This new bill being proposed would put MP3 file swappers in jail and raises the stakes making copying a single MP3 rise from being a misdemeanor to a felony.
My question is this - Given that it is likely that 90% + of the swapping over Kazaa occurring in the US is illegal under current laws, how far can politicans rachet up the penalities before there is a backlash, or is the notion of the myriad MP3 file swappers rising up with any real political or organized economic muscle absurd?
Well, if filesharers are felons, that means that, if convicted, they will lose their voting rights. This could disinfranchise a lot of people and prevent any voter backlash.
There are some situations where persons should logically be held responsible for the crimes of others. But they are exceptional, not the rule. I can’t see what’s so exceptional about this situation that requires such an assumption, other than the buddy-buddy relationship between many Democrats and the entertainment biz. Especially since under this law, nobody would have to even prove that the crimes of others were actually committed.
Oh, the irony. Or did you not realize that by posting the entire article, you were guilty of the same copyright infringement crime it describes? A mod will be along shortly to clean up your mess.
“If people are allowed to share files, the terrorists will have won!”
–Coming soon to a politician near you
This recent rash of bills and laws and such is laughable. I will go out on a limb and say that the majority of file sharers are in their mid-20s or younger. This is a group that is constantly urged to vote with limited success. If anything is going to make them vote, it’s a loss of privlage that they enjoy. I’m hoping for a backlash! Go Gen-X Go!
Moderator’s Note: astro, please review our FAQ on Copyright Issues. (Note that using a really small font still does not make it OK to post the entire article.)
In the same way the war on drugs hasn’t stopped me smoking weed or taking ecstasy these facile bills aren’t gonna dissuade me from downloading the music I want.
Call me arrogant but I believe I speak for the majority of people who like to download music.
Well, they had better get busy, they’ve only got 100,000,000 + people to prosicute.
But will it stop you from sharing all of those files?
It won’t stop me, but the RIAA KazaaSuit certainly did (although I’m more than happy to keep downloading the stuff)
Ummm what the hell are they talking about
ooh i get it, $15 x 10 = 2500 ok gotcha
This make absolutely no sense whatsoever.
The sad thing is that most of these politicians have never used/seen Kazaa… more or less used a computer.
The record industry is not going to come bounding back making billions of dollars by ripping everyone off at 18$ a pop. If the record industry lowered prices, I would buy a lot more CD’s. It’s not my fault some CD’s only have 2-4 good songs on them. I am not paying full value for a half-assed product. But I still do buy albums of artists I respect and enjoy thier music… and who always bring out albums where 90% of thier songs I like.
It’s wasn’t Kazaa or even file-sharing that brought the record industry to it’s knees.
It was CD-burners.
Hmm, this is from the article…
I haven’t been able to find a copy of the proposed bill, but that quote says nothing about you downloading music. It says that it would be illegal letting someone download from you. So download as much as you want according to this law, but don’t let any uploads go from your computer. I think if that’s the case, the bill would need to close that gigantic loophole for it to have any efficacy.
Ah, sorry. I misunderstood. Well, that’s okay. Better for my bandwidth. Faster downloads 
The voter Backlash has already come. Gore lost the 2000 election because of stuff like this.
This is one thing I like about Howard Dean though. He has actually been talking about copyright issues and the DMCA and stuff like that. The fact that he gets the large majority of his money from average people means he isn’t beholden to corporations.
I’ve actually never heard that before, do you have anything to corroborate that statement?
Napster’s demise happened a couple months prior to the 2000 election, (July IIRC), but that was due to the lawsuits by the RIAA and not any new laws protecting copywrited property.
There was a “debate” between the two candidates here:
vs.
Hmm, maybe it’s just me, but I can’t tell the difference between the candidates on this one. (Unless it was Nader’s position on it which I haven’t been able to find.)
I’ve actually never heard that before, do you have anything to corroborate that statement?
Napster’s demise happened a couple months prior to the 2000 election, (July IIRC), but that was due to the lawsuits by the RIAA and not any new laws protecting copywrited property.
There was a “debate” between the two candidates here:
vs.
Hmm, maybe it’s just mean, but I can’t tell the difference between the candidates on this one. (Unless it was Nader’s position on it which I haven’t been able to find.)
sorry, slow server made me double post…that, and the last paragraph should say “maybe it’s just me”, but mean worked well too…
Thats just it. The people who would have supported Gore just decided to stay home instead. For a comparison Clinton had 19% higher youth vote than Bob Dole. Gore and Bush drew equally.
Gores decision to attack popular culture and stuff like this hurt Gore far more than it hurt Bush.
Gore didn’t ‘attack popular culture’ on the Napster issue. He didn’t attack at all. Any in any case, Napster and its filthy clones aren’t popular culture. They are theft, pure and somple.
I am really outraged by a lot of the recent developments in copyright violation cases, and not just because I might possibly be on the RIAA To-Sue List. In fact, I’m not a really big music fan and I’d be happy listening to the radio if that were all that was available (in fact, my car doesn’t even have a CD or cassette or MP3 player). I just feel that, no matter what your beliefs about ethics and copyrights, the RIAA and friends are the greater of two evils. Even if you think all copyrights ought to be respected all the time, it does not follow that you advocate throwing millions of young people in jail or fining them six-figure sums for copyright violation. If you still disagree with me, just calm down for a minute and think about this rationally. Does it make sense to ruin several years of all of these people’s lives over copyright violations from which they didn’t even profit? Is there any reasonable justification for that at all?
At the college I go to, a student was arrested for drunk driving after he lost control of his vehicle and totaled 4 parked cars. He paid a manageable fine, lost his license temporarily, and is still a student at the school. This is a person who deliberately acted in complete disregard for other people’s lives, and the law chose to slap him with what is best described as an inconvenience. If we allow that in our society, and then we would be willing to turn around and throw him in prison or fine the living daylights out of him over copyright violation, something is wrong with out values. It is absolutely unconscionable that politicians who like so much to talk about values and fairness are willing to support this kind of despicable corporate behavior.
-Andrew L