Copyrights Bill [Passed]

[Ebowed]

Copyrights Bill

1. U.S. Code Title 17, Chapter 3, Section 2, Clause 1 is amended to read "Copyright in a work created on or after January 1, 1978, subsists from its creation and, except as provided by the following subsections, endures for a term consisting of twenty-five years or until the death of the owner, whichever occurs first."
2. U.S. Code Title 17, Chapter 3, Section 2, Clause 2 is amended to read "In the case of a joint work prepared by two or more authors who did not work for hire, the copyright endures for a term consisting of twenty-five years or until the death of the last owner of the copyright, whichever occurs first."
3. U.S. Code Title 17, Chapter 3, Section 2, Clause 3 is amended to read "In the case of an anonymous work, a pseudonymous work, or a work made for hire, the copyright endures for a term of 20 years from the year of its first publication, or a term of 25 years from the year of its creation, whichever expires first."
4. No person shall be held liable for the use of computers or the Internet in copying, sharing, or distributing copyrighted music, movie, television, text, image, or software files.


Sponsor: The President pro tempore

[Brandon H]

Amendments:

Section 4 is replaced: No person shall face more severe penalties for the use of computers or the Internet in copying, sharing, or distributing copyrighted music, movie, television, text, image, or software files than if computers or the Internet had not been used.

Section 5 is added: The Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 (17 U.S.C. §§ 512, 1201–1205, 1301–1332; 28 U.S.C. § 4001 and amendments to 17 U.S.C. §§ 101, 104, 104A, 108, 112, 114, 117, 701) are repealed.

Section 6 is added: Atlasia shall withdraw its membership from the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

While I am no proponent of our over-lengthy patent terms, this goes too far in curbing them.  It also means that Atlasia will be abrogating the Berne Convention, as the proposed lengths are far less than the minimums established under that convention.

Berne calls for life +50 as opposed to our current life +70 term.  The advantage to having an international framework for copyright outweighs the desirability for even shorter terms  (personally I'd prefer something in the range of life +25 to 40).

If someone will second my opinion, I shall set out some amendments to this bill that are compliant with the Berne convention.

[Brandon H]

Info on the Berne Convention:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention_for_the_Protection_of_Literary_and_Artistic_Works

The bureau that manages Berne, through a series of mergers, became part of WIPO.

The U.S. passed the Berne Implementation Act in 1988 (went into effect March 1, 1989).

I would suggest either withdrawal from Berne or make the law Berne compliant. And I have no problem withdrawing from it.

[SPC]

Given that I support the freedom to use the Internet in the way you want, I support this bill, and I am envious of the PPT that I didn't come up with it sooner.

[Ebowed]

Section 4 is replaced: No person shall face more severe penalties for the use of computers or the Internet in copying, sharing, or distributing copyrighted music, movie, television, text, image, or software files than if computers or the Internet had not been used.

Could you elaborate on what this means?

The original purpose was to eliminate penalties for breaking copyright law over the Internet, laws which I guarantee more than half of the Senate have broken.

[Brandon H]

If someone were to make an illegal copy of a movie (VHS) or a book (with a copy machine - which would take a while, but is possible) it would still be illegal (and no computer is involved). Right now under current law, doing this over the internet results in a greater penalty that without. You get in more trouble for copy movies over than internet than if you ran into a store and physically stole it.

Your wording sounds like it would completely legalize this. My amendment would not legalize it, but make the penalties the same either way.

And I have no doubts at least half of the Senate has done any of these things.

[Јas]

If someone will second my opinion, I shall set out some amendments to this bill that are compliant with the Berne convention.

Please do.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The amendment is as follows:

I. Sections 1, 2, and 3 of the bill are struck.

II. A new section 1 is added as follows:
1. It shall be the policy of the Republic of Atlasia that once granted the terms of copyrights should neither be increased or reduced.

III. A new section 2 is added as follows:
2. As of the date of the passage of this Act, any change in the term of copyright of a protected work caused by a change in the law after the date of first publication shall be null and void and the applicable term shall be that called for under the law at the time of first publication.  Any royalties due the copyright holder resulting from such a nullified change in the copyright term for a work published publication after the expiration of the original term the copyright and prior to the date of the passage of this Act shall still be due the copyright holder.

IV. A new section 3 is added as follows:
3. As of the date of the passage of this Act, the term of a copyright granted by the Republic of Atlasia shall be the minimum term required under Article 7 of the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works as in force as of the date of the passage of this Act.  Works for hire shall be treated as anonymous works save that moral rights under Article 6bis of the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works shall be held by the hirer and not by the anonymous author(s).

[Sam Spade]

I will need to a little research into the Copyright statute, but for at this moment my intuitions are to support BrandonH's amendments, ask to amend the bill to get rid of Clause 6 (in BrandonH's amendment) and support any amendments that put us within the Berne convention.

Copyright law is one of the few things that I think there should be a fairly strong international consensus on, just FYI.

[Brandon H]

I will need to a little research into the Copyright statute, but for at this moment my intuitions are to support BrandonH's amendments, ask to amend the bill to get rid of Clause 6 (in BrandonH's amendment) and support any amendments that put us within the Berne convention.

Those should be three separate amendments, so you can support the first two but not the third.

[Ebowed]

We are voting on the following amendments

1.) Section 4 is replaced: No person shall face more severe penalties for the use of computers or the Internet in copying, sharing, or distributing copyrighted music, movie, television, text, image, or software files than if computers or the Internet had not been used.

2.) Section 5 is added: The Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 (17 U.S.C. §§ 512, 1201–1205, 1301–1332; 28 U.S.C. § 4001 and amendments to 17 U.S.C. §§ 101, 104, 104A, 108, 112, 114, 117, 701) are repealed.

3.) Section 6 is added: Atlasia shall withdraw its membership from the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).


Amendment 1: Abstain
Amendment 2: Aye
Amendment 3: Aye

[Sam Spade]

Amendment 1: Aye
Amendment 2: Aye
Amendment 3: Nay

[Brandon H]

Aye
Aye
Aye

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Aye
Aye
Nay

I agree with Sam Spade's view that copyright law should have a strong international consensus, but the brute force tactics the RIAA and MPAA are using need to be put down.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Aye
Pending Nay
Nay

If the vote is close on the second of these three amendments, I'll take the time to look more closely at what would be struck as law.  I'm concerned that repealing the DMCA might throw out a baby along with the bathwater, but I don't have the interest to examine it more closely unless my vote ends up being potentially decisive.

See post below for reasons why I'm opposing the second proposed amendment.

[Јas]

I vote Aye on the first and Nay on the last.

I'd like some guidance as to what changes the second amendment would bring about.

[Sam Spade]

If you get us any information about decent amendments in the Sonny Bono legislation, Ernest, I'll be happy to amend my vote as such.

[PBrunsel]

Aye to all three.

[Brandon H]

The DMCA allows groups like the RIAA and MPAA to file lawsuits that are borderline extortion for people who allow sharing of the copyrighted material. While the trading of copyrighted material is wrong, the punishment should fit the crime. Would you support 50 years in prison for speeding?

The RIAA / MPAA with its million dollar lawyers threaten to sue a person for something like $50,000 per piece of material or allow them to settle for $2000. The average person can not afford $50,000 so they settle for the $2000. I am not up to date on this as I use to be though. Of course the thing is like 100 pages long and the real congress never read the thing before voting on it.

So we are just repealing bad legislation.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

If you get us any information about decent amendments in the Sonny Bono legislation, Ernest, I'll be happy to amend my vote as such.

DMCA and the Sonny Bono Act were both passed in 1998 and both affected copyright law, but they are separate acts.

DMCA consists of five titles.

Title I: WIPO Copyright and Performances and Phonograms Treaties Implementation Act
This part does two separate things.  Section 102 brought the U.S. into alignment with WIPO on the treatment of sound recording under copyright law.  Section 103 dealt with copy protection systems by adding chapter 12 to title 18.  The parts dealing specifically with requirements for VHS and 8mm video tape players are effectively obsolete already, the rest of chapter 12 makes circumventing copy protection systems illegal itself regardless of whether it used to copy a protected work.

Title II: Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act
Adds safe harbor provisions for OSPs that keep them from getting hammered by copyright holders for violations resulting from what their users do.  Could possibly use some amendments, but I'd oppose outright repeal.  Without it OSPs would be justifiably unwilling to let a lot the stuff that goes on now on the internet happen on their systems as those lawsuits that Brandon H complains about would target them instead.  Deleting this title means no more YouTube, ImageShack, etc.

Title III: Computer Maintenance Competition Assurance Act
Keeps computer repairers from being in violation of copyright law for making temporary copies of copyrighted works while doing repairs.

Title IV
Various minor changes to copyright law and changes the pay levels of some copyright officials.  Nothing particularly objectionable here.

Title V: Vessel Hull Design Protection Act
Adds chapter 13 to title 18 which establishes 10 year long design patents for small water craft (less than 200 feet long)  So if a boat builder comes out with a new hull design, other builders can't copy it immediately, even if the design doesn't incorporate any patentable engineering advances.  Sort of silly IMO, and if we had to have them, should have been set for the same 14  year length as other types of U.S. design patents.
--

In short, I'm voting nay on the second proposed amendment now, but would not oppose a narrower amendments to strike section 103 of the DMCA and would consider other amendments to the DMCA as well.

[DownWithTheLeft]

Could someone describe what we are voting on in laymen terms?

[Sam Spade]

Sorry, Ernest, I didn't realize that was the relevant legislation.

I'm changing my vote on the second Amendment to Abstain, and I'm going to just read through the Act specifically to see what's really going on, though I trust your summary.

[Ebowed]

The first amendment passes.

The vote on Amendment #2 is 4-1, with one abstention.

The vote on Amendment #3 is 2-4.

[Ebowed]

The second amendment has passed; the third amendment has failed.