And here is where people flip out, because I disagree. I think what we need is actual reform of the entire system.
I think that content makers should have a LIMITED TIME to profit from their work, but we have perverted that ideal to giving them multiple lifetimes of control to make a buck. Dead people long after their death will not be encouraged to create anything new, and the system only encourages them to seek rent from anyone who wished to build upon what should be a shared cultural heritage.
I think that separating commercial from noncommercial when computing fines would remove the incentives to not meet market demand. If the most they could hope for was x2 retail (a reasonable punishment for the 'crime') they would do everything they could to get it into the market and selling, rather than playing games trying to maximize the multiple cuts they give themselves through all sorts of channels.
I think that in an age of abundance of content, it should be a crime that content is not available at any price. If we reward them for withholding, they will withhold. Without that benefit they would find a way to make the content available.
I think that who has the rights needs to be centralized, so we never face someone building on something trying to do the right thing only to be met with we dunno if we have the rights, we don't care to look, but if you make a buck we'll sue you blind. This does not encourage creation, it encourages holding expression hostage to the whims of those who create nothing.
There is more, but I think the idea of copyright isn't horrible, what we turned it into is the real crime.
One wonders if part of the reason to not talk about numbers is they are going to be banking on Australians not being aware of the actual penalties involved. Copyright trolls have used the 'Gold Standard' of the $150K damages even in countries where that isn't supported by the law. They are trying to prey on people who aren't aware of the actual law. (and pretty much proving that exporting the US system is such a goal because of the high numbers)
If someone were to search these firms and lawsuit you end up getting much of the coverage form the US and elsewhere, and while these cases often have problems the $150K is ALWAYS talked about in media coverage (though on most blogs covering trolling we point out the number is a scare tactic) and people might freak getting "legal" notices.
These letters are going to try and gather a bunch of information based on the flawed premises - that the supersecret tech works perfectly - that you are responsible - that even if you were unaware you are responsible - you better tell us who did it or we go after you (shades of McCarthy) - the courts will stop watching us, and we'll keep sending letters without an underlying case (this will look prophetic soon enough, but its been done before)
On the upside they are getting much more media coverage of this dirty secret of the 'War on Piracy' and perhaps more people will wonder why they don't win by making the content available sooner and at the price the market wants to pay. That the content cartel players want a broken system like this because they win all around. - they use the numbers to demand more law - they use those laws to get more power - they use the power to get more financial incentives - that using a broken outdated system makes them more than remembering their business is selling to consumers not lording over them.
And even in the face of this latest bloom of those who promise the moon & deliver moldy cheese... they will still tell us the DMCA is not broken.
Until there is a fee to file, a penalty when you file absolute trash, & something to punish repeat offenders beyond that... this type of crap will continue. Hell for every 100th bad takedown open the door to ding the actual rightsholder for staying with a crap provider.
The people at the top only seem to care about numbers, oh look Martha - Content Protect filed 300,000,000 takedowns last month... they are worth the money. What they do not see or understand is that 299,999,999 of them were invalid or targeted the legal routes to the content. Content Protect isn't going to tell the people employing them that their work is crap, they want to get paid. We need to cut into their profits, to force them to evolve to a real business that doesn't just submit every link from a Google search. Perhaps Google might even use part of the penalty payments to send a note to the actual rightsholders showing the absolute failure of many of these companies to protect content.
I've seen polished sites and now this new low, but the single constant has been a very high number of these content protecting operations (even those from "reputable" companies) are total crap. Once again everyone else has to bear the costs & burdens of these poor monopoly holders. If they understood these methods were not actually helping, perhaps they might understand that creating easier access to legal content is better than living in the past where they had total control.
Why do they keep making laws like this? Why do we waste taxpayer dollars to protect groups who are exempt from the tax base?
Much time, effort, money is wasted on passing laws (and fighting court cases trying to strike them down) to protect these groups who only seem to contribute their personal outrage to the equation.
Words are icky, but they are just words. We make things taboo, and then are shocked some people use them to get a rise out of people. Perhaps it would be better to learn to ignore the yammerings of those saying things we dislike rather than attempt to regulate thought. If you want to be a racist, sexist, yadda yadda yadda... go for it. Nothing makes them more angry than being ignored. Blaming all of the ills of the world on a certain group, is the lazy mans way of sloughing off any blame they might share in the issue. Let the nutters rant, I'd rather see more time put into solving actual issues than protecting someones feels.
Oh well that nutter might do something!!! And an asteroid might fall from the sky & kill you. You can live in fear of what if, or you can live your life and know if the nutter crosses the line we have laws to deal with them. Punishing them for being loud & ignorant to appease a certain group is silly. (Although attractive as something to apply to Congress). Everyone deserves the same protections, and until we can do that we shouldn't be making some more equal than others.
of course not, because those evil people aren't worthy of special protections or even the most basic protections. (note this isn't my own personal view, just a view of many of the hyper-religious who think the law should only protect them from mean words).
From his Wikipedia page... "He is currently a principal at the Chertoff Group, a security consultancy co-founded by former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff."
Huh... perhaps maybe he is putting financial interests ahead of the good of the people.
Just keep spinning any old piece of crap to stay a talking head they always interview and scaremonger to get more money. Perhaps we should start considering expanding domestic terrorism to include those who make statements designed to incite fear & make them profit... but then most of Congress would be gone... where do I sign to approve this?
They are counting on the memories of people being short, and having no critical thinking skills... and given the reborn hysteria over dihydromonoxidie it doesn't take much.
People need to stop blindly accepting what the talking head tells them, because it just bolsters the imaginations of those they support. Despite real facts, we have people repeating fiction and clinging to it even after its disproven for the 100th time.
Snowden didn't sell us out, our leaders did. Despite all of their hysteria and fearmongering, Snowden did less than their buddy they gave a pass to. We are not less safe today because of Snowden, we are less safe because our leaders believe in magical thinking to keep us safe... look at all of the documents "stolen" over the course of a long term hack, hundreds of pages of information on people working in sensitive places because they failed to protect it while pouring billions into recording calls that haven't lead to anything worthwhile.
Perhaps this great story is just trying to spin the narrative to keep people from looking at the complete failure at every level of many governments and remind us that terrorists are in every pot, under every bed, and will snatch your children from Wal-Mart if you don't submit to another cavity search.
So about my theory that power causes a form of brain damage...
This again appears to be based in the magical thinking that Google = The Internet.
One of these times, I would really like to see Google say f' it again and give them exactly what they want. I imagine that blackholeing BC or all of Canada from Google explaining that the liability to index anything in CA is to great to do so might get people talking... and maybe someone with a modicum of technical knowledge would clue some Judges in.
It could work, but I think the most elegant solution is to put the "burden" on the rightsholder. If you can't be bothered to tick a card to say you are alive and still own the rights, the rights should fall into the public domain.
Then no one has to worry or file oodles of paperwork to cover their behinds. Hell it might even make some of the copyright transfers out there get updated so people looking to work out a deal on active rights could find the correct entity to speak with about acquiring rights to use the material.
And the longest running soap opera continues. The wheels of Justice are slowly, very so fscking slowly, threatening to get up to speed...and yet no accused Doe has been made whole.
We haven't even STARTED to have a hearing about this entire extortionate scheme, so that the courts can - in 4 or 5 years - finally reach that point where they notice that the emperor is naked. The money will not be found, it will not go back to the people who were ripped off with the court system being a willing cog in the shakedown. After the verdict, it will be another 4 or 5 years until the appeals are finally exhausted and they might finally pay something for their crimes. And the Does will be left exactly where they are today, out a bunch of cash wondering how the system could look the other way for so very long.
With liberty and justice for some... but not you little people you aren't worthy of it.
Dignity of court victim of the court. There will be no film at 11 because we couldn't give 24 hour notice before reporting on it.
Sooo we are supposed to trust the judgement of a Judge who clearly either did something blatantly stupid or was unable to clearly articulate what they intended. If you were in this Judges court would you be concerned?
And another page in the power causes a form of brain damage file.
And this of course will do nothing for the rats nest of people who might have ownership, but can't look for the papers but reserve the right to threaten lawsuits over content they might not actually own.
The most elegant solutions would be requiring copyright holders to send in a freaking postcard keeping the ownership up to date. If they skip checking in, it goes public domain. In my experiences of late, it is amazing that one can basically transfer the rights to a monopoly using a cocktail napkin and putting it in your wallet.
Copyright has become a useful tool to putting the burden of owning a monopoly on everyone else. We can't afford to protect it, you pay our costs. We can't bother to keep records up to date, you try and make some money and if its enough we'll send the lawyers to crush you. We can't remember if we own it, assume we do or else.
Why do we keep ignoring the latter half of the act to focus way to much energy on the first half. It is no longer for a limited time, and the public gets only the benefit of lawsuits for daring to do that human thing of sharing.
When the needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many, eventually someone will burn the fscker down. Could this explain why all the paramilitary build-up to keep the people from standing up and saying No, fsck you, we don't agree now stop.
Why is it when corporations do something wrong, a new law is quickly passed that does nothing to slow down corporations but are gleefully used to put the screws to the smaller easier to catch fish who don't have in-house counsel pulled from the ranks of the agencies that are supposed to keep corporations in line?
The game is rigged. Imagine the outrage if the World Series involved a professional team taking on a tee-ball team of 5 yr olds, but we accept this in our justice system. A massive well funded machine chewing people up so they can rest on their laurels of having protected "society" by putting out soundbites about sentences so far removed from human lifespan for acts that look like littering when compared to the dirty dealing done by corporations who never face anything or the occasional "we admit nothing" and here is 1% of what we earned yesterday so we can show our contrition.
While they were working on setting up the database they could have asked where the money earmarked for the earlier blown off reporting was. Perhaps it is time for them to actually clean house, rather than waste more money on setting up "lone-wolf terrorists" to take down and justify their budgets.
The system is broken, and while a database sounds nice - given the total lack of care previously - it won't make a difference. It will become a boondoggle blackhole for cash & "fixes" and maybe in 15 years someone might raise a question about why officer deaths are so low for such a "dangerous" job and citizen deaths keep growing as the paramilitary keeps executing people who they didn't have time to deal with.
Now I do not have a fancy dead sheepskin, but I like to think I know a tiny little bit about copyright law. I read the filings(s) until my head really started to hurt, that was 4 pages.
From my own skewed perspective this case adds to the evidence that we have to many lawyers willing to file cases they know are merit-less just to get paid. There is no actual downside to doing this, beyond a small slap of the wrist. All of the parts of the legal system that are supposed to punish these bad acts are more concerned with the appearance of the whole, so they never pursue those who give it a bad name... missing that allowing this sort of thing to continue strips away good appearance of the whole.
The citizens of this city need to ask the elected officials to be individually responsible for all of the costs from this bogus lawsuit. They need to start recall petitions, because these actions show they have contempt for those who they govern and the law. They will waste taxpayer money, when everyone always says there isn't enough money for needed services, on trying to silence someone who made them angry. How many other questionable lawsuits have they filed that just didn't get noticed? How much cash have they bled out of the taxpayers pockets trying to protect their image, and merely proving they are unfit for office.
They are supposed to be running a city, not filing lawsuits because someone said mean things about them.