House Passes Pro IP Overwhelmingly

from the well-that's-no-good dept

Thu, May 8th 2008 9:21pm — Mike Masnick

Last week we questioned why Congress seemed to think that the White House should be playing the role of copyright cop. Yet, apparently, the House of Representatives didn't think it was a question worth asking, as it has passed the PRO IP bill by an overwhelming vote, 410 to 10. It seems like our Congressional Representatives felt that, once they got rid of one bad portion of the bill, that the rest of it must be perfectly fine. This bill has a ton of problems, expanding copyright law and the executive branch's authority in ways that are pretty clearly unnecessary. It is, in effect, a bill to prop up the obsolete business model of one particular industry, so it's rather disappointing that our Representatives have rushed through to approve it with little discussion or debate over whether it's even necessary. Either way, it seems unlikely to get much further, as the Justice Department has already come out against the bill, one would hope that even if the Senate approves a version of the bill, the President would veto it.

In the meantime, though, given just how much damage arbitrary expansions of copyright law have done, you would think that Congress would at least want to spend some time exploring the issues before rushing through new laws. Tragically, it seems that entertainment industry lobbyists still have politicians convinced that stronger copyright is naturally "good."

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: congress, copyright, copyright czar, pro ip, white house

28 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

r fmc, 8 May 2008 @ 11:06pm

You can't say you love your country and hate your government. - Bill Clinton

FUCK THAT

The highest manifestation of life consists in this: that a being governs its own actions. A thing which is always subject to the direction of another is somewhat of a dead thing. -Saint Thomas Aquinas

MUCH BETTER

and finally

Men in authority will always think that criticism of their policies is dangerous. They will always equate their policies with patriotism, and find criticism subversive. - Henry Steele Commager
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- oregonnerd, 10 May 2008 @ 8:41am
  
  Re: power and practices
  Odd that with all the anti-drug laws...there's not one against power. Certainly it leads to stranger dreams and more dangerous practices.
  --Glenn
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lit_Teacher, 8 May 2008 @ 11:14pm

I wish I could say that this is a surprise
"...you would think that Congress would at least want to spend some time exploring the issues before rushing through new laws."
Well, while I may WISH that Congress would spend time exploring issues before rushing through new laws, I've long since given up any hope that it may actually happen.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- mobiGeek, 9 May 2008 @ 6:20am
  
  Re: I wish I could say that this is a surprise
  So with an election coming up soon, what are you doing towards rectifying this situation? [Assuming you are eligible to do something about this]
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Lit_Teacher, 9 May 2008 @ 7:53am
    
    Re: Re: I wish I could say that this is a surprise
    The same thing I do every year there is a city, county, state or federal election - voting.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 8 May 2008 @ 11:23pm

realize too that congress has a lower approval rating than the president. 90% disapprove. fire them all (cept ronp and dennisk, i guess)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rekrul, 8 May 2008 @ 11:39pm

I really hope this stupid bill doesn't get passed, but I don't have much hope. So far, the content industry has gotten pretty much everything it's wanted, so why should this be any different?

Hey, we already take people's cars, money and even homes for suspected drug crimes, let's start taking peoples computers, cash and homes for copying movies and music...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bent Over, 9 May 2008 @ 2:48am

In there!
Them commies are just gettin started, their coming for everything. It's a crying shame, that a nation with so much edgeamacation, can be so retarded. just goes to show any dumbass can be a poletic... an VOTE! Stroke's the word And it won't be gentle, if ya know what I mean.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Monarch, 9 May 2008 @ 4:43am

Write your reps
I just wrote my rep and told her I will not be voting for her in the coming election for the piss poor job her and her colleagues have been doing. Probably not worth the bits it was written in, but hey it's at least something!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
eleete, 9 May 2008 @ 5:12am

A Government
Of the Corporations, By the Corporations, For the Corporations. This is gross, why have a discussion about it, the checks cleared !

e
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 9 May 2008 @ 6:20am
  
  Re: A Government
  Ever see a TV show called Jericho? It's about an evil US corporation that attempts (mostly successfully) to take out 23 major US cities with nuclear bombs in order to shatter the existing government, and recreate it how they see fit. In essence, the corporation becomes the government, or tries to anyway. Granted, it's just a fictional dooms-day drama, but it does make you wonder just how far some corporations will go to get what they want.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - oregonnerd, 10 May 2008 @ 8:42am
    
    Re: Re: A Government
    ((did))
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Overcast, 9 May 2008 @ 5:48am

Yep - still doesn't mean I have to buy a thing.

It's sad to see innovation stifled by narrow minded politicians, though.

Soon enough - they'll be passing laws that prevent us from making comments like this too - just watch.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Old Guy, 9 May 2008 @ 6:25am

Nov 5th
Is it a coincidence that Guy Fawlke's Day is the day after elections?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 May 2008 @ 6:47am

so...
Who were the ten people against it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 May 2008 @ 6:59am

Fuck the 2 party system.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gaas, 9 May 2008 @ 7:47am

Damn Bush!
If the house was just controlled by Democrats, this would never have happened!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- eleete, 9 May 2008 @ 10:07am
  
  Re: Damn Bush!
  Unanimous does not mean that all the Democrats WANTED to vote no, but went with supporting the bill... Seems to me neither party brought their brains to work that day. But I think your comment is a bit amiss since both sides were almost 100% for it.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - eleete, 9 May 2008 @ 11:33am
    
    Re: Re: Damn Bush!
    based on this
    Rep. Frederick Boucher [D, VA-9]
    Rep. John Doolittle [R, CA-4]
    Rep. John Duncan [R, TN-2]
    Rep. Jeff Flake [R, AZ-6]
    Rep. Dennis Kucinich [D, OH-10]
    Rep. Zoe Lofgren [D, CA-16]
    Rep. Gwen Moore [D, WI-4]
    Rep. Ronald Paul [R, TX-14]
    Rep. Ted Poe [R, TX-2]
    Rep. Lynn Westmoreland [R, GA-3]
    Rep. Donald Young [R, AK-0]
    
    More Repulicans Did not vote than Dems, hmmmmmmm.
    
    e
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dan, 9 May 2008 @ 7:50am

I don't have much faith that a presidential veto will happen in spite of the justice department.

If the office of the president cared about IP issues, Clinton would have vetoed the DMCA. Now a republican president is going to go against big business? I don't think it's going to happen.

His cronies will tell him it's a good thing and he'll blindly sign it without any thought.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- eleete, 9 May 2008 @ 11:23am
  
  Re: Bush
  Blindly push the nucular button on IP ?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 May 2008 @ 8:03am

And yet...
as voters, we still do not blame ourselves for putting these hoodlums in office. Yea us!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous, 9 May 2008 @ 5:00pm

How many of you actually vote?
If you really want to make a difference, then do so.
Remember you can only truly whine, and complain about not getting your way if you actually made an attempt to get it in the first place.
Do you also Whine, Bitch, and Complain about not getting a raise at work when you never asked for one in the first place, or actually improved your work efficiency?
No.
Of course you don't because that would be stupid right?

Remember only you can prevent forest fires -Smokey the Bear
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
eleete, 10 May 2008 @ 2:52am

WONDER HOW THIS STUFF GETS PASSED ??
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eG6X-xtVask
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lucretious, 10 May 2008 @ 5:38am

Dan Glickman gushes:

It is a comprehensive, bipartisan measure that will strengthen our nation's economy and generate more jobs for American workers by bolstering protections for intellectual property,

"strengthen our nation's economy"? Talk about reaching.....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
oregonnerd, 10 May 2008 @ 8:51am

copyright
To some extent at least this is asinine. This is only for published works, as far as I can tell, and also makes the assumption that anything not formally published is at best insignificant. The writer who goes along with Emily Dickinson (i.e. "The business of poets is writing poetry"--and then if at all perhaps getting published) would most likely see denial of access to the public as a strike against the writer.
http://writing.borngraphics.com/voices.pdf

This isn't to say that publication is against writing. The artistic merits of the referenced ms. aren't the question; access is. It's poetry and free verse to boot so the ordinary reader here probably won't be much interested in it save as an example.
--Glenn
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
MLS, 11 May 2008 @ 10:36am

IP inaccurate
Merely as a point of clarification, the name of this bill voted upon by the House (which means it has a long way to go to even be enacted by Congress) is terribly misleading. This is not about "IP" generically. It is specifically about copyrights under federal law and a legally questionable incursion by the federal government into the area of trade secrets, an area that has traditionally been the province of the states as sovereign entities.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mendel Potok, 17 Nov 2010 @ 11:34am

*Gulp*
This is why I always hide my IP, at least then when the government cyber ninjas come looking for me it will take a while.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]