Bipartisan PRO IP Bill Turns White House Into Hollywood's Private Enforcement Agency

from the please-explain-why? dept

Every time you think that the tide is turning and people are beginning to realize the ridiculousness of overly burdensome IP laws, some politicians start doing the dirty work of Hollywood's worst lobbyists. The latest may be the most ridiculous yet -- though, it certainly wasn't unexpected. Remember how NBC Universal execs started whining about how law enforcement's priorities were all screwed up, since they were focused on pointless things like burglary and bankrobbing rather than copyright violations? That was merely the starting point in a lobbying campaign for the new PRO IP (Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual Property Act) bill that has been introduced with backing of both top Republicans and Democrats. As the bill's not particularly subtle name makes clear, this law is all about giving Hollywood much of what it has been asking for. Rather than decreasing the ridiculous fines that can be handed out for copyright infringement, this law would increase them. But, more importantly, it sets up a brand new gov't agency within the executive branch to help crack down on "piracy." This despite increasing evidence that "piracy" isn't a problem for the economy at all -- but rather a problem for a few big companies with obsolete business models (who just happen to have tremendous lobbying clout) who are too lazy to even bother trying to adapt to a changing market place. This bill isn't just corporate welfare. It would be creating an entire government agency whose sole job it would be to protect the unnecessary and obsolete business model of a few dying companies while stifling innovative tools and services at every turn. It would help to kill off our creative industries by falsely assuming that creativity needs to be funneled through a few big companies. It's a disgusting travesty of the political process.

Filed Under: copyright, enforcement, government, lobbyists, politics, pro ip
Companies: mpaa, riaa

MPAA Takes University Toolkit Offline For GPL Violation

from the whoops dept

Remember last week how the MPAA was pushing a ridiculous toolkit on universities that was officially supposed to help universities track network usage, but also had the side-effect of potentially exposing all sorts of private info? Well, some folks noticed that the toolkit was built on open source technologies, such as Ubuntu Linux, though the MPAA (irony alert) didn't appear to be abiding by the GPL license associated with the software. It didn't take long for an Ubuntu developer to send a takedown notice, forcing the university to remove the toolkit. The developer contacted the MPAA concerning the violations, and found that the group ignored him (shocking, I know, for a group that claims it's such a huge supporter of intellectual property rights). So, he was forced to go to the ISP hosting the content, which finally resulted in the MPAA pulling the software down. This isn't the first time, by the way, that the MPAA has decided that it was okay to ignore intellectual property rules when it suits the organization, but it does suggest that for all its talk of having a principled stand on the issue, it's all a bunch of hogwash.

Filed Under: gpl, toolkit
Companies: mpaa

The Most Anti-Tech Organizations... Or Just The Most Misguided?

from the vote-for-the-latter dept

PC World is running a bit of a linkbait article about "The Most Anti-Tech Organizations in America." Nothing on the list is really likely to surprise you. It starts off (of course) with the RIAA and the MPAA. Somehow the BSA gets something of a pass, even though it's nearly as bad. Perhaps because it represents software companies it's not considered "anti-tech." The big telcos amazingly make the list twice (now that's impressive). Actually, AT&T and Verizon sort of make the list three times, if you include their wireless subsidiaries who make the list as well. Then there's big pharma, who makes the list for standing in the way of any kind of useful patent reform. Amusingly, the only "small" organization to make the list is the "think tank" the Progress and Freedom Foundation, with whom we've had our differences.

While the list does comprise the standard list of organizations many techies have learned to hate, it's really sad to think of how this has shaped up. Too many in the industry still like to think of it as being an "us" vs. "them" situation, where if one side loses, the other side wins. But that's not actually the case. In almost every case, each of the companies listed in the article should be pro-technology and should be embracing technology. If they did, they'd discover things wouldn't be as grim as it is right now. Just imagine if the record labels hadn't followed Doug Morris and Edgar Bronfman Jr. to war with its biggest fans, and instead had embraced technology. They could be thriving today like the rest of the music industry, reveling in the biggest burst of new music in history, combined with faster, better, cheaper and more efficient means of promotion and distribution. Instead, the record labels who fought technology are shrinking fast and blaming everyone but their own misguided leadership. The same is true of almost every one on the PC World list. If each simply learned how to embrace technology, they'd discover that they'd actually be in better shape with larger markets and happier customers. Instead, they find themselves fighting with customers and begging for regulatory help to protect old business models. This isn't a situation where they should be "anti-technology." All of these firms should be pro-technology for their own good.

Filed Under: anti-tech
Companies: at&t, mpaa, pff, riaa, verizon

MPAA Trying To Rootkit Universities?

from the how-nice-of-them dept

Just as the MPAA is strongly pushing for a new law that would require universities to take proactive measures to prevent unauthorized file sharing from happening on university networks, the group is also apparently pushing certain universities to install some MPAA-sponsored software to monitor network usage. However, after examining this "toolkit" some are noticing that it appears a lot more like a "rootkit" than a "toolkit." Depending on how a university's network is configured, it could actually reveal a lot of private info to the outside world. The software also phones home to the MPAA, despite promising not to report back any information. There are a few other oddities as well. While it could password protect some of the exposed content, it never prompts the user to do so -- and, at the same time, it disables logging who accesses the pages revealing all the info. While it could all be a coincidence, effectively the MPAA has made it so that it (and others) can spy on university network usage without being tracked in many cases. People in the article note the similarity to the Sony rootkit situation, where software designed to "protect" actually opened up huge security vulnerabilities.

Filed Under: mpaa, privacy, toolkit, universities
Companies: mpaa

MPAA Explains Why It's Okay To Tie Federal Funds To Blocking File Sharing

from the because-we-say-so,-dammit dept

While Congress' new bill on education funding may not be as bad as some are making it out to be, it still seems quite questionable that Congress appears to be regulating the idea that universities need to do the kind of marketing and educational campaigns that the recording industry cannot. We've asked supporters of the bill to explain how it could possibly make sense to mandate such things, and the MPAA's top lawyer, Fritz Attaway, has given his answer, claiming that it's because the internet is "used primarily to allow college students to traffic in infringing content," while being subsidized by gov't funds. It would be nice if Attaway or someone else at the MPAA could actually back up the claim that the primary use of the internet by students is infringement. While I wouldn't doubt that it's a popular use, to say that it's the primary use is hard to believe -- unless you count things like visiting Facebook pages, using Google and sending emails as "infringement." At the same time, this doesn't seem to support the reasons for this bill. After all, many kids on college campuses own cars -- and I'd imagine that most of those students break the speed limit frequently enough. Yet, we don't see any bills being proposed in Congress that would prevent financial aid funding unless universities start handing out more speeding tickets and put in place plans to offer public transportation. So why should they do that for copyright infringement?

Filed Under: congress, copyright, fritz attaway, mpaa, music, subscriptions, universities
Companies: congress, mpaa, napster, ruckus

Senators Ask Justice Department To Become Hollywood's Private Enforcement Agency

from the the-gov't-works-for-hollywood dept

In 2004, Senator Orrin Hatch introduced the Pirate Act, which would allow the Justice Department to go after people for file sharing in civil cases. Civil cases, of course, are between two private entities, rather than the gov't and a person. In other words, the government shouldn't be a part of it at all. Just because the legacy entertainment industry can't figure out a new business model, it doesn't mean they should be able to use the FBI and the rest of the Justice Department to enforce their old business model. Even folks in the Justice Department thought it was a bad idea, as they had no desire to be Hollywood's private enforcement arm. Luckily, that bill died off, and we thought it was all gone... until Senators Patrick Leahy and John Cornyn brought it back to life on Wednesday, introducing a very similar bill, also called the Pirate Act, which again would task the Justice Department with handling the entertainment industry's civil cases. It's difficult to see how anyone can justify having the Justice Department act to prop up the obsolete business models of a single industry, but that's exactly what's happening. Not surprisingly, the RIAA and the MPAA are thrilled to find out that your tax dollars may go towards artificially keeping their business model on life support.

Filed Under: justice department, pirate act, senate
Companies: mpaa, riaa

Who's More Ethical: TorrentSpy Or The MPAA?

from the just-a-simple-question dept

Wired has an interview with Robert Anderson, the guy who hacked into TorrentSpy's servers and handed over a bunch of internal TorrentSpy info to the MPAA. From the interview, it's quite clear that the MPAA knew that it was getting access to content that had not been legally obtained, but it still pushed Anderson for more such info (including asking him if he could obtain similar info about The Pirate Bay). Yet, because they know how to cover themselves legally, they made Anderson sign a contract saying that all of the info he gave them had been obtained legally. But, still, it's quite clear that the MPAA has no qualms spying on people using questionable means. At the same time, however, we've noted that TorrentSpy is so aghast at the idea of spying on its own users, that it shut off US access to its site to protect its users from court-ordered spying. So, which organization comes across as more ethical here? The MPAA, who's actively trying to get confidential information from various torrent tracker sites? Or TorrentSpy, who's actively trying to protect the privacy of its users? Yet, why is it that people act as if the MPAA has the moral high ground here?

Filed Under: bittorrent, hacking, spying
Companies: mpaa, torrentspy

MPAA Would Rather TorrentSpy Spy On Users Than Stop Offering Service?

from the motivations,-huh? dept

TorrentSpy and the MPAA have been involved in a legal fight for quite some time. TorrentSpy is basically a search engine for files that are offered for download via BitTorrent. However, because the MPAA views such BitTorrent as a tool for unauthorized use, it's trying to sue the search engine, rather than go after those who are actually responsible for sharing unauthorized content. There was a slightly troublesome ruling earlier this year, where a judge ordered TorrentSpy to spy on its users -- violating TorrentSpy's own privacy policy. Rather than do so, TorrentSpy decided to block access to US users. Now, you would think this would make the MPAA happy. After all, the site they were so worried about was no longer an issue for the entire US market. Instead, the MPAA is back in court claiming that this action is merely another illegal move by the company. Apparently, the MPAA would rather have TorrentSpy keep operating, but spy on its users, than block access. That doesn't make much sense if TorrentSpy is really such a huge problem. Unless, of course, the MPAA doesn't have any real evidence that TorrentSpy is doing anything wrong -- and this is about the only way it hopes to prove its case.

Filed Under: bittorrent, log files, search engines, trackers
Companies: mpaa, torrentspy

Even Movie Industry Execs Seem To Think The DMCA Is Unreasonable

from the do-as-we-say dept

We've pointed out for a long time that the DMCA is bad for innovation and needlessly inconveniences users. It seems the point is becoming so obvious that even senior executives in the movie industry are beginning to tacitly acknowledge (via Ars Technica) that the DMCA is unreasonable. At a conference on DRM last week, Scott Smyers, VP of network and systems architecture for Sony Electronics, admitted that he makes backup copies of his kids' DVDs. For those keeping score at home, not only is copying DVDs illegal under the DMCA, but Sony itself participated in a lawsuit to shut down a company making precisely the sort of DVD-backup software Smyers is presumably using to copy his kids' movies. Meanwhile, Jim Helman, the chief technology officer of MovieLabs, a research organization funded by the major studios, says that one of the most promising new devices on the horizon is a video jukebox that will let you rip your DVD collection onto a hard drive and then stream your movies to all the devices around your house. That is, unless the studio-backed DVD-CCA uses the DMCA to prohibit the creation of DVD jukeboxes. Helman and Smyers are absolutely right. If only their bosses would listen to them. They should point out to their bosses at the major studios that allowing people to create useful hardware and software products could be good for their bottom line, because it would make the movies they sell more useful to consumers.

Filed Under: dmca, drm, mpaa, private copying
Companies: mpaa, sony

MPAA Moves On To Making Up Stats About Camcording In The UK Market

from the gotta-earn-those-lobbying-bucks-somehow dept

After successfully bullying Canada into passing stricter anti-camcording laws, using bogus stats, it appears that the MPAA has moved on to a new country: the UK. TorrentFreak lets us know that MPAA chief Dan Glickman has crossed the pond to warn UK politicians about the horrible "threat" of camcorded movies. Of course, he's still making up stats and still ignoring what's actually happening in the industry. We've already seen that while Glickman gets paid big bucks to hype up the threat, these laws don't seem to stop camcording activities at all. However, more importantly, camcording doesn't appear to be much of a real threat to the industry. Remember, first of all, that the industry is bringing in record revenue, despite the increasing availability of movies online. Second, the problem isn't from camcorded movies. Most of the movies you find online are studio prints leaked by insiders. Third, even with these laws the movies are going to end up online... and all it takes is one movie getting online for it to be infinitely available. Stopping just a few of those recording the movie is absolutely meaningless if a single one gets through, and it always will. If the movie industry spent a fraction of the amount of money they're wasting lobbying for these useless laws on improving the movie-going experience or offering additional incentives to purchase, the industry would be doing even better than it already is -- and no one would even worry about some movies being available online.

Filed Under: camcording, movies, mpaa, uk
Companies: mpaa