HideTechdirt is off for the long weekend! Looking for something to read instead? Check out our new Working Futures anthology »
HideTechdirt is off for the long weekend! Looking for something to read instead? Check out our new Working Futures anthology »

House Joins The Senate In Moving Forward On Plan To Massively Increase Copyright Trolling

from the this-is-bad dept

For quite some time now we've been talking about why the CASE Act, which sets up a special copyright "court" with lower barriers to entry for copyright holders, is such a bad idea. There are all sorts of problems with it, starting with the fact that we already have a massive copyright trolling problem, and the CASE Act is deliberately designed to make it worse. While supporters like to pretend that the CASE Act is the equivalent of a "small claims" court, it actually can lead to damages awards up to $30,000, which is way higher than a standard small claims court.

That said, as with so many copyright bills before it, Congress ignores all the problems associated with the CASE Act, because a bunch of vested interests pretend that there's some real problems solved by this law. So, once again, the bill has moved forward, this time with the House passing the bill out of the Judiciary Committee, meaning that it can go to a full vote on the floor. The end result here would be really dangerous for free speech online, but no one in Congress seems to care about it. Yet.

EFF is asking people to contact their elected officials in Congress to let them know that theyshould not massively expand copyright in this manner, which will only lead to that much more extortion and shakedowns, while creating even more chilling effects for free expression online.

Filed Under: case act, congress, copyright, copyright trolling, small claims


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    Gary (profile), 19 Sep 2019 @ 11:44am

    Corporate Rights

    Hey Corporations have the Right to protect their Imaginary Property. And they are going to spend whatever it takes to make Copyright Great Again.

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 19 Sep 2019 @ 2:51pm

    Soon after the intellectual property con game is made legal, there will be a huge new insurance market. I wonder how much it will cost to purchase this new intellectual property insurance.

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 19 Sep 2019 @ 3:20pm

    How is this supposed to benefit the public again?

    Since Copywright has been abused since its inception, how is this change going to be good for the taxpayer again? Oh thats right, it is only designed to screw us over again. I wouldn't be surprised if Disney uses this to keep Mickey from going public in a few years as he finally was supposed to be.

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

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 20 Sep 2019 @ 6:07am

      Re: How is this supposed to benefit the public again?

      It's worse than that dirty old mouse. (Honestly, let him rot in the sands of time where he belongs.)

      This isn't about protecting, it's about authorization. I.e. They want veto power over anything that may remotely threaten their profit margins. Develop a revolutionary new energy source? Vetoed by the fossil fuel industry. Create a cure for cancer? Vetoed by the pharmaceutical industry. Made a breakthrough with computer processing? Vetoed by Intel and AMD. Make a better OS? Vetoed by Apple and Microsoft. Build a better mouse trap? Vetoed by the mouse trap industry.

      The whole point is to bankrupt a competitor not by making better products or providing better service, but by dragging that competitor through expensive court cases until they either give you the rights to their IP through a settlement or go bankrupt and you get the IP for next to nothing at liquidation prices.

      Corporations are not good for society, if you wanted more evidence of that, here it is laid bare: They are winning the authority to decree that the clock of human progress be stopped or turned back for their own personal gain.

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

  • icon
    That Anonymous Coward (profile), 19 Sep 2019 @ 3:55pm

    That thing where they had to show actual evidence that the law would address a specific problem that exists...

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

  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 19 Sep 2019 @ 4:41pm

    Mike Masnick just hates it when copyright law is enforced.

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

    • identicon
      Daydream, 19 Sep 2019 @ 5:28pm

      Re:

      Considering that entire sites are censored without due process, fair use is rarely respected, and that fraudulent claims are rarely if ever penalised according to the DMCA...
      I'd say that Mike Masnick hates it when copyright law isn't enforced.

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

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 19 Sep 2019 @ 5:52pm

      Re:

      How's that Paul Hansmeier defense fund coming along, bro?

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

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 19 Sep 2019 @ 7:19pm

      Re:

      Hey bro. I own the copyright on that phrase. This is your only warning.

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

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 19 Sep 2019 @ 7:49pm

      Re:

      ...What copyright law? When was the last time an enforcement of copyright law made it to court based on the merits? Fox Rothschild? Malibu Media?

      For someone who wants copyright law enforced you seem to espouse a strong interest in making sure claims never make it to the courtroom. Now why is that? If your enforcement is so righteous and your evidence so rock solid, why would you feel the need to avoid judges trying to see if your claims pass the laugh test?

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

    • icon
      Toom1275 (profile), 20 Sep 2019 @ 8:05am

      Re:

      [Asserts facts not in evidence]

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 19 Sep 2019 @ 4:58pm

    If it's like small claims court

    Make it like small claims court. No lawyers. The person bring the case has to be a lay person. We could have a new Judge Just or People's court type TV program to go along with it.

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 19 Sep 2019 @ 5:48pm

    Make it like small claims court. No lawyers. The person bring the case has to be a lay person.

    Sigh--you're thinking like an honest person: for you, the law describes how honest people do things. The people who are using this court will not ever be honest people. They will be looking for ways to abuse the law, evade its intent, and harm innocent people.

    They will hire disbarred Prenda Law principals ("no longer lawyers", see?), accuse Seminole Indians in the Juneau court, indigenous Hawaiians in Rutland Vermont, and dead Arizona grandmothers in San Juan, Puerto Rico. They will not serve the accused and will lie in court about it (like they are already doing). These people are already running criminal organizations, RICO racketeering and extortion. There is nothing that you can write into the law that will keep them from continuing their current practice in the new courts.

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

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 19 Sep 2019 @ 6:57pm

      Re:

      There is nothing that you can write into the law that will keep them from continuing their current practice in the new courts.

      This is more like giving them a license to continue business as usual, just easier.

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 20 Sep 2019 @ 1:15am

    Copyright law just hates it when Mike Masnick is enforced.

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 20 Sep 2019 @ 7:58am

    I wonder if the plaintiff will be required to prove their case or will the court simply take their word for it?

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

  • icon
    JoeCool (profile), 20 Sep 2019 @ 9:00am

    Why bad laws get through Congress

    Remember that most politicians these days are lawyers. Anything that creates more jobs for lawyers will sail pretty smoothly through Congress. This bill is clearly all about increasing jobs for lawyers.

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 22 Sep 2019 @ 6:00pm

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


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: Techdirt Logo Gear
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.