Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Who is right on Protect IP Act:

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 08:48 PM
Original message
Who is right on Protect IP Act:
Leahy (who introduced it), the AFL-CIO (which supports it) or Wyden (who put a hold on it)?

Leahy, Hatch, Grassley Unveil Targeted Bill To Counter Online Infringement

AFL-CIO Applauds Proposed Legislation Targeting Rogue Websites

Wyden Places Hold on Protect IP Act

Wyden's position is known, but there hasn't been much written about Leahy's thinking or the AFL-CIO's support.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 08:54 PM
Response to Original message
1. I don't know who is "right", it's a messy issue,
but they are shit out of luck if they think they can stop this by passing a law. If pursued to its conclusion, this sort of law will make the drug war look like patty cake before they are done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 09:10 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. The thing is
finding the right way to go about it. From Wyden's statement:

<...>

“In December of last year I placed a hold on similar legislation, commonly called COICA, because I felt the costs of the legislation far outweighed the benefits. After careful analysis of the Protect IP Act, or PIPA, I am compelled to draw the same conclusion. I understand and agree with the goal of the legislation, to protect intellectual property and combat commerce in counterfeit goods, but I am not willing to muzzle speech and stifle innovation and economic growth to achieve this objective. At the expense of legitimate commerce, PIPA’s prescription takes an overreaching approach to policing the Internet when a more balanced and targeted approach would be more effective. The collateral damage of this approach is speech, innovation and the very integrity of the Internet.

“The Internet represents the shipping lane of the 21st century. It is increasingly in America’s economic interest to ensure that the Internet is a viable means for American innovation, commerce, and the advancement of our ideals that empower people all around the world. By ceding control of the Internet to corporations through a private right of action, and to government agencies that do not sufficiently understand and value the Internet, PIPA represents a threat to our economic future and to our international objectives. Until the many issues that I and others have raised with this legislation are addressed, I will object to a unanimous consent request to proceed to the legislation.”


Maybe he should propose an alternative approach that addresses the issues he raised.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 09:15 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. There is no right way to go about it. They can pound sand and it will do as much good. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 09:27 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. That comment was based
on this from Wyden's statement: "I understand and agree with the goal of the legislation, to protect intellectual property and combat commerce in counterfeit goods, but I am not willing to muzzle speech and stifle innovation and economic growth to achieve this objective...Until the many issues that I and others have raised with this legislation are addressed, I will object to a unanimous consent request to proceed to the legislation.”

Obviously he sees the need, but he has concerns.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
notesdev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 09:09 PM
Response to Original message
2. Copyright law is already out of control
We're so far from the original intent of copyrights it's not funny. The other side of the deal of respecting copyright is the benefit to the public of having works released into the public domain; with terms now at 70-95 years we are basically denying 3-4 generations the public benefit of copyright.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 08th 2024, 02:27 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC