Jun 30 2004
Thinking of the Children??
Snippets from something I turned in for class recently, related to this silly legislation that was introduced to the Senate last week:
Under pressure from a fearful and hidebound content industry and in the guise of protecting our nation’s children from the “worst type of villains” - those who would corrupt and exploit the innocence of children by encouraging them to commit copyright infringement and/or access pornography - Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) has introduced new copyright legislation that ultimately threatens to stifle technological and creative innovation. Hatch is no stranger to copyright controversies; he’s a co-author of the widely criticized DMCA, and last year suggested consideration of legislation that would grant copyright holders the right to destroy the computers of those believed to illegally download music (a suggestion that elicited more than one raised eyebrow and never officially made it to the Senate floor). Now, he is trying a different tack in a misguided attempt to curb perceived copyright infringement and thereby appease officials in the music and movie industries.
Originally dubbed the Inducement Devolves into Unlawful Child Exploitation (INDUCE) Act, the IICA (Inducing Infringements of Copyright Act) bill proposes an amendment to existing copyright law that would enable copyright owners to sue anyone who “induces” copyright infringement, where “intentional inducement” is defined as “intentionally aids, abets, induces, or procures” and “intent may be shown by acts from which a reasonable person would find intent to induce infringement.”
The primary targets of this legislation are the vendors of P2P (peer-to-peer) file sharing software that enables PC owners to download and/or share files over a network connection. P2P vendors such as Napster, Grokster, and Morpheus have come under considerable fire, particularly from the music industry, because many users of the services download music and movie files illegally. Last year the courts determined that P2P software distributors are not legally liable for this copyright; this new bill would essentially overturn that decision, and could also impact the 1984 Betamax lawsuit, which stated VCRs are legal because they are “capable of substantial noninfringing uses.” Additionally, the overly broad language of the Act opens the door for court rulings against manufacturers of other technologies such as photocopiers, DVRs (e.g., Tivo, ReplayTV), and MP3 players such as Apple’s iPod; lawyers for the Electronic Frontier Foundation have already drafted a mock lawsuit against Apple as an example, claiming that the iPod’s 10,000 song capacity is well above the size of the average user’s music collection, and thus induces copyright infringement by inviting users to download music illegally to store on the device.
[snip of other details that can be found by reading any of the search results for "induce act".. and boring bits of me complaining about how Hatch is using the kids and artists as an excuse to push through legislation on behalf of the RIAA and etc.]
Legislators should refrain from pushing legislation that panders to Hollywood’s manufactured need for ultimate control while simultaneously rewarding their stubborn refusal to accommodate contemporary methods of producing, distributing, and enjoying entertainment. Promoting the notion that such pandering in any way protects children is particularly shameless. Instead, Washington would do well to encourage the RIAA and other copyright owners to invest in programs to educate citizens about fair use, the purpose behind copyright laws, and their rights and responsibilities in an increasingly digital age. Even more importantly, in the spirit of forward-thinking American innovation, legislators and copyright holders alike should be looking for ways to embrace these new technologies and associated opportunities in ways that will spur ever more creative, artistic, and literary output.
So there. Hmf.
(and many thanks to my editor for giving this a once-over last week! 
)
