backtop


Print 152 comment(s) - last by monkeyman1140.. on May 30 at 12:00 PM

The empire strikes back; the U.S. government's holds secret plans to kill nonprofit torrent sites and increase user monitoring

The long running saga of litigation against The Pirate Bay has been well publicized and discussed depth at DailyTech. The Pirate Bay was slapped with conspiracy charges by the government of Sweden early this year, at the urging of the IFPI, the parent organization of the RIAA.  Under attack by IFPI lawyers and Swedish authorities, the sardonic pirate bay chaps told the IFPI lawyers to "screw themselves" and countersued for compensation for lost traffic.

Now Wikileaks has obtained a leaked copy of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), a shadowy bill that has been being discussed in Congress behind closed doors.  The new multi-lateral intellectual property measure is being pushed by Republican U.S. Trade Representative Susan C. Schwab, who designed much of it.  The ACTA bill is apparently supported by the U.S., the European Commission (well known for its recent fining of Microsoft), Japan, and Switzerland.

The third page, paragraph one contains a clause which is becoming known as the "Pirate Bay-killer".  It would criminalize non-profit facilitation of copyrighted information exchange on the internet.  The Pirate Bay is the largest of several torrent sites that operate on a nonprofit basis and do not provide copyright materials, but provide means to find them.  Critics argue that this is as bad as direct copyright infringement, but advocates point out The Pirate Bay also is used to find legitimate files and that similar accusations could be leveled against Google or virtually any search engine.

The new bill would place the internet under the firm grasp of international law authorities and industry officials.  ISPs operating within the U.S. and the involved nations would be forced to fully disclose consumer information.  Meanwhile, use of internet privacy tools would be greatly restricted and made illegal in many cases.

The plan details additional plans to expand the bills scope into developing nations, convincing them to join.

IP Justice, an international group directed from San Francisco group that fights for a just world intellectual property regime, is among the groups fighting the new measure.  They released a statement saying:

In 2007 a select handful of the wealthiest countries began a treaty-making process to create a new global standard for intellectual property rights enforcement, the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). ACTA is spearheaded by the United States, the European Commission, Japan, and Switzerland — those countries with the largest intellectual property industries. Other countries invited to participate in ACTA’s negotiation process are Canada, Australia, Korea, Mexico and New Zealand. Noticeably absent from ACTA’s negotiations are leaders from developing countries who hold national policy priorities that differ from the international intellectual property industry.

After the multi-lateral treaty’s scope and priorities are negotiated by the few countries invited to participate in the early discussions, ACTA’s text will be “locked” and other countries who are later “invited” to sign-on to the pact will not be able to re-negotiate its terms. It is claimed that signing-on to the trade agreement will be "voluntary", but few countries will have the muscle to refuse an “invitation” to join, once the rules have been set by the select few conducting the negotiations.

The US is negotiating ACTA through the Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR), an office within the Bush Administration that has concluded more than 10 “free trade” agreements in recent years, all of which require both the US and the other country to increase intellectual property rights enforcement measures beyond the international legal norms in the WTO-TRIPS Agreement.

As of 25 March 2008, no draft text has been published yet to provide the public with substance of the proposed international treaty. A “Discussion Paper on a Possible Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement” was reportedly provided to select lobbyists in the intellectual property industry, but not to public interest organizations concerned with the subject matter of the proposed treaty.

The ACTA push was launched October 23, 2007.  Among its other supporters in Congress, based on Congressional documents are Rep. Mary Bono (R-CA), Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA), Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), Rep. Howard Berman (D-CA), Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA).

It appears the U.S. government and other member parties plan to push forward a finalized version of the agreement in July 2008 at the G-8 summit.  Clearly this is one of the most significant develops in online law and legislation in recent history.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

I sense a disturbance in the force...
By killerroach on 5/23/2008 12:24:31 PM , Rating: 5
Critics argue that this is as bad as direct copyright infringement, but advocates point out The Pirate Bay also is used to find legitimate files and that similar accusations could be leveled against Google or virtually any search engine.

We all know it won't actually be taken literally, but the thought of the FBI raiding Google is too amusing to pass up. This provision is a "Pirate Bay killer" and nothing else, sadly.

Welcome to the brave new world of selective enforcement.




RE: I sense a disturbance in the force...
By JasonMick (blog) on 5/23/2008 12:32:49 PM , Rating: 5
If I was a Google employee and the FBI was raiding us I'd grab the important documents and go hide in the maze with the little colored balls. They'd never find you there, underneath all those little balls! Google FTW!


By Bender 123 on 5/23/2008 12:44:46 PM , Rating: 5
Only if after they are caught, the Google Employee says:
"Dantooine...the copyrighted files are on Dantooine..."


By Apocobring on 5/23/2008 12:48:28 PM , Rating: 3
Oh no, they are catching up to me! Quickly, take the circular slide down to the first floor!


RE: I sense a disturbance in the force...
By Samus on 5/23/08, Rating: -1
By ImSpartacus on 5/23/2008 4:28:23 PM , Rating: 5
Hiding in those multicolored balls is not wrong. It's about as right as you can get.


By walk2k on 5/24/2008 3:34:32 PM , Rating: 1
Don't you know, it's ok to steal as long as you are stealing from "greedy mega corporations".


RE: I sense a disturbance in the force...
By JAB on 5/25/2008 6:11:50 AM , Rating: 5
Actualy it is illegal to hold congressonal sessons behind closed doors unless it is on matters of natonal security like impeachment or war.
There are countless laws that support this. This is even more important when it involves limiting freedom of speech in any form. Controlling communication and monitoring everyone is not in the intrests of free speech.
I dont think trying to stopp someone downloading a Sympsons re-run counts as natonal security threat. No the Pirate Bay is not ethical but dont cut off your hand because of a hangnail. It is inconvinent but you really sould remain within the law when fighting illegal activities.

Any time congress or the white house feels the need to do things in private should be a big sign that it is not right. When you are doing somthing good you tell the world.


By phxfreddy on 5/26/2008 7:36:26 PM , Rating: 4
Blaming a search engine, in this case pirate bay, for what they index is like blaming Ceybords four schpelling erors


By Pythias on 5/27/2008 12:14:13 PM , Rating: 2
I'm sure you spend a lot of time under someone else's balls.


By SandmanWN on 5/23/2008 12:50:59 PM , Rating: 2
TPB was just an example. The global recognition of IP has been going on since well before the time of TPB. Its just sensationalist wording used to garner immediate support from a very vocal group of people.


RE: I sense a disturbance in the force...
By oab on 5/23/2008 1:06:44 PM , Rating: 5
If you're Canadian, you can write a letter to[no stamp required]:

Industry Minister Jim Prentice
Prime Minister Stephen Harper

House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0A6

Express your displeasure, threaten to vote NDP/Liberal/Bloc next election, use logic (this would kill Google, TPB has international redundant backups of all their servers outside of Sweeden so this wouldn't work, that you don't want to whore the country out to NBC, etc.) Oh, and put your REAL name/address on it, that way you will get a nice form letter back!


RE: I sense a disturbance in the force...
By mmntech on 5/23/2008 1:38:18 PM , Rating: 5
It's definitely time people got outraged by how copyright is being used as an excuse for governments and corportations to further invade your privacy. This is the guilty before proven innocent approach. I'll definitely try and write in if I get some time.


By P4blo on 5/27/2008 6:46:22 AM , Rating: 2
+1 and a gold star to you sir. Exactly the same with Terrorism.


RE: I sense a disturbance in the force...
By onwisconsin on 5/23/2008 2:52:14 PM , Rating: 3
Or you could send some Internet money


RE: I sense a disturbance in the force...
By Bender 123 on 5/23/2008 3:23:19 PM , Rating: 2
It's time for some Chocolate Pain.


RE: I sense a disturbance in the force...
By DASQ on 5/23/2008 4:47:59 PM , Rating: 2
It's called Cherry Chocolate Dr. Pepper.

