US Copyright Office Still Out Of Touch; Supports PROTECT IP/E-PARASITE & Felony Streaming Bills
from the whatever-the-entertainment-industry-wants dept
The US Copyright Office, for years, has remained totally out of touch with the mess that copyright has become, often acting as the entertainment industry's voice within the government. There was some hope that when longtime boss Marybeth Peters finally left, that the Copyright Office would bring in some new blood who might actually recognize how hindering and damaging copyright law is today, and seek to actually help bring copyright law into the modern era. So much for that plan. New boss Maria Pallante has released a new report detailing the "priorities" of the Copyright Office... and its the entertainment industry's two favorite bills: PROTECT IP/E-PARASITE and the felony streaming bill. The full report (pdf) also supports the RIAA bailout bill/performance rights act, also known as the extra tax on radio stations, forcing them to pay to advertise music. While there are a few nods towards things like orphan works, it seems like the Copyright Office is about more of the same failed policies... just ratcheted up further.In other words, the US Copyright Office remains totally out of touch with what's happening in the world and online these days, and how both of these bills will have massive unintended consequences; criminalizing perfectly reasonable behavior, putting massive burdens on job-creating entrepreneurs and startups, limiting investment into innovation, and fundamentally breaking important parts of the internet. But if it gets a few more dollars into some legacy Hollywood studio's pockets... well, the US Copyright Office is all for that. Sad. The US Copyright Office should be and could be a leader in fixing a broken copyright system. Instead, it appears to want to double down on the failed policies of the past, believing that greater enforcement and harsher punishments for actions done by millions is the answer. Scary stuff, but not surprising.
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: e-parasite, felony streaming, performance rights, protect ip, us copyright office
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
The ONLY thing that this will do to will be to make people go to encrypted end-to-end p2p like Freenet. Hell, Bittorrent could be rewritten to require encryption end-to-end with little to no problems with that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I wonder how much it takes to "buy" a Senator ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Frankly, even though it is 'illegal' by federal law, I wouldn't give a shit: there are times when you HAVE to break the law to keep the politicians honest!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
what was Pallante doing before getting involved with the US Copyright Office? from what i read, every position she has ever held has been to do with copyright in one form or another. loads of brains, no common sense. no wonder she got the job.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Piracy?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That says everything anyone needs to know about Mike Masnick.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Your posts all sound the same and never even contain links to the ever so rare references you typically fail to provide.
If it contains the word FUD, and sounds like a duck, it is probably your post, and that's whats *ucked up!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Everyone knows links are a form of infringement.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
copyright
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: copyright
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Captured
Not out of touch. Just captured by lobbyists.
Structurally —over the long term— we cannot rely on any government agency to protect a broad and diffuse public interest against a small group determined to profit.
It is a deep problem in all our institutions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Captured
Not out of touch. Just captured by lobbyists.
You seem to think that lobbyists exist only on the side you oppose. What do you think Masnick was doing in Washington last week? He was lobbying. Right along with the dozens of Google lobbying firms, EFF, CDT and PK all lobby. Maybe it's that the lobbyists on your side of the issue can't get traction because lawmakers largely believe that infringing is stealing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Honest question, I'd like to actually hear/read your justification for this statement.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Oh that's right, in the Freetard Fantasy World.
Ignorance is clearly bliss for some.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Can you tell us how will you monitor all means of communication and transfer of data?
Nope you can't.
Besides the trully freetards are the artists that want life + 95 years of a monopoly, that is not working for a living that is called being a parasite, not only that who was the idiot who let them control derivatives? Can Ford control what people do with their vehicles? Can Coca Cola say to others how to use their products after they have been sold?
Nope so why is that copyright allow that kind of thing.
America become independent because nobody wanted to pay monopoly rents and now everybody has to pay some entitled a-holes that believe they can define what is a crime and who is a criminal.
Yah right, without the majority of the population behind it, there will be no effective copyrights ever.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Either that, or you are a paid MAFIAA poster who has taken his brain out and shot it a few times in order to lower your IQ enough to believe the MAFIAA bunkus.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Wake up! Life is calling.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
and I have never seen a politician run for office claiming that he will expand IP laws if elected. Perhaps politicians know that these laws are unpopular among their constituents and such claims are a sure way to not get elected? If the people really want these laws, why aren't politicians eager to publicly proclaim their support of IP laws during elections? It should help them get elected, right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Don't you have a tent you should be living in?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
This part is funny. Who, pray tell, do you think kicked me out of a meeting? Because when you tell me, it'll be the first I heard of it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Bum's rush: hurrying someone out of a place. (As someone might quickly escort a vagrant from a fancy restaurant.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Really? I couldn't tell as you said this:
"Who, pray tell, do you think kicked me out of a meeting?"
when you claim that you understand that the term means:
Bum's rush: hurrying someone out of a place. (As someone might quickly escort a vagrant from a fancy restaurant.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
What's telling, of course, is that you fail to answer the actual question, preferring to play semantics.
And that's because you have nothing to back it up. You *hoped* that we were rushed out of offices. We were not. Of all of the meetings we were in, not a single one ended with us being hurried out. Multiple meetings did end with us saying we had to leave to go on to our next meeting, and at least one Congressman delayed leaving to catch his flight home to discuss the points we raised further.
But I'm glad your "intel" on what happened appears to be about as accurate as your understanding of new innovation and how people view copyright today. Frankly, I would have expected better access on your part. But now I know you're a two-bit nothing player in this debate.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Patents = monopoly
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What have we seen in the last 48 hours? 2 hit pieces against the bill sponsors, attacks on Justin Beiber, and some pretty intense pieces such as this one calling in every boogie man possible to try to make things look bad.
It's enough to make my weekend so much better!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Swing and a miss, bucko.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111028/12580416553/justin-bieber-senator-klobuchar-should -be-locked-up-felony-streaming-bill.shtml
It's a hit piece, an attack on Beiber within hours of his complaint to EFF coming public, as part of the campaign against new laws coming out.
If you can't understand why the piece was posted, I think you need to step back and think for a while. Mike has been incredibly transparent in the last few days, how come you can't see it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
As the scales are currently tipped, the Copyright Office owes each American quite a bit and is not delivering anything more than a thumb on the scales benefiting corporations.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
While one might want the Register of Copyrights to go much further, it is not, in my view, accurate or fair to suggest that she "does not get it".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
cisco
[ link to this | view in chronology ]