PDA

View Full Version : Public performances on Youtube of copyrighted material will become a felony under SB978




Anti Federalist
06-09-2011, 08:39 PM
Keep in mind this is not posting the material itself, this is for lip synching, singing, performing...hell I would imagine reading a passage from a book would qualify.

I used to have some sympathy for the pro IP argument, WRT to entertainment and performance rights.

Not any more. :mad:

I don't even care about the right or wrong of this anymore, all I see is corporate tyranny being backed by government force.



Lawmakers Pushing Bill That Could Land YouTube Lip-Synch Artists Behind Bars

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/06/09/lawmakers-pushing-bill-that-could-land-youtube-lip-synch-artists-behind-bars/#ixzz1Opx4QT2F

Record labels are clamoring for a chance to have their artist lip-synch alongside 16-year-old YouTube sensation Keenan Cahill in, of all places, his bedroom.

But could a proposed amendment to the federal copyright infringement law potentially land Cahill, or any person lip-synching copyrighted material in a YouTube video, behind bars?

Senate Bill 978, a bipartisan measure introduced last month by Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) and Sen. Christopher Coons (D-Del.), is backed by supporters who say it closes glaring loopholes in current copyright infringement law created by the realities of the digital age.

“As technology rapidly evolves, our laws must be updated to protect creativity and innovation,” said a statement by Cornyn.

But critics say a section of the bill provides for steep penalties -- up to five years in prison -- for “publicly performing” copyrighted material and embedding the video to sites like YouTube.

freedom-maniac
06-09-2011, 08:51 PM
If public performance of copyrighted songs is illegal does that mean....the Federal War on Karaoke?

tpreitzel
06-09-2011, 08:54 PM
If public performance of copyrighted songs is illegal does that mean....the Federal War on Karaoke?

Why not? The bar scene, the poor (middle class), drug scene, and now the karaoke fans are ripe for the picking. Is there anyone else our government hasn't thoroughly alienated yet? Let's see. Nope. The war on "terror" just about includes everyone else.

Anti Federalist
06-09-2011, 08:55 PM
Why not? The bar scene, the wars, and now the karaoke fans are ripe for the picking. Is there anyone else our government hasn't thoroughly alienated yet?

That which is not required, is prohibited.

AFPVet
06-09-2011, 08:56 PM
... and no more cover bands :(

acptulsa
06-09-2011, 08:57 PM
So, YouTube gets the money and the attention whore gets the fine?

Such a deal. For YouTube.

Anti Federalist
06-09-2011, 09:00 PM
... and no more cover bands :(

Cover bands already have to pay fees.

Let this bill pass and God help you if you miss a payment or foul up the paperwork somehow.

heavenlyboy34
06-09-2011, 09:09 PM
Nice to see you come around on the IP issue, AF. It's one of the sneakier, more seemingly "right"/"just" (on the surface) tools the regime employs to control creation, production, dissemination, and consumption.

heavenlyboy34
06-09-2011, 09:10 PM
Why not? The bar scene, the poor (middle class), drug scene, and now the karaoke fans are ripe for the picking. Is there anyone else our government hasn't thoroughly alienated yet? Let's see. Nope. The war on "terror" just about includes everyone else.

The MIC, Big Pharma, the Student Loan industry, the big banks, the Israel lobby, and probably several others. ETA-a side effect of this silly prohibition will be numerous other sites popping up that carry material newly prohibited by Youtube-I can all but guarantee it. (there are already foreign sites that carry IP in defiance of the law) As always, the gov'ment doesn't think through these things.

Anti Federalist
06-09-2011, 09:14 PM
Nice to see you come around on the IP issue, AF. It's one of the sneakier, more seemingly "right"/"just" (on the surface) tools the regime employs to control creation, production, dissemination, and consumption.

Yah, on the surface "they" make it look like it's the only means by which talent, of any sort, can be repaid for the efforts that went into creating a new idea or product.

Warrior_of_Freedom
06-09-2011, 09:32 PM
need a permit to sing along to a song? give me a f[weiner]g break.

ChaosControl
06-09-2011, 09:48 PM
I used to have some sympathy for the pro IP argument, WRT to entertainment and performance rights.

Not any more.

Welcome.

We have cookies.

UWDude
06-09-2011, 10:06 PM
the onion router, it's easy.

FreedomProsperityPeace
06-09-2011, 11:32 PM
Well, here we go folks. The internet's best years are going to be behind us now. The government is barging in a screwing it up, like everything else.

RCA
06-09-2011, 11:34 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLlxgYyrDH8

FreedomProsperityPeace
06-09-2011, 11:36 PM
^ HA HA! Yeah, that kid's career is over.

Philhelm
06-09-2011, 11:37 PM
Fuck their laws.

Noob
06-10-2011, 04:00 AM
Reject the PROTECT IP Act

https://secure.eff.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=487



Breaking: Secret Bilderberg Agenda Leaked by Mole

http://www.prisonplanet.com/breaking-secret-bilderberg-agenda-leaked-by-mole.html

nobody's_hero
06-10-2011, 06:58 AM
need a permit to sing along to a song? give me a f[weiner]g break.

You don't need a permit, just the artist's permission.

There are plenty of artists who don't care if their music is sung by fans on youtube. Support them. Don't support the ones who think their crap doesn't stink and sue people for a seemingly innocent act.

That's how the market can overcome this.

I don't think we need more laws, though. The precedent is there for civil penalties for copyright infringement, and this is just more feel-good legislation coming from the Fed.gov.

acptulsa
06-10-2011, 07:04 AM
There are plenty of artists who don't care if their music is sung by fans on youtube. Support them. Don't support the ones who think their crap doesn't stink and sue people for a seemingly innocent act.

That's how the market can overcome this.

It isn't the artists driving this, and often the artists have little choice. This is the 'record companies', to use the old term, and they are working so closely together that when I was a kid they'd have run afoul of anti-trust laws. They're almost a monopoly. If you don't believe me, ask Aimee Allen.

Cowlesy
06-10-2011, 07:16 AM
This smells of Rupert Murdoch and crew trying to make the internet more expensive.

VegasPatriot
06-10-2011, 08:37 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLlxgYyrDH8
So THAT is what happened to Matt Collins? After 30,000 posts he quit RPF and decided to start making videos... good for you Matt. :collins::D:collins:

nobody's_hero
06-10-2011, 10:07 AM
It isn't the artists driving this, and often the artists have little choice. This is the 'record companies', to use the old term, and they are working so closely together that when I was a kid they'd have run afoul of anti-trust laws. They're almost a monopoly. If you don't believe me, ask Aimee Allen.

The artists signed a contract with the record companies, did they not? That was their choice. Same with people who sign contracts with health insurance companies. Does the contract suck? Then don't sign. Don't associate with them.

Judging by the general sentiment on RPF, the market is just screaming for a record label that does not run roughshod over the artists. Perhaps we could start a record company that takes a lassez faire attitude towards intellectual property.

I hear opportunity knocking for the savvy entrepreneur.

oyarde
06-10-2011, 10:22 AM
This would be great news for the dems ,a huge police force will be needed to monitor this , govt job creation , may keep the phony unemployment number below ten percent for awhile.

freedom-maniac
06-10-2011, 11:12 AM
TERRIBLE THOUGHT

Does this mean that all those Ron Paul YouTube videos using copyrighted footage from CNN and FOX will be illegal too? This could be one of the greatest detriments to the R3volUTION since the internet is really our only means to spread a message ignored by the MSM>

AFPVet
06-10-2011, 12:02 PM
The artists signed a contract with the record companies, did they not? That was their choice. Same with people who sign contracts with health insurance companies. Does the contract suck? Then don't sign. Don't associate with them.

Judging by the general sentiment on RPF, the market is just screaming for a record label that does not run roughshod over the artists. Perhaps we could start a record company that takes a lassez faire attitude towards intellectual property.

I hear opportunity knocking for the savvy entrepreneur.

I agree. This lassez faire approach could be the future. Although... there is pretty good competition with indie publishers; however, they lack the resources of the big labels.