P2P users in the US face a decade in prison for sharing

[BJ_M]

http://www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,62830,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_1

Congress appears to be preparing assaults against peer-to-peer technology on multiple fronts.

A draft bill recently circulated among members of the House judiciary committee would make it much easier for the Justice Department to pursue criminal prosecutions against file sharers by lowering the burden of proof.
The bill, obtained Thursday by Wired News, also would seek penalties of fines and prison time of up to ten years for file sharing
In addition, on Thursday, Sens. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) introduced a bill that would allow the Justice Department to pursue civil cases against file sharers, again making it easier for law enforcement to punish people trading copyright music over peer-to-peer networks. They dubbed the bill "Protecting Intellectual Rights Against Theft and Expropriation Act of 2004," or the Pirate Act.

The bills come at a time when the music and movie industries are exerting enormous pressure on all branches of government at the federal and state levels to crack down on P2P content piracy. The industries also are pushing to portray P2P networks as dens of terrorists, child pornographers and criminals -- a strategy that would make it more palatable for politicians to pass laws against products that are very popular with their constituents.

In defending the Pirate Act, Hatch said the operators of P2P networks are running a conspiracy in which they lure children and young people with free music, movies and pornography. With these "human shields," the P2P companies are trying to ransom the entertainment industries into accepting their networks as a distribution channel and source of revenue.

"Unfortunately, piracy and pornography could then become the cornerstones of a 'business model,'" Hatch said in a statement. The illicit activities of file sharers "then generate huge advertising revenues for the architects of piracy."

The Recording Industry Association of America and the Motion Picture Association of America welcomed the Pirate Act.

"I commend Senators Patrick Leahy and Orrin Hatch for their vision and leadership in combating the theft of America's creative works," said Jack Valenti, MPAA's chief executive.

"This legislation provides federal prosecutors with the flexibility and discretion to bring copyright infringement cases that best correspond to the nature of the crime," said RIAA chairman and CEO Mitch Bainwol.

So far in 2004, Leahy has received $178,000 in campaign contributions from the entertainment industries -- the second-biggest source of donations to Leahy behind lawyers. Hatch has received $152,360.

The draft bill obtained by Wired News circulated among intellectual property subcommittee members in the House of Representatives. The document, titled "Closing the P2P loophole in 17.U.S.C. Section 506," was drafted in coordination with the Justice Department in response to concerns that federal prosecutors lack sufficient legal powers to go after serious abusers, people close to the matter said. They also said they believe Lamar Smith (R-Texas) is willing to propose the bill if he can find co-sponsors.

If the draft becomes law, anyone sharing 2,500 or more pieces of content, such as songs or movies, could be fined or thrown in jail. In addition, anyone who distributes content that hasn't been released in wide distribution (for example, pre-release copies of an upcoming movie) also would face the penalties. Even a single file, determined by a judge to be worth more than $10,000, would land the file sharer in prison.

Whether the leaked draft will be put forth as legislation remains unclear, and Smith's press secretary Christopher Chichester declined to comment.

Smith has received almost $25,000 this year from the music, movies and TV industries.

"This was not put together by our staff," said House Judiciary Committee spokesman Jeff Lungren. "But the intellectual property subcommittee is working on text to address the problem of digital piracy prosecutions, and it looks like this was one suggested iteration."

In response, P2P United, an organization that represents software companies that run file-sharing networks, asked the subcommittee in a letter hand-delivered to Smith on Friday to put off enacting new laws aimed at punishing file sharers and instead explore ways in which copyright holders can be paid through P2P networks.

"It's unfortunate that the entertainment industry devotes so much energy to supporting punitive efforts at the federal and state level, instead of putting energy into licensing their content for P2P distribution so those same people could be turned into customers," said Philip Corwin, an attorney with Butera and Andrews in Washington D.C., and who represents Kazaa distributor Sharman Networks. "The Pirate Act effectively gives government the authority to use taxpayer dollars to bring civil actions against file sharers on behalf of copyright holders."

All these efforts by Congress to impose severe penalties are misguided, said P2P United Executive Director Adam Eisgrau.

"As the 40 percent increase in downloads over the last year makes alarmingly clear, like it or not file sharing is likely to (continue) on a massive scale no matter how many suits are brought and what the fine print of copyright or criminal law says," Eisgrau said. "Second, putting a tiny percentage of tens of millions of American file sharers behind bars or in the poorhouse won't put one new dime in the deserving pockets of artists and other copyright owners."

[BobV]

"So far in 2004, Leahy has received $178,000 in campaign contributions from the entertainment industries -- the second-biggest source of donations to Leahy behind lawyers. Hatch has received $152,360. "

I think my signature says all I need to say.

[indolikaa]

WinMX. The Napster they won't talk about.

[The village idiot]

I still hate P2P, that crap is mucking up the works.

And it is nice to see that laws are still built by big money in the form of campaign contributions

[hhhhbk]

10 years for a pirated film
7 years for murder
so if you get caught murder the person who catches you and save yourself 3 years!!!
america has huge problems
will be interesting to see if this is enforced or if it is just another publicity stunt like the lawsuits they filed against people sharing songs on kazaa

[indolikaa]

Jack Valenti would never conspire to take part in a publicity stunt!


So what you're telling me is I spent less time in prison for knockin' off some hoodlum than pirating a Vanilla Ice tune?

Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition! :P

[BJ_M]

CANADA says :P

"Court rules against record firms
Door slammed on Canadian music industry's bid to obtain names of file sharers"


what analysts are calling a "stunning" decision, the Federal Court has ruled against a motion that would have allowed the music industry to start suing individuals who make music available online.
Justice Konrad von Finckenstein ruled today that the Canadian Recording Industry Association did not prove there was copyright infringement by 29 so-called music uploaders.

He said that downloading a song or making files available in shared directories, like those on Kazaa, does not constitute copyright infringement under the current Canadian law.

"No evidence was presented that the alleged infringers either distributed or authorized the reproduction of sound recordings," von Finckenstein wrote in his 28-page ruling. "They merely placed personal copies into their shared directories which were accessible by other computer users via a P2P service."

He compared the action to a photocopy machine in a library. "I cannot see a real difference between a library that places a photocopy machine in a room full of copyrighted material and a computer user that places a personal copy on a shared directory linked to a P2P service," he said.

The ruling sent shock waves through the industry and surprised copyright analysts.

"It raises questions of the viability of suing individual users in Canada under current Canadian copyright law," said Michael Geist, a professor at the University of Ottawa specializing in Internet and e-commerce law and technology counsel with the law firm Osler, Hoskin and Harcourt.

Geist, who called the decision "stunning," anticipates it will push the industry to increase its lobbying efforts for copyright reform in Canada.

Last month, the industry association took five Internet service providers to Federal Court, trying to force the companies to hand over the names and addresses of 29 people who allegedly shared hundreds of songs with others using programs like Kazaa last November and December.

The judge denied the recording industry's request, which means the five high-speed Internet providers - Bell Canada, Shaw Communications, Telus Communications, Rogers Cable and Videotron - won't have to divulge their client lists.

Without the names, CRIA can't begin filing lawsuits against 29 John and Jane Does who it alleges are high-volume music traders.

They're currently identifiable only through a numeric Internet protocol address and user handles like Jordana(at)KaZaA.

All the ISPs except Videotron have fought the order. Videotron had agreed to comply because owner Quebecor is also concerned about piracy in other parts of its business, which includes newspapers, television, Internet services and CDs.

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c...l=968793972154

[lenti_75]

you better start killing.....save some time for jail...
this is BS, a big one

[Roundabout]

U.S. Congress: The best lawmakers money can buy! Sure hope the encrypted networks get more popular soon, and the bugs worked out. Looks they're gonna be necessary by next year.

Still more bullshit from today-

Feds Crank Up Heat on P2P

The Justice Department said Wednesday it has formed an intellectual-property task force to analyze how the department addresses issues like piracy of software, music and movies.

Led by David Israelite, deputy chief of staff and counselor to the attorney general, the task force will also recommend what the Justice Department should do in the future to combat unauthorized use of copyright material.

"I have asked the task force to look at ways the department can strengthen and improve our efforts" to combat theft of intellectual property, said Attorney General John Ashcroft.

Justice spokesman John Nowacki declined to disclose further details on the membership of the task force, or what specific activities it will pursue.

