Forums / Discussion / Serious Debate

I felt like this was worth discussing and couldn't find a better place to put it.
https://archive.fo/3Jo6U
>A bill looking to make it easy to sue internet users for copyright infringement stands a good chance of being passed in the US Congress.
>But further facilitating such claims, as the CASE Act proposes, could boost copyright trolling and have negative effects on free speech says the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF).
Here's that linked article: http://archive.fo/E9sxM
>The bill's goal is to introduce a so-called copyright small claims court, to make sure copyright holders suing on infringement grounds don't have to bring costly federal cases each time.
>Instead, the EFF noted in its criticism of the planned legislation, a quasi-court would be set up within the Copyright Office – which is not an impartial participant. The digital rights group is now warning that the CASE Act would remove many protections currently afforded to internet users, and expose them to copyright trolls.
>Even though the bill caps the fines at $5,000 – $15,000 per work – that's still high enough to financially ruin many Americans, where the average annual income is $57,652. And this is particularly true because the new process would leave those accused of infringement “without many of the traditional legal safeguards or rights of appeal [US] justice system provides.”
>To make suing people in this way even easier – and no doubt more appetizing for copyright trolls – the bill states that a copyright holder would be able to sue even if the work they claim had been infringed was not registered with the Copyright Office.
>That would produce a catastrophic situation. “Nearly every photo, video, or bit of text on the Internet can suddenly carry a $7,500 price tag if uploaded, downloaded, or shared even if the actual harm from that copying is nil,” the EFF warned, calling on internet users in the US to contact their senators and oppose the legislation.
>As for the danger posed by the CASE Act to free speech, the organization said it would turn the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) notice “into a long-term censorship tool.”
>Namely, the bill would allow copyright holders to request that content be removed from online platforms, and at the same time bring their case before the new small claims court. The platforms would no longer be under obligation to act on a counter-notice and repost the content within 14 days.
>This could then turn into many months of effective censorship, the EFF is warning.

It's like they haven't learned from the past half dozen attempts with SOPA/PIPA/etc.

Laws like this are so bad that I'd rather want to see top mass media companies to go bankrupt than see that bill become a law.

Those laws will skyrocket the amount of SLAPPing.

Also, would this law allow some people to purposefully make something that would get distributed so they would be able to sue others later for distribution?

This is why despite being very economically conservative, I still hate the current copyright system, it is too easy to exploit and in need of a major redo.

I'd imagine Disney would probably use this to curb any critique of their shitty live-action films, especially the Star Woke movies.

> Also, would this law allow some people to purposefully make something that would get distributed so they would be able to sue others later for distribution?

Haven't you learned that they keep pushing these laws over and over because they are hoping for one to slip by public attention or the public being too burnt out by them that it gets through? Law is unwanted by 99% of the population? Just keep trying to pass it and hope the public isn't looking, because fuck democracy right?

>post video game fanart
>get fined half your yearly salary
>die early because you can't afford healthcare

capitalism's going great.

Well, it has worked. CESTA/FOSTA, Article 11/13, net neutrality destruction bills, etc…

If enough people disregard those fines/lawsuits/whatever, do you think the law would end up being pretty much just unenforceable? Like I wonder if they'd actually start imprisoning people if they refuse to pay up, especially if a lot of people do.

Given how prison systems in the US make money off of more prisoners, they'd gladly arrest those that don't pay.

And then we riot

https://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

Heres the official website for anyone who wants to message their respective senators. Just click which state your in and it'll give the list and info.

Copyright law is stupid anyway

It needs serious reform and rollbacks, the amount of time it takes a copyright to expire after the author's death is honestly too long. 70 Years is honestly so long that it's practically long enough for the author to be reincarnated as an infant and go through their entire lifespan a second time.

Surprisingly enough, The Mouse is at the center of most of it.

Also, the insult to injury is that the only way for someone to lose copy monopoly is if they sign something or if they've been tricked to do so. And usually that means someone else has copyright now.

I have a question, if copyright was designed to protect artists, then even if it would protect artists, why do you want to protect them in the first place? The only reason would be so they'd make fictional works you'd like.

But what if they don't make works you like but give you a need for slightly altered versions of those works? And then don't allow anyone else to modify them into your preferring?

This will be the death of derivative works. We have nowhere left to run.

if copyright was designed to protect artists, then even if it would protect artists

I know this post is 11 days old but, really, no, it's pretty obvious that copyright laws are made to protect majors, companies. Not the artists themselves, or, maybe the richest and most powerful ones only.

Bumping this because this bill passing will mean the end of this site.

China may actually have the right idea by having no copyright idk

Please tell me this got rejected and isn't relevant anymore.

Just passed the House Judiciary Committee today
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/09/congress-continues-ignore-dangerous-flaws-case-act

Why isn't congress jailed for doing such atrocious acts?

This thing, if passed, would ruin more lives than it would save.

This is disgusting, where's the good people in the world!? (;x; )

> Surrender
You first, I don't fucking plan to.

The boomers are at it again

Reminder that we are all alone in this battle. Literally nobody will listen to us.

Not everyone

I think those who support that act should never bring their works to public in the first place.

Why? Because they don't make the stuff end-users want.

First time I've heard of SLAPPing, and I'm thoroughly disgusted.

I guess nobody cares that this is happening. We're all going to die.

Any actual updates or nothing new?

The bill now has over 100 cosponsors in the House.

In that case let's hope it's one of those things that never gets enforced.

Can we at least make an attempt to raise awareness about this? People did this for SESTA/FOSTA shortly before it passed and it's led to at least some progress in stopping those bills from doing too much damage, even after it became law.
Example 1
Example 2

Congress is back in session, we should spread the word about this bill quick. Maybe have some e-celebs signal boost this.

House of Representatives is voting on this bill tomorrow

Trump: does literally anything
KYM: makes a new article about it and milks it for a week
US government: on the verge of passing a bill that will probably be a death sentence to anyone who posts derivative content online
KYM:

Well, remember how the article 13 and 11 thing got trending AFTER the thing was passed despite comments being posted before?

Quoting EFF:

" Under CASE, however, every copyrighted work will automatically eligible for $30,000 in damages--whether or not the owner has bothered to register it."

I can see people and organizations making contend for the sole purposes of getting money out of them in that way.

Article 13 was trending way before it passed the EU Parliament

It's live now

And they passed it.

RIP this site, RIP all our hopes and dreams, see you all on the streets.

Passing such bill should be illegal!

This basically allows anyone to shut down a website with user-generated content.

Not just that but this is another one of those anti-meme laws.

Also, I heard some of it might even be unconstitutional!

And everyone is too sedated to fight back.

We had the perfect fucking opportunity to spread the word. Now it's too late and we're basically marked for death now.

Why was PIPA/SOPA rejected but not this?

Because nobody spoke up about this. SOPA got canned due to very public outrage. This bill still has to go through the Senate so maybe there's some time left. Maybe we can speak with the site staff about this and see what they can do.

Would that mean that according to that act, distributing the following video above could cost you well over a few million dollars?

Gizmodo released an article about the CASE Act

Guys
Memes are safe for now, as the “anti-meme” bill is blocked from Senate vote