It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

White House wants new copyright law crackdown

page: 1
9
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 12:01 AM
link   

White House wants new copyright law crackdown


news.cnet.com

The White House today proposed sweeping revisions to U.S. copyright law, including making "illegal streaming" of audio or video a federal felony and allowing FBI agents to wiretap suspected infringers.

In a 20-page white paper (PDF), the Obama administration called on the U.S. Congress to fix "deficiencies that could hinder enforcement" of intellectual property laws.

Read more: news.cnet.com...
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 12:01 AM
link   
A federal felony!!!
for a song or movie or tv show!!!!!!

I am sorry obama has lost his dang mind.
This is flat crazy a felony?????

A might as well go rob banks to buy movies legit huh obama?
a felony is a felony right.

this is gonna get bad communism here we come!!!!!
If you vote obama for a 2nd term i will cuss every one of you obamatards i swear to god lol

news.cnet.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 12:10 AM
link   
reply to post by TheAmused
 


Define alternatives. The right is not it. Obama is not it. Ron Paul is a mason. Really, get together and pick a human being for a change, not one of the old empire group.

If it passes, I suggest a few things. One, to research freeman law, there is a current good thread on it. Two, to get millions to sign round table agreement to never follow a criminal law, and to write and phone their representatives and tell them how fired they are if they bring it in, and then pledge all of them to blantantly do this. Democracy does not mean waiting 4 or 5 years to cast one useless vote, it means taking action here and now.
edit on 17-3-2011 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 12:12 AM
link   
OP, whyd you post in two different forums?



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 12:26 AM
link   


No less than 78 percent of political contributions from Hollywood went to Democrats in 2008, which is broadly consistent with the trend for the last two decades, according to OpenSecrets.org. Read more: news.cnet.com...

Sellouts. All of them.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 12:26 AM
link   
reply to post by TheAmused
 


Oh no That Law would bring an end to youtube and other streaming sites for free, so much for a democratic society.

This law would also bring an end to anime online streaming i pray this doesn't happen.
edit on 17-3-2011 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 12:37 AM
link   
This being good for the music/movie industry is a misconseption. The real talented artists and directors don't care if you steal their work.
WARNING: Explicit content

edit on 17-3-2011 by SpeachM1litant because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 12:41 AM
link   
Wow.... And I thought the mafia sueing 12 year olds and mothers was bad form.... This takes the cake, I am willing to bet the RIAA and groups like that contributed a lot of money to his coffer. Corporate scumbags, I hope they hang.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 12:48 AM
link   
reply to post by TKDRL
 


I was wondering why isn't this on the mainstream news? do they fear a public revolt on this thus they aren't reporting it as news?
edit on 17-3-2011 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 12:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter
 


I wonder if all those idiot college kids realize what a mistake they made yet? A whole lot of college kids get their movies and music through piracy, so essentially their great leader is trying to criminalize a bunch of his fanbase...



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 01:20 AM
link   
reply to post by TKDRL
 


Ya, those idiots in college. Should they drop out and apply for one of the many manufacturing positions?

Anyways, I do find it odd that they'd feel the need to wiretap those that are pirating.
edit on 17-3-2011 by captainbitter because: Added something to stay on topic xD.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 01:57 AM
link   
There should be no copyright laws.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 02:25 AM
link   
This is just a reason for the DHLS to hack computers at will.

Millions of people are guilty of this kind activity, and this gives the Services a huge increase in monitoring capability.

You should have seen this as apparent right off the bat...

You need all need to become members of activist forums, and organizations so we can get s hit done.

Look at Egypt. Look at Baharain. Look at Libya.

That is what the GOV most fears now, an online brewed revolution.

Confirm their fears.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 02:27 AM
link   
reply to post by captainbitter
 


Not all college kids are idiots, just the ones that jumped on train hope and change :p There are plenty of smart ones out there, that did their research, and saw obama was a liar, and voted 3rd party.


Wire tapping pirates is odd though, do they think we are funded by alCIAda or something?



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 02:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Section69
There should be no copyright laws.


There absolutely should be copyright laws. We had a perfect system before the influence from US and other countries came in and ruined it. It was basically the same as it is except copying for your own personal use was allowed. You could buy a dvd and copy it to your friend legally or you could download anything legally. What copyright laws should do is to protect the copyright owners from people who seek to make profit from their work. That's plain and simple.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 02:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps

Originally posted by Section69
There should be no copyright laws.


There absolutely should be copyright laws. We had a perfect system before the influence from US and other countries came in and ruined it. It was basically the same as it is except copying for your own personal use was allowed. You could buy a dvd and copy it to your friend legally or you could download anything legally. What copyright laws should do is to protect the copyright owners from people who seek to make profit from their work. That's plain and simple.


Right, I completely agree (minus the part about perfect, nothing's perfect), but sharing over the internet for free is non-profit.

Also a DVD or a CD is a physical object. Meaning you could only redistribute it so much (let somebody borrow it, make a copy, etc.)

The Internet though has made this more complicated, because copy--->paste is free, its just data being sent from one hard drive to another. Why can't the copyright holder's protect themselves, like everyone else has to? Its nice that they can get a bunch of muscle behind their profits.

Maybe this could have something to do with the decline of infrastructure, too many dollars going into "virtual assets".
edit on 17-3-2011 by Section69 because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-3-2011 by Section69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 02:45 AM
link   
I remember as a kid in the early to late 80s, making copys of tapes to friends on blanks. thats how music got out! of course in the early 80;s mtv wasnt as mainstream it has become today too mainstream!
napater came in late 90s's metallica seud em, for spreading music without anyoen buying it. of coure it hurt metallicas fortune yeah, but its rediculous no one can be allowed to listen to someting. it slike saying , its illegal to listen too your frineds cd player ( yuor choice of music disc) but the purchaser can. thats rediculus and insane actually.
when vcr tapes were around ti wa immposible to copy onto another vcr tape. magnetic strip or something. cd's came along and anyone could copy anything. seems technology just makes things comsetically better looking, but makes it structuraly weaker, no matter what it is these days. i saw a commercial last night,bon jovi agianst mp3's or someting becuae it hurt his sales. i understand that. it soudns like if , lets say music was copyrighted as said in this post..then it would be the end of commercial modern radio stations as we know it then. becuae bands* would have to get payed money for radio station to play thier music. something i always thought too an extent, royalty checks* took care of*



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 02:55 AM
link   
reply to post by ziggy1706
 


People think wrong when it comes to piracy... They think 1000 downloads = 1000 lost sales, not true at all. I use piracy to make sure I never waste any money on a crap album or movie, ever again. If the album only has one or two good songs, or the movie is crap and has zero rewatchability, tough luck. They don't get my money. I make it a point to buy albums and movies that are actually diamonds in the pile of crap called entertainment. If it wasn't for piracy, I would have never even listened to a lot of my favorite bands.
edit on Thu, 17 Mar 2011 02:55:51 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 03:05 AM
link   
see thats jsut it. they made up the word so to speak, calling it piracy,a nd justified amongst themselves, lost profif figures. im not really siding with, lets say bon jovi or metallica..at least in metalicas case, i lsot all resepct for them when they sued napster, crying out it was lost sales. metallica wouldnt be were they were today if in the 80's, copying a tape to a friends was considered a copyright infringemetn. theyde be rock stars and al yeah, but not as super wealthy*
i hate when they use that word , piracy* its a business word conjured up to make money nothing less or more. well ripps you off hearing free music in a free world maybe



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 03:13 AM
link   
Correct me if im wrong..but piracy is just what the word means..jumping onto a ship or car(aka carjacking), maybe killing a few, thentaking over the ship/car. its a takeover. metalica took over the world, that could technically be looked at as piracy. what did you or me do? we didnt take anyting at all..it was given to us* in napsters case, they look at it as pircay, but it was free music found anywhere online or radio being put online. wheres the pricay in that, ya know? a mall near me , an FYI store like 10 years ago, had these machines thier, you could sample or lsiten to an outcoming album beforehand, and they were ever cited for piracy*
boy, what buisness today teaches. it isnt about pleasing the customer, or teamwork..its about who yous tep on and money* how selfish an econoy its become.
piracy to me, sounds like copyriighting words* gene simmons has a word or somehting copyrighted. i wonder if i go too the FED or opyright office, and tell them i want too patent the question mark and nO ONE can use it without my say so , ok or endoresment* lol seems related to me kinda maybe the exclamation point too* no one can use it unless they pay me kaching$ kaching$ kaching$







 
9
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join