Fair use goes bye bye! - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

denim · 11-20-2004, 05:51 AM

Quote:

MIT TECHNOLOGY REVIEW

Is 'Fair Use' in Peril?

The far-reaching Intellectual Property Protection Act would deny consumers many of the freedoms they take for granted.

By ERIC HELLWEG
November*19,*2004*3:04*p.m.

Do you like fast-forwarding through commercials on a television program you've recorded? How much do you like it? Enough to go to jail if you're caught doing it? If a new copyright and intellectual property omnibus bill sitting on Congress's desk passes, that may be the choice you'll face.

How can this be possible? Because language that makes fast-forwarding through commercials illegal -- no doubt inserted at the behest of lobbyists for the advertising industry -- was inserted into a bill that would allow people to fast forward past objectionable sections of a recorded movie (and I bet you already thought that was OK). And that's but one, albeit scary, scenario that may come to pass if the Intellectual Property Protection Act, or IPPA, is enacted into law. Deliberations on this legislation will be one of the tasks for the lame-duck Congress that commenced this week.

Last month, Senator John McCain stated his opposition to this bill, and specifically cited the anti-commercial skipping feature: "Americans have been recording TV shows and fast-forwarding through commercials for 30 years," he said. "Do we really expect to throw people in jail in 2004 for behavior they've been engaged in for more than a quarter century?"

Included in the legislation are eight separate bills, five of which have already passed one branch of Congress, one of which was approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee, and two of which have merely been proposed. By lumping all the bills together and pushing the package through both houses of Congress, proponents hope to score an enormous victory for Hollywood and some content industries.

Here's more of what's included: a provision that would make it a felony to record a movie in a theater for future distribution on a peer-to-peer network. IPPA would also criminalize the currently legal act of using the sharing capacity of iTunes, Apple Computer Inc.'s popular music software program; the legislation equates that act with the indiscriminate file sharing on popular peer-to-peer programs. Currently, with iTunes, users can opt to share a playlist with others on their network. IPPA doesn't differentiate this innocuous -- and Apple sanctioned -- act from the promiscuous sharing that happens when someone makes a music collection available to five million strangers on Kazaa or Grokster.

Not surprisingly, the bill has become a focal point for very vocal parties. In favor of the legislation are groups such as the Recording Industry Association of America, the Motion Picture Association of America, and various songwriter, actor, and director organizations. "We certainly support it," says Jonathan Lamy, spokesperson for the RIAA. "It includes a number of things to strengthen the hand of law enforcement to combat piracy. Intellectual property theft is a national security crime. It's appropriate that the Fed dedicate resources to deter and prosecute IP theft."

Against the bill stand a number of technology lobbying groups and public-interest organizations. "[IPPA] is a cobbled-together package to which Congress has given inadequate attention. It is another step in Hollywood and the recording industry's campaign to exert more control over content," says Gigi Sohn, president of Public Knowledge, a Washington, DC-based public interest group that aims to alert the public to fair use and consumer rights infringements, and fight those perceived infringements in the capital.

Anyone attuned to the machinations of Congress the last two years likely has become numb to the often overblown rhetoric on this issue. Both sides use hyperbole -- usually in the form of calling a piece of legislation the death of an industry or the death of individual rights. The 1982 statement to a congressional committee by Jack Valenti, then head of the MPAA, that the VCR is to Hollywood what the Boston Strangler was to a woman alone still stands as the ne plus ultra of exaggerated claims. And civil libertarians haven't met an affront that didn't equal a stake through the heart of individual rights.

But IPPA demands attention not just from Hill watchers, but from regular individuals. In part because IPPA is such a broad, encompassing bill that could affect things as pedestrian as fast-forwarding a commercial, but also because with Senator Orrin Hatch -- a very Hollywood-friendly pol -- on his way out as the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, to be replaced possibly by Arlen Specter, many in the Hollywood community see this as an important, last chance to get their demands made into law.

This article appeared Nov. 19, 2004 on the Web site of Technology Review, an MIT Enterprise

CONTACT YOUR CONGRESS PEOPLE!!!!

All I can say, which isn't self-evident, is that if this passes, I'll violate it at every opportunity and encourage others to do the same. I'll speak to police and suggest that they not enforce it. We need to squish the MPAA and RIAA down HARD. If you don't know who your Congresspeople are, see vote-smart.org and give it your 9-digit ZIP code.

The only part of this I agree with is making it illegal to record a movie for the price of a single ticket.

Lockjaw · 11-20-2004, 06:35 AM

Don't mind making the movie recording illegal(thought it already was), and the file sharing goes without saying...won't stop it but it is stealing. But the choosing NOT to watch a commercial and making that activity illegal? That is some of the biggest BS I've ever heard. I need to make sure I post this up on other boards.
Thanks for the heads up.

Nefir · 11-20-2004, 07:21 AM

If the commercials that corporations pay to air end up being mandatory to watch by the consumer... thats an awful big step towards corporations ruling our lives. What's next? Forcing brand loyalty and jailing "traitors"? Shouldn't the corporations be serving *us* instead, under the punishment of losing customers?

Intellectual Property Law is actually something I want to start studying in the next year or so. I am definitely interested in preventing this sort of bs, and understanding how we came to this and where we're going from here.

SecretMethod70 · 11-20-2004, 08:16 AM

There should be no doubt among well-informed people who exactly their representatives - no matter whether they are Republican or Democrat - are truly representing.

Thankfully, though, we're still the ones with the votes. Contact your congresspersons and let them know that you do not support this and will not vote for someone who supports stripping you of your freedom.

With the exception of a few places, lock picking materials are not illegal - they have legitimate uses. So why are copyright infringing materials - which also have legitimate uses - being pushed to be so? It's already illegal to break copyrights...it should not be made illegal to be CAPABLE of it.

Glory's Sun · 11-20-2004, 08:36 AM

add another check mark in the pro column for moving to Canada.

Seriously, copyright laws are just getting too crazy now. You spend a good deal of money on something then you're told how you can and can't use it (Ipod) ..pfftt there has to be some sort of middle ground somewhere.. right.. ??

SecretMethod70 · 11-20-2004, 09:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by guccilvr

add another check mark in the pro column for moving to Canada.

Seriously, copyright laws are just getting too crazy now. You spend a good deal of money on something then you're told how you can and can't use it (Ipod) ..pfftt there has to be some sort of middle ground somewhere.. right.. ??

Don't bother. These changes will follow you where ever you go. The best thing to do is fight it and work to prevent it from happening anywhere.

Don't believe me? Tell that to the Europeans who are now busy fighting the possible introduction of software patents.

The middle ground is to not treat people like criminals as the default. Breaking copyrights are already illegal. There's little need to do more than that.

JustDisGuy · 11-20-2004, 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SecretMethod70

With the exception of a few places, lock picking materials are not illegal - they have legitimate uses. So why are copyright infringing materials - which also have legitimate uses - being pushed to be so? It's already illegal to break copyrights...it should not be made illegal to be CAPABLE of it.

I would imagine the photocopier manufacturers would have some negative comments on legislation that criminalized technology that enabled copyright infringement.

The problem with government is the amount of power that can be wielded by wealthy lobby groups. Government no longer governs for the majority, but rather for those with the fattest wallets.

SecretMethod70 · 11-20-2004, 11:50 AM

Of course they would, and that's why these laws are only selectively enforced.

Willy · 11-20-2004, 11:56 AM

This might be enough to finally get me to get rid of TV at my house for good. Not that I record TV or fast forward the commercials anyway, but the principle of the thing pisses me off. I would really, really miss football though.

Paradise Lost · 11-20-2004, 12:03 PM

Quote:

Last month, Senator John McCain stated his opposition to this bill, and specifically cited the anti-commercial skipping feature: "Americans have been recording TV shows and fast-forwarding through commercials for 30 years," he said. "Do we really expect to throw people in jail in 2004 for behavior they've been engaged in for more than a quarter century?"

This is the kind of arguement I would find myself making. Besides, Advertisers are only paying for a time spot when it actually appears on television, not 5 months afterwards when we're watching a recorded version of the show. If we missed the commercial the FIRST time it went on TV (being that we're taping this and probably not home,) why on earth would they care if we fast-forwarded through the spot while watching it sometime later?

Besides, how on earth could anyone enforce this ridiculously silly act? Cops showing up at people's house at random, trying to catch people fast-forwarding through commercials of taped television shows?

The whole thing is just about as absurd as any other bill trying to be passed in Congress to help try to support some entertainment industry or another.

11-20-2004, 07:21 AM	#3 (permalink)
Nefir Junkie Location: Louisville, KY	If the commercials that corporations pay to air end up being mandatory to watch by the consumer... thats an awful big step towards corporations ruling our lives. What's next? Forcing brand loyalty and jailing "traitors"? Shouldn't the corporations be serving us instead, under the punishment of losing customers? Intellectual Property Law is actually something I want to start studying in the next year or so. I am definitely interested in preventing this sort of bs, and understanding how we came to this and where we're going from here. __________________ You do not use a Macintosh, instead you use a Tandy Kompressor break your glowstick, Kompressor eat your candy Kompressor open jaws, Kompressor release ants Kompressor watch you scream, Because Kompressor does not dance

11-20-2004, 08:16 AM	#4 (permalink)
SecretMethod70 Human Administrator Location: Chicago	There should be no doubt among well-informed people who exactly their representatives - no matter whether they are Republican or Democrat - are truly representing. Thankfully, though, we're still the ones with the votes. Contact your congresspersons and let them know that you do not support this and will not vote for someone who supports stripping you of your freedom. With the exception of a few places, lock picking materials are not illegal - they have legitimate uses. So why are copyright infringing materials - which also have legitimate uses - being pushed to be so? It's already illegal to break copyrights...it should not be made illegal to be CAPABLE of it. __________________ Le temps détruit tout "Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling Last edited by SecretMethod70; 11-20-2004 at 08:20 AM..

11-20-2004, 11:50 AM	#8 (permalink)
SecretMethod70 Human Administrator Location: Chicago	Of course they would, and that's why these laws are only selectively enforced. __________________ Le temps détruit tout "Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

11-20-2004, 06:35 AM	#2 (permalink)
Lockjaw Junkie	Don't mind making the movie recording illegal(thought it already was), and the file sharing goes without saying...won't stop it but it is stealing. But the choosing NOT to watch a commercial and making that activity illegal? That is some of the biggest BS I've ever heard. I need to make sure I post this up on other boards. Thanks for the heads up.

11-20-2004, 08:36 AM	#5 (permalink)
Glory's Sun Registered User	add another check mark in the pro column for moving to Canada. Seriously, copyright laws are just getting too crazy now. You spend a good deal of money on something then you're told how you can and can't use it (Ipod) ..pfftt there has to be some sort of middle ground somewhere.. right.. ??

11-20-2004, 11:56 AM	#9 (permalink)
Willy Insane	This might be enough to finally get me to get rid of TV at my house for good. Not that I record TV or fast forward the commercials anyway, but the principle of the thing pisses me off. I would really, really miss football though.