That stuff is disgusting.


RE: I sense a disturbance in the force...
By jconan on 5/24/2008 4:29:59 AM , Rating: 2
But with the RIAA and MPAA brainwashing people that they do not have legal rights and threatening people with frightening ads people will believe them like Hitler did in Germany. What happened to real issues that need to be dealt with like the environment and giving people real jobs instead of outsourcing? That's more important than ACTA. Until people speak out and get their representatives to do on their behalf instead of special interest groups everyone will be steamrolled by these special interest groups with unfair and biased legislation with no protection for people paid material whether material or intangible.


RE: I sense a disturbance in the force...
By djkrypplephite on 5/24/2008 7:00:38 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not your buddy, guy.


RE: I sense a disturbance in the force...
By jtemplin on 5/25/2008 10:38:01 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not your guy, friend.


RE: I sense a disturbance in the force...
By stryfe on 5/26/2008 5:35:19 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not your friend, buddy!


By xphile on 5/27/2008 6:22:08 AM , Rating: 5
Look, just because one guy has no buddies, his friend doesn't want to be a guy, and his buddy isn't looking to make new friends; doesn't mean we have to fight about it right? I mean after all, we're all pals here.


RE: I sense a disturbance in the force...
By NEOCortex on 5/23/08, Rating: 0
RE: I sense a disturbance in the force...
By Crank the Planet on 5/23/2008 4:56:09 PM , Rating: 5
Why are these guys still trying to go after the folks who are d'loading??? Why aren't they focusing their efforts on the people who put this on the net? Because I tell you- and everyone out there will agree- once it's on the net that's it. You would be an idiot of elephantine proportions if you thought otherwise ( I like that paraphrase from ratatouille ;).

The solution? Go after the ones who are making copyrighted material available. That should be the focus. These other sites that "distribute" should be next, but if the site merely tells you where to find it then they haven't done anything illegal. Otherwise you will have to arrest all of the gas station folks that give out directions, you'd have to close down every search engine, and as a matter of fact having a Table of Contents in a source is criminal! If you follow that line of thinking where will it take you? You can't arrest people for giving directions.

These people are focusing on the wrong end of the cat ;p


RE: I sense a disturbance in the force...
By imperator3733 on 5/23/2008 5:26:46 PM , Rating: 2
What you said makes absolutely perfect sense. The people who download copyrighted material do not deserve anywhere near the amount of blame that the people that made it available are to blame.

The order of blame should be:
Distributors --> Mirrors --> Downloaders


RE: I sense a disturbance in the force...
By wordsworm on 5/24/2008 7:44:13 AM , Rating: 3
If people didn't make copyrighted content, there'd be nothing to fight over. So, really, the blame should be:

artists --> Distributors --> Mirrors --> Downloaders


By ebakke on 5/24/2008 12:48:34 PM , Rating: 1
And there'd be much less to listen to, watch, play, install, etc.


By rhuarch on 5/28/2008 6:01:55 PM , Rating: 2
I think it's time we stop referring to them as artists. Artists would be more interested in creating art for it's own sake. What we are seeing today are people "crafting" a "product" in order to make lots of money. Maybe we should make a point of only referring to people who distribute their creations outside the typical IP infrastructure as artists I.E. Radiohead, Trent Reznor, Cory Doctorow (look him up). I say let the government protect copyrights as zealously as they want and then reward real artists for publishing outside the system the government is so hellbent on using to stifle our freedoms.


By murphyslabrat on 5/23/2008 5:38:14 PM , Rating: 2
Oh, excellent idea! You get to find them, though.


By elpresidente2075 on 5/23/2008 7:41:18 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Why aren't they focusing their efforts on the people who put this on the net?


That is exactly what they are trying to do. They see TPB as the person who is putting it on the net. What the efforts would be focused at is the people who are uploading to TPB and their trackers.

Unfortunately, due to the nature of bittorrent (not well understood by most government officials) EVERYONE is an uploader, and so everyone is a target of this bill.

Welcome to the new millennium...


RE: I sense a disturbance in the force...
By Noya on 5/23/2008 8:04:21 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Why aren't they focusing their efforts on the people who put this on the net?


Because those are the people that are tough to find. I'm not talking TPB, Mininova, etc. I'm talking about the "scene" release groups that use Usenet and hack and crack and what not. I read an article on how it supposedly works, and BitTorrent users are the last to get the material.


By plonk420 on 5/24/2008 10:27:10 PM , Rating: 2
uhm, no scene groups release to Usenet. Usenet is so bad that even most official releases are re-RARed, making CRC checking impossible.


By Noya on 5/23/2008 8:08:41 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Why aren't they focusing their efforts on the people who put this on the net?


Because those are the people that are tough to find. I'm not talking TPB, Mininova, etc. I'm talking about the "scene" release groups that use Usenet and hack and crack and what not. I read an article on how it supposedly works, and BitTorrent users are the last to get the material.


By walk2k on 5/24/2008 11:53:04 AM , Rating: 2
With p2p the people downloading are usually also uploading.


By Spuke on 5/23/2008 6:38:24 PM , Rating: 2
The only purpose of this agreement is the placate the IP holders. In all reality, it will stop no one.


By Omega215D on 5/23/2008 4:50:39 PM , Rating: 2
quick we've gotta deliver the plans to the Rebellion so they can find the exhaust port on the empires technological terror.


RE: I sense a disturbance in the force...
By Cygni on 5/23/2008 6:25:42 PM , Rating: 2
This bill wont do a damn thing to Pirate Bay, unless its passed in Sweden.


RE: I sense a disturbance in the force...
By Imperor on 5/25/2008 12:05:58 PM , Rating: 2
Eh, Sweden is part of the EU and if the European Commission is behind it that means the EU is in, including Sweden.

Sweden used to be a voice for the downtrodden and for liberty in general, but now we're turning into some facist state since we got a right wing government! (The party that used to call themselves "Liberals" are acctually the worst...) The people behind this bill certainly know this and will want to pass it before Swedens next election in 2010 when we'll get a Social-democrat government again! (The right has NEVER had two consecutive terms in Sweden!)


By Pjotr on 5/26/2008 4:20:33 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The right has NEVER had two consecutive terms in Sweden!


How old are you? 1976-1982 was two terms of right wing administration in Sweden. Also in the early 1900s there were lots. In the longest run from 1900 to 1920, even though governments were somewhat mixed, the Prime Minister was right wing during those decades.


By fabarati on 5/26/2008 4:49:37 PM , Rating: 2
Don't kid yourself. This is would've happened even if the social democrats had been at the power. S are not the socialists they once were, especially when Göran had power. In fact, many things now coming up had S behind it, either as originator or supporter.

However, this is not about that. This is EU politics, and there is considerable pressure from the european commission about Swedish IP laws (still) being to lax and whatnot.

The demand for decriminalisation of private downloading goes across the political blocks. M and S don't have an official standing in this question.

I do agree about FP though. Good thing that C is turnin into a nice, liberal party, so I have something to vote for next election.


RE: I sense a disturbance in the force...
By walk2k on 5/23/08, Rating: 0
By imperator3733 on 5/23/2008 6:48:16 PM , Rating: 2
Should they still be accountable for this law when the law is meant to take away people's privacy?


By V4d1m on 5/23/2008 10:41:01 PM , Rating: 2
oh no the nazi regime all over again nooooo


RE: I sense a disturbance in the force...
By slickr on 5/24/2008 12:50:14 AM , Rating: 2
WTF, why don't they shut down google, that how i find and download torrents!
Hey all i download torrents and all music, movies, games, episodes, etc... illigaly through google!


By sporr on 5/24/2008 8:47:56 AM , Rating: 2
Google finds those torrents for you because the torrent files are hosted on torrent web sites...

If such torrent web sites did not exist in the first place then... I hope you get the picture.


RE: I sense a disturbance in the force...
By sporr on 5/24/2008 8:16:22 AM , Rating: 3
Yea, google aswell as other large companies earn the US gvmnt a nice wage through taxes.

The Pirate Bay do not. :(


By Imperor on 5/25/2008 12:20:57 PM , Rating: 2
No, the Pirate Bay pays taxes to the Swedish government on the Ad-revenue they collect. Which adds up to quite a bit!

Non profit... hmmm... not entirely true although they don't charge people for downloading, they just get paid by other companies who in turn finance the whole operation so isn't it really the financiers who are the guilty ones?

I don't have a clue who advertises on TPB since I use adblock in firefox and never see a single ad on the net...


By phxfreddy on 5/26/2008 12:41:58 PM , Rating: 2
You think selective enforcement began with this?????.....Listen...any time you have more laws than any single human can know the ONLY reason it can be is for selective enforcement. Why? Because no one knows all the laws then Johnny-Law can raid when / where he likes and leave anyone he wants alone because not a soul knows who is breaking the law. But in reality we all are because there are so many its not possible not to!....

Thus selective enforcement began a very very long time ago. You only are now waking up to it!


Chuckle...
By masher2 (blog) on 5/23/08, Rating: 0
RE: Chuckle...
By oab on 5/23/2008 1:04:19 PM , Rating: 2
What about "torrent search engines" like ISOhunt? It's not THEIR fault the vast majority of torrents are for copyright protected material is it? Their spider just crawls all the torrent sites.

Then again, they moved their servers to Canada to get out from under the DMCA ..... they claim that wasn't the reason but ...


RE: Chuckle...
By masher2 (blog) on 5/23/2008 1:19:23 PM , Rating: 1
> " It's not THEIR fault the vast majority of torrents are for copyright protected material is it?"

The sooner people start admitting there's a real problem here, the sooner we can start work on *real* solutions. Stonewalling every proposal that comes down the pike really isn't that helpful.

Stick your heads in the sand forever, and the result is laws like the one above, which may not do much to solve the actual problem, and also carry draconian anti-privacy measures that will do no one any good.


RE: Chuckle...
By DASQ on 5/23/2008 2:36:18 PM , Rating: 5
Admitting there is a problem ISN'T the issue. The RIAA implants it into the public quite well.

How do you properly define the difference between 'knowing' where to get the files, and actually HAVING the said file? Do you arrest people for knowing the URL's of torrent sites?

What DO you suggest is the solution, masher?


RE: Chuckle...
By eyebeeemmpawn on 5/23/2008 2:40:21 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
The sooner people start admitting there's a real problem here, the sooner we can start work on *real* solutions.


what's the *real* problem? Media owners are getting slightly degraded profit margins? Does that justify throwing privacy principles on which our nation was founded out the window?

Shoplifting happens in retail stores, yet there isn't an FBI search team inspecting everyone leaving each store.

I'm fine with people being paid for their work, but business needs do not trump our country's ideals.

quote:
Stick your heads in the sand forever, and the result is laws like the one above, which may not do much to solve the actual problem, and also carry draconian anti-privacy measures that will do no one any good.


If you set the price of your goods too high, and then bury your head in the sand, piracy is what happens. Companies love the free market when prices are driven up, but when they try to drive prices up artificially and the market won't bear it they just blame piracy.


RE: Chuckle...
By TheDoc9 on 5/23/2008 3:12:26 PM , Rating: 3
I know, I wonder what this bill covers? TV shows, movies, software? I know that anyone can go online right now and get a fantastic copy of there favorite tv show online that they may have missed without limitations. Where as the next closest competitor is itunes or amazon, both of which have poorer quality lower res versions with drm so you can't view them on anything but your pc or special box. AND you pay $3.00 or more for each ep. Sounds like a difficult choice...

This is where passing a law that benefits only the very rich .001% minority of the population comes into play and everyone involved gets paid.


RE: Chuckle...
By Emily on 5/23/2008 4:38:59 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Shoplifting happens in retail stores, yet there isn't an FBI search team inspecting everyone leaving each store.

Shoplifting is also less common, presumably because it carries more risks. If the odds of getting caught and prosecuted is even as high as 10%, I suspect that the amount of illegal download would drop by more than 10%. As it is most people view this as an almost 'risk-free' activity.

quote:
If you set the price of your goods too high, and then bury your head in the sand, piracy is what happens.

I will probably get downrated for saying this, but I think that a lot of pirates are simply cheap. Many will go for the lowest cost assuming there are little risks. Pirated goods, by their very nature, will be always be cheaper than the original goods, since there is no development cost involved. Furthermore, piracy the cost ($, time, cost) of piracy has dropped. Duplicating floppy disks, while by no mean a difficult task, took more time/effort/cost than P2P today.

Products like music and games, haven't really increased in price in line with inflation. Development costs most likely haven't decreased. Technology might have made certain aspect of development easier, distribution cheaper etc., but as a whole, modern games take longer to develop than it used to, require a bigger team than it used to, and in the case of PC games, without a significant increase in price tag from 10 years ago. Yet piracy most likely has not decreased.


RE: Chuckle...
By jeff834 on 5/23/2008 6:34:33 PM , Rating: 2
Just a little comment on the prices of music. While it's true that game prices haven't really increased (most games used to be $50 now new games are typically $60, not a huge jump in a 20 year period), pre-mp3 music prices increased enormously in the 90s (new album prices went from less than $10 to over $20). As a matter of fact piracy has had a nice impact on the price of music. The RIAA would have you believe that rampant piracy raises the price of goods for the average consumer, and yet after 99/2000 when the napster explosion happened the prices of CDs dropped from around $20 to around $10-$15. What does that say to you? To me it says prices were artificially above what the demand dictated they should have been. Wonder why that was...


RE: Chuckle...
By Digimonkey on 5/25/2008 12:45:59 AM , Rating: 2
I wouldn't say it's just about the risk, although no doubt that can be attributed, but I think it's a bigger problem because most people don't see anything wrong with illegally downloading copyrighted material.

Illegally downloading copyrighted material and stealing media off store shelves is really not the same thing. That's just something studios want you to believe. Stealing off store shelves makes that store loose money. If you download something illegally that you never intended to buy, the artist/studio didn't actually loose money because of your actions.

Don't get me wrong. I pay for the music, games, and movies that I have. I believe everyone should be morally obligated to pay the price that is asked for the IP. If you don't want to pay, don't play/listen/watch it. I also agree with your second statement, and I'm against piracy. Especially when pirates make money off of someone else's work.


RE: Chuckle...
By crimson117 on 5/23/2008 2:58:47 PM , Rating: 3
masher, you're assuming that freely trading electronic versions of works of art is actually a problem.

"Copyright" as a concept is a relatively recent invention, and when it was reconsidered in terms of the nascent digital age we got the DMCA (which only industry execs and metallica seem to like).

If we the people vote to give more power to the Copyright concept, then it has more power. If we the people vote to take power away from it, then it has less power.

All these "proposals" you speak of involve maintaining or increasing Copyright's strength, so yes I hope every such proposal is stonewalled. I would only consider a proposal that involves REDUCING Copyright's power, such as extending fair-use rights, and limiting Copyright term length.

You might claim that that would harm the music industry. I argue it would instead transform it from a recording-based industry to a performance-based industry, and I think that would in fact be a positive overall change. The only "harm" done would be to the status quo.


RE: Chuckle...
By masher2 (blog) on 5/23/2008 3:14:57 PM , Rating: 2
> ""Copyright" as a concept is a relatively recent invention,"

The protection of intellectual property also coincides with the birth of the industrial age, and the fastest level of progress man has ever seen. Is anyone truly naive enough to believe that's just a coincidence?

While I agree that copyright lengths are at present exhorbitant, the fact remains that the immense outporing of books, music, and other material today is a direct result is the copyright system, which allows people to base careers around the production of such.

> " I argue it would instead transform it from a recording-based industry to a performance-based industry"

What about songwriters? How do they get paid in a "performance-based" industry? They're the ones creating the actual art; Anyway, focusing on music is the wrong approach; it's just the tip of the iceberg. What about books? Are you seriously suggesting authors would only get paid by those willing to attend public readings of their works?


RE: Chuckle...
By mcnabney on 5/23/2008 3:44:04 PM , Rating: 5
How did Beethoven or Mozart get paid for their works? Not long after their work was penned you could hear it played in some other city. The 'writers' were supported through a variety of means, but that was before our culture decided that you needed a few million dollars just for seeping into the collective consciousness. This has happened to many performers. Do you think NFL and NBA stars always made a fortune? The expectation of instant wealth is a relatively new idea and it has fed and corrupted most of our culture, if you can even call it that anymore.


RE: Chuckle...
By nineball9 on 5/24/2008 6:53:11 AM , Rating: 2
I know less about Beethoven's history than Mozart's, so I can only comment on Mozart.

Much of Mozart's music was commissioned, that is, he was paid to write specific pieces of music. If the music did not become the property of those who commissioned it, it was published by Mozart. Mozart also published his own work. Published work (his music on paper) had to be purchased by other composers, performers, etc.

As a poorly paid concertmaster under two Archbishops, his music likely became the property of the Church or the Archbishop (who could publish the music), though I am not sure about this. Likewise, as court composer under Joseph II, his music probably became the property of the court.

Despite composing 41 operas plus numerous lieder, canons, oratorios, cantatas and notturni, Mozart didn't write any lyrics. They were written by librettists who made their living writing and publishing lyrics. Notturni and lieder were written by poets.

So Mozart "got paid" by commission, performing his own works, and sale of published music. (He had other income as well, e.g. tutoring.)

As for athletes, their work (as athletes) is not intellectual property which is the general theme of this thread's original article. One can not copywrite a "slam dunk" or a "Hail Mary" pass!


RE: Chuckle...
By aos007 on 5/26/2008 6:25:01 PM , Rating: 2
From what I recall, Beethoven was a shrewd businessman, unlike Mozart, and didn't have money problems.


RE: Chuckle...
By MrJim on 5/25/2008 10:54:48 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
How did Beethoven or Mozart get paid for their works? Not long after their work was penned you could hear it played in some other city. The 'writers' were supported through a variety of means, but that was before our culture decided that you needed a few million dollars just for seeping into the collective consciousness. This has happened to many performers. Do you think NFL and NBA stars always made a fortune? The expectation of instant wealth is a relatively new idea and it has fed and corrupted most of our culture, if you can even call it that anymore.


Excellent post. May i just add the fuck up that the commercial medicine is in the world today, HIV medicine? Copying FTW!

Reclaim culture!


RE: Chuckle...
By Reclaimer77 on 5/23/2008 9:07:35 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
What about songwriters? How do they get paid in a "performance-based" industry?


I don't know. How about not sucking ?


RE: Chuckle...
By MeTaedet on 5/23/2008 4:03:51 PM , Rating: 4
Frankly I don't even see an issue with piracy at all. And if I do, not to such an extent as to be willing to support any legislative measure that would curtail my freedoms or impose draconian punishment.

Let me explain why I do not take issue with piracy, if you'll oblige me:

Imagine for a moment that I had a device by the use of which I could make an exact copy of any physical item, provided I furnished this device with the raw material necessary to produce the copy. Okay, now, let's say I purchased a bicycle from some bicycle manufacturing company, and upon bringing it home and showing it to a friend of mine, my friend expressed an interest in having one just like mine. But before he could go to the shop to purchase one, I stopped him and offered to use my supercalifragilistic magical copying device to produce a copy for him, so that he shouldn't have to forgo any of his hard-earned money to experience the pleasure of owning just such a bike and putting it to use. According to the laity, the great unwashed, the RIAA, the MPAA, and government, I've stolen - or at very least they would say so if the copied item were a song, a movie book or videogame. The word "stealing", however, implies divestiture of something already in someone's possession. The only thing I have actually done is to PREVENT the bicycle manufacturer from obtaining something it otherwise WOULD HAVE obtained. You see, the human mind is disposed to commit many logical fallacies like this, by relying on flawed heuristics and so forth. Because people can easily imagine my friend's money being in the hands of the bicycle manufacturer when he expresses his wish for a bicycle just like mine, they feel that the transaction has already taken place and that it is stealing to make a copy for my friend. But if you look closely, you'll see that this "stealing" underlies all healthy commerce. It's called competition. Intel makes better chips that prevents AMD from making the money they otherwise would have. AMD makes chips that prevent Intel from making the money they otherwise would have. Why is it that if I prevent a record company from making money, I get thrown in jail or receive a fine grossly disproportionate to the "loss" the pertinent company has sustained by my act of "stealing"? If your business model isn't structured in such a way that your business can continue operating in the black under the vicissitudes of life and technology, you ought not to appea to the government to get it to destroy peoples' lives so that you can remain profitable. Adapt or die. It might be sad for a number of people that the music, videogame, and movie industries should fall, but so be it. That's much better than this despotic bullshiat. (In truth, though, I doubt they would go out of business. They'd simply make less money and who can say just how much less. But the purpose of law shouldn't be to maximize profits for any industry business or person, at least IMO.)

Every time you make a copy of music - or any macroscopic object really - you are not making an exact copy. This must mean that record companies don't hold a copyright on an exact arrangement/pattern of 1's and 0's but a very loose, rough pattern - or a vast number of patterns similar in form to that of the original file. If you serially change the bits that make up a song file, after what amount of change does that song file cease to be copyrighted? After 1000? After 10000? At the point where the resultant song sounds slightly different or a bit fuzzy? I don't like the imprecision of these laws. It's is this imprecision that underlies a large portion of my opposition to copyright law. These laws imply that a person has the right to an exclusionary ownership of a vast array of different patterns of data.

As I see it, government's purpose is to embrace utilitarianism. Government's purpose is to limit some of the freedoms of those over whom it rules in order to produce the maximum amount of happiness possible for the ruled. Thus, it exists only for their benefit, precisely because it was created and is (supposed to be) maintained by those people. I don't see this bloated, reprehensible, unjust body of copyright laws as serving that end. It serves only the interests of a small number of very rich disgusting people who don't care how they damage and destabilize society insofar as they are benefited. (see: lenders, banks, blackwater, oil companies, weapons manufacturing companies, halliburton, the RIAA, the MPAA.)

/Seems to me that these days government's various enterprises and laws are designed to make a few rich people more rich by utterly screwing everyone else over - the brainwashed uneducated masses whose intellects are so addled and shriveled by their various forms of entertainment that they can't even begin to see what a mess things are.


RE: Chuckle...
By NateSLC on 5/23/2008 5:16:39 PM , Rating: 2
Can the supercalifragilistic magical copying device make copies of <p> and </p> HTML tags as well?


RE: Chuckle...
By Crank the Planet on 5/23/2008 5:18:36 PM , Rating: 5
Here's a video link of Cary Sherman, President of the RIAA, and what he thinks- Shocking!!!
http://www.publicknowledge.org/node/1388

Last week, many in the beltway attended the State of the Net Conference put on by the Advisory Committee to the Congressional Internet Caucus. The second panel discussion was on content filters. It was a lively panel, and how could it not be, Gigi and Cary Sherman were on it!

The panel went on for an hour, which is kind of long for any one with just a casual interest to stream over the Internet (Real Player video). I wanted to make sure that folks saw some of what I thought were the more important statements about content filtering—straight from the source: the RIAA.

(If the video above doesn’t load, please be patient, I just posted it to YouTube).

In this abridged six minutes of video, Sherman addresses four questions about filtering:

What’s the RIAA’s stance on content filtering?

