Matrix Posted July 27, 2019 Share Posted July 27, 2019 Streaming piracy has taken over from illegal downloading over the past several years. Despite this growth, however, under US law it's generally seen as a lesser offense than downloading. Lawmakers are now exploring options to change this and recent communication shows that they have the Government's Copyright Office on their side. Under US law, streaming and downloading piracy are seen as two different offenses. Not just from a technical point of view, but also in the way they are punished. Unauthorized streaming is categorized as a public performance instead of distribution, which is punishable as a misdemeanor, not a felony. Lawmakers tried to change this with the Commercial Felony Streaming Act in 2011, and later with the SOPA and PIPA bills. These bills were met with public outrage and didn’t pass. As a result, the gap between streaming and traditional file-sharing still remains today. This frustrates major copyright holder groups and recently caught the eye of the Senate Judiciary Committee as well. Last month, the Committee’s Chairman Senator Thom Tillis, and Ranking Member Senator Christopher Coons, requested clarification from the US Government’s Copyright Office on several streaming-related issues. The letter was sent after a hearing, where the NBA and the UFC both requested to increase the criminal penalty for streaming. The senators warn that streaming piracy poses important risks to copyright owners. The fact that this is seen as a lesser offense is problematic and creates a loophole for prospective copyright infringers, they argue. “Based on the testimony we received regarding the apparent ‘streaming loophole’ enabling illicit streamers to avoid felony criminal liability, we would appreciate the U.S. Copyright Office providing clear guidance regarding if and when unauthorized streaming infringes the right to control distribution of a work. “Allowing this to remain unanswered will only benefit infringers and harm America’s economy,” the senators add in their letter to the Copyright Office. The senators asked several questions, starting with whether streaming piracy violates the copyright holder’s right to public performance. In a reply letter published this week, Copyright Office director Karyn Temple answered this with an unequivocal “yes,” which wasn’t a surprise. From the Copyright office’s letter (pdf) The senators next wanted to know whether streaming piracy violates rightsholders’ right to control reproduction and distribution, as downloading does. This one was less straightforward with the Copyright Office noting that, depending upon the technology at issue, there may be instances in where this is the case. These two questions are at the crux of the “loophole” debate as public performance infringements are seen as misdemeanors while reproduction and distribution offenses are felonies. Streaming is generally seen as a public performance. However, in the response, the Copyright Office director stresses that it would like this to be changed. Responding to a question about its position, the Office is very clear. “The Copyright Office supports the same level of felony penalties for violation of the public performance right as for the reproduction and distribution rights, a position reinforced by the combination of the growing importance of streaming to the U.S. economy and the failure of the current law to effectively address unauthorized streaming,” the Office’s response reads. Finally, the senators asked whether the Copyright Office has any other suggestions to deal with the streaming piracy problem. The Office didn’t go into much detail on this issue but said that a small claims tribunal, which is currently being considered, could provide an additional tool for rightsholders. The answers and the questions show that there is quite a bit of concern about streaming piracy. As such, it wouldn’t be a surprise to see this issue being addressed in future legislation. Whether that will pass is yet another question, but the Copyright Office is all for it. “The Office has long supported a legislative fix for the ‘streaming loophole,’ although we do not endorse any particular method of addressing the problem at this time,” Temple writes. VIEW: Original Article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Streaming piracy has taken over from illegal downloading over the past several years. Despite this growth, however, under US law it's generally seen as a lesser offense than downloading. Lawmakers are now exploring options to change this and recent communication shows that they have the Government's Copyright Office on their side. Under US law, streaming and downloading piracy are seen as two different offenses. Not just from a technical point of view, but also in the way they are punished. Unauthorized streaming is categorized as a public performance instead of distribution, which is punishable as a misdemeanor, not a felony. Lawmakers tried to change this with the Commercial Felony Streaming Act in 2011, and later with the SOPA and PIPA bills. These bills were met with public outrage and didn’t pass. As a result, the gap between streaming and traditional file-sharing still remains today. This frustrates major copyright holder groups and recently caught the eye of the Senate Judiciary Committee as well. Last month, the Committee’s Chairman Senator Thom Tillis, and Ranking Member Senator Christopher Coons, requested clarification from the US Government’s Copyright Office on several streaming-related issues. The letter was sent after a hearing, where the NBA and the UFC both requested to increase the criminal penalty for streaming. The senators warn that streaming piracy poses important risks to copyright owners. The fact that this is seen as a lesser offense is problematic and creates a loophole for prospective copyright infringers, they argue. “Based on the testimony we received regarding the apparent ‘streaming loophole’ enabling illicit streamers to avoid felony criminal liability, we would appreciate the U.S. Copyright Office providing clear guidance regarding if and when unauthorized streaming infringes the right to control distribution of a work. “Allowing this to remain unanswered will only benefit infringers and harm America’s economy,” the senators add in their letter to the Copyright Office. The senators asked several questions, starting with whether streaming piracy violates the copyright holder’s right to public performance. In a reply letter published this week, Copyright Office director Karyn Temple answered this with an unequivocal “yes,” which wasn’t a surprise. From the Copyright office’s letter (pdf) The senators next wanted to know whether streaming piracy violates rightsholders’ right to control reproduction and distribution, as downloading does. This one was less straightforward with the Copyright Office noting that, depending upon the technology at issue, there may be instances in where this is the case. These two questions are at the crux of the “loophole” debate as public performance infringements are seen as misdemeanors while reproduction and distribution offenses are felonies. Streaming is generally seen as a public performance. However, in the response, the Copyright Office director stresses that it would like this to be changed. Responding to a question about its position, the Office is very clear. “The Copyright Office supports the same level of felony penalties for violation of the public performance right as for the reproduction and distribution rights, a position reinforced by the combination of the growing importance of streaming to the U.S. economy and the failure of the current law to effectively address unauthorized streaming,” the Office’s response reads. Finally, the senators asked whether the Copyright Office has any other suggestions to deal with the streaming piracy problem. The Office didn’t go into much detail on this issue but said that a small claims tribunal, which is currently being considered, could provide an additional tool for rightsholders. The answers and the questions show that there is quite a bit of concern about streaming piracy. As such, it wouldn’t be a surprise to see this issue being addressed in future legislation. Whether that will pass is yet another question, but the Copyright Office is all for it. “The Office has long supported a legislative fix for the ‘streaming loophole,’ although we do not endorse any particular method of addressing the problem at this time,” Temple writes.
steven36 Posted July 27, 2019 Share Posted July 27, 2019 They said the same thing back in 2011 they even drew up a bill for it Bill S.978 they never even voted on it and it's dead. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_S.978 Make streaming a felony: Obama https://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/16/make_streaming_a_felony/ They vote them pro copyright libtards back in there they talking about it again . Every since Trump been in office they not done nothing other than hand out cease and deist letters that's Obama policy the GOP not going let that pass and even when the DNC had the power they never try to see if it would pass they just talked about it and srcaped it .They sure not going get elected messing with that people went nuts when they try to get SOPA passed thee DNC never got nothing they wanted in all 8 years they was in the White House . https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act The big sites they shut down back then they still not been to trial in the USA yet . in the UK you can get 10 years for pirating and it still don't stop them . How could you prove someone is streaming from a direct download site? It's not possible without a illegal wiretap . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infinite_Vision Posted July 27, 2019 Share Posted July 27, 2019 19 hours ago, steven36 said: They said the same thing back in 2011 they even drew up a bill for it Bill S.978 they never even voted on it and it's dead. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_S.978 Make streaming a felony: Obama https://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/16/make_streaming_a_felony/ They vote them pro copyright libtards back in there they talking about it again . Every since Trump been in office they not done nothing other than hand out cease and deist letters that's Obama policy the GOP not going let that pass and even when the DNC had the power they never try to see if it would pass they just talked about it and srcaped it .They sure not going get elected messing with that people went nuts when they try to get SOPA passed thee DNC never got nothing they wanted in all 8 years they was in the White House . https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act The big sites they shut down back then they still not been to trial in the USA yet . in the UK you can get 10 years for pirating and it still don't stop them . How could you prove someone is streaming from a direct download site? It's not possible without a illegal wiretap . You have to watch the lobbying efforts by these various groups with from various companies and special interest groups. Who is funding them and what are their objectives. It is big business in Washington D.C. The swamp. They call other countries out for bribery and corruption but lobbying is the same thing. They are trying to influence these politicians to vote a certain way. Who is donating to which campaign? But at that times 2011, we did not have mass censorship from tech giants as we have now. People have to be pro-active in getting out and vote around the world not just US. I think they will try again and the mass brain washing of the youth has started. Some of these younger guys coming up are very clueless. And I don't even stream, I read a lot books and literature. Unfortunately, a lot of these people have been bought out and they now serve a master. Who are the puppets? and who are the puppet masters? Benjamin Franklin once said: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halvgris Posted July 29, 2019 Share Posted July 29, 2019 not really sure how they would build up evidence of the actual customer if he/she lives in another country. besides that they need to prove who watched it, let me just say to get legislation like this is going to take years. there is no secret that i tried paying for my entertainment in this forum but it turned out i was a fool. not only was most of the stuff on amazon prime geoblocked still they required full pay. for the record it did not tell me about the limitations. same happened with ufc pass. in the event that pirate iptv streams will lose market they will start allow vpn connections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.