Burden of policing is on copyright holders themselves
The burden of policing copyrights is on the copyright holders themselves. They should bare the expense of detecting and sending take-down notices. It is part of the responsibility of being a copyright holder. The tax payers nor Internet users should be left holding the bag.
Since courts have ruled that you may make a personal copy for your own use then all these things the MPAA suggest are rights we already have and for then to interfere in any way with fair use is an infringement on our rights and therefore THEFT as they would define infringement.
Why do copyright holders get a free ride? In order to get copyright or patent protection you should have to pay BIG TIME and also pay BIG TIME every 10 years to maintain it. Enough putting copyright holders on the public dole.
Just like newspapers. The stories are not the product. The advertising and the physical paper is. For airlines the product is not getting you from A to B. It is a seat on the plane. A concert the product is a seat not the concert itself. The music or to get you to point b is just the means of getting you to pay for the actual product.
Supreme Court ~ Copyright Infringement is not theft.
Downloading unauthorized copyrighted material is not theft it is not even considered a criminal act but a civil matter. The Supreme Court ruled in Dowling_v._United_States_(1985) that copyright infringement does not fit the definition of theft since it does not deprive the copyright owner possession or use of the property.
"The phonorecords in question were not "stolen, converted or taken by fraud" for purposes of [section] 2314. The section's language clearly contemplates a physical identity between the items unlawfully obtained and those eventually transported, and hence some prior physical taking of the subject goods. Since the statutorily defined property rights of a copyright holder have a character distinct from the possessory interest of the owner of simple "goods, wares, [or] merchandise," interference with copyright does not easily equate with theft, conversion, or fraud. The infringer of a copyright does not assume physical control over the copyright nor wholly deprive its owner of its use. Infringement implicates a more complex set of property interests than does run-of-the-mill theft, conversion, or fraud." Dowling v. United States, 473 U.S. 207 (1985)
Therefore any use of terms such as "theft" or "piracy" in connection with copyright infringement is simply hyperbole and only fits into the RIAA and MPAA's narrative.
What is worse is what is contained in their agreement. It says they can terminate the agreement at any time but go on to say you cannot even mention lowe's on your site again let along link to them. This would include any critisism of them so this really is a heavy-handed move to combat negative online reviews or criticism.
TPP negotiators insisting on secrecy and shutting out everyone except Hollywood are going to find massive opposition to whatever comes out. They no longer have free rein to sneak things in when no one is looking because now everyone is looking.
This may also apply to routers because they hold a copy of the packets in memory to send off to the next router even though it only holds it for a few nano seconds. Every router would have to purchase a licence from the music and movie industry to allow them to route a file to you.
So if each copy a computer makes is a new copy and thus subject to a licence for every copy what about digital to analog? Those are two different versions so it would make sense to charge everyone a separate fee when you buy digital but then convert it to analog.
The best weapon against trademark bullies is to have their trademark become genericised which effectively causes them to lose all trademark protections.
Victims of Trademark bullying should seek from the courts to have the bullies names become generic as a defence against this form of corporate intimidation.
The Airplane was held back by the Wright Brothers Patent Trolling
Same thing happened with Airplanes. The Wright brothers were so protective of their patents that the US Aviation Industry could not take off till their patents had expired. The US had to buy planes from France and Britain to fight WWI because Wright Brothers preferred making money by suing rather than building airplanes.
Obama, Bills No, International Trade Agreements YES!
Obama is a huge IP Maximilist. He said he opposed bills the censor or take away freedom online. Too bad that only extends to bills and not International trade agreements.
I hear people say that without IP ownership and strong enforcement that people will stop creating because they cannot make money off of their work. The proof this is bunk is the Internet itself. When the Internet was truly free and not burdened by countless lawsuits we saw the greatest explosion of creativity ever. People shared freely and it made the Internet as we know it today. The Internet is now severely threatened by patent and copyright lawsuits and the result has been a break on innovation and creativity.
I would also like to see copyrights become non-transferable. Inseparable from the creator. However the creator can licence it to others but cannot sell it or give it away. Once the creator dies the copyright is gone.
The answer is to have no arbitrary date but have anything that is not actively being used go into public domain after a few years. This would require the copyright owner to maintain their work or lose it. It would solve the problem of orphaned works and it would also benefit popular works because the copyright owner could keep it as long as they are using it in some capacity. There could be a maximum copyright of some arbitrary date.
On the post: EU Court Of Justice Says Social Networks Can't Be Forced To Be Copyright Cops
Burden of policing is on copyright holders themselves
On the post: MPAA: Ripping DVDs Shouldn't Be Allowed Because It Takes Away Our Ability To Charge You Multiple Times For The Same Content
MPAA Stealing Fair Use.
On the post: Justice Department Wants $5 Million To Bolster Its Efforts As Hollywood's Private Police Force
No more public dole for copyright holders.
On the post: The Pirate Bay's Peter Sunde Questions Why We Let Dying Industries Dictate Terms Of Democracy
On the post: Why Music Is Not A Product & Three Reasons Why That's A Good Thing
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Supreme Court ~ Copyright Infringement is not theft.
"The phonorecords in question were not "stolen, converted or taken by fraud" for purposes of [section] 2314. The section's language clearly contemplates a physical identity between the items unlawfully obtained and those eventually transported, and hence some prior physical taking of the subject goods. Since the statutorily defined property rights of a copyright holder have a character distinct from the possessory interest of the owner of simple "goods, wares, [or] merchandise," interference with copyright does not easily equate with theft, conversion, or fraud. The infringer of a copyright does not assume physical control over the copyright nor wholly deprive its owner of its use. Infringement implicates a more complex set of property interests than does run-of-the-mill theft, conversion, or fraud." Dowling v. United States, 473 U.S. 207 (1985)
Therefore any use of terms such as "theft" or "piracy" in connection with copyright infringement is simply hyperbole and only fits into the RIAA and MPAA's narrative.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dowling_v._United_States_(1985)
On the post: Beware Of Those Who Claim They're 'Saving The Culture Business' When They're Really Protecting Those Who Strip Artists Of Rights
On the post: Can We Count The Ways In Which Lowe's 'License Agreement' For Linking To Its Site Is Insane?
Agreement Meant To Stifle Criticism.
On the post: Czech Government Suspends ACTA Ratification
Staying secret to their own peril
On the post: The Real Goal Of Regulating Buffer Copies? So Hollywood Can Put A Tollbooth On Innovation
Every router would have to pay a licencing fee
On the post: The Real Goal Of Regulating Buffer Copies? So Hollywood Can Put A Tollbooth On Innovation
Digital to Analog
On the post: Hey Advertisers! Stop Believing The NFL's Lies About Trademark Law And Call The Super Bowl The Super Bowl
Re: Re: Generic Trademarks.
On the post: Hey Advertisers! Stop Believing The NFL's Lies About Trademark Law And Call The Super Bowl The Super Bowl
Generic Trademarks.
Victims of Trademark bullying should seek from the courts to have the bullies names become generic as a defence against this form of corporate intimidation.
On the post: How Patents Have Held Back 3D Printing
The Airplane was held back by the Wright Brothers Patent Trolling
On the post: Does President Obama's Google Hangout Represent A Milestone?
Obama, Bills No, International Trade Agreements YES!
On the post: Senator Ron Wyden's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
Favorite Democrat
On the post: Knowledge Is A Universal Natural Resource -- And Locking It Up Hurts Everyone
Internet proves old ideas about IP wrong
On the post: Another Interesting White House Petition: Reduce The Term Of Copyright
On the post: Another Interesting White House Petition: Reduce The Term Of Copyright
On the post: Another Interesting White House Petition: Reduce The Term Of Copyright
Re: A Step in the Right Direction
Next >>