Prior to his appointment as deputy chief of staff in 2001, Israelite served as an aide to Ashcroft and as director of political and governmental affairs at the Republican National Committee.

The task force was created in the wake of criticism by some members of Congress that the Justice Department has not done enough to crack down on digital piracy.

The announcement took place on the same day that a House judiciary subcommittee unanimously approved a bill that would punish file swappers with up to three years in jail for first offenses, and up to six for repeat offenses.

Sponsored by Reps. Howard Berman (D-California) and Lamar Smith (R-Texas), the bill targets heavy users of peer-to-peer networks and those who pirate copies of feature films. The bill outlines a new piracy deterrence program for the FBI, and calls for the Justice Department to create an antipiracy "Internet use education program." If signed into law, Justice would receive $15 million for investigation and prosecution of copyright-related crimes in 2005.

If HR4077, also known as the Piracy Deterrence and Education Act of 2004, becomes law, it would be the first legislation designed to punish file sharing with jail time. The bill also takes aim at camcorder copiers who sneak into film screenings. Anyone who "knowingly uses or attempts to use an audiovisual recording device in a motion picture theater" to copy a movie could face up to six years in jail.

"This is a common-sense bill that ensures that federal prosecutors have the tools and expertise they need to fully enforce the laws on the books," said Recording Industry Association of America chief executive Mitch Bainwol.

Critics of the bill charge that existing laws already provide stiff penalties for intellectual-property crimes, with equally strong civil remedies that allow copyright holders to bring action against individual copyright abusers. An increased role by the Justice Department in taking action against file swappers would amount to burdening taxpayers to protect the entertainment industry's interests, say critics.

"It's troubling that the government is considering expanding the rights of property owners by broadening the scope of criminal law and lowering the burden of proof," said Adam Eisgrau, a Washington, D.C.-based lobbyist for peer-to-peer tech industry group P2P United. "There would no longer be a need to show intent to infringe on copyright; prosecutors would only have to prove that the requisite number of copyrighted works were accessible through your computer as a result of your actions."

[kirpen]

2 words "jury nullification"
What 12 peple are going to convict a person for this knowing they MUST do all that time? I know I wouldnt.

[tag]

http://www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,62830,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_1

Congress appears to be preparing assaults against peer-to-peer technology on multiple fronts.

A draft bill recently circulated among members of the House judiciary committee would make it much easier for the Justice Department to pursue criminal prosecutions against file sharers by lowering the burden of proof.....

Either wire.com misread the bill or the proponents thereof are severely retarded. The burden of proof cannot be "lowered" in criminal prosecutions.

In short, per Supreme Court interpretation of the 14th Amendment, no person can be convicted of a crime by anything less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt. No one (NO ONE) is going to be convicted of a crime by a preponderance of the evidence. The latter standard will only apply to civil prosecutions. Maybe a minor distinction due to the rather stiff monetary penalties involved but an important one, nonetheless. The Justice Department will not be able to put people in prison by proving they engaged in illegal file sharing by a preponderance of the evidence.

[indolikaa]

http://www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,62830,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_1

Congress appears to be preparing assaults against peer-to-peer technology on multiple fronts.

A draft bill recently circulated among members of the House judiciary committee would make it much easier for the Justice Department to pursue criminal prosecutions against file sharers by lowering the burden of proof.....

Either wire.com misread the bill or the proponents thereof are severely retarded. The burden of proof cannot be "lowered" in criminal prosecutions.

In short, per Supreme Court interpretation of the 14th Amendment, no person can be convicted of a crime by anything less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt. No one (NO ONE) is going to be convicted of a crime by a preponderance of the evidence. The latter standard will only apply to civil prosecutions. Maybe a minor distinction due to the rather stiff monetary penalties involved but an important one, nonetheless. The Justice Department will not be able to put people in prison by proving they engaged in illegal file sharing by a preponderance of the evidence.

I'm glad you pointed that out. I was working up a post just like this one before I ran into yours.

[kirpen]

I bet a search of all the pcs in congress would turn up tons of bootleg stuff. Why dont they start by locking themselves up.

[DKruskie]

If they are so eager to go after p2p for sharing music and movies just to put them in prison, why is the Republican party doing http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=15399 this.




David