U.S. Chamber of Commerce Slams Protect IP Act Critics

November 4, 2011 -

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has some strong language for critics of Sen. Patrick Leahy’s (D-Vt.) online piracy bill, the PROTECT IP Act. The group, which represents business interests in the United States (and is considered to be a largely conservative organization), fired back at critics on Friday who painted the bill as an effort backed by Hollywood and not businesses.

The anti-IP crowd is “tripping all over themselves trying to pretend (and convince others) that legislation against rogue sites is just for the benefit of Hollywood,” wrote Steve Tepp, chief intellectual property counsel for the Chamber’s Global Intellectual Property Center, in a blog post on Friday.

The response came after Politico posted a story indicating that both Google and Consumer Electronics Association were thinking of leaving the trade group for making web companies police the Internet. Yahoo left the Chamber in October, largely over its support of Sen. Patrick Leahy’s online piracy bill.

Tepp argued in a blog post that anti-piracy legislation is supported by plenty of companies outside of Hollywood including Caterpillar, Nike and Major League Baseball and smaller companies. He says that plenty of corporations want Congress to crack down on sites that sell counterfeit software, fake pharmaceutical drugs, entertainment content and other American-produced goods.

"The even bigger story is that rogue sites harm businesses and steal jobs across our entire economy," Tepp wrote. "And that is why the support for legislation to tackle rogue sites has incredibly broad support."

The IP protection laws before the House and Senate also have the support of the AFL-CIO, National Fraternal Order of Police, International Association of Firefighters and more than 40 state attorneys general, Tepp wrote.

They face plenty of opposition from online rights groups and internet users who feel that these laws go too far, erode internet freedoms and don't provide a fair amount of due process to accused sites.

Source: Politico


Comments

Re: U.S. Chamber of Commerce Slams Protect IP Act Critics

the entertainment industry (read: hollywood) has been crying bloody murder over piracy for a while now - of course they will be referenced in legislation that benefits them at the cost of others, the squeaky wheel gets the attention after all. how does Tepp not understand that? oh yeah, he's clueless regarding tech.

since hollywood is arguably the hardest hit by piracy, then in terms of "business", as Tepp says, hollywood's bottom line should have a measurable amount of resulting damage. But that's not the case,  they just keep breaking their own sales records and awarding themselves ever-increasing bonuses!

http://boingboing.net/2011/11/08/piracy-stricken-viacom-ceo-tops-pay-rai...

don't give up your freedoms for these lying fat cats! if you must give them up, give them up for something else worthwhile, not this!

Re: U.S. Chamber of Commerce Slams Protect IP Act Critics

mmm.. straw men.

So their argument that it isnt' 'just hollywood' is they bring in a few other IP groups that are acting hollywood like?  That doesn't change the equation much....

Re: U.S. Chamber of Commerce Slams Protect IP Act Critics

Some people forget that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is just another lobbying group. It isn't a government entity, unless you count all of the congressmen it owns. Also, you can see it spinning in full effect by calling those who oppose this bill as "Anti-IP." In addition, they fell as long as it is good for the industry, then it is OK to screw everyone else over.

Hellooooo! IP companies are doing better then they ever have in a time when the rest of us are just making it by. They aren't exactly wounded and dying, you know? In addition, just because it will benefit SOMEONE, doesn't mean it is OK to go to any lengths to do this. Things are pure black and pure white. You can EASILY support IP, frown on piracy, and yet feel that this bill oversteps what should be done.

Risking reductio ad absurdum, or perhaps not so much risking it as stepping right into it, let's compare this to the "soft on terror" accusation. Terrorists are bad. We would like to kill them. Carpet bombing an area with nukes will kill them. Ergo, if you feel terrorists are bad and want to kill them, you support carpet bombing an area with nukes. "But what about innocents that will suffer from this?" Shut up! If you don't support the carpet bombing with nukes, then you don't want to kill terrorists, therefore you are pro-terrorism (and ipso facto, weigh the same amount as a duck and/or very small rocks).

You can be pro-IP without resorting to the nuclear option. Just because we are against this bill doesn't mean we are anti-IP.

I'll see your "AD HOMINEM" (follow link under "blog post") and raise you a false dichotomy.

Re: U.S. Chamber of Commerce Slams Protect IP Act Critics

I'm willing to bet that these "businessmen" at the Chamber of Commerce have only a vague understanding of what they are supporting, which has also been heavily influenced by a greater community of absolute capitalization reinforced by corruption.

Not much support can be mustered for illegal profit of pirated media or pharmaceuticals, but that's just a diversion to usher-in legislation that provides unchecked power to an oligarchy. From a law-enforcement perspective, proposition to eliminate copyright infringement sounds justifiable,  but when laws are established that provide a broad umbrella for an agent to indiscriminately target anything or anyone who even links to sources of potential infringement, this will turn into a witch hunt. I can't imagine a more clever tactic than to anonymously post a few links to copyrighted material on a competitors website, then incessantly complain to it's webhost that the site is condoning piracy.

http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/pdf/112%20HR%203261.pdf

Re: U.S. Chamber of Commerce Slams Protect IP Act Critics

"No no no, this bill isn't about just one industry trying to buttfuck you!  It's about several industries trying to buttfuck you!"

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
MattsworknameSame here so far, minus some issues with a few old games, it's been solid for me. I do think they need to adjust some of the interface in the start menu, but I can work with it08/04/2015 - 5:56pm
Matthew WilsonI like it, havent had any major issues.08/04/2015 - 5:45pm
MattsworknameSo, now t hta we have had time to mess with it, whats everyones view on windows 10?08/04/2015 - 5:43pm
james_fudgeNot I, said the fly.08/04/2015 - 4:31pm
Big PermAnyone use an Intel 750?08/04/2015 - 3:40pm
E. Zachary KnightSome great comments about gender diversity in game development from GDC Europe. http://gamasutra.com/view/news/250417/Women_in_the_game_industry_share_stories_of_improving_diversity.php08/04/2015 - 3:11pm
Sora-Chan@EZK: It's kind sad that kind of thing still occurs to this day (and for good reasons...)08/04/2015 - 2:33pm
E. Zachary KnightA woman author shares her experience submitting her manuscript to publishing agents under a man's name. http://jezebel.com/homme-de-plume-what-i-learned-sending-my-novel-out-und-172063762708/04/2015 - 1:21pm
james_fudgeme either. They are rolling it out in phases.08/04/2015 - 12:41pm
Big PermI haven't got my notification yet, even though I reserved it the day the pop up came.08/04/2015 - 12:27pm
james_fudgeThanks Matthew. I have not yet installed Windows 10, but the complaints about it have been minimal.08/04/2015 - 12:19pm
benohawkhttp://goo.gl/6yZ7EO suggests you can kill it all, but I haven't tested it on my system as of yet. And I wouldn't recommend digging in the registry or playing around withdisabling services for most users08/04/2015 - 12:18pm
Matthew Wilsonyes you can turn it off08/04/2015 - 12:15pm
james_fudgeCan you completely disable it though? I think you can minimize what it collects.08/04/2015 - 12:06pm
benohawkThe Win 10 data collection sounds scary, but I think it would be just too much data to be useful08/04/2015 - 11:57am
benohawkNo need to apologize Big Perm08/04/2015 - 11:55am
benohawkThe changing to 0 only being a 1 was local security policy change, not the reghack08/04/2015 - 11:49am
Big PermSorry Beno, it looks like you're right.08/04/2015 - 11:49am
Big PermFrom what I've heard (and obviously I could be wrong here), but I hear even setting it to "0" in the registry will only change to "1" or "Basic" collection. I'll try to find the article I got this from08/04/2015 - 11:40am
benohawkBig Perm, you can disable telemetry, just not through the gui. It's a matter of adding a registry key and disabling a couple services08/04/2015 - 11:34am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician