And Of Course: DOJ Announces New Focus, Funding On Intellectual Property Enforcement

from the did-you-expect-anything-else dept

As we all know by now, the new administration hired a bunch of the entertainment industry's favorite lawyers, and during the confirmation hearings for the most senior among them, a desire to have the Justice Department focus more on intellectual property was a key point. So, it shouldn't be much of a surprise that the Justice Department has announced new grants to focus on intellectual property enforcement. It's not a huge amount ($1.9 million) and, as per the DOJ's purview, the focus is on criminal intellectual property infringement, but you really wonder if there aren't more important things for the DOJ to be focused on these days. Still... thanks to the Justice Department PR folks who sent me a press release for the first time ever. Apparently, someone there is reading us.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    icon
    ChurchHatesTucker (profile), Aug 28th, 2009 @ 5:08pm

    WTF?

    What about the jaywalking epidemic? Will nobody think of the children?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    Lindsay S., Aug 28th, 2009 @ 5:42pm

    Re: WTF?

    I think of the children every time I jaywalk. I call it "leading by example."

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 28th, 2009 @ 6:05pm

    Apparently, someone there is reading us.

    $20 says it's Neil MacBride.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    icon
    Thomas (profile), Aug 28th, 2009 @ 7:25pm

    DOJ owned now

    by the **AA. Great for terrorists wanting to kill americans, terrible for Americans wanting protection.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 28th, 2009 @ 7:33pm

    So much for "change we can believe in"

    President Obama and his team have a big double standard going right here.

    He and his supporters bemoan the fact that big money and coroporate fat cats have too much control in healthcare. I guess he doesn't care if they run the IP infrastructure and further ruin our IP laws to benefit a few greedy pigs.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    icon
    Thomas (profile), Aug 28th, 2009 @ 7:35pm

    Change the department title

    from Department of Justice
    to
    Department of Protecting Media companies.

    screw the people.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 28th, 2009 @ 7:47pm

    THEM TORTURERS ARE DESTROYING THE RULE OF LAW!!!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    identicon
    Robin, Aug 28th, 2009 @ 9:19pm

    d.o.j. has to

    they have to do this, my inglorious senator leahy forced them to:

    s.3325 became, without a vote on the senate floor (now that's! democracy), public law 110-403. specifically, section IV:

    "Sec. 401)
    Amends the Computer Crime Enforcement Act to allow existing grants to combat computer crime to be used for activities relating to infringement of copyrighted works over the Internet. Authorizes appropriations. Authorizes the Office of Justice Programs of the Department of Justice (DOJ) to make grants for training, prevention, enforcement, and prosecution of intellectual property theft and infringement crimes. Authorizes appropriations."

    where actually does the money go? lord only knows, and only the *AA care.

    the only thing going on here is regulatory capture at its finest.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 29th, 2009 @ 5:08am

    Too many laws + too much government = more taxes,larger national debt, less freedom


    Its not just the DOJ its our whole system that needs to be scraped and/or fixed

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 29th, 2009 @ 5:54am

    Wow, what a whiny bunch here today. Sounds like you guys are a little worried that there might be some actual enforcement, and you might have to stop downloading stuff and sharing it.

    On Noes!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    identicon
    ..., Aug 29th, 2009 @ 6:19am

    Re:

    O, possibly,they are sick and tired of the bullshit which screws up competition in the marketplace.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    identicon
    Nifty, Aug 29th, 2009 @ 8:05am

    Not belonging to either major party I find it amusing how people seem to have no problem when the leadership in their party wants to have additional 'authority' to protect them. Yet they are afraid of the other party having the authority. No one ever says to themselves...would I be comfortable if Reagan, Clinton, Bush, or Obama had access to this authority? Or how it goes unreported that the same lawsuits against the Bush administration for rights violations were taken right up by the Obama administration. After all we can trust O to listen to our conversations... The people in government are more beholden to their contributors than their constituents.

    It might be a RIAA, the MPAA, it might be the Pharmaceuticals, it might be the wealthy in their community, but rarely is it the voter. Otherwise, where are the border fences a clear majority of us want, why does money keep going to banks that give it to international interests, why does every program end up costing twice as much and taking twice as long to enact as they tell us it will- and why is the guy doing the work always related to a congressman?

    It doesnt matter what you believe, giving the govt the power will simply result in more debt and less freedom - always. It is because the government is owned by interests who hijack the party most likely to get elected in a particular district and people blindly vote the ticket not caring if their guy is a puppet. This administration has big $$ from the entertainment sector so expect to see all kinds of laws to protect and extend their rights and expect it to make them more money which they will kick back a portion to the politicians. Expect them to pay people to monitor these blogs and try to shame us for loaning our records...or cassette tapes... or files or even books for someone else to use or lord forbid even recap the ball game we saw last night to people sitting at the lunch table at work.

    I dont think a law has been passed in 40 years that didnt profit someone or destroy a competitor. So did your party win the last few elections or the few before that...did it ever result in things getting any better? If it did then why every few elections is the other party sitting in power? It is because in order to get into power the parties must give in to corruption to get the money to win or overthrow elections.

    Government by nature is corrupt regardless of party the only answer is to limit its influence by making it smaller.

    If you want a big government to take care of you then you have to accept these facts.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 29th, 2009 @ 5:08pm

    Re: Re:

    When has a government-enforced monopoly that lasts a century or more been bad for competition? What are you, some kind of commie?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    icon
    Jordan (profile), Aug 31st, 2009 @ 10:18am

    Techdirt -- Gitmo Edition

    Watch out Mike. They may be trying to declare you an enemy blogger.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  15.  
    icon
    donalds (profile), Sep 7th, 2009 @ 4:26pm

    Maybe this will speed up the investigation of an organized crime ring that has been stalking me for 3 yrs, all because of a cybercriminal.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This