US Copyright Office Still Out Of Touch; Supports PROTECT IP/E-PARASITE & Felony Streaming Bills
from the whatever-the-entertainment-industry-wants dept
The US Copyright Office, for years, has remained totally out of touch with the mess that copyright has become, often acting as the entertainment industry’s voice within the government. There was some hope that when longtime boss Marybeth Peters finally left, that the Copyright Office would bring in some new blood who might actually recognize how hindering and damaging copyright law is today, and seek to actually help bring copyright law into the modern era. So much for that plan. New boss Maria Pallante has released a new report detailing the “priorities” of the Copyright Office… and its the entertainment industry’s two favorite bills: PROTECT IP/E-PARASITE and the felony streaming bill. The full report (pdf) also supports the RIAA bailout bill/performance rights act, also known as the extra tax on radio stations, forcing them to pay to advertise music. While there are a few nods towards things like orphan works, it seems like the Copyright Office is about more of the same failed policies… just ratcheted up further.
In other words, the US Copyright Office remains totally out of touch with what’s happening in the world and online these days, and how both of these bills will have massive unintended consequences; criminalizing perfectly reasonable behavior, putting massive burdens on job-creating entrepreneurs and startups, limiting investment into innovation, and fundamentally breaking important parts of the internet. But if it gets a few more dollars into some legacy Hollywood studio’s pockets… well, the US Copyright Office is all for that. Sad. The US Copyright Office should be and could be a leader in fixing a broken copyright system. Instead, it appears to want to double down on the failed policies of the past, believing that greater enforcement and harsher punishments for actions done by millions is the answer. Scary stuff, but not surprising.
Filed Under: e-parasite, felony streaming, performance rights, protect ip, us copyright office
Comments on “US Copyright Office Still Out Of Touch; Supports PROTECT IP/E-PARASITE & Felony Streaming Bills”
Once artists sign with non-US labels, companies move to Canada or Europe, and Radio stations stop playing music, people will wonder how it could have happened…
Re: Re:
They’ll blame it on piracy and then push for even harsher laws.
Re: Re: Re:
I’m convinced that is the plan.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Agreed. These idiots don’t seem to realize that the famous ‘Tarkin’ comment from Star Wars applies here.
The ONLY thing that this will do to will be to make people go to encrypted end-to-end p2p like Freenet. Hell, Bittorrent could be rewritten to require encryption end-to-end with little to no problems with that.
Re: Re:
People are dumb and do not pay attention to or even understand what is going on pertaining to tech internet stuff.And little to no papers or news outlets have carried the story of our government about to sell out the Country for a little money form their MAFIAA SCUMBAG Friends.
I wonder how much it takes to “buy” a Senator ?
To be fair, their entire existence is predicated on these laws being put in place. After all, it “guarantees” that jobs are there.
Re: Re:
But handpicked jobs… and most of which shouldn’t really exist. Who needs an overpaid record executive? An underpaid one would probably do a better job.
Re: Re: Re:
Correction: bosses who actually paid for their failures would do a better job.
Why didn’t our elected officials mention that they were going to pass pro-IP legislation before they got elected? Could it be because they know that doing so is a sure way to lose an election.
Re: Re:
Good point. Personally, I would like to slip a recording device on these people and see all the ‘conflicts of interest’ that are coming up here.
Frankly, even though it is ‘illegal’ by federal law, I wouldn’t give a shit: there are times when you HAVE to break the law to keep the politicians honest!
just a different name condoning the same or even worse policies. perhaps the ‘massive unintended consequences’ are not so ‘unintended!
what was Pallante doing before getting involved with the US Copyright Office? from what i read, every position she has ever held has been to do with copyright in one form or another. loads of brains, no common sense. no wonder she got the job.
Piracy?
How can they worry about pirates when I’m losing $43,213,125,734.27 per year because of overprotective copyright laws?
Despite coming over to Copyhype and trying to defend his obvious piracy apologism, Masnick remains committed to ignoring how Terry Hart explained what the bill really does, and instead just focusing on continuing to lie and spread FUD.
That says everything anyone needs to know about Mike Masnick.
Re: Re:
Yes, you are correct. Any opinion other than your own is FUD and obvious lies. How could I have been to blind to this?
Re: Re: Re:
Well, this one guy said this one thing and all these other people are saying these different things. Maybe there could be some sort of governing body to sort all this shit out?
Re: Re:
Quack-FUD, quack-FUD, quack-FUD….
Your posts all sound the same and never even contain links to the ever so rare references you typically fail to provide.
If it contains the word FUD, and sounds like a duck, it is probably your post, and that’s whats *ucked up!
Re: Re: Re:
never even contain links
Everyone knows links are a form of infringement.
Re: Re: Re:
Ducks who fly upside down invariably quack up.
Re: Re:
*yawn* Wake me up when he has a better opinion not mired in disingenuous arguments, complex readings of law, and don’t support the mpaa, eparasites, and the destruction of innovation to support their old business models.
Re: Re: Re:
Nice punt.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I’ve been quite critical of his position before. If there’s something specific that I have to say about his position, link me and I’ll be sure to analyze and critique what he’s saying. I just have no interest in looking up his latest articles when his logic and reasoning have been getting worse and worse since the beginning of the year.
Re: Re:
Give it up already, your FUD is weaker than the FUD from Mr. Masnick, I take his word over yours anyday of the week.
copyright
I don’t see the point of making them pay to advertise music.. the music industry is a minefield anyway as far as copyright legislation is concerned (since the internet has opened it up for anyone to download nearly anything).
Re: copyright
I very rarely listen to music radio any more – I might be infringing just by tuning in.
Captured
Not out of touch. Just captured by lobbyists.
Structurally ?over the long term? we cannot rely on any government agency to protect a broad and diffuse public interest against a small group determined to profit.
It is a deep problem in all our institutions.
Re: Captured
“In other words, the US Copyright Office remains totally out of touch…”
Not out of touch. Just captured by lobbyists.
You seem to think that lobbyists exist only on the side you oppose. What do you think Masnick was doing in Washington last week? He was lobbying. Right along with the dozens of Google lobbying firms, EFF, CDT and PK all lobby. Maybe it’s that the lobbyists on your side of the issue can’t get traction because lawmakers largely believe that infringing is stealing.
Poor Masnick. It’s one thing after another. Protect IP, e-Parasite, the Copyright Office, six strikes, payment processors jumping ship, foreign governments tightening the noose, bum’s rush in DC. Maybe life is sending you a message Masnick. May the rest of the world is right and you’re wrong?
Re: Re:
Since when is the Copyright industr…..sorry, the “content” industry the rest of the world?
Honest question, I’d like to actually hear/read your justification for this statement.
Re: Re: Re:
Since when do losers that rip off artists think it’s ok and that they should be able to do it forever?
Oh that’s right, in the Freetard Fantasy World.
Ignorance is clearly bliss for some.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Since I know for a fact that you can’t stop nobody from copying anything.
Can you tell us how will you monitor all means of communication and transfer of data?
Nope you can’t.
Besides the trully freetards are the artists that want life + 95 years of a monopoly, that is not working for a living that is called being a parasite, not only that who was the idiot who let them control derivatives? Can Ford control what people do with their vehicles? Can Coca Cola say to others how to use their products after they have been sold?
Nope so why is that copyright allow that kind of thing.
America become independent because nobody wanted to pay monopoly rents and now everybody has to pay some entitled a-holes that believe they can define what is a crime and who is a criminal.
Yah right, without the majority of the population behind it, there will be no effective copyrights ever.
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
Thank you, Anonymous Coward. You hit all the nails on the head. To the first Anonymous Coward in this post, you are a troll of the WORST DAMNED KIND!
Either that, or you are a paid MAFIAA poster who has taken his brain out and shot it a few times in order to lower your IQ enough to believe the MAFIAA bunkus.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yes, blissfully thinking that the entire world is filled with pirates when things like Soundcloud, Youtube, and Turntable enable customers and artists alike.
Wake up! Life is calling.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Since when is okay to rip off the consumer, and think you can do it forever. Since when is it okay to charge anyone time and time again for the same thing. If they think they can rip me off forever , the feeling is mutual and I will continue to do the same.
Re: Re: Re:
It’s far more than the content industry. It’s also hundreds of companies and the Chamber of Commerce, AFL-CIO and of course millions of law abiding citizens who don’t believe it’s OK to take something of value without compensating the rights holder.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Copyrights and patents should also last forever.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
If the people really support these laws then why was ACTA negotiated in secret? Could it be because the government-industrial complex knows that people do not support these laws? and now TPP.
and I have never seen a politician run for office claiming that he will expand IP laws if elected. Perhaps politicians know that these laws are unpopular among their constituents and such claims are a sure way to not get elected? If the people really want these laws, why aren’t politicians eager to publicly proclaim their support of IP laws during elections? It should help them get elected, right?
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
“government-industrial complex”
Don’t you have a tent you should be living in?
Re: Re:
bum’s rush in DC
This part is funny. Who, pray tell, do you think kicked me out of a meeting? Because when you tell me, it’ll be the first I heard of it.
Re: Re: Re:
From Dictionary.com:
Bum’s rush: hurrying someone out of a place. (As someone might quickly escort a vagrant from a fancy restaurant.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I’m fully aware of what it means. I’m just wondering who you think it happened with. Because it didn’t.
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
I’m fully aware of what it means.
Really? I couldn’t tell as you said this:
“Who, pray tell, do you think kicked me out of a meeting?“
when you claim that you understand that the term means:
Bum’s rush: hurrying someone out of a place. (As someone might quickly escort a vagrant from a fancy restaurant.
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
Depending on your perspective, being rushed out is being the same as kicked out.
What’s telling, of course, is that you fail to answer the actual question, preferring to play semantics.
And that’s because you have nothing to back it up. You *hoped* that we were rushed out of offices. We were not. Of all of the meetings we were in, not a single one ended with us being hurried out. Multiple meetings did end with us saying we had to leave to go on to our next meeting, and at least one Congressman delayed leaving to catch his flight home to discuss the points we raised further.
But I’m glad your “intel” on what happened appears to be about as accurate as your understanding of new innovation and how people view copyright today. Frankly, I would have expected better access on your part. But now I know you’re a two-bit nothing player in this debate.
Patents = monopoly
I think the author might want to change this “unintended consequences” to “INTENDED”.
All of this posting about protect IP and such gives me the impression that Mike is pretty much having a foot stamping, hair pulling tantrum, just like any child denied his binky.
What have we seen in the last 48 hours? 2 hit pieces against the bill sponsors, attacks on Justin Beiber, and some pretty intense pieces such as this one calling in every boogie man possible to try to make things look bad.
It’s enough to make my weekend so much better!
Re: Re:
You amuse me, you really, really do. The attack wasn’t on Bieber, it was on his lawyers. Oddly enough, Bieber hasn’t passed the Bar Exam, in any state.
Swing and a miss, bucko.
Re: Re: Re:
You didn’t read the same post I did, did you?
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111028/12580416553/justin-bieber-senator-klobuchar-should-be-locked-up-felony-streaming-bill.shtml
It’s a hit piece, an attack on Beiber within hours of his complaint to EFF coming public, as part of the campaign against new laws coming out.
If you can’t understand why the piece was posted, I think you need to step back and think for a while. Mike has been incredibly transparent in the last few days, how come you can’t see it?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Maybe I can. And maybe I find his arguments more consistent than your ilk’s
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
I left my ilk in my pants pocket when they went to the cleaners. So I don’t have an ilk, sorry.
It would be quaint if someone reminded the Copyright Office that part of copyright was supposed to balance the rights of the one side and the rights of the public.
As the scales are currently tipped, the Copyright Office owes each American quite a bit and is not delivering anything more than a thumb on the scales benefiting corporations.
The article makes it sound as if the Copyright Office has only the two legislative matters on its plate of priorities. This is hardly the case, as the paper goes on to point out a whole host of other matters, many of are in consonance with what is repeatedly expressed here.
While one might want the Register of Copyrights to go much further, it is not, in my view, accurate or fair to suggest that she “does not get it”.
cisco
To be fair, their entire existence is predicated on these laws being put in place. After all, it “guarantees” that jobs are there.