RIAA collapses INDUCE talks
p2pnet.net News:- The internicine war that started to become evident at the end of July, when the powerful BSA (Business Software Alliance) took decided exception to the entertainment industry’s INDUCE Act, could be about to explode in full.
The BSA numbers Microsoft, HP and IBM among its members.
Spearheaded by Hollywood favourite senator Orrin Hatch, INDUCE would both kill all hope of an independent p2p community not controlled by the major movie studios and Big Four, and “force technology companies of all kinds to ‘ask permission’ before innovating for fear of ruinous litigation if they don’t,” as the EFF’s (Electronic Frontier Foundation) Fred von Lohmann put it.
The Inducing Infringement of Copyrights Act was scheduled for today in the Senate Judiciary Committee, but the, “action has been delayed in the wake of the collapsed negotiations” with the RIAA blamed for the collapse, writes Keith Regan in TechNewsWorld.
The RIAA is owned by the Big Four record label cartel – Warner Music (USA), EMI (UK), Sony-BMG (Japan, Germany) and UMG (France).
Only three Judiciary Committee panelists, Larry Craig, John Cornyn and Saxby Chambliss – new to the committee – haven’t received $$$ support from the entertainment industry, of which the RIAA is an integral element.
The remaining 15 have all had financial contributions, with Charles Schumer at the top of the list. The figures beside their names, from the invaluable OpenSecrets.org, indicate how much they’ve accepted so far this year.
Orrin Hatch, chairman, $174,928; Pat Leahy, ranking Democrat, $233,800; Chuck. Grassley, $75,572; Edward M. Kennedy, $213,208; Arlen Specter, $305,400; Joseph Biden, $75,774; Jon Kyl, $54,350; Herb Kohl, $250; Mike DeWine, $111,199; Dianne Feinstein, $289,316; Russ Feingold, $51,500; Lindsey Graham, $80,523; Charles Schumer, $544,135; Dick Durbin, $81,100; and, John Edwards, $328,297.
Now read on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Congressional Action on Induce Act Could Be in Jeopardy
By Keith Regan – TechNewsWorld
The fate of the controversial Induce Act that would restrict file-sharing technology that can be used to illegally download and share copyrighted material was in question today after negotiations between the music and electronics industries broke down as the current Congressional session nears an end, possibly by this weekend.
The bill, formally known as the Inducing Infringement of Copyrights Act, had been scheduled to be acted on today in the Senate Judiciary Committee, but that action has been delayed in the wake of the collapsed negotiations.
It was not known when, or if, the bill will be acted on before the Congressional session ends.
Representatives of the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and a coalition that includes the Consumer Electronics Association, the IEEE and NetCoalition said talks broke down early yesterday, with the other groups blaming the RIAA for not being willing to move toward a compromise.
Sen. Orrin Hatch, a Utah Republican who chairs the Judiciary Committee, had planned to have the committee vote on the bill today. However, after the last-minute and late-night talks broke down, that vote was apparently put on hold.
A spokesman for the Judiciary Committee said no vote had been taken as of 3 p.m. Washington, D.C., time today and said he did not know if one was scheduled. An agenda for a meeting of the full committee did not list the bill among a dozen action items.
Catching Flack
The rest of the industry groups blamed the RIAA for the breakdown in talks, saying that a compromise version of the bill’s language it put forward at 1 a.m. yesterday represented a step backwards from earlier drafts.
The first attempt at the bill was drafted by the Copyright Office after court rulings declared peer-to-peer (P2P) file-swapping networks such as Morpheus and Grokser were legal.
Will Rodger, director of public policy at the Computer and Communications Industry Association and the Open Source and Industry Association, said committee chairmen often schedule votes on bills as a way to jump-start compromises. However, he said, a compromise is not likely to happen in this situation because the two sides are moving farther apart.
Rodger said the latest draft essentially gives judges the power to stop any technology that is found to be capable of making illegal copies.
“That describes just about every part of the IT infrastructure and most of what is in your living room as well,” Rodger told TechNewsWorld. “We know infringement is bad. Our members deal with it too. But we also know there’s no magic bullet. And right now, this goes to the core of what we do. We’re heading for a showdown.”
The RIAA did not return calls seeking comment. The association had tried to use the courts to force P2P networks to take responsibility for the file-swapping actions of their users, only to have a U.S. Court of Appeals find that makers of the technology were not responsible for how it was used.
