LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  November 2004

ARSCLIST November 2004

Subject:

Re: Copyright Alert

From:

Aaron Luis Levinson <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Mon, 22 Nov 2004 13:37:15 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (194 lines)

What was the obnoxious legislation that was NOT stripped out?

aaron
On Nov 22, 2004, at 1:26 PM, Matt Bailey wrote:

> Alas, the bill already passed this weekend. Thankfully, most of the
> really obnoxious legislation was stripped out:
>
> http://www.publicknowledge.org/pressroom/pressrelease.2004-11 
> -22.6500991518
>
> November 22, 2004
>
> For Immediate Release
> Contact Info
>
> Art Brodsky
> Communications Director
> Public Knowledge
> [log in to unmask]
> office: (202) 518-0020 x103
> cell: (301) 908-7715
>
> Background: The Senate late in its weekend session passed by unanimous
> consent S 3021, a shorter version of the omnibus copyright legislation
> (HR 2391) that had been introduced earlier in the session.
>
> Statement of Gigi B. Sohn, president of Public Knowledge:
>
> Consumers won a major victory when the Senate passed legislation
> removing the most egregious elements of the omnibus copyright bill that
> had previously been under consideration. We strongly support the  
> version
> of the Family Movie Act, included in the bill, which gives families  
> more
> control over how they watch movies and television, preserving the right
> to skip over commercials. The bill will benefit consumers, both in  
> their
> entertainment choices now, and from the innovation in technology that
> will result in coming years.
>
> We are also pleased that HR 4077 was dropped from the bill that passed.
> That legislation would have lowered the standard for copyright
> infringement. The Senate also wisely removed the PIRATE Act, which  
> would
> have made the government the entertainment industryís private law firm
> at taxpayer expense.
>
> The Senate should also be commended for including in the bill
> legislation helping to preserve orphan works and reauthorizing the
> National Film Preservation Board. These features of the bill are
> important steps in preserving our nationís culture. We look forward to
> working with Congress in coming sessions to make further progress in
> advancing consumer interests and preserving copyright balance.
>
> A copy of the bill is available at:
> http://www.publicknowledge.org/pdf/S3021.pdf.
>
> Matt
> --
> Matt Bailey
> Audiovisual Archivist
>
> Richard B. Russell Library for Political Research and Studies
> University of Georgia Libraries
> Athens, GA 30602-1641
> (706)542-5788
> http://www.libs.uga.edu/russell/
>
>
> Tim Brooks wrote:
>> Copyright Alert
>>
>> Everyone should know about three pieces of legislation which copyright
>> holders are trying to push through the lame duck session of the  
>> current U.S.
>> congress before it adjourns for the holidays.
>>
>> The "Database and Collections of Information Misappropriation Act"  
>> (HR 3261)
>> would for the first time grant copyright protection to facts  
>> contained in
>> databases.  It is being pushed by some large directory publishers.   
>> This would put
>> a lot of discographers out of business, not to mention comparison  
>> shopping
>> sites, and fact-gathering aids of all kinds.  The "Induce Act"  
>> (S.2560) would
>> make it a crime to "induce" someone to violate copyright, even if  
>> that person
>> was not under your control or the violation was unknown to you. This  
>> might well
>> shut down this chat list.  Fortunately there is significant  
>> opposition to both
>> acts.
>>
>> A bill given a much better chance of passing is the "Intellectual  
>> Property
>> Protection Act" (HR 2391), an omnibus bill that gathers in once place  
>> a
>> Christmas tree of goodies for media companies.  It would limit how  
>> libraries can  make
>> available copyrighted material, restrict fair use, and even make it  
>> illegal
>> to skip commercials on video recordings!  There is a lot of good  
>> information on
>> these bills at www.publicknowledge.org , which I highly recommend,  
>> including
>> a suggested letter you can send to your congressman (see below).  If
>> politicians don't hear from us when these kinds of bills come up they  
>> stand a much
>> better chance of passing.  I'm told the 1998 Copyright Term Extension  
>> Act (which
>> keeps old recordings out of the public domain until 2067) was passed  
>> by voice
>> vote at midnight!
>>
>> Here's their proposed letter:
>>
>> I write to you today to ask that you oppose the omnibus "Intellectual
>> Property Protection Act," both as a whole and in its parts, and ask  
>> that you not
>> allow it to come to the floor for a vote.
>>
>> I believe that intellectual property plays a critical role in the  
>> United
>> States as a means of fostering both artistic expression and  
>> technological
>> innovation.  However, the IPPA, which is comprised of a number of  
>> individual bills,
>> contains provisions that may harm my long-established rights as a  
>> legal user of
>> content.  Additionally, the bill may harm the development of new  
>> technologies.
>>
>> There are a number of sections of the bill that particularly concern  
>> me:
>>
>>     Title II:
>>
>> The Piracy Deterrence in Education Act (formerly H.R. 4077):  This  
>> section
>> establishes "offering for distribution" as basis for criminal  
>> copyright
>> violation and "making available" for civil violation, regardless of  
>> whether there is
>> any distribution or copying, let alone infringement.  This bill  
>> drastically
>> lowers the standards for what constitutes a criminal copyright  
>> violation.  The
>> standards are far too vague and could include as targets for  
>> prosecution
>> material passively stored on computers or shared on networks.
>>
>> The ART Act (formerly S. 1932):  This is a bill that prohibits the
>> unauthorized use of a video camera in a movie theatre.  While I do  
>> not support movie
>> bootlegging, I believe that under some limited circumstances the  
>> public needs the
>> fair use protections granted under traditional copyright law, which  
>> this bill
>> would eliminate.
>>
>> The Family Movie Act (formerly H.R. 4586): This bill was originally  
>> intended
>> to protect the my right to use technology to skip-over and mute parts  
>> of a
>> movie that my family may find objectionable-- a proposition which I  
>> fully
>> support.  Unfortunately, the broadcasting industry and Hollywood  
>> added a section to
>> take away my right of skipping over ads in DVDs and recorded  
>> broadcasts with a
>> TiVo like device.
>>
>>     Title III:
>>
>> The PIRATE Act (formerly S. 2237):  This bill would allow the Justice
>> Department to file civil suits against copyright infringers.   
>> Especially with the
>> record profits that the media industry is making, it doesn't seem  
>> appropriate
>> that I as a tax payer should have to fund a corporation's private  
>> right of
>> action.  The Justice Department has even said it did not want this  
>> authority.
>>
>> There is too much in "The Intellectual Property Protection Act" that  
>> harms
>> market innovation and my rights as a consumer.  For the reasons  
>> above, I
>> respectfully ask that you oppose H.R. 2391.
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager