Epiphany: Rep. John Conyers Realizes Mid-Hearing That His Copyright Position Contradicts His Stand Against Overcriminalization
from the when-reality-sets-in dept
It's hard to imagine looking at the absurdly excessive copyright penalties on the books and thinking, "Hey, maybe these should be a bit higher." But Congress has shown itself to be exceedingly imaginative when it comes to cranking up copyright, so perhaps it is no surprise that in yesterday's hearing on those penalties—covering statutory damages and criminal sanctions—a number of witnesses and Representatives alike seemed to think that those remedies are insufficient.
More surprising, though, was an unexpected moment of clarity from Michigan's Rep. John Conyers, a staple of the Judiciary Committee's reform hearing process and a reliable supporter of ratcheting up copyright enforcement capabilities. Conyers broke the first rule of copyright exceptionalism club by actually talking about the fact that this discussion would seem pretty unreasonable—even by Congressional standards—in areas outside of copyright.
Specifically, Conyers referred to the very real problem of overcriminalization, which absolutely afflicts copyright policy. This, after all, is the area of law that has made us an "Infringement Nation," routinely racking up millions of dollars in hypothetical damages throughout the course of an average day. Conyers generally pushes back against this overcriminalization, but here he is arguing for misdemeanors to be made into felonies—what gives?
Conyers: Mr. Assistant Attorney General, what else can we do besides addressing the felony streaming issue? It seems like... uh... once we get that going... uh... {long pause}... Well, it seems to me like there's an underprosecution. Normally, I... {pause} come to the committee complaining about overcriminalization. {Looks around} And now I find myself in the awkward position of saying... uh... let's make a felony of somebody's misdemeanors. Can you give me some comfort in some way? {awkward smirk}
David Bitkower, the witness from the Department of Justice, basically says that from the DOJ's perspective there is no overcriminalization problem, which is unsurprising. Then Nancy Wolff, a witness from the law firm of Cowan, DeBaets, Abrahams & Sheppard, adds that the ridiculously high damages helps plaintiffs force defendants to settle. Finally, Public Knowledge's Sherwin Siy notes that Conyers's question was spot on: our current excessive penalties do encourage certain plaintiffs to pursue non-meritorious claims, and that's something to be concerned about.
You can see on Conyers' face that he was looking for some resolution to his cognitive dissonance, but he couldn't find it. Copyright exceptionalism is simply inconsistent with fact-based policy—so when it comes time to reconcile the two, you're going to have a bad time.
Let's hope this moment was a lawmaker beginning to see the light. As EFF lays out in our brand new copyright whitepaper, "Collateral Damages", excessive and unpredictable penalties can chill free speech and stifle innovation. On such an important issue, it's encouraging to see lawmakers breaking from the standard script.
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: copyright, copyright remedies, david bitkower, doj, felony, house judiciary committee, john conyers, nancy wolff, overcriminalization, streaming
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
and yet - where is the counting and listing of laws
Help us Congress with understanding what the laws are so we avoid not having the excuse of "ignorance of the law"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: and yet - where is the counting and listing of laws
The reason for these damn circuses is exactly what it is.
Congress & Politicians et al asking for clarification on the damn laws they "stupidly and ignorantly" passed!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
His handler frantic signals.....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Streaming is theft, shipmate!
The only way out of these issues is to declare special classes of people, perhaps with patrilineal inheritance, so that these classes, call them "Rightsholders" (a.k.a. "property owners", "landowners", "gentry"), have a separate rule that lets them copy. For everyone else, mate, it's a High Crime, perhaps akin to terrorism, or treason, or consorting with demons.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Streaming is theft, shipmate!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
America -- The best justice money can buy
"Then Nancy Wolff, a witness from the law firm of Cowan, DeBaets, Abrahams & Sheppard, adds that the ridiculously high damages helps plaintiffs
force defendants to settle."
So let me get this straight, high damages awards are just
because they gives an IP plaintiff the leverage to force a defendant to settle rather than having the claim proven in court.
Your legal system is sickening.
There is much wrong with Europe, but our
IP laws are, except for Germany, more reasonable.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: America -- The best justice money can buy
It's like... hey pick your poison... we have one that will burn your skin off and here is one that will peel your skin off.
Different and while some may 'prefer' one poison to another... the end result is the same. You DIE.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: America -- The best justice money can buy
We know. Oh good goddess how we know.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: America -- The best justice money can buy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Understatement much?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Understatement much?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Understatement much?
I said for most of the history OF COPYRIGHT which was to imply that before that copyright didn't even exist.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
They use monopoly money to drum up the costs, but expect real money in exchange for the pay off... nice scheme they have going.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
they aren't changing at all. what they are doing is trying to find another way to screw the ordinary citizens (rather than going after the criminal gangs we keep hearing about that really are making a living off copyright infringement. remember though, the people concerned here fight back, literally!!) by using different terminology!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Maybe someday, humans and politicians will be able to live together in harmony...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I hear the position he takes for the MPAA is the one he bends over for , he just want us the enjoy it as much as he does (but by force)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A Modest Proposal
Since you can't understand 'over-criminalization' with the current penalty creep, let's work backwards and everyone decide what's the WORSE punishment everyone agrees would be 'over-criminalization' and let everyone see where they are coming from.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Incorrect. He was actually filling his Depends.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Begins to see the light
Lobbyist: "Here's your donation check for this year."
Rep Conyers. "Thank you, feeling better already."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Probably more like the .01%. After all, 1% is over 3 million people.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And this is what happens when the bank account runs dry
I'm sure his 'temporary confusion' will clear right up after a healthy dose of Vitamin C(ash), and he'll be right back on board, championing putting copyright infringement right up alongside assault and other actual major crimes.
Also, the DOJ and someone from a pack of lawyers are in favor of measures that make it less likely they'll ever have to take their evidence to court and prove it, who'd have ever seen that coming? /s
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]