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 and EZK help me pull back a bit , still working on it05/22/2015 - 7:06am
ConsterI think IP is the only person here who doesn't think IP needs to dial it back several levels.05/22/2015 - 6:14am
Mattsworknamehttp://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/05/22/fec-backs-off-flirtation-with-regulating-internet/05/22/2015 - 1:34am
MattsworknameWell, on another subject, Saw this, and while I know it's fox news, thuoght I should share it05/22/2015 - 1:34am
MechaCrashYeah, even I think IP needs to dial it back.05/22/2015 - 12:35am
Mattsworknamesays05/21/2015 - 11:17pm
MattsworknameRE doc, everyone has a tendancy to let emotion get ahead of them, especially in an annoymous forum like the web. We have have those moments. Ip however has nothing but those moments. it's why I stopped responding to him, regardless of what he thinks or05/21/2015 - 11:17pm
DocMelonheadNo offense, but I see your behaviors in the comment sections uncalled for.05/21/2015 - 8:51pm
DocMelonheadHell, I could use both Goth_Skunk and IronPatriot as an example of such behavior between the two.05/21/2015 - 8:43pm
Andrew EisenMock? Ridicule? No, we're talking about serious threats and abuse, not people being cheeky or mean. Big difference.05/21/2015 - 8:42pm
DocMelonheadIn fact I see both mocks and ridicule between both the GamerGate Supporters and GamerGate Critics.05/21/2015 - 8:41pm
DocMelonheadAs for the Harassment, well, this is the internet; people will mock and ridicule whoever they want, whenever they want, at all times.05/21/2015 - 8:40pm
Mattsworknamegoth I think all media news outlets have that disclaimer05/21/2015 - 8:39pm
Andrew EisenThat's an... interesting way to interpret that.05/21/2015 - 8:36pm
Goth_SkunkAnd re BBC vs Rockstar: Ahh. I missed that. Woops!05/21/2015 - 8:33pm
Goth_SkunkAE: The entire disclaimer is a valid reason why I don't take it seriously. Particularly the part where they say "the information contained herein may not be necessarily accurate or current." Because fact-checking, like math, is haaaaaaaaard!05/21/2015 - 8:32pm
MattsworknameI take all media reporting with huge skepticism. the Mary sue Included. that said, there not as bad Jezebel.05/21/2015 - 8:27pm
DocMelonheadYou could say that the Mary Sue only interested in Gender issues in pop culture, and they only see GamerGate as a Hate group that fight for the oppressive status quo.05/21/2015 - 8:22pm
MechaCrashWell, can't blame him for not expanding on it and missing stories here. Sealioning people demanding proof of claims and then calling them liars when they provide it is busy work!05/21/2015 - 8:20pm
Andrew EisenRe: Mary Sue - Uh, why exactly? Re: Rockstar - Yep, we reported that earlier today.05/21/2015 - 8:12pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician