PIRATE act +

["Hamaker, Chuck" <cahamake@email.uncc.edu>]

Hatch and Leahy stepped up to the plate to give the Intellectual property
industry a FEDERAL CIVIL Law enforcer, the PIRATE act. (or How many times
can you be sued??)

The Senate Judiciary committee on Thursday (April 28) approved four
intellectual property bills, clearing the way for votes on the Senate
floor.

-- March 25, --Sens. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.)
introduced S. 2237 the Protecting Intellectual Rights Against Theft and
Expropriation Act of 2004 - PIRATE, proposing to empower the Attorney
General with new civil enforcement powers against copyright infringement.

Title: A bill to amend chapter 5 of title 17, United States Code, to
authorize civil copyright enforcement by the Attorney General, and for
other purposes.

Sponsor: Sen Leahy, Patrick J. [VT] (introduced 3/25/2004)  Cosponsors: 2
Sen Hatch, Orrin G. - 3/25/2004 [UT] Sen Schumer, Charles E. - 5/3/2004
[NY]

The official summary:

SUMMARY AS OF:  3/25/2004--Introduced. Protecting Intellectual Rights
Against Theft and Expropriation Act of 2004 - Amends Federal copyright law
to authorize the Attorney General (AG) to commence a civil action against
any person who engages in conduct constituting copyright infringement.
Directs the AG to develop a program to ensure effective implementation and
use of the authority for civil enforcement of the copyright laws,
including training programs for qualified personnel from the Department of
Justice and United States Attorneys Offices."

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:SN02237:@@@L

For full text of the bill:

http://www.publicknowledge.org/content/legislation/s2237/attachment

  (PDF file) 

In part it provides that the Attorney General can take a civil action
against "any person who engages in conduct committing an offense under
section 506"  and a civil penalty under this charge does not preclude any
other criminal or civil statutory, injunctive, common law or
administrative remedy, which is available bylaw to the United States or
any other person."

Although we don't permit double jeopardy in criminal law, clearly this law
INTENDS to create double jeopardy to individuals who can be sued by the
federal government for a copyright offense AND by RIAA or other copyright
holder. This is bad law, bad principles, and is on its way to the Senate
floor.  The government should not be the enforcer for the music and movie
industries copyrights more than it has already by making what is at times
bad law to favor and industry that is already seen as vicious and mean by
many Americans.

It's already an unequal battle. (the copyright industry can muster as much
legal fire power as it wants) now we have the copyright industries
sometimes petty and mistaken complaints enforced by the government. (How
would Betamax have played out today I wonder?) The only pirates most of
the US sees in the music industry is the musis companies themselves. Dolly
Parton and David Bowie had to sue them to get paid-how many smaller income
artists are getting the same royalties treatment??

ALA Washington Office has also put up material on this law, which looks
like it is being rushed through the senate without much public discussion
of the implications. If you think getting a notice from the RIAA is
something, wait till the Attorney General's staff gets in the act too.

ALA's comments on this bill:

S.2237 amends Copyright Law to allow the government to seek civil
penalties as well as criminal penalties for willful copyright
infringement.

Another  bill introduced in the House is, H.R. 4077. 
according to ALA's Washington office:

March 31, 2004:

H.R. 4077, the "Piracy Deterrence and Education Act of 2004." Introduced
by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), H.R. 4077 would enhance enforcement of
copyright laws and require the Justice Department to educate the public
about copyright infringement. In addition, the bill makes it an offense to
record, transmit or make copies of a motion picture in a theater with an
audiovisual recording device. The bill would also amend the Copyright Act
to allow criminal prosecution of someone who "makes available" one work
worth $10,000 or more, or 1,000 or more works of undetermined value.

It is also described at public knowledge :

"Legislation to provide criminal penalties for violation of copyright laws
over peer-to-peer networks. The bill also requires the Justice Department
to establish an Internet Use Education program to educate the public
"concerning the value of copyrighted works and the effects of the theft of
such works on those who create them."

"Section 6: Under this section, the Justice Department could pursue a
copyright infringement claim, regardless of whether the work was
registered. It is unclear whether such a criminal infringement claim could
have been made before this provision, but in combination with other
legislation (the PIRATE Act recently introduced in the Senate), this bill
would allow the Justice Department to file civil suits for unregistered
copyrighted works." (the copyright infringement claim could result in jail
time).

http://www.publicknowledge.org/content/legislation/hr4077

Chuck