PIPA vs Fair Use. Who Wins?

[137th Gebirg]

Don't know if this has been covered elsewhere (hopefully not in TNZ), but I recently read this article:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ternet-piracy/2011/12/11/gIQA9TK6nO_blog.html

...which is one of many in recent weeks regarding the US Senate’s Protect IP Act (PIPA) and the House version, the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA).

Long and short, it gives broad-sweeping censorship powers to the FedGov to force ISP's and other content providers to shut down whole websites if a single page has content that "provides that a complaining party can file a notice alleging that it is harmed by the activities occurring on the site ‘or portion thereof." Now, I'm not an advocate of online piracy but these two bills seem to throw the baby out of the bath water. If any IP holder like Paramount decided that they were losing market share from a Trek fan film on YouTube, they could shut all of YouTube down, or Facebook or Twitter.

Then, on the other hand, we have the older and more internet-friendly Fair Use act, which allows copyrighted content to be used on sites, provided that proper credit is given to all copyright holders and that not a single penny of profit can be obtained through the use of said copyrighted material. How does this new proposed law intend to reconcile with Fair Use? Or does it intend to supersede it?

I definitely don't want to propel this conversation into TNZ, so I'd like to keep it as flame-free as possible and not get into right-wing/left-wing finger pointing that doesn't contribute to the discussion, especially since members of both sides of the aisle seem to be on board with this. I think this new law could really kill Trek fandom, as well as the fan bases of other genres, and we really should understand the ramifications of what could happen. This entire BBS could be shut down by DHS (as they've already done with several other blatant IP infringement sites) if someone got a wild hair about it.

Will Fair Use protect us, or will I be spending time with some of you in Gitmo for running my Schematics Site?

 

[Trekker4747]

Fair Use will protect you.

If you can afford it.

The problem with much of our legal system in both criminal and civic court is that to protects your rights and freedoms you have to able to afford the lawyer to do it.

Now, Fair Use does allow for the various Internet Vloggers and personalities out there to talk about a property and show clips from it. That's what Fair Use is all about. Unfortuantely, say a studio sees clips from their property being used on an Internet Vlogger's show and he trashes the property (as they often do) then they can try and to sue the person, the host, or whomever for the copyright violation.

And in the letter of the law the Vlogger will be in the right, but the copyright holder has nearly limitless funds and an army of lawyers who can all rain down hellfire and evil onto the blogger who has only the paltry sums in their bank account with which to defend themselves and it'd just be easier and vastly cheaper to pull the offending material.

That's the problem with the measure it's more of the rich, big, guys forcing draconian rule onto the poor people acting with the laws and right but have neither the means, time or money to protect themselves.

 

[Random_Spock]

Fair Use will protect you.

If you can afford it.

The problem with much of our legal system in both criminal and civic court is that to protects your rights and freedoms you have to able to afford the lawyer to do it.

Now, Fair Use does allow for the various Internet Vloggers and personalities out there to talk about a property and show clips from it. That's what Fair Use is all about. Unfortuantely, say a studio sees clips from their property being used on an Internet Vlogger's show and he trashes the property (as they often do) then they can try and to sue the person, the host, or whomever for the copyright violation.

And in the letter of the law the Vlogger will be in the right, but the copyright holder has nearly limitless funds and an army of lawyers who can all rain down hellfire and evil onto the blogger who has only the paltry sums in their bank account with which to defend themselves and it'd just be easier and vastly cheaper to pull the offending material.

That's the problem with the measure it's more of the rich, big, guys forcing draconian rule onto the poor people acting with the laws and right but have neither the means, time or money to protect themselves.

Yep, sadly. You've hit the nail on the head there.

The only way that you'd even have a chance there is if you're rich. Otherwise, for the most part, people will be screwed due to it.

Originally posted by 137th Gebirg:

I definitely don't want to propel this conversation into TNZ, so I'd like to keep it as flame-free as possible and not get into right-wing/left-wing finger pointing that doesn't contribute to the discussion, especially since members of both sides of the aisle seem to be on board with this. I think this new law could really kill Trek fandom, as well as the fan bases of other genres, and we really should understand the ramifications of what could happen. This entire BBS could be shut down by DHS (as they've already done with several other blatant IP infringement sites) if someone got a wild hair about it.

Agreed. That's one of the main reasons why I'm not a huge fan of HR 3261. A lot of fan made internet forums and fandoms in general would be in danger due to this draconian act.

It's one thing to protect your copyright, as in preventing people from streaming whole tv shows or movies illegally, but it's another thing once they start to go on to other's rights.

As in: making movie, video game, tv show reviews, commenting about your favorite tv show, movie, video game, etc. Those kinds of things could be affected by this.

So sites like IMDB, tv.com, and other sites like that, along with fan made sites would really be at risk.

 

[SeerSGB]

Don't know if this has been covered elsewhere (hopefully not in TNZ), but I recently read this article:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ternet-piracy/2011/12/11/gIQA9TK6nO_blog.html

...which is one of many in recent weeks regarding the US Senate’s Protect IP Act (PIPA) and the House version, the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA).

Long and short, it gives broad-sweeping censorship powers to the FedGov to force ISP's and other content providers to shut down whole websites if a single page has content that "provides that a complaining party can file a notice alleging that it is harmed by the activities occurring on the site ‘or portion thereof." Now, I'm not an advocate of online piracy but these two bills seem to throw the baby out of the bath water. If any IP holder like Paramount decided that they were losing market share from a Trek fan film on YouTube, they could shut all of YouTube down, or Facebook or Twitter.

Then, on the other hand, we have the older and more internet-friendly Fair Use act, which allows copyrighted content to be used on sites, provided that proper credit is given to all copyright holders and that not a single penny of profit can be obtained through the use of said copyrighted material. How does this new proposed law intend to reconcile with Fair Use? Or does it intend to supersede it?

I definitely don't want to propel this conversation into TNZ, so I'd like to keep it as flame-free as possible and not get into right-wing/left-wing finger pointing that doesn't contribute to the discussion, especially since members of both sides of the aisle seem to be on board with this. I think this new law could really kill Trek fandom, as well as the fan bases of other genres, and we really should understand the ramifications of what could happen. This entire BBS could be shut down by DHS (as they've already done with several other blatant IP infringement sites) if someone got a wild hair about it.

Will Fair Use protect us, or will I be spending time with some of you in Gitmo for running my Schematics Site?

That's a bit of a myth. Fair is more complicated than that

Copyright Off Link

Section 107 contains a list of the various purposes for which the reproduction of a particular work may be considered fair, such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Section 107 also sets out four factors to be considered in determining whether or not a particular use is fair:

The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes

The nature of the copyrighted work
The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole
The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work

The distinction between fair use and infringement may be unclear and not easily defined. There is no specific number of words, lines, or notes that may safely be taken without permission. Acknowledging the source of the copyrighted material does not substitute for obtaining permission.

YouTube has a great educational page on this stuff

SOPA / PIPA wouldn't kill Fair Use, but it would makes a mess to defend yourself with it. And it's give IP owners the authority to get your content pulled without any form of appeals process or punishment for them make fraudulent claims and it puts a undo burden on service providers to constantly review content to make sure that it isn't some form of infringement. It puts insane penalties in place (5 years in prison per an infringement and 25000 dollars in damages per an infringement). The DMCA, while not perfect, is a better law in that is puts penalities in play for making false claims and is a much slower process.

More Info

Rep. J Polis Q&A on why SOPA is a 'net killed

Another provision that I think is just ridiculous is to have this blacklist of notorious infringers that are named foreign people that are then ineligible to raise capital from Americans or the the American marketplace. It shows a real misunderstanding of how the Internet works. Because if we name somebody a "notorious infringer," they can raise a ton of money from the netroots just on that.
Can you imagine if the attorney general said that "Vladimir Vivinsky" from Moscow is a notorious infringer? All of a sudden, that person who was a nobody becomes a somebody and can raise millions of dollars from people who tend to support WikiLeaks and other causes like that. We're causing a bigger problem.

It should be noted that two of the staffers that help concoct SOPA, recently received cushy new jobs as consultants and future lobbyists for the entertainment industry .

The same MPAA whose president is using China as the model of the law he want:

If you're wondering why lawyers and Hollywood folks would get behind legislation to censor the Internet, you only need to listen to former Senator Chris Dodd, now the head of the MPAA, who last week explained to Variety that the lobby is only asking for the same kind of power to censor the Internet as the government has in the People's Republic of China:

"When the Chinese told Google that they had to block sites or they couldn't do [business] in their country, they managed to figure out how to block sites."

Even in China they are calling it the “Great Firewall of America.” At least the Chinese are enjoying the irony of the U.S. government moving toward a legal regime that would give it carte blanche to seize and take down websites on the basis of "infringement." Tech Dirt, the site that reported on the above domain seizure, quotes one Chinese blogger on Sina Weibo subversively commenting on the progress of SOPA and PIPA in Congress:

It looks like that we can finally export our technology and value to the Americans. We’re strong, advanced, and absolutely right!

When the chinese are cheering on a law, it's a bad law.

 

[Random_Spock]

Don't know if this has been covered elsewhere (hopefully not in TNZ), but I recently read this article:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ternet-piracy/2011/12/11/gIQA9TK6nO_blog.html

...which is one of many in recent weeks regarding the US Senate’s Protect IP Act (PIPA) and the House version, the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA).

Long and short, it gives broad-sweeping censorship powers to the FedGov to force ISP's and other content providers to shut down whole websites if a single page has content that "provides that a complaining party can file a notice alleging that it is harmed by the activities occurring on the site ‘or portion thereof." Now, I'm not an advocate of online piracy but these two bills seem to throw the baby out of the bath water. If any IP holder like Paramount decided that they were losing market share from a Trek fan film on YouTube, they could shut all of YouTube down, or Facebook or Twitter.

Then, on the other hand, we have the older and more internet-friendly Fair Use act, which allows copyrighted content to be used on sites, provided that proper credit is given to all copyright holders and that not a single penny of profit can be obtained through the use of said copyrighted material. How does this new proposed law intend to reconcile with Fair Use? Or does it intend to supersede it?

I definitely don't want to propel this conversation into TNZ, so I'd like to keep it as flame-free as possible and not get into right-wing/left-wing finger pointing that doesn't contribute to the discussion, especially since members of both sides of the aisle seem to be on board with this. I think this new law could really kill Trek fandom, as well as the fan bases of other genres, and we really should understand the ramifications of what could happen. This entire BBS could be shut down by DHS (as they've already done with several other blatant IP infringement sites) if someone got a wild hair about it.

Will Fair Use protect us, or will I be spending time with some of you in Gitmo for running my Schematics Site?

That's a bit of a myth. Fair is more complicated than that

Copyright Off Link

Section 107 contains a list of the various purposes for which the reproduction of a particular work may be considered fair, such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Section 107 also sets out four factors to be considered in determining whether or not a particular use is fair:

The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes

The nature of the copyrighted work
The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole
The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work

The distinction between fair use and infringement may be unclear and not easily defined. There is no specific number of words, lines, or notes that may safely be taken without permission. Acknowledging the source of the copyrighted material does not substitute for obtaining permission.

YouTube has a great educational page on this stuff

SOPA / PIPA wouldn't kill Fair Use, but it would makes a mess to defend yourself with it. And it's give IP owners the authority to get your content pulled without any form of appeals process or punishment for them make fraudulent claims and it puts a undo burden on service providers to constantly review content to make sure that it isn't some form of infringement. It puts insane penalties in place (5 years in prison per an infringement and 25000 dollars in damages per an infringement). The DMCA, while not perfect, is a better law in that is puts penalities in play for making false claims and is a much slower process.

More Info

Rep. J Polis Q&A on why SOPA is a 'net killed




It should be noted that two of the staffers that help concoct SOPA, recently received cushy new jobs as consultants and future lobbyists for the entertainment industry .