What about encryption?

What about fair use?

Should Congress mandate filters for ISPs?

Lastly, Chris Soghoian asks Sherman about the legality of ripping CDs to your iPod.

Perhaps the most interesting part comes as a response to Question 2, where Sherman essentially proposes placing spyware on users' computers to get around the “problem” of encryption:

Filters can be put in the applications for example. You know, one could have a filter on the end user’s computer that would actually eliminate any benefit from…encryption because if you want to hear it, you’d have to decrypt it, and at that point the filter could work.

And he goes on to say the spyware might be in your virus checker or media player, or even in an ISP-provided modem or somewhere else under the ISP’s control. But fear not, it's just to "notify" you so you learn what's right and wrong.

Don’t believe me? Watch the video.

What's next, our keyboards will shock us when we download the wrong music?

If you care about issues of fair use and net neutrality, you owe it to yourself to learn how the recording industry would like to change the Internet, in the name of protecting its music.


RE: Chuckle...
By bodar on 5/23/2008 11:42:30 PM , Rating: 2
Sherman at least had a decent answer for the RIAA's stance on Fair Use, as opposed to the woman next to him:

"We won't say it's legal, but you won't sue you for it."

How kind of you. Sounds like she's reserving the right to buy off Congress into canceling Fair Use completely at some later date. I'm sure she'd love nothing more than to make people buy multiple copies of the same songs or worse yet, micro-transactions on a per-listen basis.

I sincerely hope she gets a terminal illness.


RE: Chuckle...
By Hawkido on 5/23/2008 5:32:52 PM , Rating: 1
Yeah they didn't intend for their site to direct people to illegally ripped ISO images when they named their product ISOHunt... LOL Nice try man.

With a name like PirateBay, how can you plead innocence.


RE: Chuckle...
By DASQ on 5/23/2008 2:28:32 PM , Rating: 2
No, it's more like people saying that Hitler did absolutely nothing good.

It doesn't matter if that's what The Pirate Bay MOSTLY has, it's the fact that there is barely a difference between The Pirate Bay and every other search engine or really any kind of caching service AT ALL.


RE: Chuckle...
By Ananke on 5/23/2008 6:03:12 PM , Rating: 2
Hmm, I don't understand why Hollywood is so suicidal. To a great extend downloading is free advertisement for the products they create. Consumers will not increase purchases of music or movies if they don't have money, consumers will just shift to different entertainment. And as you can see that most probably will be console gaming. I guess pay-per-view or pay-per-listen on your PS3 is the next targeted thing, but still, if that consumer don't have the money to spend, that doesn't change anything. Instead, they will simply play more multiplayer games and participate in more social online groups, dating, making babies to teenage moms :). So sad, this country is so sad.


RE: Chuckle...
By symbiosys on 5/25/2008 7:59:59 AM , Rating: 2
I THINK your've all missed something MASSAIVE...
upload sites... sh *t
i can download LEGAL files from rapidshare.com @ 19mb/s ... ermmm.. so someone explain to me why they wouldn't be punishing the worst biggest warez (and every know wats the biggest warez site is all about... sh*t half a billion users?) site like they are persuing TPB


RE: Chuckle...
By symbiosys on 5/25/2008 8:01:21 AM , Rating: 2
edit buttons are far to come by hey? lol sorry.. but you get it guys.. sorry about the grammer.


RE: Chuckle...
By FaceMaster on 5/26/2008 6:10:32 AM , Rating: 1
I'm more pissed off about the ...'s and the fucking use of swearwords, which is just shittingly inappropriate.


By kileil on 5/23/2008 12:39:18 PM , Rating: 2
They're both search tools, and neither of them actually store the copyrighted content on their own servers.

About the only difference I see torrent sites are specialized, whereas Google will give you torrents and more.


By Oregonian2 on 5/23/2008 1:56:34 PM , Rating: 2
Well, actually Google does store copyrighted stuff on their servers. They have website cache's (copyrighted stuff) which are available to be seen via a click in their search results. Their image search contains massive copying of copyrighted images in Google's servers (as well as in the site cache storage as well). And then there's youtube....


By kileil on 5/23/2008 2:31:52 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Well, actually Google does store copyrighted stuff on their servers.


Sure, there are exceptions but in general they're not storing movies and music for distribution to Joe Public.

Either way, lets sue the bastards! Sue 'em all!


By Falloutboy on 5/24/2008 1:21:58 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
they're not storing movies and music for distribution to Joe Public.


neither is pirate bay


By Pjotr on 5/26/2008 4:22:03 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Sure, there are exceptions but in general they're not storing movies and music for distribution to Joe Public.


No, sorry, that's YouTube.


By Oregonian2 on 5/27/2008 3:15:06 PM , Rating: 2
Music and movies aren't the only things copyrighted. The text on my websites are, and the photos on my websites are as well. And google has copies of those on their servers. They copied my copyrighted productions and distribute them to make money through advertising.


By heeros1 on 5/24/2008 9:00:17 PM , Rating: 2
google may let you search for the torrent, but TPB, and other torrent trackers, actually "track" the torrents. so torrent sites play an active roll in distributing the torrent content. the search function on torrent sites is just an extra, which isn't illegal.


By CU on 5/23/2008 1:25:32 PM , Rating: 2
Google is actually worse, it will give links to torrents on several different torrent sites not just the one you choice to search on.


By FITCamaro on 5/23/2008 1:42:33 PM , Rating: 2
Yes but the fact that both can give it will be enough. When a bat manufacturer can get sued because a bat was used to hit a ball, that then hit a kid in the chest and caused serious injury, I think we'll definitely get suits first from the media companies that Google and company provide a means for the h@x0r$ to pirate their media. Then we'll get suits from the victims of those suits saying Google did not inform the consumer that what they were doing was illegal.


By DASQ on 5/23/2008 2:30:37 PM , Rating: 2
Actually Google can still get you the 'real deal'; it crawls torrent sites as well.

It's one extra hop. Apparently the only difference between Google being a 'legitimate' service and being a piracy wonderland.


By DanoruX on 5/23/2008 4:03:05 PM , Rating: 3
Do a search like:

latestawesomemovie dvd rip filetype:torrent

Extra hop? I think not.


I'm just a bill....
By AntiM on 5/23/2008 12:41:54 PM , Rating: 5
I'm just a bill. Yes, I'm only a bill. And I'm sitting here on Capitol Hill...

I don't know what the chances are of this being passed; most of the supporters are from CA.

We must give up our right to privacy just so a few media companies can make obscene amounts of money?? I would rather Hollywood fall off the map and never make another movie rather than give up the constitutional rights that many have fought and died for. Stop making and selling movies and music if it's going to mean the loss of my freedoms! I can live without entertainment, but I can't live with an Orwellian government. Am I over reacting here?

The most worrisome part to me is that it outlaws the use of privacy tools.




RE: I'm just a bill....
By Esquire on 5/23/2008 12:50:35 PM , Rating: 2
LOL I'm just a bill... so funny


RE: I'm just a bill....
By Apocobring on 5/23/2008 12:59:40 PM , Rating: 2
The limitations of privacy tools concerned me as well. I am aware that programs like PG2 are frequently used by torrenters, yet it is also used by people who are more cautious with using their computer. Using a torrent directly invites people to connect to your computer, but to believe that you HAVE to be using a torrent to have someone connected is flat out ignorant. Limiting privacy tools will negatively affect everyone, not just pirates - you are inviting anyone and everyone to jump on in and have a look around. (Note: Especially those of us who connect through college networks - colleges love to bombard computers with requests for access. PG2 stops a large majority of those.)


RE: I'm just a bill....
By FITCamaro on 5/23/2008 1:39:31 PM , Rating: 1
Crazy, extreme bills get drafted and proposed all the time. That doesn't mean that it'll get passed by Congress.


RE: I'm just a bill....
By TETRONG on 5/23/08, Rating: -1
RE: I'm just a bill....
By DASQ on 5/23/2008 2:25:09 PM , Rating: 2
I don't really think the pope gives a flying shat.


RE: I'm just a bill....
By 306maxi on 5/23/2008 4:05:26 PM , Rating: 5
That reminds me of this from the Simpsons

Kid: Hey, who left all this garbage on the steps of Congress?
Amendment: I'm not garbage.

I'm an amendment-to-be, yes an amendment-to-be,
And I'm hoping that they'll ratify me.

There's a lot of flag-burners,
Who have got too much freedom,
I want to make it legal
For policemen to beat'em.

'Cause there's limits to our liberties,
At least I hope and pray that there are,
'Cause those liberal freaks go too far.

Kid: But why can't we just make a law against flag-burning?
Amendment: Because that law would be unconstitutional.
But if we changed the Constitution...
Kid: Then we could make all sorts of crazy laws!
Amendment: Now you're catching on!
Kid: What if people say you're not good enough to be in the
Constitution?

Amendment: Then I'll crush all opposition to me,
And I'll make Ted Kennedy pay.
If he fights back, I'll say that he's gay.

Congressman: Good news, Amendment! They ratified ya!
You're in the US Constitution!
Amendment: Oh yeah!
Bart: What the hell is this?
Lisa: It's one of those campy '70s throwbacks that appeals to Generation Xers.
Bart: We need another Vietnam to thin out their ranks a little.


RE: I'm just a bill....
By Regs on 5/30/2008 7:03:35 AM , Rating: 2
I use to like the Simpson's...until Bart came on after an ep and told us the only good war was WW2.

I would rather my kids watch softcore porn then be brain washed by some f'ing political nut job using a cartoon as the portal.


RE: I'm just a bill....
By P4blo on 5/27/2008 6:44:17 AM , Rating: 2
You make some points I completely agree with. I would further that this bill is a totalitarian snowball. If the snowball gets going it's going to get bigger and bigger and the result (many years down the line) will be the active monitoring of every single byte of users Internet traffic. I think this is because even if they do manage to knock out the main Torrent sites the battle will drag on way beyond that. For the IP freakz to win they have to get all the ISP's roped into sniffing EVERY packet. If they manage it, never again will anyone fire up their computer and surf in privacy.

What right do these people have to dictate whether we can have privacy or not for the myriad of things we do on the net? Just like you I put a free Internet way above the profits of a few record and movie companies. JUST BECAUSE THEIR PRODUCT IS SIMPLE TO TRANSFER OVER DIGITAL NETWORKS IS NOT A REASON TO DESTROY INTERNET FREEDOM. THEIR PRODUCT IS UNFIT FOR FUTURE PURPOSE and they have to FIX THE PRODUCT. Otherwise, using their logic, they would put checkpoints on every road in Italy and search every vehicle - disadvantaging the whole populous because a company is building counterfeit Ferraris! It's lunacy. We will start down a slippery slope with a few measures and it will end up a total digital civil liberties lockdown.

And can someone tell me what right they have to try and restrict our use of 'privacy tools'? Stick it where the sun doesn't shine you pr*cks. If you dont have the technology to make your proposed policy work then tough luck! Why dont you just tell us all to have our names stamped on our foreheads??

We all have a LOT to fear from Internet Big Brother brought to us by Fascists in suits. We better all wake up to this, fast.


RE: I'm just a bill....
By DragonFire on 5/27/2008 5:57:32 PM , Rating: 2
I agree 100%.

The problem is governments to lazy to deal with the real problem. The problem is the music,movie,software,and even hardware companies.

How so?
A good example for software companies : Microsoft Windows Home server. People went out and paid how much for the POS that later destroyed there data?

Or how about EA CRAP? Gamers will know where I'm coming from on this one...Game after game by them just ends up having more issues then the last. So if they do make Simcity 5, yeah I'm going to download it before I throw $50 at it. Thank god I download vista first, saved me lots of money there. Also saved some money by not getting NFS:PS.

I see privacy as a form of outrage by the people towards said companies.. Sadly now days the people have little power to changes these companies, however, our governments do. To bad our governments are ran by a bunch of idiots that seem to have forgotten about the failing education system(US),the poor, global warming (yes it's real!), the fact oil prices are out of control.

Instead lets worry about the billion dollar companies losing $20-50 because 24yo joe sixpack spent the last of his $6.50/hour paycheck on the increasing gas/food prices.... For those that do have the money to throw around, see my MS example...

You know what I find most amusing, I would have to think that porn companies lose more money from there videos being downloaded (even full blueray dics now) then Microsoft does from people downloading Vista Ultimate.... Do you see the porn companies getting worked up about it?

Funny how most see porn companies as greedy nasty pigs and yet they are the ones more then happy with the millions they make... So who are the real greedy pigs here?


Reference update
By Justin Case on 5/23/2008 12:34:45 PM , Rating: 1
Remember those Slashdot trolls that started with "In Soviet Russia..."? It's amazing how many of them hold true if you just replace that with "In Neocon America..."

Good luck trying to get that to fly in continental Europe, though.




RE: Reference update
By SandmanWN on 5/23/2008 12:38:36 PM , Rating: 3
yeah, uhm, you missed a part...
quote:
ACTA is spearheaded by the United States, the European Commission , Japan, and Switzerland


RE: Reference update
By jskirwin on 5/23/08, Rating: 0
RE: Reference update
By Justin Case on 5/23/2008 3:47:52 PM , Rating: 5
There is a difference between "reading" and "understading the issue". You see, it is possible for people to actually know something about a subject that goes beyond what they've just "learned" in the last 10 seconds from reading an article on a webite. Especially if they've actually lived in Europe for the last 5 years.

Case in point, the EC doesn't make laws. Unless someone gets this through the European Parliament, and then through each member state's legislative branch, it's not going anywhere (which is not to say that some countries in Europe don't already have highly restrictive laws).


RE: Reference update
By jamdunc on 5/23/2008 6:32:52 PM , Rating: 1
I think you'll find that as a law gets passed by the EU (not the EC, that's a different thing) then it does become law in all the member states in some form or another. The highest court of law in any EU country is the European Court of Human Rights.

Europe makes a law and then the member states take this law and make it so in their own countries.

BUT and it's a big but, it's upto the member states how strict and literal they take the new law. The UK tends to be very strict and literal and places like France and Spain less so.

And I haven't lived in Europe for the last 5 years, I've lived here for the last 26 1/2 and studied Law in the UK.


RE: Reference update
By Justin Case on 5/23/2008 9:22:01 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I think you'll find that as a law gets passed by the EU (not the EC, that's a different thing) [...]


There is no such thing as "a law passed by the EU" any more than there is a bill "passed by the US". It's passed by the US House of Representatives (for example) or by the European Parliament. There is no single organ called "the EU".

There are lots of laws passed by the EP that don't apply to all countries. If you live in the UK you should know that very well. Even after Blair, the UK has more exceptions and exemptions than any other member of the EU. These exceptions are sometimes mentioned in the law itself (if it's a law meant to be applied to international transactions, for example), or are simply never included in specific countries' legislations (if they're meant to be applied locally).

In my experience, the southern countries tend to do whatever the EC wants *, the UK tends to do whatever the US wants, and the northern countries (plus Ireland) tend to actually think about things and use some common sense.

* Except for Berlusconi, who will do whatever gets him more air time.


RE: Reference update
By TETRONG on 5/23/08, Rating: 0
RE: Reference update
By Justin Case on 5/23/2008 3:40:47 PM , Rating: 2
The European Comission doesn't have the power to make laws; they're executive, not legislative.


RE: Reference update
By SandmanWN on 5/23/2008 5:13:15 PM , Rating: 1
Neither does a small group of congressman in a backroom have the power to sign an idea into law. It has to be introduced as a bill and ratified by both houses of congress. Yet you felt perfectly justified in equating a few congressmen to the entire Congressional body, so I felt equally justified in equating the entire continent of Europe's law system with the EC.

