From the document:
“… an attempt to violate the criminal copyright statute should be counted an offence whether it is successful or not.”
I am not a lawyer, but this sounds scary. The document does not specify anywhere what constitutes an “attempt”. For example, imagine that I mistakenly configured my home web server so that my music collection became accessible from outside. No one ever downloaded anything – but it was an attempt, wasn’t it?
There is more interesting stuff in this proposal. For example, how do you like this one:
“…Because prosecutors work for public good, they should be able to institute an infringement prosecution even if the copyright has not yet been registered.”
Or this:
“…penalties that apply when the offense "consists of' reproduction or distribution, also apply when reproduction or distribution is intended but not completed.”
Or:
“Currently, a Federal court may issue an order authorizing the use of a voice intercept (otherwise known as a "wiretap") in the investigations of a host of Federal crimes; copyright and trademark counterfeiting crimes are not among them. This is unacceptable.”
You can read the whole text of the bill here (PDF), and some analysis here.
I do hope that this bill will never become a law. DMCA is bad enough without this sort of enhancements. Giving the government ability to sue people for attempts and intents to share a file is stupid and dangerous.
Technorati tags: copyright, law, DMCA
1 comment:
Is it really that different from prosecuting other “attempts” – we have no problem with attempted murder or “intent” to distribute. Just because someone tried and failed to commit a crime does not mean they should not be prosecuted for it.
Post a Comment