< Continued from page 3
Losing the public relations battle, the RIAA shamefully resorted to making the battle against P2P networks about child pornography rather than their own profit margins. According to a CNet.com article RIAA President Carey Sherman "cautioned the U.S. Senate that Kazaa could be a tool for adults to lure children into having sex." Carey is credited with saying a pedophile could send "an instant message to the unwitting young person who downloads an Olsen twins or Pokemon file from the pedophile's share folder on Kazaa."
Taking this cue, Hatch has chosen to incorporate the battle against child pornography in his bill to expand the scope and power of the RIAA and MPAA ability to fight P2P file sharing networks. Politically, linking the two issues makes it more difficult for elected officials to vote against the bill. No senator or representative wants to be on record as the person who voted against fighting child pornography.
In the end though, maybe this concept isn't all bad. I mean, rather than waging a war to squash the INDUCE bill maybe we need to expand it to include other "inducers". We can add in clauses to allow people or entities to go after gun manufacturers (inducing homicide), alcohol producers (inducing homicide through DUI), oil companies (inducing poverty and damage to the environment), fast food restaurants (inducing obesity), cigarette companies (inducing both suicide and homicide) and more. Of course, I realize that some have actually already tried suing some of these companies on these or similar grounds, but why not give them a clear cut law to use?
The Carlyle Group might be a good target too. They induce war by virtue of making the weapons and instruments to wage war. The recent conflict has resulted in the death of just under 1,000 American soldiers and 10,000 Iraqi civilians. I would say that the Carlyle Group is just as guilty of those deaths as Kazaa is for the illegal downloading of Britney Spears latest hit.
If you are as appalled by the implications of this proposed bill as I am (especially by linking the obviously biased effort to fight the RIAA's battles with the issue of child pornography) take the time to write or call your Senator or Representative and let them know.
If you live in the state of Utah make sure you take a close look at Hatch's positions on the various issues as well as his actual voting record and really think about whether you want this person representing your state again when his term expires in 2006.
UPDATE: Senator Hatch and his compatriot Senator Leahy must have been inundated with criticism about trying to link their RIAA fight to child pornography. They dropped the acronym for INDUCE (Inducement Devolves into Unlawful Child Exploitation Act) and changed the name of the bill to simply IICA (Inducing Infringement of Copyrights Act). Regardless of the bill's name the wording is still too broad and overreaching even if you agree with the intended goal of holding P2P networks liable for the illegal actions of their users.
Another side note is that this seems to be yet another area where there is already legislation on the books that makes the action of inducing copyright infringement illegal (Patent Law Statute 35 U.S.C. s. 271(b)), but whether to provide a more targeted tool for the RIAA and MPAA to use against P2P networks or simply to get their names on the front page and appear productive these distinguished gentleman have chosen to create a separate bill proposing a new law stating essentially the same thing.
Losing the public relations battle, the RIAA shamefully resorted to making the battle against P2P networks about child pornography rather than their own profit margins. According to a CNet.com article RIAA President Carey Sherman "cautioned the U.S. Senate that Kazaa could be a tool for adults to lure children into having sex." Carey is credited with saying a pedophile could send "an instant message to the unwitting young person who downloads an Olsen twins or Pokemon file from the pedophile's share folder on Kazaa."
Taking this cue, Hatch has chosen to incorporate the battle against child pornography in his bill to expand the scope and power of the RIAA and MPAA ability to fight P2P file sharing networks. Politically, linking the two issues makes it more difficult for elected officials to vote against the bill. No senator or representative wants to be on record as the person who voted against fighting child pornography.
In the end though, maybe this concept isn't all bad. I mean, rather than waging a war to squash the INDUCE bill maybe we need to expand it to include other "inducers". We can add in clauses to allow people or entities to go after gun manufacturers (inducing homicide), alcohol producers (inducing homicide through DUI), oil companies (inducing poverty and damage to the environment), fast food restaurants (inducing obesity), cigarette companies (inducing both suicide and homicide) and more. Of course, I realize that some have actually already tried suing some of these companies on these or similar grounds, but why not give them a clear cut law to use?
The Carlyle Group might be a good target too. They induce war by virtue of making the weapons and instruments to wage war. The recent conflict has resulted in the death of just under 1,000 American soldiers and 10,000 Iraqi civilians. I would say that the Carlyle Group is just as guilty of those deaths as Kazaa is for the illegal downloading of Britney Spears latest hit.
If you are as appalled by the implications of this proposed bill as I am (especially by linking the obviously biased effort to fight the RIAA's battles with the issue of child pornography) take the time to write or call your Senator or Representative and let them know.
If you live in the state of Utah make sure you take a close look at Hatch's positions on the various issues as well as his actual voting record and really think about whether you want this person representing your state again when his term expires in 2006.
UPDATE: Senator Hatch and his compatriot Senator Leahy must have been inundated with criticism about trying to link their RIAA fight to child pornography. They dropped the acronym for INDUCE (Inducement Devolves into Unlawful Child Exploitation Act) and changed the name of the bill to simply IICA (Inducing Infringement of Copyrights Act). Regardless of the bill's name the wording is still too broad and overreaching even if you agree with the intended goal of holding P2P networks liable for the illegal actions of their users.
Another side note is that this seems to be yet another area where there is already legislation on the books that makes the action of inducing copyright infringement illegal (Patent Law Statute 35 U.S.C. s. 271(b)), but whether to provide a more targeted tool for the RIAA and MPAA to use against P2P networks or simply to get their names on the front page and appear productive these distinguished gentleman have chosen to create a separate bill proposing a new law stating essentially the same thing.
Source...