I believe the likelihood of this is very low, but it is exactly what the entertainment industry wants: the internet as a one-way, broadcast medium like television and radio. It is absolutely essential to their current business model.
Qwest (DSL) and Mediacom (cable) (the only two providers in my area) both already do this. You get one letter wherein they warn you and offer to send a technician out (at your expense) to help you secure your system. Next accusation, you are cut off.
They also both throttle bittorrent to 0 if you use the default port. They aren't terribly sophisticated about it, though: if you just change ports, they don't notice (azureus picks a random port by default, AFAIK).
This has been happening for two years that I know of.
A felony is one of three strikes. A convicted felon cannot vote, is restricted from many jobs, etc. There are plenty of reasons why this shouldn't go from a misdemeanor to a felony.
"Um, how do you manipulate the numbers? The value to the uploader is what the value is. When you upload a video to YouTube, how much money do you get? That's the issue."
You forgot to add all the money that the copyright owners lost WHEN YOU STOLE FROM THEM. THAT MONEY IS VALUE, DAMMIT!
Sound ridiculous? Said owners claimed Limewire owed them $75 million. Seems pretty easy to claim more than $5000 lost.
"You haven't addressed the issue. How do you prove that two-pronged mens rea element for a regular YouTube uploader? Saying it's "not a problem" is not an answer."
If you think the feds can't ignore the law or make it up as they go, you haven't been paying attention. ICE seizures anyone? If they can seize domains without due process, they can provide mens rea easily enough (or skip it, take your choice).
"So even though it's a misdemeanor and you can't point to anyone being arrested for uploading a YouTube video, you assume that once it's a felony, the feds will be chomping at the the bit to make arrests? That's not a convincing argument."
The feds are already chomping at the bit to get arrests. This won't increase their fervor any. The only difference is that IT IS NOW A FELONY. Why? (I'll give you a hint: felons don't share all the rights of regular citizens.)
"Record the music, and you can hold it in your hand (and they can copyright it). Write it down as sheet music, and you can copyright it. You can also hold both of those in your hand. Does that make them more real for you?"
No.
The plastic disc is physical. The paper is physical.
"Saying that his activity --> U.S. jurisdiction is not tantamount to saying that those other activities --> U.S. jurisdiction, EVEN THOUGH BOTH ACTIVITIES HAPPENED ON THE INTERNET."
"Saying that his activity --> U.S. jurisdiction is not tantamount to saying that those other activities --> U.S. jurisdiction, EVEN THOUGH BOTH ACTIVITIES HAPPENED ON THE INTERNET."
On the post: Senator Leahy Praises US Gov't Censorship Of Websites As ICE Takes Another Victory Lap
Re: Re: Re:
In the first instance, the owner still has the original, in the latter, they do not. This has been explained MANY times.
Do pay attention, you'll look less of a fool.
On the post: Why ISPs Becoming Hollywood Enforcers Won't Actually Solve Hollywood's Problem
Re: Let's see how this scenario plays out:
On the post: Why ISPs Becoming Hollywood Enforcers Won't Actually Solve Hollywood's Problem
Re: Re: Re:
I don't usually start with and ad hominem attack, but I'll go along with your format.
This happens in my area NOW, it has for at least two years. ONE written (snail mail) warning, then disconnection for 90 days.
If you think it won't happen, see my initial statement (the all caps one).
On the post: Why ISPs Becoming Hollywood Enforcers Won't Actually Solve Hollywood's Problem
Re: Re:
On the post: Why ISPs Becoming Hollywood Enforcers Won't Actually Solve Hollywood's Problem
Re:
They also both throttle bittorrent to 0 if you use the default port. They aren't terribly sophisticated about it, though: if you just change ports, they don't notice (azureus picks a random port by default, AFAIK).
This has been happening for two years that I know of.
On the post: MPAA Directly Lobbies Law Enforcement To Be Its Own Private Police Force
Re: calling the cops is not "lobbying"
You are if you pay them $400,000 before you call them.
On the post: Collateral Damage: In The Hunt For LulzSec, FBI Takes Down A Bunch Of Websites
Be vewwy, vewwy, quiet.....I'm hunting wabbits!
On the post: Sony Continues Suing People Who Help Others Modify Their PS3s
Anyone wanna guess which brand I didn't purchase?
On the post: Sony Continues Suing People Who Help Others Modify Their PS3s
Re: stupid
When they can't come up with an argument, they insult the messenger. Typical twelve-year-old mentality.
On the post: US Trying To Extradite UK TVShack Admin Over Questionable Copyright Charges?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Jurisdiction
On the post: US Trying To Extradite UK TVShack Admin Over Questionable Copyright Charges?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Jurisdiction
On the post: Why Is The Justice Department Pretending US Copyright Laws Apply In The UK?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
And now we get see another case study: France.
I'm sure this one will be significantly different. ;)
On the post: Senators Unconcerned About Massive Unintended Consequences Of Criminalizing People For Embedding YouTube Videos
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Arguing...
Should've stuck with that statement.
On the post: Senators Unconcerned About Massive Unintended Consequences Of Criminalizing People For Embedding YouTube Videos
Re: Use the crappy law(s) crappily
On the post: Senators Unconcerned About Massive Unintended Consequences Of Criminalizing People For Embedding YouTube Videos
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Senators Unconcerned About Massive Unintended Consequences Of Criminalizing People For Embedding YouTube Videos
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You forgot to add all the money that the copyright owners lost WHEN YOU STOLE FROM THEM. THAT MONEY IS VALUE, DAMMIT!
Sound ridiculous? Said owners claimed Limewire owed them $75 million. Seems pretty easy to claim more than $5000 lost.
"You haven't addressed the issue. How do you prove that two-pronged mens rea element for a regular YouTube uploader? Saying it's "not a problem" is not an answer."
If you think the feds can't ignore the law or make it up as they go, you haven't been paying attention. ICE seizures anyone? If they can seize domains without due process, they can provide mens rea easily enough (or skip it, take your choice).
"So even though it's a misdemeanor and you can't point to anyone being arrested for uploading a YouTube video, you assume that once it's a felony, the feds will be chomping at the the bit to make arrests? That's not a convincing argument."
The feds are already chomping at the bit to get arrests. This won't increase their fervor any. The only difference is that IT IS NOW A FELONY. Why? (I'll give you a hint: felons don't share all the rights of regular citizens.)
On the post: George Clinton Explains How Bridgeport Allegedly Faked Documents To Get His Music Rights
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
No.
The plastic disc is physical. The paper is physical.
The music IS NOT.
On the post: Why Is The Justice Department Pretending US Copyright Laws Apply In The UK?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Saying that his activity --> U.S. jurisdiction is not tantamount to saying that those other activities --> U.S. jurisdiction, EVEN THOUGH BOTH ACTIVITIES HAPPENED ON THE INTERNET."
This case.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110616/03555214716/us-porn-company-wins-default-judgment -against-file-sharer-canada-guy-told-to-pay-64k.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110615/1 4240014708/us-trying-to-extradite-uk-tvshack-admin-over-questionable-copyright-charges.shtml
Thre e example from the main page of this site.
It appears the US sees no middle ground.
On the post: Why Is The Justice Department Pretending US Copyright Laws Apply In The UK?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
This case.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110616/03555214716/us-porn-company-wins-default-judgment -against-file-sharer-canada-guy-told-to-pay-64k.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110615/1 4240014708/us-trying-to-extradite-uk-tvshack-admin-over-questionable-copyright-charges.shtml
Thre e example from the main page of this site.
It appears the US sees no middle ground.
On the post: US Trying To Extradite UK TVShack Admin Over Questionable Copyright Charges?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Jurisdiction
I'll even help you out, AC. The answer is none.
Next >>