Hatch-Leahy PIRATE Act
p2pnet.net News:- It looks as if 2004 is the year Hollywood pulls out all the stops to gain control once and for all of how people – firstly in North America but ultimately, around the world – use and/or share digital media.
Hollywood favourite senator Orrin ‘Terminator’ Hatch has just joined with another entertainment industry stalwart, senator Patrick Leahy, to introduce the ‘Pirate Act to “provide the Department of Justice with tools to combat the rampant copyright piracy facilitated by peer-to-peer filesharing software”.
As p2pnet pointed out last June, Hollywood (music, tv and the movies) contributed $175,332 to Hatch in 2002, and so far in 2004, has pumped another $152,360 into his coffers for a total of $327,692.
At $160,250, Leahy’s top contributor in 2002 was, once again, Hollywood and for 2004, he’s so far chalked up $178,000, adding up to $338,250.
You’ll find the numbers in at the Open Secrets site here and we mention them only because of the coincidence – that the two senators are sponsoring a bill of tremendous benefit to an industry which has contributed so generously to them.
And according to a Wired News report here, “A draft bill obtained by Wired News recently circulated among members of the House judiciary committee that would make it much easier for the Justice Department to pursue criminal prosecutions against file sharers by lowering the burden of proof. The bill also would seek penalties of fines and prison time of up to ten years for file sharing.”
And, says the story, “If the draft becomes law, anyone sharing 2,500 or more pieces of content, such as songs or movies, could be fined or thrown in jail. In addition, anyone who distributes content that hasn’t been released in wide distribution (for example, pre-release copies of an upcoming movie) also would face the penalties. Even a single file, determined by a judge to be worth more than $10,000, would land the file sharer in prison.”
Go here for the details of the Hatch-Leahy Kill [p2p] Bill. Vol 1. You can be sure there’ll be more. Don’t miss the last line.
And in the meanwhile, so far this year:
Hollywood has forced the owner of 321 Studios to stop selling software that allowed 321 customers to make backup copies of DVD movies they own.
Big Music’s pseudo cops raided the homes and offices of Kazaa employees in Australia, looking for evidence of wrong-doing.
A Hollywood lobbyist admitted having worked on an official ‘warning letter‘ aimed at p2p operators and originating in California attorney general Bill Lockyer’s office.
On March 23 the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) launched another barrage of lawsuits designed to scare people who share music online into the hands of its owners, the Big Five record labels. It’s also targetting individuals it claims are ‘pirating’ music owned by Big Music, and students in universities across the country.
Simultaneously, RIAA president Cary Sherman is trying to convince the same students that Gosh, Big Music really hates dragging them through the courts, but Gee, what else can it do?
In Britain the BPI has launched an instant messaging campaign to threaten file sharing music lovers, echoing similar – and notably unsuccessful – attempts by record label enforcement units in Canada and the US to do the same.
In Canada, RIAA clone the CRIA (Canadian Recording Industry Associartion) is trying to get a Canadian justice to force Canadian ISPs to reveal the names of clients so Big Music can sue them too.
And that’s just the big stuff. There are a lot more elements in the carefully orchestrated Hollywood plan to become master of all it surveys.
We haven’t even mentioned Broadcast Flag.
Protecting Intellectual Rights Against Theft and Expropriation spells PIRATE
Now Hatch says he and Leahy are sponsoring the Protecting Intellectual Rights Against Theft and Expropriation Act which, by an astounding coincidence, spells PIRATE when initialized, because recently …
“… some unscrupulous corporations may have exploited new technologies and discovered that the narrow scope of civil contributory liability for copyright infringement can be utilized so that ordinary consumers and children become, in effect, ‘human shields’ against copyright owners and law enforcement agencies. Unscrupulous corporations could distribute to children and students a ‘piracy machine’ designed to tempt them to engage in copyright piracy or pornography distribution.
“Unfortunately, piracy and pornography could then become the cornerstones of a ‘business model’.”
Whoa!
Thank God Hatch and Leahy are on guard together, of course, with the Big Five Record labels and Big Seven movie studios and their loyal US enforcement units, the RIAA and MPAA (Motion Picture Association of America), and their endless clones and spin-offs around the world.
Now read on >>>>>
HATCH CONTINUES TO FIGHT AGAINST COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
Introduces ‘Protecting Intellectual Rights Against Theft and Expropriation Act’
Washington: Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah), Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, today joined Ranking Democrat Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) in introducing the ‘Protecting Intellectual Rights Against Theft and Expropriation Act’ (the ‘PIRATE Act’) to allow the Department of Justice to exercise its existing enforcement powers through a civil, rather than criminal, enforcement proceeding.
Senator Hatch?s remarks to the United States Senate follow:
Mr President, I rise to join Senator Leahy in sponsoring the Protecting Intellectual Rights Against Theft and Expropriation Act (the ‘PIRATE Act’), a measure that will provide the Department of Justice with tools to combat the rampant copyright piracy facilitated by peer-to-peer filesharing software.
Let me underscore at the outset that our bill does not expand the scope of the existing powers of the Department of Justice to prosecute persons who infringe copyrights. Instead, our proposal will assist the Department in exercising existing enforcement powers through a civil enforcement mechanism. After considerable study, we have concluded that this is the most appropriate mechanism.
