Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

U.S. Reps Chu and Coble Start Intellectual Property Caucus

timothy posted about a year ago | from the please-line-up-here-with-your-bribes dept.

Government 150

cervesaebraciator writes "U.S. Representative Judy Chu (D-CA) will be starting a new caucus with the ostensible purpose of protecting the intellectual property rights of filmmakers, musicians and other artists. The new caucus, styled the Congressional Creative Rights Caucus, will be formed along with Rep. Howard Coble (R-NC). Chu's office released a statement, including the following: 'American innovation hinges on creativity – it is what allows our kids to dream big and our artists to create works that inspire us all. The jobs that result are thanks entirely to our willingness to foster creative talent, and an environment where it can thrive and prosper. [...] The Congressional Creative Rights Caucus will serve to educate Members of Congress and the general public about the importance of preserving and protecting the rights of the creative community in the U.S. American creators of motion pictures, music, software and other creative works rely on Congress to protect their copyrights, human rights, First Amendment rights and property rights.'"

cancel ×

150 comments

And who will represent the people? (5, Insightful)

Jackie_Chan_Fan (730745) | about a year ago | (#42994621)

The corporations?

Eat a dick liars!

Re:And who will represent the people? (5, Insightful)

White Flame (1074973) | about a year ago | (#42994749)

And what caucus will promote the Public Domain?

Re:And who will represent the people? (4, Interesting)

flyneye (84093) | about a year ago | (#42994775)

Meanwhile, the people are educated by the people who are vastly not fooled.
Unfortunately, these are the same people who also know the corruption of government, the lies of the media, that taxes buy votes, that marijuana is safe,that guns don't kill people, that doctors do kill people, the lottery is an idiot tax, the war is over corporate interests, black is not white, etc...

          But , it just doesn't matter, because the government will always tip to those who fill their individual retirement funds and promote their continued office.

          Tired of voting Repubmocrat tyranny yet or do we vote for business as usual next time? Are you one of the educated or just another drone that is part of the problem?

Re:And who will represent the people? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42995119)

Are you one of the educated or just another drone that is part of the problem?

Are you kidding?

You're talking to drone city here. Most of Slashdot is Microsoft or Apple reputation management teams, there's almost no real nerds left.

Re:And who will represent the people? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42996155)

Interesting post. On the one hand, you talk about corruption in government generally, representing the situation as a very clear "people vs government" nonpartisan issue, but then you lump in to it some very pointed, very partisan, political opinions which are not shared by many of the "people" with whom you are trying to identify (and motivate).

Plenty of people, apart from any kind of government corruption, believe that they should be free to smoke marijuana whether it is safe or not. You sneaking that in just alienated a big part of your audience.

The same is true for gun control, since a large percentage of the American people believe that they should be free to own and carry firearms (not just apart from, but in response TO government corruption). Another huge chunk of your audience alienated.

Same for your points about the lottery, doctors, etc.

By conflating these issues, you seem to be suggesting an identity between them which is simply not there.

Your final implication that anyone who disagrees with you (about ANY of these points) are mindless drones basically seals the deal of alienation. You aren't going to motivate anyone to act this way, apart from perhaps flaming your post.

Re:And who will represent the people? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42994797)

The GOP is a party funded by corporations for the corporations , not for the people.
They take away the rights and freedoms of Americans and Americans keep electing them because they're lying to Americans all the time. People still beleive them , lord knows why and keep getting fu***** by them .The Enemy of The People of the USA is the GOP aka Republicans.
They are the enemy that fights the Americans from within.Wake up and if you value Freedom and TRUE Democracy stop voting for them .
The GOP will stop at nothing to crush you !

Re:And who will represent the people? (1)

hebertrich (472331) | about a year ago | (#42994827)

Amen .
It would be quite nice to see only individuals funding parties and to a max of say 100 bucks each and make things even.
Wonder how long the GOP would last loosing it's corporate funding with only the people funding them ,the citizens.
Sounds like a war on the US citizens is raging on . i'm happy not to live there.

Re:And who will represent the people? (4, Insightful)

Stormthirst (66538) | about a year ago | (#42994893)

Whilst I agree with your sentiments, the Democrats aren't really any much better. After all, which president was it that started killing Americans unconstitutionally? Oh yes, that would be a Democrat. At least the Democrats *say* they want to return to a slightly more reasonable tax regime in order to try and balance the books.

Indeed, keeping it on topic with the story, isn't Judy Chu a Democrat? Do you really think this Congressional Creative Rights Caucus will do anything to protect the other half of the Intellectual Property rights - the Public Domain? I seriously doubt it.

Re:And who will represent the people? (1)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | about a year ago | (#42995209)

You think this was the first time an American was killed unconstitutionally by his own government?

Very, very unlikely.

Re:And who will represent the people? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42995257)

Read GP better please.
Repubmocrat. He's not saying Republicans are bad, he's saying both of them are.

Re:And who will represent the people? (1)

Stormthirst (66538) | about a year ago | (#42995449)

I will if you will. The GP doesn't mention the Democrats once.

Re:And who will represent the people? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42995727)

Does not mention Republicans, Either.

Re:And who will represent the people? (2)

nametaken (610866) | about a year ago | (#42996137)

At least the Democrats *say* they want to return to a slightly more reasonable tax regime in order to try and balance the books.

Republican *say* they want to return to a slightly more reasonable tax regime, too. The problem is that neither actually do. One is "kill tax loopholes and reduce spending", both of which are legitimate ideas depending on where they're implemented, the other is "spend more to promote economic growth and increase taxes", which, depending on how it's implemented, also makes sense.

If it weren't all bullshit political posturing, where two enemies were trying to preserve their voting records for reference in future elections, we'd get some arrangement that involves all of the above and be in pretty good shape in short order.

But they bicker, we bicker, and nobody comes to a legitimate solution.

Re:And who will represent the people? (2)

bwcbwc (601780) | about a year ago | (#42996333)

"...the Democrats aren't really any much better."

Considering the caucus is sponsored by both a Democrat and a Republican, this demonstrates more of a talent for noticing the obvious, not insight. And the stuff about killing American citizens is pretty much off-topic.

On the other hand, if 90% of people try to turn this into a partisan debate, even though it has both D and R members, maybe it's not so obvious to the illiteratti after all.