The same MPAA whose president is using China as the model of the law he want:

If you're wondering why lawyers and Hollywood folks would get behind legislation to censor the Internet, you only need to listen to former Senator Chris Dodd, now the head of the MPAA, who last week explained to Variety that the lobby is only asking for the same kind of power to censor the Internet as the government has in the People's Republic of China:

"When the Chinese told Google that they had to block sites or they couldn't do [business] in their country, they managed to figure out how to block sites."

Even in China they are calling it the “Great Firewall of America.” At least the Chinese are enjoying the irony of the U.S. government moving toward a legal regime that would give it carte blanche to seize and take down websites on the basis of "infringement." Tech Dirt, the site that reported on the above domain seizure, quotes one Chinese blogger on Sina Weibo subversively commenting on the progress of SOPA and PIPA in Congress:

It looks like that we can finally export our technology and value to the Americans. We’re strong, advanced, and absolutely right!

When the chinese are cheering on a law, it's a bad law.

Agreed, especially on the bottom line there.

 

[SeerSGB]

Vote's tomorrow.


Rep. Issa Comments

Even if SOPA does clear the committee, "would it be appropriate to bring such a controversial bill to the floor?" Issa asks. "I think the Republican House leadership will look and say, 'Unless we have the support of the vast majority of Republicans, we're not going to take the bill to the floor.'" (Issa is the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform committee, which is busy investigating the Obama administration on many fronts, including Fannie and Freddie bonuses, the Justice Department's Operation Fast and Furious, and the Freedom of Information Act.)

When the guy that is leading the investigation into the PRESIDENT is calling your law a no starter and thinks that the party isn't likely to back it...that's pretty much calling you out of your mind to keep pushing it.

For his part, MPAA chairman Chris Dodd lashed out at "piracy apologists" in a speech yesterday and called comparisons between SOPA and the Great Firewall of China "outrageous." Hollywood has prepared its own a set of ads warning of offshore Web sites. Rep. Marsha Blackburn, a Tennessee Republican, has written an op-ed offering many of the same arguments.

As a Tennessean can I say Blackburn can go fuck herself. She likes to call herself "Independent" but runs right and only runs Independent cause it gets her votes.

The MPAA is being disingenuous when they say that," Issa replies. If a foreign Web site doesn't reply and participate in the ITC process, he says, the process wouldn't be the normal 16 or 18 months but far speedier. "The ITC has a faster rocket docket than any federal court."

Yeah, like things like FACT and TRUTH has ever been a high priority to the MPAA and the RIAA

 

[Holdfast]

... the US Senate’s Protect IP Act (PIPA) and the House version, the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA).

Don't know the answer to your question but of only the Senate called had their version the Protect Ip Limits Act, when they came to reconciling the two bills, we could at least have got a sopapilla...

 

[SeerSGB]

Live feed of the house debate: http://keepthewebopen.com/sopa

 

[Random_Spock]

Live feed of the house debate: http://keepthewebopen.com/sopa

Thanks for the link. *crosses fingers and hopes that this doesn't pass*

 

[SeerSGB]

Some of the few treats from the debate: Create a Copyright Office within the diplomatic office and assign a IP "Ambassador" to every US embassy to insure that US copyright law is protected in foreign markets

Small Govt People!

A few from the EFF Live Tweet Feed

Sandia Labs, the government's own cyber-security experts, who say that #SOPA would be harmful to American security.

If your bill needs to be amended to ensure you don't sue a refrigerator, it's broken.

House taking recess so Reps who voted against fridge-exempting amendment can ask staffers to explain why they voted against it

 

[Random_Spock]

Some of the few treats from the debate: Create a Copyright Office within the diplomatic office and assign a IP "Ambassador" to every US embassy to insure that US copyright law is protected in foreign markets

Small Govt People!

A few from the EFF Live Twee Feed

Sandia Labs, the government's own cyber-security experts, who say that #SOPA would be harmful to American security.

If your bill needs to be amended to ensure you don't sue a refrigerator, it's broken.

House taking recess so Reps who voted against fridge-exempting amendment can ask staffers to explain why they voted against it

Well that's one good group there.

Also, best thing on there:
good for them

Glad they shared that.

 

[137th Gebirg]

^^^ Wow! Talk about a list of luminaries God, I hope this thing is DOA. It's shocking to think of what could become of this downstream.

Keeping fingers crossed...

 

[SeerSGB]

The douche that is Lamar Smith

Meet The Author Of Sopa

In 2007, he proposed that sexually explicit Web sites must post warning labels on their pages or face imprisonment. He opposed a journalist shield law for bloggers, and pushed to expand the ability of police to conduct warrantless Internet wiretaps.

In 2007, Smith said that Internet providers must be required by law to keep track of what their users are doing in case police want access to the logs later.

Yeah, cause that whole pesky "due process" thing is just there for shits and giggle. Only the guilty need privacy.

Smith, a Republican member of the Tea Party Caucus, is from an old South Texas ranching family and proudly subscribed to Field and Stream magazine as a college freshman. He earned a perfect "A+" rating from the National Rifle Association and, in a move not calculated to endear him to coastal elites, tried to increase fines for "indecent" broadcasts.

Okay, I didn't know he was Tea Party till I read this article. And "indecent"...so what showing "teh boobies" on TV is worth a fine?

 

[Peach Wookiee]

Crossing my fingers too. This bill isn't right.

 

[SeerSGB]

It's pack of highschool kids

The tweet in question came from Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), a pro-gun, anti-abortion conservative who wrote that: "We are debating the Stop Online Piracy Act and Shiela Jackson [sic] has so bored me that I'm killing time by surfing the Internet."

That would be Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, a Texas Democrat who's a notoriously combative member of Congress and was named the "meanest" by the Washingtonian magazine. She didn't take kindly to being called boring.

Jackson Lee objected. And the hearing ground to a sudden halt.

I swear, a pack of bored highschoolers would be more focused than this lot.

Okay this moment was cool, I'll grant that: ""Without objection, I'd like to submit the lyrics of 'The Internet for Porn' into the record"-Rep. Jared Polis

 

[Peach Wookiee]

Heh... the solution to killing this bill is simple, then... Twitter. And maybe them getting "offended" is the key to it dying in committee. They know this is heavily unpopular and yet they have backers sticking monetary pins into them... so if they keep dragging their feet, it doesn't look to the AFL-CIO and Hollywood like they're going against their backers.

 

[137th Gebirg]

Looks like this bill is thankfully headed for some hard times:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/16/us-usa-internet-piracy-idUSTRE80F1PU20120116

Is it election time yet?

 

[23skidoo]

Just in case anyone's missed the announcement, several major websites - most notably Wikipedia and Reddit - will be going dark on Wednesday for 24 hours to protest the two laws.

Unfortunately I don't think that'll have much impact. If they really want to make the Internet - and lawmakers - shudder, we need to see the Holy Trinity of Google, Twitter and Facebook go dark for a day.

Alex

 

[Stone_Cold_Sisko]

This might be one of the worst bills I've ever seen, and that's saying a lot.

A great example of why tech-illiterate lawmakers need to stay the F away from the internet.

It actually gives corporations the power to "disappear" a site from all US internet users, AT THE DNS LEVEL (!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) without almost no oversight whatsover! And not just for hosting copyrighted material, but for linking to one!

This is exactly how China censors the Internet. The sites exist, you're just can't access the site.

Sure piracy is a real problem, but it's not such a world threatening problem that you have to fuck with the structure of the entire goddamn internet itself! For instance nobody ever suggested anything this drastic to, say, combat child pornography websites - and that's FAR FAR worse than online piracy.

Awful awful awful.

 

[23skidoo]

I'm far too modest to say "great minds think alike" (oops - I just did! ) but apparently Google is going to be joining the protest tomorrow too. They apparently aren't taking the search engine down - a fair argument can be made that doing so would actually cause some economic harm to innocent parties, it's that ubiquitous and so many businesses rely on Google searches now - but they're going to have something posted and that could potentially reach millions more users than having Wikipedia and Reddit go dark. Now all that's needed is for Facebook to do something.

Alex