Officials vow to protect intellectual property
by Vashner · in General Discussion · 10/31/2005 (1:42 pm) · 18 replies
Local news article
Quote:LAST UPDATE: 10/31/2005 2:08:27 PM
Posted By: Jim Forsyth
This story is available on your cell phone at mobile.woai.com.
Two top level Bush administration officials today vowed that enforcement of laws against theft of 'intellectual property' will be a top priority for the government, but warned that education, diplomacy, and use of the civil courts, not new and broader statutes, are the most effective way to combat when has become a $250 billion a year crime, 1200 WOAI news reported today.
"Our economy now grows on the basis of ideas," U.S. Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez told a conference on intellectual property law and enforcement at the University of Texas school of law in Austin. "We cannot create a world environment where copyright protections mean nothing."
Gutierrez said the problem of intellectual property theft is growing at an alarming rate, he said 10% of all pharmaceuticals sold today are counterfeit.
Intellectual property is defined as copyrights and patents covering processes, ideas, and artistic expression, including music, movies, and software. Congressman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) who chairs the House Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet and Intellectual Property, told the conference that the term didn't even exist fifteen years ago.
"High tech is now responsible for 40% of the increase in the productivity of our economy, and half of our gross domestic product reflects some form of intellectual property," Smith said. "Failure to protect that intellectual property threatens to destroy that productivity increase."
Senator John Cornyn (R-Tx) echoed that, saying 'innovation' not natural resources or cheap labor, is America's economic advantage today.
But Gutierrez and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales both expressed concerns that passing 'too many new laws' may discourage innovation, and urged the government and industry to rely on education and diplomacy to resolve many of the key issues.
"There are places right now in the U.S. and overseas that a customer can buy a knockoff of a $100 handbag for $5," Gutierrez said, "and I bet many of those customers think that's pretty cool. Those people need to know that it's not cool."
Gutierrez said there are 'entire societies' which 'celebrate the art of copying,' and which actually encourage the theft of products ranging from pharmaceuticals to software. He did not identify the countries he was referring to, but he did cite Thailand as an violator of copyright and industrial property laws.
Ronald Mann of the University of Texas School of Law pointed out that today's copyright laws date from 'before the invention of software.'
"Innovation has clearly outpaced the law," he said. "But the key is to make sure any new laws don't restrict and stifle new innovation.
www.woai.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=7982341E-20F5-42FE-9E5A-9D7A0F11E3...
#2
I was having a conversation with a friend about bootlegs last night and the problem it represented, and it seems that one of the only ways to stop the spread of the "screener copy" versions of bootlegs would be to create individual copies of the screeners with the name of the person or theatre it's shipping to on the movie itself, like a subtitle, so that if it's given out, there's a very exact place for the MPAA to start looking for culprits. I know people might bitch and moan about it, but think- who gets a screener copy except the people in the theatres who are reviewing the movie to make a decision on whether to show it or not? A lot of them are responsible for the state of the black market of DVD's in regards to that kind of bootlegged DVD, and this would take a good chunk out of that market, seeing that screeners are the better quality bootlegs. For camcorder versions, hmmmm... Is there a way to generate interference against them so that any data that they record in a theatre is corrupt in a way that does no actual damage to the device? If so, then that would be the solution right there, making it extremely hard to film a movie in a theatre, and narrowing down the origin of the bootlegged screener copies so that individual theatres would be on the spot to investigate and prosecute theives, as well as better secure the screener copies.
People might think that that's all a bit draconian, but some things to remember are that these studios do lose money on these bootlegs (if you don't think so, come here to NYC and see how many people buy them on the street and never go to the theatre because of it), and they do need to take steps to counter these kinds of theft. The only thing that bootleg DVD's have over regular DVD's is that you can watch a movie in your living room when it's in the theatre. Otherwise, why chance a dodgy DVD when you can get the real one, and with special features? The average joe won't be impacted by these two measures, as they're narrowly focused on the bootleggers themselves. It's not foolproof, but it would be a huge blow to them.
Now, the question is, how could you implement that kind of system for a much harder to target black market such as the warez scene?
11/01/2005 (6:19 pm)
It's good that they aren't looking too hard at new laws, since today's lawmakers usually tend towards being either too narrow or too broad in the language they put into those laws. The main thing is to bring some of these countries that have huge "infringement industries" back towards international laws in regards to intellectual property. While Thailand has some knockoffs going, it's larger countries like China, Taiwan, and Russia that have it much worse. Out of those three, China seems to be all for it (Taiwan has a big black market, and Russia can't seem to help itself these days).I was having a conversation with a friend about bootlegs last night and the problem it represented, and it seems that one of the only ways to stop the spread of the "screener copy" versions of bootlegs would be to create individual copies of the screeners with the name of the person or theatre it's shipping to on the movie itself, like a subtitle, so that if it's given out, there's a very exact place for the MPAA to start looking for culprits. I know people might bitch and moan about it, but think- who gets a screener copy except the people in the theatres who are reviewing the movie to make a decision on whether to show it or not? A lot of them are responsible for the state of the black market of DVD's in regards to that kind of bootlegged DVD, and this would take a good chunk out of that market, seeing that screeners are the better quality bootlegs. For camcorder versions, hmmmm... Is there a way to generate interference against them so that any data that they record in a theatre is corrupt in a way that does no actual damage to the device? If so, then that would be the solution right there, making it extremely hard to film a movie in a theatre, and narrowing down the origin of the bootlegged screener copies so that individual theatres would be on the spot to investigate and prosecute theives, as well as better secure the screener copies.
People might think that that's all a bit draconian, but some things to remember are that these studios do lose money on these bootlegs (if you don't think so, come here to NYC and see how many people buy them on the street and never go to the theatre because of it), and they do need to take steps to counter these kinds of theft. The only thing that bootleg DVD's have over regular DVD's is that you can watch a movie in your living room when it's in the theatre. Otherwise, why chance a dodgy DVD when you can get the real one, and with special features? The average joe won't be impacted by these two measures, as they're narrowly focused on the bootleggers themselves. It's not foolproof, but it would be a huge blow to them.
Now, the question is, how could you implement that kind of system for a much harder to target black market such as the warez scene?
#4
If you made an album and where going broke you might complain too. Intel property is very
complex issue. But let's look at just Garage Games for example.
These guys bust there Butts to bring us some good tools and games. There are people out there
that would hack or abuse various GG products without even thinking twice.. or thinking like you said
"hey it's only 20 dollars".
It's that mindset coupled with the distribution of the internet that poses a problem for people that make
Intellectual property of all kinds.
Being raised in a "rule of law" country, basic manners of what's right and wrong should be known.
Trends do not make things right.
If you look at Mp3's. The huge profits that fell off hurt the ability of musicians to pay bills. They are like
game developers too. Every industry has staffing and they need to put food on the plate too and pay bills.
If you make a game, a song or a book you should be able to protect it and charge a price. Otherwise anything
could be ripped off. And when that happens it's stifles creative abilities and resources for new things.
11/01/2005 (9:54 pm)
The settlements are penalties. It's not just the cost of the one. But the many.If you made an album and where going broke you might complain too. Intel property is very
complex issue. But let's look at just Garage Games for example.
These guys bust there Butts to bring us some good tools and games. There are people out there
that would hack or abuse various GG products without even thinking twice.. or thinking like you said
"hey it's only 20 dollars".
It's that mindset coupled with the distribution of the internet that poses a problem for people that make
Intellectual property of all kinds.
Being raised in a "rule of law" country, basic manners of what's right and wrong should be known.
Trends do not make things right.
If you look at Mp3's. The huge profits that fell off hurt the ability of musicians to pay bills. They are like
game developers too. Every industry has staffing and they need to put food on the plate too and pay bills.
If you make a game, a song or a book you should be able to protect it and charge a price. Otherwise anything
could be ripped off. And when that happens it's stifles creative abilities and resources for new things.
#6
11/02/2005 (2:36 am)
They surely didn't make a 'butt load' (I suppose you meant 'boat load') of money off of the lawsuits they brought. IIRC not a single one has made it to court and they all have been settled for reasonable sums. For most people who get caught like that you can bet it's a lesson well learned. After having to pay a $3,000 settlement, would you go back to filesharing again? 'Do the crime, serve the time'. And in this case instead of serving jail time they are paying money. Sounds fair to me.
#8
As well as protecting the right of authors, you also need to balance the right of competition in society.
Neither authors nor consumers benefit in the mid to long term from a Monopoly. Only the Monopolist does.
e.g. Most countries in the world will force a patent holder to license the use of that patent on reasonable grounds. The patent is not there to create a monopoly for no good reason, the patent is there to allow a temporary monopoly so it can be exploited by the patent holder and thus innovation is rewarded. It is not rewarded with a ad infinitem patent. If the patent holder won't utilise the patent reasonably, the law will actually step in and force it to license it if so required.
11/02/2005 (3:08 pm)
Just thought I'd add a little point here.As well as protecting the right of authors, you also need to balance the right of competition in society.
Neither authors nor consumers benefit in the mid to long term from a Monopoly. Only the Monopolist does.
e.g. Most countries in the world will force a patent holder to license the use of that patent on reasonable grounds. The patent is not there to create a monopoly for no good reason, the patent is there to allow a temporary monopoly so it can be exploited by the patent holder and thus innovation is rewarded. It is not rewarded with a ad infinitem patent. If the patent holder won't utilise the patent reasonably, the law will actually step in and force it to license it if so required.
#9
In thursday Activision release COD 2 and yesterday I overheard two kids..One kid is talking to another "I finished COD 2..."(COD 2 isn't in the stores yet) and they allready finished the game!!! If the kids of 10-12 years can download game that was released 6 days ago and finish it then how could anyone stop the piracy....The fines should be much bigger, 3000$ is cheap. If one guy pays 3000$ for downloading and using pirated copy, then 20 others around him will think twice before doing something like that.
IMHO of course ;)
11/02/2005 (3:12 pm)
Well Jim, neither RIAA can operate without making money. I am not defending anyone, I am not living in USA so I am not familiar with your law but piracy is a great problem everywhere.In thursday Activision release COD 2 and yesterday I overheard two kids..One kid is talking to another "I finished COD 2..."(COD 2 isn't in the stores yet) and they allready finished the game!!! If the kids of 10-12 years can download game that was released 6 days ago and finish it then how could anyone stop the piracy....The fines should be much bigger, 3000$ is cheap. If one guy pays 3000$ for downloading and using pirated copy, then 20 others around him will think twice before doing something like that.
IMHO of course ;)
#10
11/02/2005 (5:44 pm)
@jim,...,, did you see an @jim there? I was replying to the topic... You would of known if it was a personal attack. When I said 'You" was not You was "you" as in some joe hacker. Hope that helps to clarify.
#11
11/02/2005 (7:15 pm)
@Jim - Acquiring someone else's software patent and suing companies who can't afford the legal process and who probably aren't even violating your patent in the first place - that's an example of profiteering and legal system abuse. There's a lot wrong with our legal, patent, and copyright systems in the US, no doubt. But what the RIAA is doing is well within the bounds of reason and well within their rights. $3000 was just a figure I pulled out of my ass. Some of the settlements have been for less, some for more. If they were suing 35 year old soccer moms for $50,000 I would agree with you. But they aren't.
#12
I would put forward the arguement that many times, the offender doesn't ever consider getting caught, thus the amount of fine is not highly relevant to their decision. $5, $5000, $5,000,000 are just numbers and not reality to these people at the point of making the decision. Even if they have read a slashdot article about someone getting fined (which I doubt the adolescents in your example would have)
Especially if you use the example of a 10-12 yo kid. Are they thinking about the potential fine? I doubt it.
Maybe the legal system shouldn't be asked to fill in the gaps left by giant PR machines creating a frenzied state of demand for a product in childern. Especially if they can satisfy that demand illegally days before they can satisfy it legally.
11/02/2005 (8:23 pm)
Are bigger fines going to stop it?I would put forward the arguement that many times, the offender doesn't ever consider getting caught, thus the amount of fine is not highly relevant to their decision. $5, $5000, $5,000,000 are just numbers and not reality to these people at the point of making the decision. Even if they have read a slashdot article about someone getting fined (which I doubt the adolescents in your example would have)
Especially if you use the example of a 10-12 yo kid. Are they thinking about the potential fine? I doubt it.
Maybe the legal system shouldn't be asked to fill in the gaps left by giant PR machines creating a frenzied state of demand for a product in childern. Especially if they can satisfy that demand illegally days before they can satisfy it legally.
#14
The majority of the time the person would never have bought it in the first place, and many other times, the use inspires a purchase... Take MP games for example. the 2 kids above Grabed COD2 before it was out... Obviously loved it. They want to keep playing it, so they have to buy it to play MP...
The only reason piracy has an effect on most industries is because of poor content. Poor games, poor music, poor movies.
11/03/2005 (12:12 am)
Piracy is much less a problem than we are led to believe. Those cost analasys you see all the time are over stated, and beyond that, make the blatantly stupid assumption that every time someone downloads a song, or a game etc that a sale is lost. Thats grossly incorrect.The majority of the time the person would never have bought it in the first place, and many other times, the use inspires a purchase... Take MP games for example. the 2 kids above Grabed COD2 before it was out... Obviously loved it. They want to keep playing it, so they have to buy it to play MP...
The only reason piracy has an effect on most industries is because of poor content. Poor games, poor music, poor movies.
#15
Despite piracy on the web CD sales and Record Company profits continue to set new records. It's been shown through various studies that music "theft" on the web actually helped to increase sales of music. People like being able to try before they buy.
11/03/2005 (3:45 am)
Quote:If you look at Mp3's. The huge profits that fell off hurt the ability of musicians to pay bills. They are like
game developers too.
Despite piracy on the web CD sales and Record Company profits continue to set new records. It's been shown through various studies that music "theft" on the web actually helped to increase sales of music. People like being able to try before they buy.
#16
11/03/2005 (4:10 am)
I'm wondering when americans will stop believing that they run the world. =P
#18
The RIAA has made up figures, saying they have lost money due to filesharing and claiming it has reduced the number of CDs sold (yet there are several greater causes for this, like less releases in the past few years). If it wasn't for filesharing a lot of bands would go unheard. These are bands that don't have the continual push of ClearChannel, meaning they get less money. Yet filesharing assists in giving them free airplay and hopefully a larger fanbase. I have seen this happen.
BTW, I'm fairly sure musicians make less than $1 per CD.
As for IP in general, I would like to see some protection, but I would rather see a review of the US patent system. Too much crap gets passed through and is counterproductive. Surely everyone has heard of Sony's 'rootkit' protection scheme for CDs by now, right?
11/03/2005 (6:37 am)
@Jim - yes, the RIAA has sued grandmothers, grandfathers and mothers on behalf of their children. Just recently it was determined they cannot sue a 12 yr old's mother, so they are suing the 12 year old directly. Yes, a 12 year old for thousands of dollars.The RIAA has made up figures, saying they have lost money due to filesharing and claiming it has reduced the number of CDs sold (yet there are several greater causes for this, like less releases in the past few years). If it wasn't for filesharing a lot of bands would go unheard. These are bands that don't have the continual push of ClearChannel, meaning they get less money. Yet filesharing assists in giving them free airplay and hopefully a larger fanbase. I have seen this happen.
BTW, I'm fairly sure musicians make less than $1 per CD.
As for IP in general, I would like to see some protection, but I would rather see a review of the US patent system. Too much crap gets passed through and is counterproductive. Surely everyone has heard of Sony's 'rootkit' protection scheme for CDs by now, right?
Torque Owner Jeffrey Bakker
Similar issues were going on in Eurpoe earlier this year. The software community was fighting against software patents. It seems the software patents proposal was rejected, thank god.