Re:And who will represent the people? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42995957)

"keep getting fu***** by them"

Hmmm. "fu*****" can't be "fucked", because there's an extra "*" there. "fubared"? Could be, but why use asterisks for that word?

I'm confused ...

Re:And who will represent the people? (1)

CanEHdian (1098955) | about a year ago | (#42995445)

Every time, again and again, this video [vimeo.com] becomes more and more of a reality. It's a good thing that as a matter of happenstance the creators used the UK as the operating theater. The rest of Europe will be moving the other way.

It is all that America has left (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42994629)

With the outsourcing of jobs and the cheap labour of Asia/India replacing the manufacturing sector in the USA, what does it have left to export or create jobs with?

You can't make a Hollywood blockbuster in China or India or South Africa, you can't outsource new music to India...

But make no mistake about it, the word "preserve" here is code for "never allow into public domain."

Re:It is all that America has left (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42994641)

Here's how the scam works:

Two seriously good-looking 20-something girls come over to your car as you are packing your shopping into the trunk. They both start wiping your windshield with a rag and Windex, with their breasts almost falling out of their skimpy T-shirts. It is impossible not to look. When you thank them and offer them a tip, they say, 'No' and instead ask you for a ride to McDonald's.

You agree and they get into the back seat. On the way, they start undressing. Then one of them climbs over into the front seat and starts crawling all over you, while the other one steals your wallet.

I had my wallet stolen May 4th, 9th, 10th, twice on the 15th, 17th, 20th, 24th, & 29th. Also June 1st & 4th, twice on the 8th, 16th, 23rd, 26th & yesterday, three times last Monday and very likely again this upcoming weekend.

So tell your friends to be careful. What a horrible way to take advantage of older men. Warn your friends to be vigilant.

Wal-Mart has wallets on sale for $2.99 each. I found cheaper ones for $1.99 at Dollar General and the Dollar Store and bought them out. Also, you never will get to eat at McDonald's. I've already lost 11 pounds

Re:It is all that America has left (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42994707)

copypasta [greatervan...hotels.com] mod redundant.

Re:It is all that America has left (1)

flyneye (84093) | about a year ago | (#42994777)

Mod above post up for being the only good news in this thread.

Re:It is all that America has left (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42994747)

You can't make a Hollywood blockbuster in China or India or South Africa,

From a special effects standpoint, perhaps. I'd say China, India and South Africa are on equal footing in terms of poor stories and nonsensical plots.

you can't outsource new music to India...

Daler Mehndi is awesome.

But seriously, nearly all the music I buy these days comes from either Japan or Europe.

If movies and music is all the US has left, let's just start dividing up the spoils of the fallen empire already, and save everyone a whole lot of legislative bullshit and attempts at forcing our ill-thought-out treaties on other countries.

Re:It is all that America has left (4, Insightful)

rossdee (243626) | about a year ago | (#42995049)

Next they will be saying you can't make a Hollywood blockbuster in New Zealand

Warning: sarcasm detector failure in moderator (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42995141)

You should have mentioned (for the benefit of the braindead they give mod points to) that LOTR and that prequel trilogy was filmed in New Zealand. Your sarcasm went right over their empty heads. Sad.

Re:It is all that America has left (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42995917)

Fair enough. He should have said, "You can't make every Hollywood blockbuster in China or India or South Africa."

Re:It is all that America has left (5, Insightful)

Znork (31774) | about a year ago | (#42994785)

IP is ultimately a form of taxation and redistribution and as such it contributes to the general cost level of the economy. Saying that IPR is needed because the jobs are the only ones that don't get outsourced to cheaper countries is equivalent to saying that we need higher taxes to pay for government jobs that are the only ones that don't get oursourced.

IPR simply makes an economy less competitive and is part of the reason why everything is too expensive to do in the west.

And frankly I can't see any reason why blockbuster couldn't trivially be outsourced. The script for most films could probably be written by, eh, a script. Effects can certianly be done anywhere and I really doubt actors will last beyond the decade before they start getting replaced by rendered versions.

HALF OF HOLLYWOOD & TV IS OUTSOURCED TO AUSTRA (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42994833)

Guess it's OK to outsource to a nation that sucks up to us!

Re:It is all that America has left (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42994849)

>You can't make a Hollywood blockbuster in China or India
(Part of?) Ironman 3 is made on location in China. There are Hollywood hit movies from Hong Kong.
There are tons of Indian movies that have higher IMDB ratings than Hollywood hits.

Just that YOU are not watching in the US of A, doesn't mean that it is not a big hit in somewhere else in the world.

Re:It is all that America has left (3, Insightful)

alexgieg (948359) | about a year ago | (#42995071)

You can't make a Hollywood blockbuster in China or India or South Africa, you can't outsource new music to India...

Yet.

CG technology is approaching full photo realism, including for simulated human actors. Voice simulation too is advancing enormously, just look at the most recent generation of the Vocaloid software line in Japan. In a few years all the pieces will be in place for any small CG studio in the world to produce entirely virtual Hollywood-level blockbusters indistinguishable from any "real" production. They won't be able to use the likeness of currently living famous actors, at least not if they plan to release in the US, but add a few more years of well crafted virtual actors reappearing and forging brand awareness and even that will be a moot point.

Unless Hollywood discovers a way to out-innovate technological advances its prominence, a result mostly of the outrageous costs of state-of-the-art film making that so far only it could manage to fund, is a decline in the waiting.

Re:It is all that America has left (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42995127)

Here's a weird idea...

Quit complaining that some work or another might never be public domain. The way law is being skewed is a good thing; it's a blessing in disguise: it will force us to consume art, literature, our culture in general and be required to pay for them, or patronize free art, literature, etc., that is released under the Creative Commons, or similar free licenses.

There is always the third option, pirate it, but when America starts lopping off limbs as punishment for IP "theft," which I'm sure most of you will live to see (ah, youth...) you'll realize crime doesn't pay, and will find that there is plenty of good music, art, etc., that was released for free. Just eschew the paid-for crap in favor of the free art that people who love art for art's sake, rather than art for money's sake made. It's out there, there's plenty of it.

When you (and here's the point, dude,) when you knuckle under and pay for music, or whatev's, even when it's a tiny amount, if you use a service like Rhapsody, or Amazon's Cloud player, or even that... what's it called? AppleTunes or whatever, about 99 cents out of every dollar goes to someone other than the person (or people) who actually created the art, the rest goes to parasites we don't need, and maybe never did. Some of it even goes to paying off and bribing lawmakers to make laws that allow them to continue to try to force you to pay them because they feel somehow entitled to what you so foolishly thought was... your money.

Even if you only buy used, the existence of the used marketplace rewards people in one more, admittedly small way, for buying into the system, by giving them a place to dump the crap after they've tired of it. If you buy more CD's, SACD's, DVD's, Blue-ray Discs, if you pay for music or movies online, if you watch television and buy things you see advertised there, if you buy books or watch movies in theaters, congratulations, you are part of the problem.

So if you do any of these things, quit whining about members of the government conspiring with thieves to steal what's yours, you're helping THEM. So enjoy your enslavement, you've EARNED IT! :)

Re:It is all that America has left (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42995241)

Or here's an even better idea: Quit being a jackass, stop putting words in others mouths, and actually try replying to the arguments being made, you know, what is actually being said. And why shouldn't we be annoyed that stuff that should go in the public domain isn't? I doubt your answer will be anything but amusing though since you lumped together whining and complaining [protip: whining is a form of complaining, but complaining != whining in of itself. Grammar, jack-off, try using it some time.]

Re:It is all that America has left (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42995193)

Dear Rep. Chu: go to hell.

Signed,

Regular human people.

Re:It is all that America has left (2)

c0lo (1497653) | about a year ago | (#42995323)

You can't make a Hollywood blockbuster in China or India or South Africa, you can't outsource new music to India...

You [youtube.com] reckon? [wikipedia.org]

Re:It is all that America has left (2)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about a year ago | (#42995377)

You can't make a Hollywood blockbuster in China or India or South Africa

You don't say! Where do they make Hollywood blockbusters then? I just can't work it out...

Re:It is all that America has left (2)

bbelt16ag (744938) | about a year ago | (#42995427)

um, first off music can be made anywhere, All you need is a studio and the hardware. Both are getting cheaper by the day. They will be posted on you-tube and the like. Movies like a blockbuster are going to take awhile, but not forever. The tv shows are dying off, and you tube is taking over as well. They intelligent and creatives are making videos and getting money from these. They have the ability to be sponsored by commercial entities like PBS or CBS or who ever. Its the perfect medium to get your ideas out there. A boy in his basement say what he wants to the world and people can choose to listen or not. As far as moving stuff to china, India or Africa. The infrastructure is being built right now. They are no longer undeveloped, and third world. They are emerging into the first world. The next generation of Chinese, Indian, African, and who ever else are being taught in your systems of colleges now. We still have that at least for now, until they go back to their own countries..

No Hope, No Change (5, Insightful)

haruchai (17472) | about a year ago | (#42994633)

looks like the RIAA / MPAA is, once again, stepping up their game

Re:No Hope, No Change (5, Informative)

_xeno_ (155264) | about a year ago | (#42994693)

Bingo. I was hoping that, even after seeing "(D-CA)", this would be someone talking about making IP laws sane.

Nope.

This is all about "strengthening" them because they're "ineffective."

Really all you need to know is this bit from Rep. Chu's own press release:

The motion picture industry has a strong economic presence in Rep. Chu's current district. According to the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), $437 million is paid by their member studios to local businesses, and almost 140,000 jobs are in direct film and television in Los Angeles County.

Re:No Hope, No Change (4, Insightful)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about a year ago | (#42994769)

They are ineffective. And the only way to make them effective in the age of the internet is to make them draconian. You can't hope to enforce a law against a crime so trivial to commit and commonplace if you need to worry about things like proof, verified evidence, a fair hearing or all the other things usually seen as legal rights. Just like you can't hope to stop people shareing memory sticks full of music with their friends unless you ban the technology to make those copies, or at least impose a penalty far out of proportion so you can ruin a few lives as examples to the rest of the population. That is the price of effective copyright, and I'm not willing to pay it.

Re:No Hope, No Change (4, Insightful)

KiloByte (825081) | about a year ago | (#42994809)

I was hoping that, even after seeing "(D-CA)", this would be someone talking about making IP laws sane.

You got party affiliation wrong. It's Democrites who suck on MAFIAA's teat more. Repugnicants prefer big oil and military contractors; both parties are all-out whores to big finance.

But really, the difference between these two parties is pretty cosmetic.

Re:No Hope, No Change (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42995711)

Politicians will suck off whoever has money in their districts.

I live in a district that flipflops regularly but we have (and I work at) a defense contracting site in that district.
Doesn't matter which party represents us, we always get visits and photo-ops and other strokes-- either during elections, or when they need to distract from some other dumb-ass thing they're doing.

Re:No Hope, No Change (1)

_xeno_ (155264) | about a year ago | (#42996153)

But really, the difference between these two parties is pretty cosmetic.

Actually, I was more focused on the "CA" part of "D-CA" than the "D" - since, as you point out, it's the state that the politician's from that determines which company they serve. D or R, if it's "CA," that means "film/record industry." TX would mean oil, and NY means finance.

If it were anything other than a D or R that might mean something, but D or R, you're never going to hear any politician from CA interested in useful IP reform.

Re:No Hope, No Change (2)

Jetra (2622687) | about a year ago | (#42994991)

Life plus 70 isn't enough? Where will they stop? Life of the Universe + a couple of centuries?

Re:No Hope, No Change (5, Insightful)

AlphaWolf_HK (692722) | about a year ago | (#42994699)

True, but the voters are the ones to blame for this. Lobbyists can promote candidates, but they can't vote for them.

I want to stress, by the way, that this isn't a republican or democrat thing and I'd hope to nip those blame games in the bud. The problem here is people not bothering to look at who they vote for. Among things that people vote for are this: whether it's a D or an R next to their name, whether or not their friends are voting for them, whether or not they like their appearance, or most recently the color of their skin (seriously, my sister voted for no reason other than she thought it would be good to have a black president.)

If any of you have ever seen v for vendetta, he paints equal blame for an oppressive government on the citizens themselves. And that is exactly the thing - we're basically reaping what we've sown. And please, for gods sakes, don't go around telling people who they should vote for either. Tell them to either think for themselves about what they are voting for, or else do everybody else a favor and don't vote at all.

If you want proof of this, just read slashdot. Not the articles, but the comments. It's pretty hard to find a liberal that is in favor of gun control, yet still they vote in droves for politicians who are in favor of gun control. It's hard to find a conservative that is in favor of big government, yet they still vote in droves for politicians that are in favor of big government. Quit voting for the god damn letter, and always second guess those advertisements that e.g. say Joe the politician voted against education funding when in reality the bill he voted against was aimed at something else entirely, but had education as an earmark.

Re:No Hope, No Change (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42994863)

You blame the voters, but the information presented to them is pure deception. I don't give a fuck if they were a school teacher or volunteered for 37 years scraping tarter off retarded children's teeth. I only care if they are a member of PNAC, AIPAC, CFR, the UN (subs - UNEP/IPCC/Agenda 21), ICG. I only care if they are doing revolving doors with monsanto, HFCS, banking, etc. I only care if they won't break their sworn oaths. The ballot doesn't tell you they've broken the logan act, or been convicted of felonies, the ballot won't tell you if their ID is real. Neither will the corporate owned media. In essence you don't know shit about who your voting for, you can't validate an electronic vote, and you can't do JACK SHIT about the two party electoral college system. Go read land destroyer, who connects these dots: http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2011/03/naming-names-your-real-government.html [blogspot.com]
Go read about the disaster that is the "electoral college" GO look at the ron paul people that got fucked.

The problem is these officials have broken their OATHS, and I believe this is because they aren't natural citizens anymore, which explains why they don't give a shit about the Constitution they have European ideals, not American, Constitutional ideals.

There's ISRAEL (land of the ritual to un-bind all your sworn oath, no wonder they don't obey pesky GOY oaths, nice word huh? Goy?)
http://maplight.org/us-congress/interest/J5100/view/all [maplight.org]

They have completely infiltrated DHS, NSA, CIA, Senate, House--everything. There's a difference between being Jewish, and being a zionist psychopath, so don't lob shells at me sayin I am anti-semetic, and for the record my fucking grandmother is Jewish! My point here is that people refuse to even address this issue because of the fucking mind games.

Technically you don't need to vote, the electoral college does it FOR you. Don't like it? FIX it.

You know I thought ol Debra Bowen (D, CA secretary of state) was going to rid those electronic boxen. Nope. And even recently found a lawsuit vs Debra Bowen about motherfucking Barack's Birth Certificate ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE ARGUMENT.

How the fuck is it we are all to get national ID's and be spied and monitored by NSA and databases and all this fucking SHIT and the mother fucking president can't prove he's a fucking natural born citizen.

This shit is just too un-real, the turning is coming soon. That's why they want your guns, that's why their fucking judges don't prosecute the Jon Corzine's. Just wait until the banksters fuck it up again, it will be Jubilee time this time

Re:No Hope, No Change - OATH TO ISRAEL (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42994935)

Congress "must sign an written oath to Israel" is correctly put or there is hell to pay if you don't. You are confusing oath of office with oath to Israel.
We now know its more then "kissing up to money". You must take a blanket oath after kissing up to money, again to Israel.
Listen to Cynthia McKinney talking all about it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=795ZZH0emE0

Re:No Hope, No Change (4, Insightful)

dkleinsc (563838) | about a year ago | (#42994887)

I want to stress, by the way, that this isn't a republican or democrat thing and I'd hope to nip those blame games in the bud.

Absolutely, it's not a Democrat thing nor a Republican thing. What it is is an entrenched corruption thing. For instance, a freshman congressman can show up bright-eyed and bushy-tailed for their first session, ready to debate the issues of the day, and will promptly find out that their own party leadership (who controls the agenda) will ignore them unless they raise $5 million for the party's congressional campaign fund. If they don't play the game, they don't get any kind of serious say in what's going on, and are doomed to life as a backbencher who's bills never make it into a committee hearing, much less a floor vote, and all the federal pork will move out of their district (creating unemployment), until they either give up and decide not to run again, or play ball.

That's the game in Washington, and everyone is playing it, except possibly Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Angus King (I-ME). For those of you wondering why I left out Joe Lieberman (I-CT), it's because he may be nominally independent, but he's a major fundraiser for the Democrats, so they protect him from even the primary voters from Connecticut.

Re:No Hope, No Change (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42996201)

Lieberman also has a raging hard-on for internet censorship.

Re:No Hope, No Change (3, Interesting)

jmichaelg (148257) | about a year ago | (#42995857)

It doesn't matter who is voted into office, what matters is who is willing to pay for the campaign. It takes money to run for Congress and these creatures are acting no differently than their predecessors or successors.

It takes a small number of people with a strong vested interest to fund a campaign when the opposition is not willing to fund an counter campaign. To wit

Judy Chu, a Democrat, [opensecrets.org] has raised $80,000 from people, pacs and companies associated with the movie industry.

Howard Coble, a Republican, [opensecrets.org] has raised $40,000 from the same sources.

$120,000 tells you why these people are doing this. Slashdot isn't raising $120,000 against the legislation so it goes forward..

This snippet sums it all up, "I've put in two calls to your PAC director, and I haven't received any return phone calls," the Congressman said, according to Williams. "Now why am I taking this meeting?" The minute he left the office, Williams called his PAC director, and she cut those checks. " [npr.org]

True Innovation (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42994643)

True innovation is about taking the ideas that people have spent years and resources developing and subtly improving them, not about paying lawyers to sort out license fees or waiting for patents to expire.

Re:True Innovation (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42994655)

To protect the dreams of children is a great tag line, but this will only let them dream. If they try to do anything but dream based on the material, they will be sued.

In other words... (0)

thejynxed (831517) | about a year ago | (#42994675)

"We don't like the fact that so-called 3rd World nations are starting to catch up to, and surpass us, we must form a working group in Congress for the sole purpose of guaranteeing profits for dinosaur companies for centuries into the future!"

I love good music (5, Insightful)

balsy2001 (941953) | about a year ago | (#42994679)

And good films. However, it is only possible to make money on those when people in other industries are employed and have disposable income. These jobs are secondary effects of others having money to spend on them. It is maslow's hierarchy of needs, if everyone else is broke they can't and won't buy the media. Some will turn to piracy and some will just do without. You can't create jobs or support an economy with a circle of media industry workers buying each others stuff. By necessity there needs to be other people involved. If the law makers wanted to help, they would work on improving the economy. With more disposable income in the hands of the masses, media sales would increase. If the media industry wanted to help they could improve the quality of their product and/or lower prices (I feel like there is not nearly as many good movies any more, but maybe it is just because I am getting older). While "strengthening" the IP protections of artists may prevent some people from pirating media, I don't think this is the big problem. I'm not sure I know any adults in the work force that pirate stuff. Most just buy the things that they think are worth the price and don't bother with the other stuff.

Re:I love good music (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42995295)

I love sexy American porn. Since I'd have to copy-paste most of your comment here, I just add a point from the international perspective: there are not many easy, no-cost or extremely low cost payment systems for persons who don't have a credit card, can't have one and have earnings significantly lesser than $15000 a year.

Creativity ... right (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42994721)

"American innovation hinges on creativity â" it is what allows our kids to dream big ..."

- and then pay royalties on those dreams. We can't let them kids steal those dreams. Think of the children!

I no longer recognize IP (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42994761)

Sorry, I'm over it and past it. Do I still directly contribute to the individual artist or inventor if I can? Yes.

Do I respect the patents, copyrights, and trademarks of large corporations? Well, not any more.

Congressional Campaign Donations Caucus (0)

we3 (546328) | about a year ago | (#42994763)

yays for corruption!

Re:Congressional Campaign Donations Caucus (1)

tqk (413719) | about a year ago | (#42995999)

yays for corruption!

Indeed. The only information this story conveys is who got the latest cheque cut by the MafiAA. Surprising for the open-ness, I must say. It's not often you see confessions writ so large and so publicly. SOP; do it the stupidest way possible, stick your fingers in your ears, damn the torpedos, and sing "Lalalalalala ..." as loudly as you can. Dummies.

Soon the fucking BANKSTERS are goin down (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42994767)

In the big picture the RIAA/MPAA doesn't matter, they're made of the same shit oath breakers are made of, I've never met a band, musician, friend, producer, or record label that likes these motherfuckers, NOT ONE.

These pieces of shit in government are just diddling their filthy penis's up our asses day after day - BOHICA, the sad thing is that they have got people to the point that things are so fucked up, people just take it because it's too much of a hassle to get the root of the problem, look if you are reading this, YOU Can't even tell me what the law is anymore, it's fucking become a STATE SECRET! When Debt to GDP math exponents finally blow their horn the jig will be up, This is why these fucking "stein's" and "goldman's" of this world are trying to take away guns, and devalue money they want to CONTROL your fucking ass before and after the shit hits the fan. Some shit is already hitting the fans now but the controlled fascist media ain't talkin bout it, they're just saying things are just fine, but they too are not our friends, they enable the oath breaking officials to get away with the shit

That bitch Feinstein belongs in Ft Leavenworth, a domestic terrorist about to start a civil war with this gun grabbing anti- 2nd amendment shit
  What this agenda 21 lover doesn't get, is that I WILL DIE FIGHTING RATHER THAN LIVE UNDER THIS UNCONSTITUTIONAL FASCIST SHIT

I like many others just want to be left the fuck alone, but they ain't going to do that, there WILL BE A TURNING, it will be our piece of shit officials fault 100%.

So what are you fighting for? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42994815)

My property rights when I've bought a movie?

No, apparently you're fighting to remove my property rights.

My First Ammendment when it comes to saying what I've heard?

No, apparently you're fighting to remove my First Ammendment rights.

The very term "intellectual property" is misguided (5, Insightful)

cjonslashdot (904508) | about a year ago | (#42994819)

Nowhere in the US Constitution does it equate protections of rights pertaining to intellectual works as "property".

The term "property" implies that it can be sold, that it can be inherited, that it can be owned - and owned by non-persons at that. Nowhere does the Constitution say these things, nor does it even use the term "property" in this context.

Rather, it says that Congress shall have the power "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries." And that is all it says on the matter.

Note that it says "Authors and Inventors". It does not say businesses: if it had meant to include businesses, it would have said so, but the Constitution starts out with "We the People", and it is about the rights of people and the powers and limitations of government over those people (much less corporations or unions, which are not people: a group of persons is not a person any more than a human body is a cell). And note that the Constitution uses the term "exclusive Right": it does not use the term "property". A right is akin to a lease. It is not ownership of the object in question. Thus, in the term "intellectual property", the "property" is merely a lease of sorts granted to Authors and Inventors (people) - for a limited time. That does not automatically imply inheritance to me, nor does it automatically imply that it can be bought and sold as we assume that property can: those are extrapolations of the "rights" intended and we should question those extrapolations and not take them for granted: do they actually promote science and the useful arts? I therefore think that the term "intellectual property" implies extrapolations that might not have been intended.

Copyright and patent law (these terms are also not in the Constitution) have made huge leaps beyond what the Constitution intended. That is why we are off track.

Re:The very term "intellectual property" is misgui (2)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | about a year ago | (#42995149)

It would be perverse indeed to assume that the founders intended a system where every copyright holder would have to own a publishing company. Because that is exactly what you are proposing.

It was certainly NOT true under English law that this was the case, and there is no evidence that such was the intent of the founders to require this.

The existing process in English law included the sale of the copyright to publishers, and in fact this process was encouraged by people like John Locke when the reform of Licensing led to the Statute of Anne.

Re:The very term "intellectual property" is misgui (1)

foniksonik (573572) | about a year ago | (#42995555)

And yet we live in a world where every artist / writer / collective CAN have their own publishing company and it is trivial to set up. The cost of distribution is nearly zero, the cost of transaction is the same as any business and again trivial. The cost of marketing is probably the biggest expense and time consumer.

Creative people don't need publishers, they just need good PR. They don't need to sell their copyrights for that. There is no need to allow businesses to own copyrights.

Re:The very term "intellectual property" is misgui (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42996307)

It would be perverse indeed to assume that the founders intended a system where every copyright holder would have to own a publishing company. Because that is exactly what you are proposing.

No ownership required. The copyright holder would simply hire a publisher to print his works and pay them their fee, he would then be free to sell his works for whatever he could get for them. If he is popular enough he gets rich, if his works suck he goes out of business. That's the American way.

Long ago (years before the first CD burner became available to the public), I looked into having some CD's made. It was like $50 to make the master disk and then $1 for each copy after that. I don't remember off hand what the cost was per disk for the artwork (it depended a lot on the number of colors as if I remember right it was all silk-screened). So say for sake of argument (I'm just going to make up some numbers) I could make 10,000 copies for $50,000 (cost of pressing, CD artwork, jewel case, art insert, shipping and storage) and then sell each of those for $18 apiece (the typical cost of a music CD in those days), I could made approximately $130,000 in profit. That's a profit margin of 260%. At this insane profit rate you can see why the big media corporations absolutely panicked when CD burners became available to the public. Now I could do the same thing today via MP3s and the Internet which brings the cost per unit down to almost nothing. The big media people are just desperate to keep a hold of their failing business model.

Re:The very term "intellectual property" is misgui (2)

Stormthirst (66538) | about a year ago | (#42995151)

Yeah, but corporations are people don't-ya-know

Re:The very term "intellectual property" is misgui (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42996311)

The concept of IP is a direct violation of the principle of free speech, and the one major loophole in the US constitution. It basically amounts to saying "speech is free unless the government decides it's not, and then it goes to the person with the most money." Businesses are realizing this loophole and taking advantage of it. The only reason why it's become a problem in recent decades is because copyright and patent law and practices have become so unreasonable.

IP is a crutch for those who can't innovate. It's protectionism for the weak, lazy, and corrupt. If what you do is really that innovative, you don't need the government to bless it as such.

Corporate interests (4, Interesting)

EmperorOfCanada (1332175) | about a year ago | (#42994823)

Do they realize that 99% of theses rules that corporations want will hurt artists, creators, etc. The record companies want to bring back the days where they can sell a million records and the band hardly gets enough money to buy a new van.

A great but typical example of this would be the guy who wrote the book, "Nature of Code"(great book) he now gives people the option of buying his book online for a price you choose ranging from 0-10 dollars. Other than the transaction fee he gets 100% of the money resulting in his getting up to triple as much as he did when his previous book sold through a traditional publisher while the consumer gets it for 1/5th as much.

I don't see any need to protect the traditional publisher one iota. If any new laws are needed they should be there to protect the little guy from the traditional publisher. But in this day of big money politics politicians aren't there anymore for the voter. If anything they seem annoyed when voters get their own act together and boot them out.

Re:Corporate interests (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42995261)

There was a time when the industry was needed and did serve a valid purpose. Marketing and production wasn't cheap on the national scale. Someone had to pony up and risk cash on new talent, unless you wanted to stay local forever. At some point they did lose their way and became an entity onto itself and the artists were no longer the priority. Which ended up hurting the ones they were supposed to be promoting, the 'little guys'.

But regardless, those days where they were an important part of the music ( and video ) industry are long gone now, and the government should not be in the business of using our money ( and freedoms in many cases ) to protect and shelter older business models that are no longer viable.

Orwell would be proud (3, Insightful)

jbmartin6 (1232050) | about a year ago | (#42994857)

American innovation hinges on creativity

so let's do everything we can to stifle it.

Re:Orwell would be proud (1)

c0lo (1497653) | about a year ago | (#42995391)

American innovation hinges on creativity

so let's do everything we can to stifle it.

Why do you hate Orwell so much?

Re:Orwell would be proud (3, Interesting)

Somebody Is Using My (985418) | about a year ago | (#42995441)

In the past, America's greatness was a result of its vast natural resources. While those resources remain, they no longer seem so endless and are becoming increasingly hard to tap into, due to NIMBY syndrome and other factors. It is easier to look outside our own borders and take what we need from other nations, regardless of the cost in lives to the natives of those lands.

In the past, America was great because it was open to new ideas. Its not that it necessarily had more ideas than anyone else, but a less rigid class-system - supported by a vast frontier that allowed anyone daring enough to remake themselves - fostered an environment where even the wackiest ideas could be considered... and some of those ideas bore fruit. But now, rich and wealthy, the nation is becoming increasingly conservative and close-minded to anything that might jeopardize the security of that wealth.

In the past, America's manufacturing might was bolstered by a motivated workforce. The country was the factory of the world. But as cost-of-living increased, it became cheaper for all those jobs to migrate to other nations, and now whole cities once dedicated to industry lie in ruins.

In the past, America was breadbasket to the world. More than just feeding ourselves, our fruits and grains were shipped out to the starving nations of the world. Now, thanks to plummeting shipping costs, it is oft-times cheaper to grow those plants in far-off lands and ship them back into the country. Meanwhile its heartlands become increasingly less productive from decades of overproduction and over-fertilization.

In the past, America's strength was its highly-educated technicians and scientists, who created electronic marvels that changed the world. But now, these marvels have become commonplace, we sell our know-how to our erstwhile allies, and educate its own rivals. Meanwhile, its own children falter at the most basic tasks because their own education is hampered by backwards-looking fanatics.

In the past, America was a noble beacon to the world, a land of opportunity and freedom. People thronged to America's shores, bringing with them their vitality and industry and bettering their adopted country with their skills. Today, that beacon is guttering as opportunity fades due to an increasingly classist society within the nation's borders, and unilateral actions without. If people come to the country, it is only to take what they can from the nation - education, resources, technology - before returning to their homelands, which reap the benefits.

Why do American politicians and industrialists focus so much on IP law? Because, more and more, it is the only advantage the country has left! For one hundred years, America used its strengths to build up a huge war-chest of patents, copyrights and trademarks as one method to protect its interests. However, over the past few decades, other nations - China, India, Mexico, just to name a few - have stepped up to the plate and matched America in industrial output. America depends heavily on resources from other nations to keep its own faltering engine running. Its own workforce is no longer as competitive when compared to those in erstwhile "third world nations". Short-sighted politics squandered many other of its advantages. Those patents, copyrights and trademarks - once just a single weapon in its arsenal - are increasingly becoming America's /only/ strength.

Sadly, like SCO, America is becoming a patent troll (and IP troll in general), relying on draconian enforcement of ethereal "intellectual property", because it cannot otherwise compete. It will increasingly sacrifice all else - industry, Constitutional rights, political allies - in the vain hope that somehow this single weapon of IP law can be sharpened enough to cut itself out of the draconian knot of political missteps that have caused its current economic malaise.

Why..? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42994865)

then do they remake, and or make sequels, the the same damn movies over and over again?

Re:Why..? (1)

Stormthirst (66538) | about a year ago | (#42995167)

The simple answer: Because it's cheaper than producing something new

The more complex answer: Because there's a finite number of stories to be written. The plots seem the same, because on their most basic level, they are the same.

Howard Coble: Copyright Term Extension is Good (5, Informative)

jrincayc (22260) | about a year ago | (#42994877)

Howard Coble stated that the Copyright Term Extension act (which retroactively extended copyright's terms by 20 years) was good for consumers: "It is also good for consumers. When works are protected by copyright, they attract investors who can exploit the work for profit. That, in turn, brings the work to the consumer who may enjoy it at a movie theater, at a home, in a car, or in a retail establishment. Without that exploitation, a work may lie dormant, never to be discovered or enjoyed." (Congressional Record, Volume 144, 1998, H1458 http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/search/citation.result.CREC.action?congressionalRecord.volume=144&congressionalRecord.pagePrefix=H&congressionalRecord.pageNumber=1458&publication=CREC [gpo.gov] )

Re:Howard Coble: Copyright Term Extension is Good (5, Insightful)

Dachannien (617929) | about a year ago | (#42994917)

Coble is well-known as Public Enemy #3 when it comes to copyright, with Mary Bono Mack being #2 and Howard Berman at #1. Fortunately for us, Mack and Berman both lost during the last election, but Coble is still a very dangerous man in this regard.

We can only hope that Zoe Lofgren will start a caucus in support of the rights of the public.

I think people are misunderstanding the purpose (5, Funny)

mark_reh (2015546) | about a year ago | (#42994891)

of setting up and announcing a task force of this type.

Right now, the MPAA, RIAA, and other organizations that represent artists have a difficult time figuring out to whom they should make political donations in order to protect artists' rights. 450+ representatives and 100 senators- that means a lot of money has to be spread far and wide in order to have the desired outcome. By forming and announcing the existence of a group dedicated specifically to protecting artists' rights, this group of senators has provided a focal point for the flow of donations, easing the burden on contributing organizations and leaving more money for the artists whose works are going to be protected.

The representatives should be applauded for their efforts to ensure that artists rights are protected and that there will be more money for those artists now that the lobbying groups will have to spend less to acquire that protection.

Re:I think people are misunderstanding the purpose (2)

Stormthirst (66538) | about a year ago | (#42995195)

By forming and announcing the existence of a group dedicated specifically to protecting artists' rights, this group of senators has provided a focal point for the flow of donations, allowing the *AA to keep yet more of their ill gotten gains, whilst fucking over the artists whose works are going to be protected.

FTFY

Well (3, Insightful)

EzInKy (115248) | about a year ago | (#42994903)

As long as the U.S. provides for the time tested tried and proven methods of letting people freely experiment with building on existing ideas and technology it will be just fine. Woe be the day though when artists and inventors have a say in which direction the next generations creator's choose to take their ideas, for that will be the death of innovation in this nation.

Re:Well (1)

paiute (550198) | about a year ago | (#42995417)

As long as the U.S. provides for the time tested tried and proven methods of letting people freely experiment with building on existing ideas and technology it will be just fine. Woe be the day though when artists and inventors have a say in which direction the next generations creator's choose to take their ideas, for that will be the death of innovation in this nation.

That day of woe is soon. Disney is lobbying Congress to allow the patenting of movies and songs, so if you want to make a movie which in any way uses any of the themes, settings, character types, or is suggestive in any way to a viewer of any aspect of a patented Disney film the Federal Copyright Bureau of Investigation will raid your set and cart you off.

media (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42994977)

It's terrible. The music and film industry crush innovation 24-7. Entertainment, music, news, storytelling, whatever you want to call it lost all aspects of meaning and it's blatantly a propaganda machine at this point. Of course big moneymakers that don't know anything about music or film can't be bothered providing valid and reliable products and services, so they use the money to force everyone into playing their lousy 1 dimensional game of fake economies. I can't believe people are spending so much money on garbage and it's such a critical part of our economy. On the other hand, I wouldn't want to know what MPAA/RIAA would do with their time if they weren't wasting it there. We seriously need to get off this rock, the cosmos may be incredibly dangerous but it isn't nearly as dangerous as us sitting here and gossiping about celebrities.

Thread commentary, distilled (2)

cellocgw (617879) | about a year ago | (#42994979)

Hey, Chu and Coble: Fuck you and the horse you rod in on.

All that needs to be said.

One word (1)

Puzzles (874941) | about a year ago | (#42995019)

Disney

Gosh I was worried (2)

Giant Electronic Bra (1229876) | about a year ago | (#42995201)

Wow! This is what we needed. I'm so GLAD Congress has finally come to its senses and organized to protect the rights of a minority which has been so shortchanged and hard pressed. Next we really badly need a lobby for mega-yacht owners, they get such a raw deal.

Re:Gosh I was worried (2)

Spectre (1685) | about a year ago | (#42995627)

Wow! This is what we needed. I'm so GLAD Congress has finally come to its senses and organized to protect the rights of a minority which has been so shortchanged and hard pressed. Next we really badly need a lobby for mega-yacht owners, they get such a raw deal.

The mega-yacht owners already have a group to protect them. It's a private union, though, your level of protection is determined by the amount of dues you pay under the table. That union is colloquially known as "congress".

Super (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42995235)

More corruption and waste. Just what we need in the federal government.

Keep voting for bought and paid for politicians. (1)

The Shootist (324679) | about a year ago | (#42995249)

You get the government you deserve.

Re-elect no one, ever.

Educating Chu & Coble: Lesson 1 (4, Informative)

cmholm (69081) | about a year ago | (#42995305)

Before Chu and Coble get too far into this propaganda exercise, they should educate themselves about the background for the culture they're presuming knowledge of:

If the terms of the Copyright Term Extension Act (CTEA) of 1998 were instead enacted in - say - 1920, a good portion of our current legacy of movies and music likely would not exist. Example: Walt Disney & company borrowed liberally from the works of the Brothers Grimm. If the brothers' estate had retained rights, would Walt been able to afford it? If the Grimm tales had become orphan works, with the rights holders unknown, would Walt have been able to proceed at all?

Re:Educating Chu & Coble: Lesson 1 (1)

boorack (1345877) | about a year ago | (#42995631)

They know very well their "reforms" will hurt everyone but their corporate sponsors. Their only concern is to push it down everyone's throat by any means possible - cheats, lies, threats, bribes etc., so they'll get their money for next elections or at least some well paid jobs in one of corporations they "represent" in the Congress. Educating those two fucke is pointless excercise - the only possible outcome is that their lies and cheats will be more sophiscated. Educating people in their districts makes more sense - the only thing they're afraid of is possiblity of losing next elections.

Lesson Two (1)

Freddybear (1805256) | about a year ago | (#42996041)

Tar and Feathers.

Representation and taxation (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42995313)

We are propagandized that there must be no taxation without representation. Let me express the converse. Can there be representation without taxation? Of course. Low income people can vote because anything that impedes their vote has been identified by the US Attorney General "a poll tax".

The more absolute intellectual property rights become, the more certain the government needs to collect taxes from the income thereof. It cannot be had both ways. Having intellectual property as an absolute right and yet having the income from the same be out of reach of taxation for the government's protection of that right.

Intellectual property has representation by the fact that laws were passed for its protection. It is only just that the income thereof is properly taxed for that representation.

Ruh Roh (3, Interesting)

paiute (550198) | about a year ago | (#42995347)

Sounds like our Congress has already been retrained to believe that copyright violations are a criminal matter to be prosecuted by the government rather than a civil disagreement to be adjudicated between private parties.

Yeah, I'm being obvious. But it got me thinking: What civil matters are the next to become criminal through lobbying by corporations?

The Drill (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42995375)

I am totally certain that Mozart could not compose without being certain that he could be filthy rich. Van Gogh also would never dream of painting without certainty of great wealth.
                    But I am really certain that law makers can only make laws. Think of all those laws as a huge roll of toilet tissue on which endless printing of laws continues night and day and no old laws are ever deleted. So these law makers get out of bed each morning and argue over just how a pile of new laws should be written and then they get their pay checks.
                      And in the case of intellectual property we must all become so very aware that supporting the middle men is all so important. Without all these laws these middlemen could not rob the artists blind. And we all just might be able to listen to music that is not buried by economic interests. For example try listening to Dixieland Jazz on the net. Oops! The gendre is missing. Can't be found anywhere. It can't be purchased either. A form of music both genuine and unique to America simply can not be accessed simply because commercial interests have strangled the market. Oh! don't worry. The artists never got paid anyway. And that music is 100 years old or so so copyright does not apply. But our copyright system strangled it anyway.

Time for a new system (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42995517)

MPAA, RIAA are just going to keep beating this dead horse and people are going to keep walking away from them. I've already stopped going to most movies, buying music that isn't indie and good and cut the cable cord. I'm not the only one.

I see music in particular heading in a new direction. Bands will become more popular via places like Youtube, etc and then use a kickstarter like site to raise funds to record an actual album. Touring live shows will bring in income and the music will be pretty much given away freely. Fans can continue to give money between albums via patronage sites. Bands who do well will get a lot of contributions via fans to their album kickstarters. Crap bands will not get backed and will die out. People in the music industry will be expected to work like any small business paying their own taxes and putting aside funds for their retirement. No more free ride on a single hit. People who do music for the love of it will flourish here. People just wanting to hump the system for fame and fortune will not do so well.

Movies may head this way too with people joining kickstarters set up by well liked producers and directors. Giving x amount gets you a free ticket at any theater in the country, giving more might get you goodies like posters, toys, signed memorabilia, or even your name in the credits for major contributors. Once the movie goes out, people will share it but fans can patronize via donations if they liked it. Same rules apply as to music as for retirement planning, etc. Those who get it and do good work will still go far and do well. Those who just pump out crap and want to milk it forever will go nowhere.

A different (and crazy) perspective (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42995571)

Posting as AC because I've forgotten my password.

I've been partaking in copyright legislation discussions on a sound engineering forum called Gearslutz. One opinion that seems to be spread with a considerably large amount of people on that board is the idea that copyright legislation is constantly on retreat and that the music industry is being bullied by masses of lobbyists from the tech-industry (Microsoft, Google, Apple) weakening copyright legislation and filling their own pockets with money made from piracy.

It's supposedly a grand conspiracy where copyright is under heavy assault and the just might of the media companies isn't enough to stop it.

This is handy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42995603)

For years I'd have to dig around candidate platform docs to find out if they were an ally on these issues before donating. Now I just have to see if they caucus with this group and use that info as a proxy. I suspect that I can now fund primary challengers and general opponents to members of this caucus to influence congressional attitudes towards copyright and patents. And instead of trying to educate representatives individually we could focus on caucus leadership to sway their position at the same time.

Perpetual copyright (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42995881)

How long until they remove the expiration date of copyright entirely? As it stands we have copyrights that last OVER A CENTURY. Do you know how many things actually last a century in the public consciousness? Not a whole hell of a lot. Bring back the 28-year term limit.

What the "F" is this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42996007)

So, now we have corrupt congress critters creating a group to lobby the other members of congress that aren't currently taking bribes from the RIAA/MPAA? How can this possibly serve the public interest? This is doubtless a backdoor "big media" ploy to get rid of fair use entirely and make things even more one sided.

I think that is why most people have such disdain for things like the DMCA. The take down demands are TOO one sided, there needs to be rapidly escalating penalties for issuing false take downs (and yes, issuing a take down for material covered by fair use is a false take down).

It is unfortunate (1)

maroberts (15852) | about a year ago | (#42996297)

That this is probably not about protecting the rights of artists, but extending the rights of corporations over the people. Next up, music copyrights taken over by companies because it is produced as work for hire, extension of copyright terms for "limited times" of 999 years, overrides to laws of first sale, increased use of trade marks to block copyright expiry etc.

AKA the MPAA/RIAA/BSA mailing list... (1)

bwcbwc (601780) | about a year ago | (#42996367)

This looks like the first salvo in the upcoming "Mickey's Law" that is expected when the copyright on Mickey Mouse again comes up for expiration (2018, I think). 5 years is about the right time-frame for the caucus to establish itself and starting putting out "studies" showing how beneficial extended copyright is.

Meanwhile, it's a nice big sign to the world saying "Hey Hollywood and patent trolls, we want your money!"

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...