70 Groups Tell Congress To Put The Brakes On Any Further Efforts To Expand Intellectual Property
from the time-for-a-rethink dept
Over 70 different groups, including many who were central to the January 18th online protests against SOPA, have put together a letter asking Congress to put a halt to any attempts to further expand intellectual property laws. The key point:Now is the time for Congress to take a breath, step back, and approach the issues from a fresh perspective. A wide variety of important concerns have been expressed – including views from technologists, law professors, international human rights groups, venture capitalists, entrepreneurs, and above all, individual Internet users. The concerns are too fundamental and too numerous to be fully addressed through hasty revisions to these bills. Nor can they be addressed by closed door negotiations among a small set of inside the-beltway stakeholders.The letter goes on to point out that Congress cannot and should not continue only taking one industry's point of view into account -- and most certainly should not ignore how existing law is already being abused. Historically, this is exactly the kind of letter that Congress would ignore, but after the events of January 18th, perhaps it'll start paying attention.
![Hide This Hide this](https://ii.techdirt.com/s/t/i/topclose.png)
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, intellectual property, pipa, sopa
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Listen up, union leaders!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Listen up, union leaders!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
thus continuing its trend, in igniting and stoking the fire
please do continue to ignore us, while some of us still have a civil tongue, then proceed to be gobsmacked when shit finally hits the fan
or prove us wrong?............. its that simple, be the government your people want you to be, or not
[ link to this | view in thread ]
with the internet recently making a push on the issue will they push harder, or back off?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Like an industry that has been making money off others via loopholes in the DMCA?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
There's not a signatory to the letter who approves of things like piracy just as there's not a signatory to the letter who approves of the way in which SOPA and PIPA showed how so-called intellectual property (copyright and patents) are legislated and who actually gets involved in the early stages of legislation, usually the entertainment industry and them alone.
As for some of the unions in the entertainment industry they come so close at times to being yellow dog unions that I just don't listen to them anymore.
(And I'm a committed trade unionist, by the way. :)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Can't vs Won't
US voters, do your duty. Find them guilty.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Listen up, union leaders!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
First step - Acknowledgement
Governments acknowledge that their governments are corrupt
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Response to: monkyyy on Feb 6th, 2012 @ 5:18pm
I've been seeing the signs lately that this exactly where the debate is headed. They're working on the messaging and the bills right now. Look for it this year.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
The DMCA Safe Harbors are not a loophole AC, they are a feature.
This is how the U.S. Copyright office describes the DMCA:
Congress enacted the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (the "DMCA" or "the Act") as part of an effort "to begin updating national laws for the digital era." It was designed to "facilitate the robust development and world-wide expansion of electronic commerce, communications, research, development, and education in the digital age."
Source
The Section 512 Safe Harbors are pretty much the only part of the DMCA that are actually doing what Congress intended. And you want to label them as "loopholes".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Criminal Creation In Progress
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
It's also facilitated parasites that can't create their own content to illegally piggyback on those that can.
Everyone knows this. You aren't fooling anybody.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Listen up, union leaders!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Maybe the news media should start doing journalism rather than pretending like it's "too complicated" and taking press releases or shrills word for it.
Half the reason people responded is because they had never heard about it or hadn't heard any other side.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
"Historically, this is exactly the kind of letter that Congress would ignore.."
I have to agree - "Did anyone talk to the NERDS about this ..." (from the SOPA hearing)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Response to: monkyyy on Feb 6th, 2012 @ 5:18pm
"...It just so happens to be funded by the movie studios claiming that piracy is helping to promote terrorism -- and because of that, the US government needs to devote stunning levels of new resources to stopping piracy at all costs." 2009
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090304/0025383981.shtml
Yup. This is criminal priority number one. Never mind that a study came out today stating 45,000/year die due to lack of healthcare in the U.S.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
All Hollywood needs to do is keep things stalling for a few years more and this debate will be mute; stories that grandma and grandpa told ...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I happen to think...
You better believe those lobbyist had a nice talk to every one of them that said no. I don't doubt they were threatened. If Dobbs will announce to the world his distaste in the Bill not getting passed... What makes you think Dobbs and the rest of those mongers talked to them any better in private?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Ah, the good old argumentum ad populum fallacy.
"Everybody knows the fight was fixed
The poor stay poor, the rich get rich
That's how it goes
Everybody knows"
- Leonard Cohen
Woops. Am I guilty of illegally piggybacking on someone else's creation now?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
The whole stance is that the DMCA is a loophole, not that there are loopholes in it.
If you are going to argue nonsense, then at least argue the official nonsense.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the other hand in your monopoly dream world that is bad, but for society that is just another day and will continue to happen even if you don't like it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
You're cool with consumption of labor without compensation? Awesome. Come wash my clothes, car and dishes.
No? You're a hypocritical parasitical leech.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Listen up, union leaders!
I find your comment heartily depressing.
When you consider why the labour unions were founded and their original ideals of standing up for the ordinary man against the big companies and the government it is amazing that they have reached the point when they are part of the problem - when they should be part of the solution. I'm not in the US so I'm not familiar with how your unions operate - but if your comment is a fair one then Wow!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Hmm - within the industry - meaning within our little private game where outsiders are excluded.
You're cool with consumption of labor without compensation? Awesome. Come wash my clothes, car and dishes.
Don't give us that crap AGAIN! We've seen it all before.
If you want compensating I suggest you put the arrangements in place before you do the work.
What you want to do is roughly equivalent to the people who come and cleane your windscreen at traffic lights and then expect to be paid afterwards when no-one asked them to do it beforehand.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
You mean like the big content companies who monetise YouTube videos that they don't actually have the rights to?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The laws that exist within that industry are far more stringent than those that exist in the online world.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
It's also facilitated parasites that can't create their own content to illegally piggyback on those that can. Everyone knows this. You aren't fooling anybody.
Everybody also knows that it's a small price to pay for the benefit - you'll just have to live with it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Oh, wait, you won't. Fucking hypocrite, hiding behind the very same anonymity you want ot remove from everyone else...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
They are flexing their political muscles to discover they haven't really got any.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This is very encouraging
It seems to me that the best thing which can happen now is for HUGE numbers of people - ordinary folk with jobs, mortgages, etc - to actually make the (minimal) effort to contact their representatives and endorse the objectives of the letter. The more I think about it, the more I am amazed at the paradox of how democracy can become so warped and deformed, despite the fact that such warping and deformation can be prevented by simply participating. All it takes is a phone call or an email, or even a visit in person to make an impression on a representative, and right there you have democracy in action. (Perhaps it isn't strictly a paradox, but it is puzzling).
I recently watched the video of Jack Abramoff being interviewed by Lawrence Lessig, and I was transfixed. It was fascinating to me how things actually work in Washington (and I'm not even American). But the most telling part (for me) came towards the end where a member of the audience asked "how does a new member of Congress get corrupted?" And the answer was chilling in its simplicity. When newly elected politicians arrive in Washington, the first thing that happens is they meet with their leadership. The leadership informs new members that their number one priority is to get re-elected at the next election. And since most new members arrive with a debt (presumably from running a campaign), the leadership informs the new members that they need to retire that debt. And here is a group of people who are very good at helping you to retire that debt - meet the lobbyists. Now the lobbyists (for the most part) represent large corporations and other special interests (eg: MPAA, RIAA, etc). But here is the kicker. Lobbyists, companies, etc can give all the money they want to a member of Congress (and in doing so "buy" a vote), but there is one thing they can't do (despite a corporation being a "person", which frankly is ridiculous), which real people can do. Vote. If a member of Congress was inundated, on a scale previously unheard of, with phone calls, letters, emails, and personal visits, I suspect that most members would take notice, and probably do the right thing (whatever that is). Remember, the leadership has already told them that priority number one is to get re-elected. I suspect that the reason it is so easy for lobbyists and special interests to get their way is it is a one-sided tug-o-war. There aren't enough people pulling the members of Congress in the other direction.
Which brings me to my next observation. A democracy is a double edged sword. It is great because it affords us many freedoms. But it demands that EVERYONE participate. If only a handful participate, you may have elections, and you may call it democracy, but to the extent that people are not involved (usually out of apathy), it is not a democracy. In ancient Greece, the term "idiot" referred to a private person, a person who took no interest in politics. Involvement or participation doesn't necessarily mean running for office, or volunteering in a campaign, or joining a party. Personally, I define participation as making your views known to your representative. That is as simple as it needs to be. If 100% of the population did that, lobbyists would be completely redundant.
The tricky part, of course, is how do you get people involved? How do you motivate someone to make that phone call or write the letter? I think the thing which prevents most people is inertia. Somehow we need to make taking that first step (eg: writing a letter or an email) as painless as possible. The Internet is probably the single most powerful tool available for connecting with people to get them motivated/activated. And there are probably lots of strategies for achieving this. But that needs to be the goal - mass mobilisation.
I am reminded of some of the things that Winston Churchill had to say about government and governing:
"But it is not Parliament that should rule; it is the people who should rule through Parliament."
"No-one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."
PS: Sorry for the long post - I get carried away sometimes.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Actually that is precisely what copyright law (in particular the "tradeable" nature of copyright) does.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Not a single signatory has been "making money off others via loopholes in the DMCA."
Furthermore, the DMCA does not have any loopholes. It is currently working exactly as it was designed. If anything, it is biased too heavily in favor of the rights holders.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Translation: I believe my own prejudices. Therefore, everyone else must believe them too.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Yep. Whiners like the American Library Association, Amnesty International, Free Press Action Fund, Human Rights Watch, and Women's Media Center. Thieves, the lot of them!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Copyright/IP = Monopolistic Power Grab
The legacy players are acting the part of Satan, gladly tempting our politicians by flaunting money, seducing them with empty promises in exchance for our rights. As such, these days Washington resembles a brothel moreso than a democratic government. To be honest, there are still a few politicians who care enough to listen to what we have to say, but they are too few and far-between which is why we must continue to push back against having our rights trampled in this seemingly neverending battle.
We have a choice: either a vibrant internet built by the people or a destitute one built to serve corporate interests.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
A small criticism
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Do you honestly expect evidence from IP extremists?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Good Luck
Furthermore, we ned to see fresh politicians who understand how technology works before we can expect legisation in the area to resemble something sane.
Additionally, none of this will be likely with the current state of the average voter's intelligence. If you've spoken with anyone outside of the field at all about any technology related political issues you will realise the level of ignorance is amazing.
Nothing will change while the voters remain blissfully ignorant. And the SOPA protest, in my opinion, was a fluke caused by the social networks and will not hold as much attention when its time to fight the next round - the fad will be old hat to the constituents of the social networks who's attention span for the matter will have expired.
To move toward a solution would require more education, which the US needs to improve badly anyway. I don't see any politicians willing to turn off the faucet of money coming from lobbiests.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
So what's worse - underserved consumers looking elsewhere for what they want because Hollywood refuses to heed market forces or the Hollywood middlemen activity screwing over the actual artists and content-creators while pretending to work in their interests?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Protest ACTA and Decolonize The Internet 12pm-2pm Feb 11 San Jose City Hall
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Listen up, union leaders!
> point when they are part of the problem -
> when they should be part of the solution
> if your comment is a fair one then Wow
Not only is it fair, it's an understatement.
The entire state of California is teetering on the brink of insolvency due to union domination of the political process and the politicians in Sacramento that run it.
They've raided the state's coffers dry, and now that there's noting left, they're demanding the state raise taxes so that they can have more.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]