Rodger said if the bill passes as drafted, an industry that makes up 1 percent of the gross domestic product would be dictating rules for the tech sector, which accounts for as much as 10 to 15 percent of GDP. And because the legislation will only apply to U.S. companies, overseas competitors will be able to continue to innovate and will quickly fill the void.
Try and Try Again
If the bill is not voted on in this session of Congress, which is expected to end as soon as this weekend, it could return as a rider to appropriations bills passed later in the year. If not, it’s likely to be back next year, Rodger said. “We’ve put out word that we’re going to be watching very closely,” he added.
The various industry groups have been working together since late July, when Hatch asked them to try to work out a bill they could both support during a public hearing before the committee.
“Notwithstanding everyone’s hard work and good intentions, we find ourselves farther apart now than at the outset of this process,” the IEEE, NetCoalition and CEA wrote in a letter to Hatch.
The letter continued: “The recording industry continues to propose language that would not solve the piracy problems in the manner you identified, but instead would effectively put at risk all consumer electronics, information technology products and Internet products and services that aren’t designed to the industry’s liking.”
==================
Reproduced with permission of TechNewsWorld and ECT News Network. (c) 2004 ECT News Network. All Rights Reserved.
==================
See:-
internicine war - Josh Wattles on INDUCE, p2pnet, September 22, 2004
October 8th, 2004 at 10:36 pm
The numbers reflected above actually upset my stomach.
Any member of Government that accepts money (no matter the context) like that should be in prison themselves.
As for this induce garbage – if it passes, it’s not going to change anything in the p2p world – it’s long since too powerful to try and seal up now.
Sure the kiddie p2p programs will go away soon enough as more and more p2p’s lean to secure, trust-based sharing like ‘WASTE’ and even my p2p of choice, ‘Direct Connect’ will have to move with the times or US users will simply be out of the picture (even though its orig Author resides in the US – Hey Hess, add some ip-masking/encryption like WASTE!!!)….
The bottom line is that this act gives too much power to a puny segment of our GDP – imho I’d rather have NO new movies or music EVER released than give them that much power!
_-Jile-_
October 9th, 2004 at 12:46 pm
It’s over for the moment. The act is not going to get voted on this time around it would seem.
—
US grapples with anti-P2P law
Ted Bridis in Washington
October 8, 2004
ENTERTAINMENT groups and consumer organisations have been unable to reach a compromise over a US Senate proposal aimed at manufacturers of peer-to-peer file-sharing software.
The Induce Act, strongly supported by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch, would make manufacturers of such software liable for inducing people to commit copyright infringement.
Consumer groups and some computer companies have complained that the bill’s language is too broad and could apply liability to legitimate technology.
Sensing an impasse after weeks of acrimonious debate, Senator Hatch invited lawyers and lobbyists representing the sides to propose their own compromise. But the sides have agreed that a compromise was increasingly unlikely given the tight deadline, according to participants in the talks who spoke on condition of anonymity.
Senator Hatch cancelled plans to present the bill to the Judiciary Committee, and participants in the talks said there would likely be no movement on the proposal in the immediate future. Senator Hatch had previously said he intended to pursue the legislation next session if a bill wasn’t approved. Senator Arlen Specter, is expected to take over as Judiciary chairman early next year.
The chief executive for the Recording Industry Association of America , Mitch Bainwol, acknowledged that negotiations needed more time.
“So long as illegitimate peer-to-peer services hijack a positive technology and intentionally offload their legal liability to America’s kids, legislation will be a priority for the creative community,” Mr Bainwol said.
In a letter late Wednesday, the Centre for Democracy and Technology, a Washington-based civil liberties group, urged Senator Hatch to delay action, saying the current proposals would “chill the development of legitimate consumer technologies”.
In a separate letter, several consumer groups – including Public Knowledge, the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Consumer Union – cautioned Senator Hatch that divisive unresolved issues could have a “potentially enormous impact on innovation, creativity and competition”.
Supporters of the Induce Act said it was necessary after a federal appeals court cleared manufacturers of file-sharing software of liability for large-scale copyright infringement committed by customers.
That court effectively limited entertainment companies and others to suing users of such software individually.
The Associated Press
http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,11009855%5E15306,00.html