Not to mention you had to show how big of a tool you were by introducing coin phrased terms like neocon when the origins of such bills would back the ideals of such organizations as the RIAA and MPAA and originate from the most liberal elitist state in the union(Cali).


Oh Crap!
By Quiescent on 5/23/2008 12:45:03 PM , Rating: 2
I better download all the seasons of Charmed before ThePirateBay gets screwed. 3 down, 5 more to go. (Btw, if you wanted to know, Charmed is on TNT, but I never have the time to catch the episodes, plus I can pause them whenever I wish. Don't suggest a DVR, I may be 18, but it's not like I have a good paying job to get all sorts of hookups like that!)

America is going downhill. The laws are crazy, the gas is outrageously high, the prices on everything is rising, our USD worth is dropping, and people are making laws that are ridiculous.




RE: Oh Crap!
By bldckstark on 5/23/2008 1:04:55 PM , Rating: 5
Okay, I won't suggest a DVR, but I would like to suggest a show that doesn't suck. jk 8>)


RE: Oh Crap!
By kyleb2112 on 5/24/2008 12:51:42 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
America is going downhill. The laws are crazy, the gas is outrageously high, the prices on everything is rising...
...people are watching Charmed.


RE: Oh Crap!
By Quiescent on 5/24/2008 12:54:08 PM , Rating: 2
I find it better than the soaps my step mother watches on the SOAP network. BTW, I'm female.


This needs to be stopped
By imperator3733 on 5/23/2008 12:57:45 PM , Rating: 4
This whole bill/treaty/whatever needs to be stopped. This part especially concerns me.

quote:
The new bill would place the internet under the firm grasp of international law authorities and industry officials. ISPs operating within the U.S. and the involved nations would be forced to fully disclose consumer information. Meanwhile, use of internet privacy tools would be greatly restricted and made illegal in many cases.
(emphasis added)

Nobody should be able to take away your right to privacy on the Internet (at least no more than the NSA already has, and that should be reversed).

Contact your senators and representatives to stop this bill.




RE: This needs to be stopped
By DASQ on 5/23/2008 2:37:57 PM , Rating: 5
"Whoah whoah! Drapes over your windows? That's illegal, I'll have you know. In fact, you should probably upgrade to a glass house. And wear no clothing."


RE: This needs to be stopped
By ATWindsor on 5/23/2008 5:01:03 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, I'm suprised this part hasn't gotten more attention in the discussion. This is the most far-reaching and disturbing part of the article. I find it quite bad that the government would want to ban privacy-tools.


RE: This needs to be stopped
By Quiescent on 5/24/2008 12:56:50 PM , Rating: 2
Though the abuse of "privacy tools" has been done, it protects others from hackers and skiddies (I like to call them Skiddles, inside joke).

Another opening for the hackers.


Trackers
By gramboh on 5/23/2008 2:36:54 PM , Rating: 1
If they can just figure out a way to kill public Torrent trackers this issue will go away, it's too easy for the masses to pirate stuff these days, the issue has blown up compared to the days of FTP and BBSes where only true nerds were stealing copyright works.




RE: Trackers
By Digimonkey on 5/23/2008 4:06:04 PM , Rating: 2
After they killed Napster and similar clients the Torrent system was made popular. The bad thing for pirates is that if Torrent pirating dies, and no new protocols are developed to take it's place, FTP, MIRC, and Usenet will probably be flooded with traffic from those refugees and the old services will be the new targets.


RE: Trackers
By Imperor on 5/25/2008 12:34:25 PM , Rating: 2
There will allways be a new protocol, the nerds and hackers are always well ahead!
And there's always still DC...


RE: Trackers
By gramboh on 5/26/2008 5:06:37 PM , Rating: 2
My point was not that new technologies will not emerge, but rather than Bit Torrent is too easy and thus the masses use and abuse it for pirating copyright material. In the days of FTP/IRC/USENET, users had to be somewhat sophisticated to obtain pirated material, now you just google "blah torrent" and viola, done, no gaining access to private sites, just one click and it's done. I'm just going to be pissed off if data privacy/security is compromised by industry lobbying because too many common idiots are using public Torrent trackers.


This is great!
By amanojaku on 5/23/2008 12:36:07 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
It would criminalize non-profit facilitation of copyrighted information exchange on the internet.


Now I have grounds to sue the government for facilitating criminals by providing them with working roads to aid their crimes. SOBs...




net neutrality?
By Armorize on 5/24/2008 8:22:05 PM , Rating: 5
so much for net neutrality, say hello to the new and fully monitored spy-neted states of america, the european monitoring union, and the not-so neutral switzerland, and the ghost in the shell of japan.




Liberty
By pdelagarza on 5/24/2008 9:52:26 PM , Rating: 3
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Benjamin Franklin (1706 - 1790), Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759




RE: Liberty
By Imperor on 5/25/2008 12:38:00 PM , Rating: 2
I have the same quote ready for "Ctrl+V" but you beat me to it!!!
Exactly right!


that has been being
By derwin on 5/23/2008 3:44:32 PM , Rating: 2
that is being?




RE: that has been being
By derwin on 5/23/2008 3:44:56 PM , Rating: 2
that has been?


Letters?!?
By Autisticgramma on 5/23/2008 4:31:44 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The ACTA push was launched October 23, 2007. Among its other supporters in Congress, based on Congressional documents are Rep. Mary Bono (R-CA), Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA), Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), Rep. Howard Berman (D-CA), Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA).


Quite the Racket California has with the help of just 2 other reps.

If most of the apparently infringed took advantage of the web to begin with, we could have market forces, instead of police forces.

Money>Guns IMO. And yes enforcement implies the long eventuality of guns, it just depends on the ‘enforcements’ rule of patience.




RE: Letters?!?
By aos007 on 5/26/2008 6:14:41 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Quite the Racket California has with the help of just 2 other reps.


But isn't that exactly what you'd expect to get when you elect a Terminator?


So Disappointed
By Reclaimer77 on 5/24/2008 8:18:56 AM , Rating: 2
I am so disappointed with what the Republican party has become over the last ten years. I expect legislation like this being drafted and supported by Democrats, but when Republicans start it thats when the knifes need to come out.

When both parties adopt similar philosophies thats simply not good for the American public. Where are all the great Conservatives ? Even Bush, who has polarized people on both side, is nothing more than a moderate. Not the ultra Conservative proponents make him out to be.

It used to be understood that the Republican party was the Conservative party. All I see now are sniveling idiots in sheep's clothing pretending to be Republicans. When John McCain is the Republican presidential canidate you KNOW things are not right !

No honest to god person calling him/herself Republican should ever DREAM of drafting, much less supporting, a bill such as this. I'm disgusted in my party. I'm disgusted how they can't back a president re-elected by the people in a time of war. I'm disgusted that liberals hold offices and call themselves Republican and people are too stupid to vote them out of office.

Most of all I'm disgusted that they have allowed, by inaction, the Liberals to destroy the American peoples faith in themselves and our government. There is time to be silent and a time to speak out against the constant media and political onslaught attempting to tear down all of our traditional beliefs. Was it really THAT long ago when Reagan had us feeling good and optimistic about who we were ? Apparently so...




RE: So Disappointed
By Kaleid on 5/26/2008 5:05:36 AM , Rating: 2
Actually both parties are, in case you haven't noticed, in the pockets of the wealthy lobbyists so they're bought and paid for (it became increasingly bad during Bush 43 years).

And the policy is very rightwing, both parties are, and they can easily sell this as an idea to protect the holy property rights.


My bigger concern...
By Donkeyshins on 5/23/2008 3:46:21 PM , Rating: 3
Is that this law would be 'creatively' used against sites like Wikileaks or EFF.org. We've already seen attempts in the recent past to silence the former (and I'd be surprised if there hadn't been attempts in the past to silence the latter).