Peer-to-peer file sharing software has created a dilemma for law-enforcement agencies. Millions of otherwise law-abiding American citizens are using this software to create and redistribute infringing copies of popular music, movies, computer games and software.
Some who copy these works do not fully understand the illegality, or perhaps the serious consequences, of their infringing activities. This group of filesharers should not be the focus of federal law-enforcement efforts. Quite frankly, the distributors of most filesharing software have failed to adequately educate the children and young people who use their software about its legal and illegal uses.
A second group of filesharers consists of those who copy and redistribute copyrighted works even though they do know that doing so violates federal law. In many cases, these are college students or young people who think that they will not get caught. Many of these filesharers are engaging in acts that could now subject them to federal criminal prosecution for copyright piracy.
It is critical that we bring the moral force of the government to bear against those who knowingly violate the federal copyrights enshrined in our Constitution. But many of us remain concerned that using criminal law enforcement remedies to act against these infringers could have an overly-harsh effect, perhaps, for example, putting thousands of otherwise law-abiding teenagers and college students in jail and branding them with the lifelong stigma of a felony criminal conviction.
The bill I join Senator Leahy in sponsoring today will allow the Department of Justice to supplement its existing criminal-enforcement powers through the new civil-enforcement mechanism. As a result, the Department will be able to impose stiff penalties for violating copyrights, but can avoid criminal action when warranted.
In advancing this measure, I must note that I view this civil-enforcement authority as another tool, hopefully a transitional tool at that. In the long run, I believe that we must find better mechanisms to ensure that our most vulnerable citizens ? our children ? are not being constantly tempted to infringe the copyrights that have made America a world leader in the production of creative works.
Only recently has America faced the specter of widespread copyright-enforcement actions against individual users of copyrighted works. For nearly 200 years, copyright enforcement was rarely directed against the millions of ordinary American citizens who use and enjoy copyrighted works. Instead, creators and distributors of copyrighted content worked together to negotiate the complex licensing agreements and technological protections needed to distribute copyrighted works in ways that accommodated both the expectations of users and the copyrights of artists.
But recently, some unscrupulous corporations may have exploited new technologies and discovered that the narrow scope of civil contributory liability for copyright infringement can be utilized so that ordinary consumers and children become, in effect, ‘human shields’ against copyright owners and law enforcement agencies. Unscrupulous corporations could distribute to children and students a ‘piracy machine’ designed to tempt them to engage in copyright piracy or pornography distribution.
Unfortunately, piracy and pornography could then become the cornerstones of a ‘business model.’ At first, children and students would be tempted to infringe copyrights or redistribute pornography. Their illicit activities then generate huge advertising revenues for the architects of piracy. Those children and students then become ‘human shields’ against enforcement efforts that would disrupt the flow of those revenues. Later, large user-bases and the threat of more piracy would become levers to force American artists to enter licensing agreements in which they pay the architects of piracy to distribute and protect their works on the Internet.
Federal enforcement action is surely warranted if such ‘business models’ are driving the increasing ease of piracy on peer-to-peer filesharing networks. Such business models exploit children, cheat artists, and threaten the future development of commerce on the Internet.
Indeed, our government recognizes that its enforcement powers are appropriate when protecting intellectual property and public safety. Recently, in a speech to the United States Chamber of Commerce, Deputy Attorney General James B. Comey, Jr. asserted that the Department of Justice should assist private enforcement of intellectual property rights if any of three criteria are met: (1) the level of piracy becomes particularly egregious; (2) public health and safety are put at risk; or (3) private civil remedies fail to adequately deter illegal conduct.
In the case of peer-to-peer filesharing, all three criteria may be met. The level of piracy on these networks is not merely egregious, it is unprecedented. Public health and safety are also directly threatened by business models that tempt children toward piracy and pornography and then use them as ‘human shields’ against law enforcement.
Finally, the recording industry and other affected rights holders have tried ? so far largely unsuccessfully ? to use civil remedies to halt the operations of those who would profit by turning teenagers and college students into copyright pirates or pornography distributors.
As a result, our creative industries? only remaining option to deter piracy is to bring enough civil enforcement actions against users of filesharing software. Tens of thousands of continuing civil enforcement actions might be needed to generate the necessary deterrence. I doubt that any nongovernmental organization has the resources or moral authority to pursue such a campaign.
If enforcement actions against end-users were really the best or only way to enforce copyrights on the Internet, then civil enforcement authority would be necessary. But there may be other ways to combat this piracy at the root, not at the branch. I thus invite the Department of Justice and other federal law enforcement agencies to work with me, Senator Leahy and other members of the Judiciary Committee to determine how the enforcement powers of the federal government can best be deployed to solve the problems arising from piracy and pornography on peer-to-peer filesharing networks.
I also understand that others may be developing proposals to increase criminal enforcement authority against piracy, and I hope to work with them on such proposals. Today, I stand with Senator Leahy to buttress the enforcement of copyrights by enabling the Department of Justice to proceed with a robust program of civil enforcement.
Mr President, for the reasons I have just delineated, I urge my colleagues to join us in supporting the Protecting Intellectual Rights Against Theft and Expropriation Act.
