Group Uses Justin Bieber to Counter Anti-Piracy Bill

October 20, 2011 -

Using Justin Bieber (of all people) as a focal point for their message an advocacy group has created a campaign to warn U.S. citizens of the dangers found in an anti-piracy bill pending in the Senate. The bill, which was approved in the Senate Judiciary Committee approved the bill in June, would make it a felony for users to post unlicensed content online 10 times in 180 days. The bill is backed by the Recording Industry Association of America, the Motion Picture Association of America and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

So why use Justin Bieber for the campaign? Because, as the group points out Justin Bieber began his career by posting YouTube videos of himself singing other people's songs. Under the proposed law, he'd do five years in prison. Of course realistically Justin Bieber wouldn't spend five years in prison because he's a minor, but you get the point.

"Those videos are still on the Internet, so if Bieber doesn't pull them all down right away, he could be prosecuted and sent to the slammer for five years on felony charges," Fight for the Future claimed in a press release.

The bill, sponsored by Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), would make it a felony for users to post unlicensed content online 10 times in 180 days. The bill is strongly supported by the usual suspects: the Recording Industry Association of America, the Motion Picture Association of America and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Linden Zakula, a spokesman for Sen. Klobuchar, tells The Hill that this bill would not send Justin Bieber to jail.

“The bill language specifically targets people who willfully engage in copyright infringement for commercial advantage or private financial gain," he said. "The bill does not criminalize uploading videos to YouTube or streaming videos at home.”

Fight for the Future disagrees.

"What's genuinely troubling is that this bill applies to a massive slice of social media activity," said Fight for the Future co-founder Holmes Wilson.

The group claims that the legislation would apply to karaoke videos, footage of people dancing to music and videos with music playing in the background.

Fight for the Future is using FreeBieber.org to make its point. The site features digitally-altered photos of police hauling Bieber away in handcuffs and the pop star in an orange jumpsuit sitting in a prison cell. The site's headline reads: "Justice faces 5 brutal years in prison."

As much as some people would like to see the teen pop sensation do some hard time behind bars, the point the group is trying to make is that - if this law were in place a few years ago - Justin Bieber would go to prison (or at the very least a seedy reform school).

Source: The Hill


Comments

Re: Group Uses Justin Bieber to Counter Anti-Piracy Bill

Oh man, hard choice.

 

Between Justin Bieber and the American criminal justice system being used to strip people of their voting rights and label them the same as a violent offender or sex offender for something as difficult to explain to someone as copyright law...

 

Such a tough choice!

Re: Group Uses Justin Bieber to Counter Anti-Piracy Bill

Pirate more to send Bieber to jail? HELL YA!!!


Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Let's renegotiate them.

---

http://zippydsm.deviantart.com/

Re: Group Uses Justin Bieber to Counter Anti-Piracy Bill

For once, I agree. This Bieber fiend must be stopped.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Sora-ChanI realize that they have ways getting around it, but one reason might be due to earthquakes.04/17/2014 - 4:42am
Matthew WilsonSF is a tech/ economic/ trade center it should be mostly tail building. this whole problem is because of the lack of tail buildings. How would having tail apartment buildings destroy SF? having tail buildings has not runed other cities around the US/world04/16/2014 - 10:51pm
Matthew WilsonAgain the issue is you can not build upwards anywhere in SF at the moment, and no you would not. You would bring prices to where they should have been before the market distortion. those prices are not economic or socially healthy.04/16/2014 - 10:46pm
ZippyDSMleeYou still wind up pushing people out of the non high rise aeras but tis least damage you can do all things considered.04/16/2014 - 10:26pm
ZippyDSMleeANd by mindlessly building upward you make it like every place else hurting property prices,ect,ect. You'll have to slowly segment the region into aeras where you will never build upward then alow some aeras to build upward.04/16/2014 - 10:25pm
Matthew WilsonSF have to build upwards they have natural growth limits. they can not grow outwards. ps growing outwards is terable just look at Orlando or Austin for that.04/16/2014 - 4:15pm
ZippyDSMleeIf they built upward then it would becoem like every other place making it worthless, if they don't build upward they will price people out making it worthless, what they need to do is a mix of things not just one exstreme or another.04/16/2014 - 4:00pm
Matthew Wilsonyou know the problem in SF was not the free market going wrong right? it was government distortion. by not allowing tall buildings to be build they limited supply. that is not free market.04/16/2014 - 3:48pm
ZippyDSMleeOh gaaa the free market is a lie as its currently leading them to no one living there becuse they can not afford it makign it worthless.04/16/2014 - 3:24pm
Matthew WilsonIf you have not read http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2014/04/introducing-steam-gauge-ars-reveals-steams-most-popular-games/ you should. It is a bit stats heavy, but worth the read.04/16/2014 - 2:04pm
Matthew Wilsonthe issue is when is doesn't work it can screw over millions in new york city's case. more often than not it is better to let the free market run its course without market distortion.04/16/2014 - 9:36am
NeenekoTrue, and overdone stagnation is a problem. It is a tricky balance. It does not help that when it does work, no one notices. Most people here have benifited from rent controls and not even realized it.04/16/2014 - 9:23am
ZippyDSMleehttp://www.afterdawn.com/news/article.cfm/2014/04/15/riaa_files_civil_suit_against_megaupload04/16/2014 - 8:48am
ZippyDSMleeEither way you get stagnation as people can not afford the prices they set.04/16/2014 - 8:47am
Neenekowell, specifically it helps people already living there and hurts people who want to live there instead. As for 'way more hurt', majorities generally need less legal protection. yes it hurt more people then it helped, it was written for a minority04/16/2014 - 8:30am
MaskedPixelantehttp://torrentfreak.com/square-enix-drm-boosts-profits-and-its-here-to-stay-140415/ Square proves how incredibly out of touch they are by saying that DRM is the way of the future, and is here to stay.04/16/2014 - 8:29am
james_fudgeUnwinnable Weekly Telethon playing Metal Gear http://www.twitch.tv/rainydayletsplay04/16/2014 - 8:06am
ConsterTo be fair, there's so little left of the middle class that those numbers are skewing.04/16/2014 - 7:42am
Matthew Wilsonyes it help a sub section of the poor, but hurt both the middle and upper class. in the end way more people were hurt than helped. also, it hurt most poor people as well.04/16/2014 - 12:13am
SeanBJust goes to show what I have said for years. Your ability to have sex does not qualify you for parenthood.04/15/2014 - 9:21pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician