nsane.forums Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 Three U.S. Senators have introduced a bill that would make streaming unauthorized music, movies and TV-shows a felony. The bill is said to address a gap in current legislation where streaming is not considered a criminal offense. The question is whether the new legislation is really needed though, as the authorities have already started several criminal investigations into movie streaming sites in recent months. In March, the White House published a white paper with several recommendations on how to make copyright law compliant with the digital age. Among other things, it suggests classifying unauthorized streaming of copyrighted material as a felony and to allow for wiretaps in copyright related cases. The first suggestion has now been turned into a bill that Senators Amy Klobuchar, John Cornyn and Christopher Coons officially introduced last week. The bill (S. 978) was presented in the same week as the PROTECT IP Act, another major anti-piracy bill designed to clamp down on sites that facilitate online copyright infringement. If adopted, the bill will criminalize sites that offer streams of copyrighted content (such as YouTube) if they don’t act within the boundaries of the law. Under current definitions the law considers streaming to be a “public performance” instead of “reproduction and distribution.” Under the new bill, streaming sites (and users) will get the same treatment as the more traditional forms of file-sharing such as BitTorrent and direct downloads. This opens the door for the authorities to crack down on streaming sites more aggressively. But the big question, however, is whether this additional power is really needed. Those who’ve followed the news about the U.S. Government crackdown on ‘unauthorized’ movie streaming sites in recent months might reasonably think that providing streams is already a felony. As part of “Operation in Our Sites” U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) have already launched several criminal investigations into such sites. One of the affected sites was Channelsurfing.net, a website where links to external sports streams were listed. The site itself did not offer any streams, it merely linked to streams that were offered by third-party sites. Nevertheless, ICE and HSI classified the site as a criminal operation and arrested the alleged owner, 32-year old Brian McCarthy from Texas. McCarthy has been charged with criminal copyright infringement for “reproduction and distribution” of copyrighted material. In addition he was charged with aiding and abetting copyright infringement. The above suggests that the authorities already treat streaming, or linking to streams, as a felony. This means that either the arrest of McCarthy and the seizures of a dozen domains last year were illegitimate, or that the new bill isn’t really needed to deal with streaming sites. If the bill is adopted, streamers of copyrighted content face a maximum prison sentence of five years. This is the same sentence as Brian McCarthy is currently facing, even though he was arrested in March for ‘linking’ to streams. The law can often be confusing, and apparently so confusing that it may even fool justice at times. View: Original Article Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ambrocious Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 To hell in a hand basket... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HX1 Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 I am positive that there will be action against this and the IP Protect as well is already underway... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myidisbb Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 this is why you do not vote for any F!@#$% democrat or rino. laws just like china. have a nice day. cant wait for 2013 jan. 4 years freaken wasted with this joker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HX1 Posted May 18, 2011 Share Posted May 18, 2011 :rolleyes: Well rather its Victoria Espinel ... or the next elected official.... It will always be the same.. no bother .. it's going to happen anyway... I see this failing as it intrinsically dissociative to the actions being taken to begin with......Fighting on corporations behalf...she is going for sensationalizing the action, probably so it looks like she is doing her job.. Yet in this article.. It would suggest that she knows nothing of it... 'IP n00b' ...especially if she does not comprehend the actual basics.. I mean okay lets say I am going to pull a Desert Eagle and stick it in your mouth while I am talking to you.. strapped in a chair... to get what I want.. They catch up to me in the end.. and you press charges.. Are they going to charge me with murder? ..as you live and breath and testify in court? Would anyone there believe I had murdered you? ... Would you charge me with embezzlement or fraud for placing the gun in your mouth? Could you make it work.. :dunno: ( Like charging your Lawyer with it as he wastes everybody's time and makes a mockery of the Judicial System... for his own financial gain )They talk about how confusing it is yet it is not.. Its quite clear and defined... There is a lack of proper knowledge concerning the basics.. and blurred lines of perception.. This continues to plague them in every way to ever find a forthright solution to address an issue... ....Comparison to existing structure concerning other items isn't viable.. It must be what it is... Not something of the same yet something else entirely.. a mix of items that is incorrect and unclear only in what she proposes.. It would seem that the people only need be informed and the Judicial Branches as well as to these operations and how they operate.. including the production of said items.. the process involved.. Scales of accountability are a whole other matter... and really how much damage does this REALLY cause? Even that information is questionable.Even at that your talking about some large operations with some huge money and servers involved with some serious bandwidth to be streaming anything... ..( Point being we all look for consolidation in a sea of data anyway ) Its sad really how awfully backward and technologically ignorant I keep seeing this being.. Almost like the wives tales and stories you see people telling their children to control their actions.. And here in our lawmakers ears and in our Judiciary System.. we have someone like this talking in their ears... We have ignorance driving our direction... Inclusion of a real bill with talk of a WhitePaper by someone else.. Personally I would probably sit her down and give her the talk about 'change' right as I relieved her of her position. I just wonder if the US is so broke now that.. we can't even afford an IT Advisory Team for people with ideas like these.. Better yet how about advice about making WhitePapers that tend to bend the ear in the direction of corruption.. in order to obtain what is called Justice... and produce usable data and clarity in assessment.. Saying that she has any real knowledge.. Are we just the next campaign... because we have the knowledge and we can.. While these other services are offered to the rich who can afford it.. or the stupid who spend on it anyway?.... On Brian McCarthy... I would say that in a court of Law.. the charges have to be proven.. Throwing everything in the book they can find on a piece of paper at him will not work and they will have to prove it.. This is one of the reasons people hate lawyers.. because they will twist things up so much you have someone saying yes to something clearly defined within the case as being a no.. ( Is guilt a feeling of guilt.. for doing something not right.. or truly guilty as outlined in the law? Rhetorical- )Then hang an innocent man for something he hasn't done.. But evidence speaks for itself... The files themselves even contain data that can attest to this factor.. ( if there even are any ) logs.. IP Traffic... so on and so forth.. if it comes down to having to lie about it.. to make someone guilty its where you should stop.. If you really are out for justice.. because at that point you show the world that nothing has been done wrong.. that you pick someone out f the crowd to 'finger' in something... and that this whole overbuilt systematic phallic representation is as worthless as the hot-air expelled and wasted writing all of this.. and wile taking this to a Judiciary setting.. its actually about profitability and business and money.....as they say.. I type too much.. It should be a global effort to quit doing things that make me type.. :rofl:Like building with dominoes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.