EFF Joins ECA, DCIA in Opposition of Bill S. 978

July 19, 2011 -

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has joined the Entertainment Consumer Association (ECA) and the DCIA in opposing the bill S. 978, also known as the anti-streaming bill being fast tracked through the U.S. Congress. The advocacy group issued an alert urging the public to oppose the bill, which it called a "reckless attempt to attack online streaming by focusing on the 'unlawful public performance' area of copyright law." Much like the ECA's letter campaign, the EFF is offering a way for the community to send a strong letter to their elected officials. More from the alert:

"S. 978 is a reckless attempt to attack online streaming by focusing on the "unlawful public performance" area of copyright law. By increasing the criminal penalties for certain online public performances, the bill will impose a chilling effect around the posting and creation of online video. Moreover, it will hamper the pace of innovation as users, websites, and investors cope with the uncertainty of running afoul of one of the more vague sections of copyright law. Act now and tell your Senators to oppose this shortsighted bill!

Under certain conditions, an "unlawful public performance" of a copyrighted work is already a crime. But this bill targets online streaming in an effort to give the government more enforcement power to bear—particularly against websites that the entertainment industry believes to be threatening.

There have been few court decisions regarding public performance online. That means that if this bill passes, it’s hard to predict whom the government will target. Government agents may choose to go after individual users, or entire websites and video platforms. Given the history of the government's approach to copyright enforcement, the government may well wind up taking cues from trigger-happy copyright holders. The attempt to expand criminal penalties for online streaming also reeks of a means to stock the arsenal of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in performing more wild seizures of domain names.

Bills like S. 978 are the "inch" from which the government and rightsholder industry will take a "mile" out of freedom and innovation on the Internet. S. 978 was recently approved by the Senate Committee on the Judiciary to be considered by the entire Senate, so your action is urgently needed. Contact your Senators now to let them know to OPPOSE this bill!
"

You can participate here.

Source: EFF


 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
MattsworknameAndrew: Yep, though thankfully its not as common as it was when GG started. hopefully as time goes on, it'll just fade away entriely08/04/2015 - 12:58am
ZippyDSMleeGot one of my "books" (such as it is) finished, 17k words, here is the first chapter. http://zippydsmlee.tumblr.com/post/123483609450/chronicles-of-the-lord-of-power-lost-and08/04/2015 - 12:56am
Andrew EisenPeople decided to hate her before she said anything and to this day are desperately search for something, anything to justify that decision.08/04/2015 - 12:56am
MattsworknameExactly andrw anita had teh ire of some people in the movment and as a result she got dragged into the mess . Not fair, not pleasent, but thats all there to it. Moving on08/04/2015 - 12:55am
Andrew EisenHow did she piss off a large group? By announcing the intention to produce a series of videos examining the representation of females in video games if enough people were interested in the project to donate $6k. That horrible monster!08/04/2015 - 12:54am
Mattsworknamethe whole thing exploded. The ethics targerts were actually stuff like polygon, kotaku, Gamesutra, Leagh alexander, Etc etc. Anita was just an extra name they could throw on the pile08/04/2015 - 12:52am
Andrew EisenSarkeesian isn't a journalist. If GamerGate is SOLELY about ethics in games journalism it shouldn't have any interest in her. Point made. Move on.08/04/2015 - 12:47am
MattsworknameIP: Cause she got caught in a larger issue by pissing off a large group. As andrew and I have discussed in the past, the issues at hand with her videos are more about content and context then ethics, she just got pulled into the larger fight about it when08/04/2015 - 12:47am
MattsworknameI find it hard to dispute his points andrew, though you are right ,his points are often focused on VERY specific statements and concerns, of that you are correct08/04/2015 - 12:45am
Andrew EisenOh well. At least it was only seven and a half minutes.08/04/2015 - 12:45am
IronPatriotMattswork, if Gamergate is actually about ethics in journalism, why is Sarkeesian a major gamergate target?08/04/2015 - 12:45am
Andrew EisenI watched Chris's video. It's pretty lousy. He has a serious problem with strawman arguments, taking things out of context and arguing pieces of an argument in turn rather than the overarching point.08/04/2015 - 12:44am
MattsworknameGot it andrew08/04/2015 - 12:43am
Andrew EisenI deleted the other one too. Abbreviating the f-word does not make it okay.08/04/2015 - 12:43am
MattsworknameAndrewL fine fine , sorry, ill try to keep that stuff out of the box08/04/2015 - 12:42am
Andrew EisenMatt - I deleted your comment. Keep that out of the Shout box.08/04/2015 - 12:39am
MattsworknameIP: ahh, but theres the rub, I never brought up that arugment today, only you have, so i never failed to prove anything, you were the one who brought up that old canard08/04/2015 - 12:38am
IronPatriotMattsworkname makes an ugly personal attack and admits the video fails to prove any breach of ethics by sarkeesian08/04/2015 - 12:37am
IronPatriotThe video fails to prove breaches of journalistic ethics by Sarkeesian. So that means gamergate's obsession with her is NOT about ethics, right?08/04/2015 - 12:34am
MattsworknameIP: yet you also are not disputing the videos content08/04/2015 - 12:31am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician