Anti-Piracy Laws ? Disaster?

[Handley_Page]

Anti-piracy laws will smash internet, US constitution - legal eagles

" Legal experts are warning that the proposed PROTECT IP and the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) legislation, currently working their way through Congress, will damage the world's DNS system, cripple attempts to get better online security and violate free speech rights in the US constitution. "

More from:-
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/12/20/us_ip_fail_internet_constitution/

 

[sr71plt]

Don't count on the U.S. government giving more than lip service to enforcing antipiracy laws to any meaningful extent, even if passed.

 

[mikey2much]

What makes you say that

Don't count on the U.S. government giving more than lip service to enforcing antipiracy laws to any meaningful extent, even if passed.

I would think that we as a nation would be trying to put such laws in place to help protect our rights while at the same time letting the Chinese get all the factories.

I am always against any new laws. We have way too many now.

 

[sr71plt]

I would think that we as a nation would be trying to put such laws in place to help protect our rights while at the same time letting the Chinese get all the factories.

I am always against any new laws. We have way too many now.

One would think, yes. But U.S. policy is purposely hypocritical in this regard--and always has been.

(Truth be known there are far more U.S. citizens interested in access than are interested in protection, and the government knows this. Besides, enforcing protection is much too costly and complex to be something the government wants.)

 

[dr_mabeuse]

I hate when people just post links and are too lazy to tell you what they're about! I don't know why the fuck I went and read this, but to save other people the trouble, here's the crux:

Under the terms of the proposed PROTECT IP legislation a US federal prosecutor who finds a foreign website that is “dedicated to infringing activities” can force all US internet service providers, domain name registries, domain name registrars and operators of domain name servers to block either the offending page or the whole web domain from the DNS system* - effectively wiping the site off the internet map.

The professors warn that the SOPA legislation is even worse in this regard. “Under SOPA, IP rights holders can proceed vigilante-style against allegedly offending sites, without any court hearing or any judicial intervention or oversight whatsoever… and all of this occurs based upon a notice delivered by the rights holder, which no neutral third party has even looked at, let alone adjudicated on the merits,” they write.


I doubt this legislation is going to pass, or if it does, that it can stand up to constitutional challenge.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

I would think that we as a nation would be trying to put such laws in place to help protect our rights while at the same time letting the Chinese get all the factories.

I am always against any new laws. We have way too many now.

Laws, schmaws. Unless you're losing more to piracy than it'll cost you to prosecute, it makes no sense to go after pirates, and such laws are useless.

 

[JackLuis]

The law may not make it through Congress, but I'll bet it fills a few Congressional Re-Election funds while Congress postures and poses for photo-Ops.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Laws, schmaws. Unless you're losing more to piracy than it'll cost you to prosecute, it makes no sense to go after pirates, and such laws are useless.

The music industry and the publishers fervently believe that their losses are due to piracy. The idea that the market has evolved beyond them is... well, beyond them.

 

[Handley_Page]

I hate when people just post links and are too lazy to tell you what they're about!

.

I apologise for the inconvenience caused, but, in a similar way to the fact that a bloke in the UK can screw the living daylights out of a 17 year-old girl without it being statutory rape, we have a convention of NOT quoting the source verbatim on a board such as this; the source address is provided for those interested.

In view of recent threads and comments, I figured it might be.
Stella's comment is most apposite.

 

[sr71plt]

Yes, but you didn't really give enough of the issue for readers to know what it is without linking to it.

 

[PayDay]

The bold made me laugh

One would think, yes. But U.S. policy is purposely hypocritical in this regard--and always has been.

(Truth be known there are far more U.S. citizens interested in access than are interested in protection, and the government knows this. Besides, enforcing protection is much too costly and complex to be something the government wants.)

I agree, that is, everything up until that last line I bold'd. If it was meant to be sarcastic, then I agree with it as well.

I've noticed that US copyright protection pretty much stops at the patent office, as intellectual properties are copied and pirated daily with only the worst of offenders being prosecuted, and even then, it's not to the full extent of the written law.

 

[sr71plt]

I agree, that is, everything up until that last line I bold'd. If it was meant to be sarcastic, then I agree with it as well.

I've noticed that US copyright protection pretty much stops at the patent office, as intellectual properties are copied and pirated daily with only the worst of offenders being prosecuted, and even then, it's not to the full extent of the written law.

Any copyright stuff going to the patent office is deadlettered simply because it went to the wrong place. These are entirely different processes/functions/offices.

Yes, I definitely meant the U.S. government doesn't want its law enforcement and courts tied up with "he said/he said" copyright battles--and has done everything it can to avoid that--to the point even of giving no teeth to most the laws it passes in this realm.

 

[HeyItsDani]

It was announced a couple of days ago that there was already a plugin for Firefox that bypasses the "technology" specified in the law to implement the restrictions.

 

[PayDay]

I still agree.

Any copyright stuff going to the patent office is deadlettered simply because it went to the wrong place. These are entirely different processes/functions/offices.

I understand that, what I meant, though I did not clearly type it, is that intelectual copyrights for patents are usually held up, whereas intellectual copyrights for non physical items or ideas (things that can not be patented) are fair game in the government system.

Yes, I definitely meant the U.S. government doesn't want its law enforcement and courts tied up with "he said/he said" copyright battles--and has done everything it can to avoid that--to the point even of giving no teeth to most the laws it passes in this realm.

Indeed. The bigger joke, to me, is the international laws on copyrights, some of which have no actual means of enforcement.

Back to the OP: It really doesn't matter what laws pass, as China will be running all the servers far sooner than you think, and even now, they are just a TELNET away. Also, online security is a myth. There is no such thing. It never existed, and it never will.

 

[Handley_Page]

. . . .

Yes, I definitely meant the U.S. government doesn't want its law enforcement and courts tied up with "he said/he said" copyright battles--and has done everything it can to avoid that--to the point even of giving no teeth to most the laws it passes in this realm.

No, I guess the courts are too busy battling with other stupid natters of "he said / She said".
{PS this assumes that reports seen in the UK reflect a fair presumption on the US court system}

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

The law may not make it through Congress, but I'll bet it fills a few Congressional Re-Election funds while Congress postures and poses for photo-Ops.

Es verdad. Let's hope that this doesn't get any teeth. I hate piracy, but I hate Big Brother even more.