Okey Dokey
By Goty on 5/23/2008 12:45:52 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not at all against stopping the free distribution of copyrighted material, but placing the entire internet under the control of the various governments around the world (well, more so than it already is) strikes me as a bad move.




wtf mate
By Sohjinn on 5/23/2008 12:55:27 PM , Rating: 2
I just gotta say:

AAAAARRRRRGGGGHHHHHH!!!!




Something don't smell right here...
By Saist on 5/23/2008 1:14:20 PM , Rating: 2
Something about this whole event stinks more than a barrel of dead fish. The IFPI and it's various submembers (RIAA / MPAA) are largely made up of died in the wool Liberal Democrats. I'm finding it difficult to believe that a Republican would ever be caught dead writing potential laws that heavily favor targeting the liberal democrat's targets. It just doesn't make logical sense.

Some of the names listed for the Congressional documents do make some kind of sense, with 3 California Representatives in the mix. The voting on this potential law may have a great impact on the election results for the US later in the year. Those who back the ACTA might find themselves committing political suicide.




European Commission
By Strunf on 5/23/2008 3:26:17 PM , Rating: 2
It's not a country... besides the EC doesn't make the laws it just enforce it or propose new laws to the EU Parliament and the EU council, it's these two that make the laws.




By poothedrew on 5/23/2008 4:53:02 PM , Rating: 2
Their whole argument is flawed and it's really not their aim. Their aim is price control.
The value of content has dropped and games and DVDs are consuming the cash used to purchace these goods. Using music as an example production and quality have completly fallen and the companies want still want to charge you the same for poor quality and features.

They point to falling revenues of CDs but fail to recognize the fact that every year the same companies have reaping those lost and more dollars on DVD.

Albums should be the gold standard of quality with videos features and even downloadable access but they are still shleping the tired old CDs that they put even less effort into producing them.

The industry is a monopoly but if they stated their aims which is by controlling access to content they control price they would be charged as a monopoly.

Customers are rightfully downloading content for free because it's that or prices that do not reflect the value in a truly open market.

Sometimes it's a citizen's responsibility to break the law if they are unjust.

PS I own about 600 movies that purchaced legally because the content was worth it.




By Chosonman on 5/23/2008 11:12:18 PM , Rating: 2
and online search engines and anything else lets a user find copywrited material.

The bottom line is profits. Corporate greed is out of control democracies are based on free media. Argue what you want about the media industry needing to make a buck but that's the problem with society today, the entertainment industry has too much influence over society. It's time we return to the core principals of free media a tell them to shove their money grubbing hands up theirs.




Here's a solutions to the problem
By Chosonman on 5/23/2008 11:23:41 PM , Rating: 2
If they don't want people to copy their materials don't make and sell DVD's. That's the best form of control. People will pay money if they feel the it is worth buying. That is called marketing. Can record companies make money if people copy their works, yes they can. They can make tons by providing more than just what people hear on the radio or see on TV. Like color books that come with a DVD that write about the movie in detail or something else... If the record and movie industry expect us to pay $15 for a DVD we as consumers expect $15 worth of goods.




won't pass
By xxsk8er101xx on 5/24/2008 6:35:19 PM , Rating: 2
if it does pass it'll be struck down as unconstitutional. Republicans are quick to form legislation to attack a single organization.

this is illegal and won't pass.




Where is this coming from?
By Comdrpopnfresh on 5/24/2008 10:19:05 PM , Rating: 2
If the judicial system of the US finds people who share copyright material to be not guilty of whatever the RIAA was pressing them for, it doesn't make sense for the legislative branch to go over it's head by, well, legislating...

Is this the result of lobbyists from the industry?
Doesn't the US have more important things to do?

Weren't similarly structures services as pirate bay found not guilty, because they have legitimate sharing? That was also found by the judicial system, right?




WAREZ??????????????????
By symbiosys on 5/25/2008 7:55:36 AM , Rating: 2
I dunno if im allowed to say the word warez here...

but french-connection-united-kingdom 'you torrent people' have no idea how much crap is going on in the good old rapidshare.com and megashare.com and hostfiles.com etc... etc.. etc...

people are finding it easier to pay $9AUD a month for unlimited downloads from rapidshare.

All im really trying to get at is..
Torrents
rapidshare.com
irc

.... why are the gov just interested in 1/3 of wats happening?

oh wait... they cant do anything about the rest... FK!




By jabber on 5/25/2008 10:52:58 AM , Rating: 2
So the other day when the report that the UK govt wants to record and monitor all our emails/calls etc. we were told by our US cousins it was our fault due to us giving up our guns (which we never had by the way)so we couldnt rise up against this injustice and invasion of privacy.

Ok so now we have a tentative step by the US govt, which chances are will lead to more similar legislation as time goes by. So when does the shootin' start boys?

C'mon I'm after watchin' some good ol' boys fightin' fer freedom here!

Isnt it time to get the militia armed and ready? C'mon show us how democracy and freedom really works.




By flurazepam on 5/26/2008 2:26:39 PM , Rating: 2
I've said it before, want to drastically reduce piracy (you can't eliminate it totally)?? Price it right, don't be greedy, just price it right. Many people out there would gladly buy software if it was palatable (from a price point of view). Microsoft dropped it's Office Ultimate for students by a whopping 90%+. Movie companies could do the same. If you sell for cheap you'll move product. Price it too high and people will become creative and won't mind wasting time and effort to duplicate it.




Meanwhile...
By perzy on 5/27/2008 6:23:05 AM , Rating: 2
Meanwhile the Asian countries are copying the whole industrial efforts and painstaking efforts over hundreds of years of the western world....




Very scary time
By robinthakur on 5/27/2008 7:32:00 AM , Rating: 2
No doubt this is merely scary speculation, but then look at the DMCA, Patriot Act etc. I find this sort of totalitarianism absolutely terrifying, but then clearly i'm a "liberal" or a "democrat". In point of fact I believe in both liberty and democracy and this law along with the others mentioned should upset you whatever political leaning you have.

Bush to Cheney

"Execute Order 66..."




Simple solution
By monkeyman1140 on 5/30/2008 12:00:31 PM , Rating: 2
Unplug.

Quit buying movies, music. there's more to life than Miley Cyrus and R-Kelly. Whoops, best not get those two in a room together, ha!




Wikipedia
By Strunf on 5/23/2008 3:28:49 PM , Rating: 1
If it's not in wikipedia then it doesn't exist :D




Pirate Bay should be shut down...
By PWNettle on 5/23/08, Rating: -1
By Digimonkey on 5/23/2008 4:00:10 PM , Rating: 2
The problem with that statement or idea is the definition of facilitate. It's vague at best. You may say "A site that purposely facilitates pirated material." Then in turn that site could deny that allegation saying it's not their intention to aid piracy, and it'd be hard to prove otherwise.


By imperator3733 on 5/23/2008 5:45:54 PM , Rating: 2
As mentioned by someone else in the comments, that means that if you give someone directions to a bank, and then they go and rob that bank, that you are an accessory to robbery.

The first people that should be gone after are those that are putting the copyrighted content online in the first place. After that would be the people that make copies of that content available.

You can probably find copyrighted content using Google. Are you supporting Google being "dealt with accordingly"?


By OblivionMage on 5/24/2008 12:40:58 PM , Rating: 2
So should google, I found Pirate Bay on it and many other sites on it.


By Comdrpopnfresh on 5/24/2008 10:32:21 PM , Rating: 1
C'mon, that is like saying if terrorists are being raised in a country, that country should be taken down.....

wait.....

oh....


"DailyTech is the best kept secret on the Internet." -- Larry Barber

Did You Partake in "Black Friday/Thursday"?
Did You Partake in "Black Friday/Thursday"? 





0 Comments












botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki