047) [Link] (1 responses)

Just what in the blue peeping hellacious eyes of Samuel W. Scratch does the bill's text have to do
with unlawful child exploitation?

Did Hatch actually think that copyright infringement harms children? Or did he choose that name
just to use the "think of the children!" mantra to pull at the heartstrings of other senators?

I can hear him caterwauling about it if the bill gets voted down: "See? They don't care about
children!"

Stupid question time...

Posted Jul 28, 2004 10:40 UTC (Wed) by cross (guest, #13601) [Link]

> Just what in the blue peeping hellacious eyes of Samuel W. Scratch does
> the bill's text have to do with unlawful child exploitation?

His argument and intent (as best I understand it) boils down to it's not the RIAA's fault they sued a 12 year girl for copyright inringement (something they found embarrassing), and it's not her fault that she was running a major "pirate" music distribution service from her bedroom. In his world view those nasty P2P companies were to blame for "inducing" this child to commit this crime but under current law (post Sony / the Grokster case) they cannot be prosecuted for that.