Bill creating US Copyright Czar signed into law

[MKTerra]

BLARRRGH. (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2332432,00.asp)

They did at least get rid of provisions that would have had the DOJ take over the RIAA's unpopular litigation campaign. Still, the final legislation (http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/files/czarfinal.pdf) (PDF) creates new classes of felony criminal copyright infringement, adds civil forfeiture provisions that incorporate by reference parts of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970, and directs the Copyright Czar to lobby foreign governments to adopt stronger IP laws.This is the law that got passed unanimously by the Senate and, in one form, received over 400 Yes votes in the House, so it is very sadly bipartisan.

[Shellhead]

Wow! Enforcement of intellectual property laws so that creative people can earn a living too? That's brutal.

[MacQuarrie]

Wow! Enforcement of intellectual property laws so that creative people can earn a living too? That's brutal.

Anything that benefits the RIAA is by definition a bad idea. They are evil rapacious thugs who use the law to steal artists blind while pretending to benefit them.

"Boo hoo, the recording industry is in trouble. Record sales are down. Wah!" Good. Screw 'em. The RIAA is anti-artist.

[Royal]

Wow! Enforcement of intellectual property laws so that creative people can earn a living too? That's brutal.

It be great if TV, Movie and Music production companies weren't always abusing copyright law.

[MacQuarrie]

It be great if TV, Movie and Music production companies weren't always abusing copyright law.

They've found a way around that. They (with a lot of help from the American Library Association, Google and Yahoo) just had Congress rewrite the copyright laws so they can screw artists any way they want to without having to abuse the now-toothless Copyright laws anymore.

[Sanagi]

Wow! Enforcement of intellectual property laws so that creative people can earn a living too? That's brutal.
Wow! Your amusing sarcasm has completely distracted me from the fact that I am being forced by my government to pay RIAA thugs to ruin ordinary people's lives on the basis of little or no evidence!

[Calybos]

Anything that benefits the RIAA is by definition a bad idea.

This is actually a pretty reliable yardstick. If the RIAA is happy, the idea is automatically bad.

[Agent Helix]

Why do we have so many fucking czars now? I don't understand the chain of command in American politics at all anymore!

[Sean Walsh]

This is the law that got passed unanimously by the Senate and, in one form, received over 400 Yes votes in the House, so it is very sadly bipartisan.

Further proof that politicians CAN work together to BLEEP over the people.

[LewMoxinsghost]

So what does this new law mean for the average Joe artist who is developing an idea? The way I understand it now, it basically just grants more power to people who already have some power to take someone else's ideas and run with them. Is this accurate or not at all correct? Or am I just missing this entirely?

[Shellhead]

Wow! Your amusing sarcasm has completely distracted me from the fact that I am being forced by my government to pay RIAA thugs to ruin ordinary people's lives on the basis of little or no evidence!

I could give a shit about ordinary people who are illegally downloading lots of music without paying the musicians.

[LewMoxinsghost]

I could give a shit about ordinary people who are illegally downloading lots of music without paying the musicians.

But you should consider this chart:
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/steal_this_comic.png

Doesn't that make sense?

[Paradox]

Shellhead goes one way:

I could give a shit about ordinary people who are illegally downloading lots of music without paying the musicians.

I couldn't give a shit about the mass conglomerates behind the RIAA that aren't paying the musicians, either.

[Shellhead]

I couldn't give a shit about the mass conglomerates behind the RIAA that aren't paying the musicians, either.

So either the way, the musicians still get screwed over. It's just a question of whether they get ripped off by the suits or the fans. At least the suits had the decency to offer them a contract to read and sign.

[Paradox]

Except that these laws do nothing to alleviate the situation, only to give more power to the RIAA goons, IMHO, the true criminals there.

[Royal]

I could give a shit about ordinary people who are illegally downloading lots of music without paying the musicians.

You mean like old ladies, dead people and people who don't own computers?

[Shellhead]

You mean like old ladies, dead people and people who don't own computers?

You forgot to mention the strawmen.

[Sanagi]

You forgot to mention the strawmen.
They haven't sued any strawmen yet, but they really did sue a dead woman.* (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20050204-4587.html)

Fact-checking is not a familiar concept to the RIAA.

[Shellhead]

Sure, RIAA is unreasonable and stupid, and they have definitely gone after the wrong people in some cases. But that is just trivia compared to the vast amount of illegal downloading going on right now, and it's completely unfair to the musicians. Sure, many musicians got screwed over by their labels, but they could have used some common sense and gotten attorneys to review those contracts before they signed. Instead, they chose to sign unfavorable deals. But the fans who are illegally downloading the music aren't giving the musicians any choice at all.

[Sanagi]

Sure, RIAA is unreasonable and stupid, and they have definitely gone after the wrong people in some cases. But that is just trivia compared to the vast amount of illegal downloading going on right now, and it's completely unfair to the musicians. Sure, many musicians got screwed over by their labels, but they could have used some common sense and gotten attorneys to review those contracts before they signed. Instead, they chose to sign unfavorable deals. But the fans who are illegally downloading the music aren't giving the musicians any choice at all.
In this thread we are talking about a particular law which continues a pattern of misuse of power by the government and the IP industry.

The argument you're making is not necessarily wrong, but it brings no information to the discussion.

[howyadoin]

Sure, RIAA is unreasonable and stupid, and they have definitely gone after the wrong people in some cases. But that is just trivia compared to the vast amount of illegal downloading going on right now, and it's completely unfair to the musicians.Trivial to you, maybe. Not trivial to a lot of other people.

[J. Robb]

With the Conservatives gaining seats in yesterday's election, my fear is we'll see Bill C-61 return, Canada's attempt at music industry ass-kissing.

This despite overwhelming opposition from the musicians themselves. (http://www.musiccreators.ca/wp/index.php)

[mikekerr3]

You forgot to mention the strawmen.

How are those strawmen? They are existing cases. Those things really happened.

[dupont2005]

I couldn't give a shit about the mass conglomerates behind the RIAA that aren't paying the musicians, either.

but isnt that like saying "i dont like how nike makes asian children work in sweatshops for pennies, so im gonna steal these shoes"

[J. Robb]

So either the way, the musicians still get screwed over. It's just a question of whether they get ripped off by the suits or the fans. At least the suits had the decency to offer them a contract to read and sign.
You're assuming the musicians feel like fans are screwing them over.

More and more artists are selling concert tickets thanks to file-sharing.

[howyadoin]

You're assuming the musicians feel like fans are screwing them over.

More and more artists are selling concert tickets thanks to file-sharing.Any exec who doesn't have his head up his ass should see that. Unfortunately, that's a pretty select group.

From the latest issue of Vancouver Magazine (http://vanmag.com/articles/08oct/McBride.shtml):

It’s easy—even stylish—to point fingers at the corporate monster, but when McBride defends the power of consumer choice, he puts his money where his mouth is. When the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) sued a Texas family in 2006 because the children were downloading songs from the Internet, Nettwerk paid the family’s legal fees and promised to pay any damages. Two years into the case, the fight is still on.

Some view Nettwerk and McBride as enemies of copyright holders everywhere, but McBride claims they’re not fighting to win, necessarily; they just want to make the RIAA understand the futility of ignoring the inevitable. “I believe in copyright,” he says. “I believe in the value of intellectual property. Nettwerk’s a member of the RIAA. But this has got to be one of the stupidest things I’ve seen in a long time. Suing your consumer, and all the bad media that comes with it, does not build any goodwill. It doesn’t build up any sort of business relationship. How can you sue someone and maybe six months later ask them to buy a concert ticket?

[J. Robb]

How can you sue someone and maybe six months later ask them to buy a concert ticket?
I like Stephen Page (of the Barenaked Ladies)'s line, "You just can’t say I’ll see you in court, and then say I’ll see you at Massey Hall. I’d rather see them at Massey Hall."

[The Watcher]

All right, setting aside for a second opinions about copyright law itself, are copyright violations such a big problem, such a threat to the well being or security of the country, that it merits a Czar of its own?

[MKTerra]

Sure, RIAA is unreasonable and stupid, and they have definitely gone after the wrong people in some cases. But that is just trivia compared to the vast amount of illegal downloading going on right now, and it's completely unfair to the musicians.Speaking of vast amounts (and this relates to The Watcher's question as well), Ars Technica recently tried finding the origins (http://arstechnica.com/articles/culture/dodgy-digits-behind-the-war-on-piracy.ars) of some big numbers (750,000 jobs and $200 to $250 billion) often recited as economic losses to piracy. Long story short, the "jobs lost" number was the upper bound on a huge range the Commerce Secretary apparently pulled out of his ass in 1986, while the "dollars lost" number was traced to a 1993 Forbes article with no citation.

But enough theory and speculation; here is what we can say for certain: the two numbers that are invariably invoked whenever Congress considers the need for more stringent IP enforcement are, at best, highly dubious. They are phantoms. We have no good reason to think that either is remotely reliable.

Perhaps more importantly, both numbers are seemingly decades old, gaining a patina of currency and credibility by virtue of having been laundered through a relay race of respectable sources, even as their origin recedes into the mists. That's especially significant, because these numbers are always invoked as proof that the piracy problem is still dire—that everything we've done to step up international enforcement of intellectual property laws has been in vain. But of course, if you simply recycle the same numbers from 15 and 20 years ago—remember that IACC's 2005 publications still cite that 1995 congressional testimony, from which it seems safe to infer that they have no more recent source—then it will necessarily seem as though no ground has been gained.

Neither figure is terribly plausible on its face. As Wired noted earlier this week, 750,000 jobs is fully 8 percent of the current number of unemployed in the United States. And $250 billion is more than the combined 2005 gross domestic revenues of the movie, music, software, and video game industries.

[Paradox]

dupont2005 misrepresents:

but isnt that like saying "i dont like how nike makes asian children work in sweatshops for pennies, so im gonna steal these shoes"

No. Who said I was in favor of illegal downloads (whether I am or not)? I was merely retorting to Shellhead's misguided retort. As was pointed out later, the issue is abuse of power, not illegal downloading.

[Paradox]

The Watcher sees it:

All right, setting aside for a second opinions about copyright law itself, are copyright violations such a big problem, such a threat to the well being or security of the country, that it merits a Czar of its own?

Only to the RIAA. This is a completely unnecessary move.

[Rattlehead]

I keep asking myself, why don't the record labels have mp3's hosted on their sites, for people to sample and purchase? I know a few do, but why not all of them? Instead of doing endless legislation and lobbying, they could probably host entire discographies of their biggest acts for a fraction of what they're spending now. It's all futile really, the RIAA is more willing to spend billions clinging to their CD mark-ups than they are to spend a few million embracing the digital age. For that alone they should be left out in the cold.

This isn't, and never has been, about "protecting the rights of the artist", it's about clinging desperately to an outmoded delivery system that has been a cash cow due to the massive price mark-up.

[jesse_custer]

Another reason why I detest both parties.

[Serik]

There's only one thing to do now: PIRATE!

http://dclips.fundraw.com/zobo500dir/pirate_jack_rackham.jpg

[Shellhead]

This isn't, and never has been, about "protecting the rights of the artist", it's about clinging desperately to an outmoded delivery system that has been a cash cow due to the massive price mark-up.

In the meantime, lots of people are helping themselves to free music and the artists aren't getting paid for it. Don't like the current business model for the music industry? Fine, don't buy the music, and don't burn free copies for your friends. Support the artists. Instead of downloading their music for free, listen to them on the radio, or go to their concerts, or buy MP3s from legitimate websites. But don't rip off the artists and then complain about RIAA. While RIAA is handling everything in a stupid, clumsy and outdated method, that still isn't justification for fans ripping off their favorite musicians.

Think how bad it would be if people enjoyed comics the way they enjoy music these days? A minority would still buy comics and trades, but the rest would just download scans, and justify it by complaining about Dan Didio or Joe Quesada or even Diamond. Meanwhile, companies would need to slash titles, fire artists and writers, and eventually go out of business.

[howyadoin]

In the meantime, lots of people are helping themselves to free music and the artists aren't getting paid for it.And yet, many, many, artists make their own music available for free download. Should the RIAA sue them for ripping themselves off?

[Shellhead]

And yet, many, many, artists make their own music available for free download. Should the RIAA sue them for ripping themselves off?

It depends. If a given artist has signed a contract with a record company that prohibits the artist from offering free downloads, I think it's a reasonable to enforce the terms of the contract. If the artist isn't restricted by any contractual obligations, then they should be able to do whatever they want with their own music. It's true that some artists have signed unfavorable contracts, but unless there was coercion involved (in which case the contract is null and void anyway), they entered into the contract with free will.

[howyadoin]

It depends. If a given artist has signed a contract with a record company that prohibits the artist from offering free downloads, I think it's a reasonable to enforce the terms of the contract.Wow, this really is a binary thing for you, huh?

[Shellhead]

Wow, this really is a binary thing for you, huh?

A contract isn't valid unless both sides are receiving some form of consideration. For the artist, that generally means money. So yeah, if they are getting paid money in return for accepting contractual obligations, including ones that offer potential profits to the record company, then they need to hold up their end of the deal. Or pay back the money. Otherwise, don't sign contracts and don't take advance money. Put out a hat and play for change, or work out some way to get paid directly by fans, either online or in person.

[howyadoin]

A contract isn't valid unless both sides are receiving some form of consideration. For the artist, that generally means money. So yeah, if they are getting paid money in return for accepting contractual obligations, including ones that offer potential profits to the record company, then they need to hold up their end of the deal. Or pay back the money. Otherwise, don't sign contracts and don't take advance money. Put out a hat and play for change, or work out some way to get paid directly by fans, either online or in person.That's a "yes", then.

[Shellhead]

That's a "yes", then.

Yes. And also, "break a deal, face the wheel." :)

[howyadoin]

Yes. And also, "break a deal, face the wheel." :)Fair enough. I sort of agree with the latter part, but I'd be willing to bet that nine times out of ten, it's the record companies breaking the deal.

[Shellhead]

Fair enough. I sort of agree with the latter part, but I'd be willing to bet that nine times out of ten, it's the record companies breaking the deal.

I think it's probably more common for the record companies to offer an unfair deal, which the new artist eagerly signs without getting an attorney or even an agent to look over carefully.

[howyadoin]

I think it's probably more common for the record companies to offer an unfair deal, which the new artist eagerly signs without getting an attorney or even an agent to look over carefully.That's a good point. In which case, the person deliberately setting up the unfair deal is the record company rep. And yet, it's the artist who ends up paying through the nose.

[Sanagi]

The real reason the music and movie industries are losing money is because their products aren't good enough to compete with the video game industry.

[Paul McEnery]

Only to the RIAA. This is a completely unnecessary move.

Actually, there's probably more to it than that.

A good deal of what's left of the American economy is propped up by "intellectual property rights".

That "intellectual property rights" are about corporations taking individuals' civil liberties away seems to escape certain people.

[Serik]

Let's consult the Constitution, shall we?

Article I, Section 8, Clause 8:

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.

Congress shouldn't perpetually renew copyrights and patents. It's that simple. Mickey Mouse should've been in the public domain decades ago. Same goes for "Happy Birthday to You."

Copyrights and patents give creators a period to profit off of their creations, incentiving progress and discovery. After this period, however, the creators have to make something else of value or find a friggn' job. Using copyrights and patents as a means of securing perpetual income is bullshit.

Copyrights and patents are granted by the People under the assumption that they'll be temporary. Extending them indefinitely violates the Public's trust and corrupts the entire system.

Interestingly, China (and many other nations) don't have the same cultural view about copyright and will continue ignoring the WTO and other such organizations which attempt to force these practices on the world community.

[MacQuarrie]

Let's consult the Constitution, shall we?

Article I, Section 8, Clause 8:



Congress shouldn't perpetually renew copyrights and patents. It's that simple. Mickey Mouse should've been in the public domain decades ago. Same goes for "Happy Birthday to You."

Copyrights and patents give creators a period to profit off of their creations, incentiving progress and discovery. After this period, however, the creators have to make something else of value or find a friggn' job. Using copyrights and patents as a means of securing perpetual income is bullshit.

Copyrights and patents are granted by the People under the assumption that they'll be temporary. Extending them indefinitely violates the Public's trust and corrupts the entire system.

Interestingly, China (and many other nations) don't have the same cultural view about copyright and will continue ignoring the WTO and other such organizations which attempt to force these practices on the world community.
Happy Birthday should never have been granted a copyright. It's a traditional tune and was in use for decades before those two sisters claimed it. It's just that nobody with the resources to fight it wants to bother. It's cheaper to pay them off or use a different song.

I hate those people.

[howyadoin]

Happy Birthday should never have been granted a copyright. It's a traditional tune and was in use for decades before those two sisters claimed it. It's just that nobody with the resources to fight it wants to bother. It's cheaper to pay them off or use a different song.So it's kinda like Microsoft filing a patent on the up and down arrow keys on computer keyboards.

[MacQuarrie]

The real reason the music and movie industries are losing money is because their products aren't good enough to compete with the video game industry.

That's only part of it.

The truth is, the movie and music industries are making money hand over fist; the music and movie companies are losing their asses. Part of it is competition with video games and other entertainment (like the internet); part of it is piracy. But the biggie (at least in music) is the rise of the independents. The democratization of the arts.

Anyone who wants to produce a record can do so. A computer, a hundred bucks worth of software, a Fast Track audio interface and Oxygen8 keyboard and you're good to go. You're in the music business for under a grand. Screw the record companies and their predatory policies.

The movie biz is damn near there. The animation biz is there. Podcasting and Youtube means anyone can create a vehicle to make themselves a star. We don't need the studios, and if they want to stay in business, they have to either change their policies or change the laws.

Guess which they chose?

[MacQuarrie]

So it's kinda like Microsoft filing a patent on the up and down arrow keys on computer keyboards.
Exactly, or Amazon's claim on online purchasing.

There's this one prick out there who has filed for trademark protection for a couple hundred words, and now he just monitors the media for usage of "his" words, then fires off a Cease & Desist letter when one pops up. Enough people roll over and send him money that he's able to make a nice living off it. Criminal.

[MKTerra]

Happy Birthday should never have been granted a copyright. It's a traditional tune and was in use for decades before those two sisters claimed it.Is that so? The other day I looked up this issue on Snopes (http://www.snopes.com/music/songs/birthday.asp), which said one of the sisters composed the melody. Do you remember where you read that it predates them?

[Agent Helix]

The real reason the music and movie industries are losing money is because their products aren't good enough to compete with the video game industry.

The movie industry is doing fine.

[jesse_custer]

The real reason the music and movie industries are losing money is because their products aren't good enough to compete with the video game industry.

In a nerdy dream I once had ...

[jessecuster3]

In a nerdy dream I once had ...

Yes, 9.5 billion dollars in revenue last year was all from nerds.

[Agent Helix]

Oh, nobody's saying that it's a small industry, just that Sanagi's assumption is pretty wrong. First off, the movie industry is doing just fine, and second off, the music industry has absolutely no correlation to the videogame industry.

[MacQuarrie]

Is that so? The other day I looked up this issue on Snopes (http://www.snopes.com/music/songs/birthday.asp), which said one of the sisters composed the melody. Do you remember where you read that it predates them?

No, it's something I read decades ago. But Google gives me this:

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1111624

[jesse_custer]

Yes, 9.5 billion dollars in revenue last year was all from nerds.

I didn't say everyone who plays video games is a nerd ...

... but thinking that video games affect the sales of a large chunk of the entertainment industry because of substitution, well, I think that qualifies as a nerdy dream, especially when there is no hard evidence to back up such a claim. No one is doubting the video game industry is successful, though.

[MKTerra]

No, it's something I read decades ago. But Google gives me this:

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1111624Hmm. That paper's author does bring up some specific claims of similarity, but he also tries to refute them and sides with the sisters.
...
I think the answer to both questions is favorable to the Hill sisters. To be sure, they did
not invent the rhythmic, melodic, or harmonic vocabulary that they were using. But
they managed to put together a melody that is significantly different from all known
previous melodies; that delivers some drama; but that is at the same time extremely
simple, using a major scale with no accidentals, remaining within a range of one
octave, and limiting itself to half and quarter notes. That, I think, is an achievement
worthy of the incentive of copyright protection.It's a pity the site doesn't seem to have the mp3's he originally included as supplementary materials for comparison.

[MacQuarrie]

Hmm. That paper's author does bring up some specific claims of similarity, but he also tries to refute them and sides with the sisters.
It's a pity the site doesn't seem to have the mp3's he originally included as supplementary materials for comparison.

True, but he also shows considerable evidence that teh copyright should have lapsed during the 25-odd years that it was unenforced, or should have expired in 1963. In any case, the fact that this song is still under copyright after over 120 years demonstrates how messed up and abusive our copyright laws have become, in that they grossly favor corporations like TimeWarner over actual artists.

[Donald M.]

The real reason the music and movie industries are losing money is because their products aren't good enough to compete with the video game industry.

You must be playing different games than I am.