backtop

Print 25 comment(s) - last by johnsmith9875.. on Oct 27 at 1:00 PM
If passed this could spell trouble for YouTube

Most people that use the internet will agree that the amount of trademark infringement on the web is massive and the amount of pirated software, games, and other content continually grows. For a long time, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) has protected websites like Google and YouTube from any prosecution by copyright holders due to content posted by users.
 
The DMCA appears to be in danger with a new bill that two members of the U.S. House of Representatives plan to push soon. The bill is a new version of a Senate bill called the PROTECT IP Act that was approved by the Senate in May of this year. By all accounts, the House version of the PROTECT IP Act is more stringent and more harmful to the internet than the Senate version.
 
The House version of the PROTECT IP bill is seeking to add new legal liabilities for websites and online services that host user-generated content. That means that the bill would make sites like YouTube liable to copyright holders if someone posts their copyrighted content to the site even if the host of the content doesn't know it's there. The details on the House bill comes from a liberal civil liberties group called Demand Progress that is opposing the bill.
 
The Senate version of the bill already allows the DOJ to seek court orders that would force search engines like Google and ISPs to stop sending traffic to websites that are accused of copyright infringement. The same bill would also allow the copyright holder to seek a court order requiring credit card and payment processing firms and advertising networks to stop working with sites accused of infringement.
 
Assuming Demand Progress is accurate with what the House bill is requesting, it would overturn parts of the DMCA that have protected YouTube and Google in the past from suits by copyright holders. The House bill is being sponsored by Representatives Bob Goodlatte, a Virginia Republican, and Lamar Smith, a Texas Republican, and will be introduced this week.
 
Demand Progress' David Segal said, "We ask even those lawmakers who are leaning towards supporting it to hold back for now, decline cosponsorship, and listen to opponents' concerns. The Senate version of PROTECT IP will stifle free speech and innovation -- and all indications are that the House version will be even worse."

Source: TechWorld


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
I'm just sick of this crap...
By MrBlastman on 10/26/2011 12:05:25 PM , Rating: 3
When will people wake up and realize what these imbeciles are trying to do to us in our Government? When will they start caring? When will they stop the madness? When will they...

Stop voting PARTISAN!

Until then, hooligans such as these will continue to try and trample us into the dirt.

Now, to be fair... I do believe that IP holders have rights and they should be respected. However, it is impossible for a site such as Youtube to police every single submission and remain profitable. It can't happen. They'll be shut down and put out of business which is a shame because I enjoy the mishmosh of content available on there.

Why not just keep it how it is? Are measures like this really necessary? Oh, sorry, let me rephrase that. Are measures that make the RIAA and MPAA more profitable due to their laziness, such as these, needed?




RE: I'm just sick of this crap...
By Invane on 10/26/2011 12:35:19 PM , Rating: 3
No, they're not needed. But with corporations paying off the government they get what they want.

I absolutely agree with not voting partisan. I think both parties are the same damn car with different coats of paint. However, I don't believe this problem can ever be voted out of.

Big media controls what the vast majority of the American public sees. They are well versed in manipulating this majority. The corporations control/are big media. There's no way for someone who opposes them to get the publicity they need to be elected. Not only that, but they certainly won't be publicized in a fair manner.

The result? The American public will continue to elect people in the corporations' pockets. Some politicians might be sacrificed along the way for general goodwill from the public, but the next guy in line is the same with a newer whiter smile.

It's disgusting.


By superunknown98 on 10/26/2011 1:27:30 PM , Rating: 2
Very true. The problem isn't so much who we elect. They all take money from big corporate. We need to figure out how to stop lobbying and payola.


RE: I'm just sick of this crap...
By wiz220 on 10/26/2011 3:31:13 PM , Rating: 2
Ok, only one solution then. Public campaign financing, no outside money at all. I like the idea, but, good luck getting it through.


RE: I'm just sick of this crap...
By Piiman on 10/26/2011 5:40:39 PM , Rating: 3
And if you don't think the media is trying pick who we vote for just look at how they don't mention Ron Paul's names even when he wins.


RE: I'm just sick of this crap...
By FITCamaro on 10/26/2011 6:07:42 PM , Rating: 2
I agree that too much of voting down the line Republican or Democrat is largely the problem. Too many people vote for a candidate without looking at what they stand for and have done.

This won't change though until people get more involved with the primary process and voting in general. There is nothing wrong with having two parties. The problem is that people don't vote in the primary process for the candidate they DO like. So that person usually doesn't make it to the race.

House seats are the most direct line to the people there is. They're re-elected every two years. So if someone doesn't do what their constituents want, they're easily replaced. Much like those in state governments. And many times the election is decided by a few hundred votes.


RE: I'm just sick of this crap...
By HrilL on 10/26/2011 7:53:58 PM , Rating: 4
That's why everyone that believes in liberty should vote for Ron Paul. Restore America NOW!


RE: I'm just sick of this crap...
By gorehound on 10/27/2011 10:16:44 AM , Rating: 2
I doubt that I vote for asny Democrats or Republicans this year.I think 2012 is the year we should march on Washington by the Millions and force these pricks to do what is right.They are stealing from our lives with their arguing and taking money behind closed doors.bunch of lying hypocrites is who we keep voting in.
you want to change the system then we need to vote in those who will and vote out all these old greedy schmucks.


Data Move
By IceUpHere012 on 10/26/2011 12:00:22 PM , Rating: 2
How would this stop people like isohunt.com to moving their servers up to Canada and continuing their business?




RE: Data Move
By Iaiken on 10/26/2011 12:05:50 PM , Rating: 2
Won't matter for them, but it will matter for companies like Google and Facebook. The day this set of laws is instated, I guarantee you see companies set up whose job is to brick their windows.

They'll say "Hey Viacom old buddy, for a small fee, we'll upload some of your programming to Youtube so you can sue Google."

Rinse and repeat.


RE: Data Move
By superunknown98 on 10/26/2011 1:25:08 PM , Rating: 2
I agree, Maybe google/youtube should just move their servers now before they get sued. Or even better they can threaten to move their entire operation to Canada and see how fast the politicians whine about job loss.


RE: Data Move
By zmatt on 10/26/2011 2:46:57 PM , Rating: 2
You know what a logistical nightmare that would be? Google's servers take up a huge complex and consist of hundreds if not a few thousand computers in a cluster at this point. You just don't "move" that.

It's obvious that groups like the RIAA and MPAA are using unethical lobbying to get this in, maybe Google should start using its mass of data to unethically lobby congress to stfu. I'm sure it has dirty on all of them with their Google accounts. If they don't already have the ability, I suspect it wont be long until Google is so powerful it can hold parts of the government hostage through either information it has or through service outages.


RE: Data Move
By wiz220 on 10/26/2011 3:29:25 PM , Rating: 2
I was under the impression that Google already had datacenters all over the globe, not just in the U.S. Wouldn't that mean that moving operations out of the US only would be a bit simpler and less disruptive?


RE: Data Move
By jimbojimbo on 10/26/2011 5:43:01 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
maybe Google should start using its mass of data to unethically lobby congress to stfu
Really any lobbying, or basically bribing the politicians, should be BANNED out right! It's lawful bribing and that's it. There's absolutely no justification to it whatsoever.

It should be treated like insider trading. If you accept money from organization A and then you vote for a law that benefits organization A you've committed an illegal act. Both parties go to jail. THAT should be the way things go.


RE: Data Move
By JediJeb on 10/26/2011 5:59:55 PM , Rating: 2
I like this idea. There is nothing there to stop a group from voicing their opinion but works to take the money out of the equation. You could add in a prohibition of employment for a former government official by any group that benefited from any legislation they voted on. That would be in line with the non-compete clauses most companies make you sign where you can not leave and work for a competitor for a certain amount of time.


RE: Data Move
By shabby on 10/26/2011 7:13:14 PM , Rating: 2
You'll need a revolution for that to happen, for the time being it'll just keep getting worse and worse. The occupy movement is a small needle prick to the system, but its a start.


Accusation of guilt
By Invane on 10/26/2011 12:27:32 PM , Rating: 5
If this writeup is correct, actions will be required to be taken against sites ACCUSED of infringement. The ability of big media to bypass our judicial system and enforce whatever the hell they feel like on whomever they feel like enforcing it on is going far past ridiculous. Oh, and they're making us taxpayers pay for their own police force. Nice.

It would seem that this kind of bill would violate due process and sixth amendment rights of the accused. Just our rights eroding away a little more. Nothing to see here.




RE: Accusation of guilt
By tastyratz on 10/26/2011 2:53:21 PM , Rating: 2
You speak the truth here,
but what surprises me is that the article was posted quoting Davig Segal BUT does not link to the PETITION on change dot org??
Why not DO SOMETHING about it instead of only bitching on dialytech?
http://act.demandprogress.org/sign/pipa_house/?sou...


RE: Accusation of guilt
By JediJeb on 10/26/2011 6:03:36 PM , Rating: 2
"Animal Farm" becomes more and more a true story.


Bill only pertains to FOREIGN domains
By GeorgeOu on 10/26/2011 5:27:38 PM , Rating: 2
Bill only pertains to FOREIGN domains that are selling counterfeit goods. You need to at least get the basic facts right before claiming that this would affect YouTube.




RE: Bill only pertains to FOREIGN domains
By Piiman on 10/26/2011 5:44:39 PM , Rating: 2
Where does it say that? And I don't care even if it does. Making a company like Google stop directing traffic to them just because someone as accused them of something is crazy.


By GeorgeOu on 10/26/2011 6:18:05 PM , Rating: 2
Both the house bill and senate bill specify *foreign* multiple times, and it's only after efforts to reach the foreign domains fail and after the courts make a ruling. All you need to do is do an in-document search for the string "foreign" and it will pop up many times.

In the domain seizure cases from a year ago, the domains were seized after the owners refused to respond. That's understandable given the business they were in.


By jimbojimbo on 10/26/2011 5:45:01 PM , Rating: 2
Let's convict the politicians with their own stupid laws.




Corporate agenda censorship
By 9t9percenter on 10/27/2011 12:37:52 PM , Rating: 2
One more reason why the Occupy resistance movement is important, coming soon to a city near you, taking back the megaphone and the message, ultimately returning the power of the Constitution to the majority. Compendium site, find support an occupy near you, start one yourself....

occupytogether.org




By johnsmith9875 on 10/27/2011 1:00:26 PM , Rating: 2
Nobody can look at you, speak to you, or take your picture unless they pay a communications or imaging royalty.
Charge for EVERYTHING. If the news wants to interview you, demand a payment.
If the car dealer wants to negotiate, demand a negotiation fee.

If your mortgage company calls you, demand an oral communications fee.




"If you can find a PS3 anywhere in North America that's been on shelves for more than five minutes, I'll give you 1,200 bucks for it." -- SCEA President Jack Tretton











botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki