Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Markham
What those who are hoping the new law will fail don't seem to realise is the US Government won't stop there if it doesn't work.
The pirates are now clearly in their sites. Probably the big recording, programming, gaming and other companies are spending a lot of money lobbying the US Government to do something.
If people can't sue pirates, get their domain taken down or remove the Internet connection of serial downloaders or uploaders. Then a new law will come out.
The piracy lobby can't outdo the power of big business.
|
i love how you think the pirates have a lobby group
news flash paulie it groups like EFF that are defending all americans rights.
the same law that protect this industry protect peoples right to make the commentary "check yout quest crews best dance routine"
the safe harbor provision you guys are bitching about never existed in the proposed draft of the DMCA, it only got put in to balance the takedown notice power given to the copyright holder to protect the free speech/ fair use of the copyrighted content.
there is no way in hell that any law that is passed is not going to have a balancing clause, and with the current arguement being proposed (lose your copyright if you use those powers to abuse fair use) the "big business" is running scared.
Look at how many times people here complain about how "unfair" such a restriction is. As if you couldn't hire a lawyer, to adequately inform you of the potential fair use infringing liablity of attempted use of those powers. As if if they gave you patently bad advice you could sue them for malpractise.
the only people who would be fucked over by such a counter balancing proposal would be idiots who hire divorce lawyers to do their copyright work or hire qualified lawyers get the right advice and deliberately ignore it.