Bob Goodlatte Calls For Copyright Reform, Leaves Specifics To The Imagination
from the at-least-we-agree-it's-broken dept
In a press release issued today, Rep. Bob Goodlatte made a call for comprehensive copyright reform and announced series of hearings on copyright before the House Judiciary Committee. Of course, this isn't the first indication that Congress is interested in copyright reform — they heard Maria Pallante's testimony, which addressed many of the key issues involved, and was a mixed bag of good and bad ideas.
One thing the two have in common is a lack of specificity. Goodlatte is a friend of Hollywood and played a big role in SOPA during its conception, so it's pretty much guaranteed that a lot of his ideas for reform won't be the kind of reform we actually need — but for now, he's avoiding saying much. Most of the press release is dedicated to discussing the history of copyright reform and attempting to establish his own credentials. Only one paragraph offers any suggestion as to what Goodlatte thinks copyright reform might consist of:
There is little doubt that our copyright system faces new challenges today. The Internet has enabled copyright owners to make available their works to consumers around the world, but has also enabled others to do so without any compensation for copyright owners. Efforts to digitize our history so that all have access to it face questions about copyright ownership by those who are hard, if not impossible, to locate. There are concerns about statutory license and damage mechanisms. Federal judges are forced to make decisions using laws that are difficult to apply today. Even the Copyright Office itself faces challenges in meeting the growing needs of its customers – the American public.
Well, right off the bat we have concerns about piracy (while avoiding using the word), so we know where his priorities are. The rest of the things he lists — orphaned works, compulsory licenses and royalty rates, statutory damages, unclear legal definitions — are indeed some of the key parts of copyright law that need fixing, but that doesn't mean he has the right ideas about how to fix them. When it comes to things like statutory royalties and damages, both sides often think they are broken — the question is whether they are too high or too low. When it comes to clearing up legal definitions of things like fair use and contributory infringement, one small detail could swing the needle wildly in either direction.
Maybe it's a good thing that Goodlatte is avoiding getting into specifics, and instead launching hearings — but based on his past opinions and some of the implications of the press release, there's plenty of reason to wonder just how open and balanced these hearings will be. Will they include representatives of the public, or just industry lobbyists like so many copyright discussions in the past? And will they be seeking to reform copyright in a way that benefits the public, as it is supposed to, or just trying to "stop piracy"?
Goodlatte has surprised us a little bit in the past. Here's hoping he surprises us again — but I'm not holding my breath.
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: bob goodlatte, copyright reform, house judiciary committee, maria pallante
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
I do not Trust this man at all.
Why should I ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
It's not gonna happen.
Either get with the real world, or go back to the sandbox with the other kindergartners.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Let's go ahead and lock all those slaves back up, too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I'm just tired of some anonytroll screaming "BAN COPYRIGHT" on every single post in here that relates to Copyright law.
There are more productive conversations than that, especially when most people agree that Copyright is both desirable and necessary.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Furthermore, a more radical push against copyright in general can always lead to compromise (ie, shortened terms or the elimination of "copyright on creation").
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
and I'm tired of stupid shills calling to maintain and expand it because it benefits them and the worthless middlemen but not the public or the artists. BAN IT!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Sure they can. Treaties don't limit what Congress can do; only the federal constitution can do that. Hell, US copyright law violates Berne right now, and Congress isn't doing a damn thing about it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
If I remember right, treaties actually do supersede statute and are supposed to be binding on Congress. This only matters if Congress cares or there's a court challenge with a judge who actually gives a damn. Either way though, we can always pull out of Berne.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
call it a hunch based on history
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: call it a hunch based on history
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: call it a hunch based on history
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How does one submit views to the committee?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
NOW'S your chance, Mike! Leap into the vacuum:
And all this minion has is a false dichotomy: 'And will they be seeking to reform copyright in a way that benefits the public, as it is supposed to, or just trying to "stop piracy"?'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: NOW'S your chance, Mike! Leap into the vacuum:
We may not have an idea of fixing it to your personal satisfaction in your personal interests but we have an idea of how to fix it for the public interest. Abolish it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: NOW'S your chance, Mike! Leap into the vacuum:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: NOW'S your chance, Mike! Leap into the vacuum:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: NOW'S your chance, Mike! Leap into the vacuum:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: NOW'S your chance, Mike! Leap into the vacuum:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: NOW'S your chance, Mike! Leap into the vacuum:
"
A train derails in the woods and the only survivor is the train driver. They ask him about the accident:
- Why did the train derail?
- Well, I saw a jew walking on the rails..
- What?! Why didn't you ran him over?? Hundreds died..
- I tried! But he ran into the forest!
"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: NOW'S your chance, Mike! Leap into the vacuum:
lol. You're a fucking idiot.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: NOW'S your chance, Mike! Leap into the vacuum:
Funny thing about that: nobody has any real, tangible, provable ideas on how to fix copyright. Everyone from Mr. Masnick and the Techdirt Crew to regular jackoffs such as myself might have opinions on how to fix copyright, and some of them might even sound sensible, but we can�t prove one way or the other than our ideas could fix the massive problems with copyright.
That also assumes any idea, whether a singular major idea or a combination of smaller ideas, can somehow �fix� copyright as it stands today. We have a system that criminalizes people for doing what technology allows them to do, makes it possible for a work to stay out of the public domain for seventy years after its creator dies, and has no real teeth in regards to punishing those who use the system to send fradulent copyright takedowns or use copyright to silence perfectly legal speech. A �quick fix� would patch problems, but how long would those patches last, and how effective would lawmakers make those patches?
When you can come up with a definitive way to salvage a workable copyright law that both allows creators to protect their works and respects the original purpose of copyright without allowing the major media conglomerates to control all of culture due to their massive bankrolls and legion of lawyers, feel free to lay it on us in detail.
Until then, don't whine about �lack of specificity� in the opinions and ideas presented here on Techdirt, �kay?
a false dichotomy
Except�yeah, it�s not. The major media companies would love to reform copyright in a way that makes it easier for them to stop piracy, and such reforms would likely do more for that purpose than it would do for benefitting the public interest. Feel free to offer any evidence to the contrary, though; I�d love to see the MPAA or RIAA actually say they have the public interest in mind and mean it.
[ 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 ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://www.google.com/patents/WO2013055564A1?cl=en
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cynical interpretation
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Optimism
Little can be worse than it is already if you want TPP(A) as one dirty example. Sure the copyright side would fight for changes they want but that is fair even if not by much.
Keep in mind they simply cannot ignore the public these days unless they want millions contacting them in protest and hundreds of thousands out on the street protesting. We are the destroyers of SOPA and PIPA where ACTA is also fatally wounded.
So if the House wants open debate then face the fact that we are armed, ready and able to put on a damned good show. Our concerns about copyright law are already being heard and that is a good thing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Batman TV 1960's
Topper TV
Great Space Coaster
London After Midnight
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Of course, the cynic in me expects copyright "reform" based on studies conducted by the MPAA and/or RIAA (complete with $10 trillion being lost to piracy every year), and yet another round of laws allowing large (campaign contributing) companies to sue small companies into oblivion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]