How People Voted
 |
 |
8% For, 92% Against
Take Action
  |
Alert Your Friends and Colleagues |
  |
Write Your Representative in Congress |
| Save & Share | |
 |
del.icio.us |
 |
Digg |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Yahoo! |
H.R. 3155, The Intellectual Property Enhanced Criminal Enforcement Act of 2007
- This item is from the 110th Congress (2007-2008) and is no longer current. Comments, voting, and wiki editing have been disabled, and the cost/savings estimate has been frozen.
Original version created by webmaster
H.R. 3155 would amend titles 17 and 18, United States Code, to strengthen the protection of intellectual property.
Detailed Summary
(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to provide a detailed summary of the bill!)
Status of the Legislation
(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to update the status of the bill!)
Points in Favor
(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)
Points Against
(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)
Learn More
RSS Feeds for This Bill
Keep yourself updated on user contributions and debates about this bill! (Learn more about RSS.)
Visitor Comments
None of your business
July 27, 2007, 7:58pm (report abuse)This is clearly a travesty that should not be passed. IP law is overpowerful as it is and needs to be toned down, not made worse. This could serve only one purpose: to enable a "p2p witch-hunt" and suppress a technology with numerous legitimate uses, and to enable new RIAA entrapment tactics. While studies have shown that the music sharing that does go on has no effect on sales of popular albums and sometimes BOOSTS sales of "hidden gems" that are underpromoted by traditional means but good.
Just Say No to HR3155.
David Sternlight
July 27, 2007, 8:45pm (report abuse)Is the sponsor in the pay of the MPAA or RIAA via campaign contributions. Once again this bill proves the old adage that we have the finest Congress money can buy. And they wonder why their credibility is in the toilet!
Some Guy
July 27, 2007, 9:59pm (report abuse)This bill is absurd, plain and simple. As both an artist and a musician, I find this bill highly offensive. Sure, I think it's wrong when somebody to pinch my work, but I don't think he should go to jail for it -- In fact, sometimes it has actually ended up helping me gain a little exposure. This bill goes no further than existing IP law to help and protect me as an artist, and seems to be designed to only benefit the RIAA, the MPAA, and a bunch of lawyers.
HR3155 must NOT succeed!
Founding Son
July 27, 2007, 10:04pm (report abuse)Rep. Steven Chabot introduced this plagiarized Alberto Gonzales law? Perhaps they are both as ethically retarded as they appear to be.
August West
July 27, 2007, 10:57pm (report abuse)What a moron. And to think that people voted for the author of this bill.
Anonymous Coward
July 27, 2007, 11:41pm (report abuse)I suggest a slightly modified bill. Firstly, how about rescinding all copyright extensions since the Constitution was written and leave the length of copyright at 14 years? Secondly, make copyright non-transferrable. Thirdly, de-criminalize internet copying of copyrighted works but not the unathorized sale of hard copies. And how about diverting war funds to a government fund specifically for sponsoring recording artists who make their works freely available online?
Just a lowly little peaon
July 28, 2007, 12:03am (report abuse)just more proof that the lobbyist can buy anyone and anything
brwyatt
July 28, 2007, 12:27am (report abuse)This will just make it easier for the RIAA to make more money from copyright abuse. Any intelligent person paying attention to what the RIAA has been doing, would know that several times the RIAA has been suing obviously innocent persons (don't have a computer or even know what file sharing is) all just to enlarge their already bloated salaries! How much you want to bet that Steven Chabot got a healthy check from the MAFIAA (RIAA)?
Mike
July 28, 2007, 6:46am (report abuse)It just looks like we are attempting to choke technical and artistic innovation by increasing copyright law. As we increase the body of machine searchable Intellectual Property and with expanding bounds of what includes copyright infringement. We are creating a situation where only the rich can innovate and new innovators will be punished by the entrenched corporate interests.
Check this for a academic paper on optimal copyright length.
http://www.rufuspollock.org/economics/papers/optimal_copyright.pdf
Overcast
July 28, 2007, 6:47am (report abuse)Next - even *thinking* about thinking about copyright violation will be punishable.
Keogh
July 28, 2007, 7:47am (report abuse)Why don't you work on something that is a real problem to this country? Listed below are a few suggestions.
1. Ending the war in Iraq.
2. Ending illegal immigration.
3. Tax relief for the middle class.
4. Corruption in our political system.
I am sorry, I forgot, you are not getting paid by some lobbiest to work on something important.
Our government is a waste.
"I love my country, but I had the government"
congressive
July 28, 2007, 7:55am (report abuse)This guy should be jailed for stealing Gonzales' idea.
eric
July 28, 2007, 9:47am (report abuse)This is the most horrible idea I've ever seen.
I've recently discovered that even the most upscale families that do not believe in pirating software also do NOT see any wrong in downloading a few songs from time to time. These will be the people to drive their Congress critters to working at Mick D's. So good luck with that bill. We the People will be fighting it every step of the way.
Alberto Gonzales
July 28, 2007, 11:32am (report abuse)Hey, that was MY idea! But I suppose it'll go further if some other *sshat introduces it. I say go for it. :-)
Dre
July 28, 2007, 12:24pm (report abuse)The idea of making copyright infringement (assuming copying a song so I can use 10 seconds of it in a home video is copyright infringement and not simply fair use) a criminal offense is ridiculous. Proposing stupid laws that will have a host of unintended consequences (not the least of which will be further eroding of the CD industry) should be a criminal offense. Copyright laws were originally designed to enhance the odds of future creativity. This bill will have the opposite effect and provide a slippery slope to all copyrights (off to jail if you quote a book).
disgusted
July 28, 2007, 1:30pm (report abuse)This should be a joke if it's not !
inc
July 28, 2007, 3:32pm (report abuse)Nice to see all the difficult issue have been tackled. Now the rapists, murders and copyright infidgers can sit in a cell together. Mean while the corporate scumbags at companies like Enron get a slap on the wrist for stealing millions and bankrupting thousands.
Anthony
July 28, 2007, 6:42pm (report abuse)"Intellectual" definitely doesn't belong in this acts title. Peer-to-peer file sharing and the like that they're looking to fight here is unstoppable. They should've learned that when they tried to shut down Napster all to have several new peer-to-peer programs pop up in it's place.
The only hope the RIAA and the like have is to find ways to profit from it, not keep trying to fight it. It's like a mouse trying to fight a rottweiler. It may get a couple bites in and really annoy the dog, but if that mouse doesn't stop attacking, the dog's eventually gonna bite it in half. If the RIAA and the like keep dropping money into politicians to get them to try to pass laws like this, eventually they're gonna find themselves not only out of business, but broke as well.
Oh, and let's not forget the reason why the RIAA is so upset. God forbid they can't buy that 4th house they wanted in Europe! "Damn those kids, send them to jail!"
Erik
July 28, 2007, 8:07pm (report abuse)This is absolutely ridiculous, and clearly illustrates that the RIAA has far too much control and influence over our federal government. Chabot is obviously sucking up to corporate backers in a big way, and it shows. Hopefully his constituents will show their displeasure when election day rolls around again. He needs to be reminded that campaign contributors still don't count as much as voters, and this bill is really going to irritate a LOT of voters.
What about first freedom
July 28, 2007, 8:11pm (report abuse)Firstly an unbiparteason right is all of us to each other and next to have and any private, to unpublic way, first. I don't sell songs, but I could and that if I would is my justifyable only to that extent right to just have to claim copyright justification for monies as it is. The rest must as is public domain and, is our extened thought as to what is human kind futures. To say more if you share to someone else then that is a very cherishable society thought AND NOT a governmental instatment as it seem come be, right to judge you to the as, fact to be a criminal. If you care to submit financial support for medias to copyright then that is your monies in hand that moment only because recieved right to have, unless you'd rather have the monies in entirety taken away from you because everybody didn't have it like you? A law for that cooking too?
Alvin
July 29, 2007, 8:53am (report abuse)It's bad enough that Steven Chabot is seen by may Ohioans as the South end of a North bound horse, now he has to prove it once again.
Robert
July 29, 2007, 8:59am (report abuse)Stop worrying about RIA profits and do something about Darfur.
Jeff
July 29, 2007, 1:19pm (report abuse)The pursuit of liberty, huh? I understand Montana more and more each and every day.
Nick
July 29, 2007, 3:15pm (report abuse)We would be one step closer to a real-life Minority Report scenario.
feldie
July 29, 2007, 6:30pm (report abuse)What's the big surprise. It's just another way of filling prisons. We do it with drug laws and now with the kids who used to be the customers of the recording industry. Put em in jail and keep the unemployment rate low. Cynical, huh?
tack
July 29, 2007, 11:18pm (report abuse)Looks like the RIAA has another corrupt politician in their pocket. Listen to the public, we DO NOT want file sharers treated as criminals.
Jim
July 30, 2007, 8:35am (report abuse)This bill is so far over the top it makes me want to cry. Not only does it propose to criminalize a routine civil infraction, but it proposes to criminalize even the ATTEMPT to make a civil infraction.
Stop this bill now.
JR from Dallas
July 30, 2007, 9:36am (report abuse)This is a bad piece of legislation, obviously pandering to the RIAA and MPAA. It is time to stop treating the average consumer like a criminal.
Hmmm....
July 30, 2007, 4:37pm (report abuse)So if I attempt to tune into a cable channel I haven't subscribed to (like pushing the wrong numbers on the remote by accident), and my cable box is connected to a DVD or video recorder, did I "attempt to copy" something?
Who is running this country?
July 30, 2007, 10:16pm (report abuse)When did we elect the RIAA and the MPAA to office? It is offensive that these (private) organizations are allowed to continue to exercise the control they have obtained over this government. They are not happy with controlling the direction of technology (Digital Rights Management - in all of its insidious forms), but now they want to control the judicial system as well. With their heavy handed approach to copyright enforcement, I am surprised that they didn't have their friends (Gonzales, Chabot, et. al) include a public flogging provision in the proposed legislation. Word to Washington - get busy with the critically important matters facing this country and let the lobbyists fight their own battles.
wvhillbilly
August 6, 2007, 10:07pm (report abuse)If this passes, they better start building prisons on every block, because they're going to need them. We're all going to be criminals.
Seriously, why does content need absolute, total protection for 70 years after the author is dead? By the time it enters the public domain, if it ever does (every time the copyright on Mickey Mouse is about to expire the term gets extended another 20 years), the stuff is going to be so old it will be useless to anyone, if it survives at all. And to criminalize every possible use of copyrighted material is going to defeat the purpose of having or creating it in the first place.
Bill
July 30, 2008, 2:41pm (report abuse)I'm taking a list of everyone who supports this bill with me when I vote in November. I am voting AGAINST every person who supports it. I own 700+ CDs and 700+ DVDs and it sickens me that I ever gave those A-hole companies a penny of my money. I hate being treated like a criminal by an industry I supported financially. I'm going to do my small part to get their lackey puppets out of our government. It's time for a BIG change.
Gene
December 13, 2008, 8:15pm (report abuse)Severe actions by the public like jury nullification has to begin. Both Directv and the RIAA have sued those they knew were innocent. When you sue an innocent person you have had to lie in the court complaint. The act of lying in a court complaint to force settlement money is a crime. The victim of that crime then asks government to protect them against the fraudulent filing. The plea oif the crime victim falls on deaf ears. Justice does nothing to assist in arresting directv or RIAA for fraudulent court filing for gains. In order to put Justice on the right side of the law and protect innocent people, people need to do just what justice has done in these cases. Ignore Justice. The next time you are a Juror or a witness, ignore justice just like justice has done to those innocent people sued by directv and the RIAA. When enough jurors and witness ignore justice, then justice will have to get back to there job of protecting innocent people from such fraudulent lawsuits.