Jail time for streaming?!??

HajimeOwari said:
While it is an extreme example, karaoke isn't fair use and would be considered a felony under this bill. This also falls under any type of game streaming. Don't give me that nonsense about pirates stirring up misinformation and pirates supporting this bill. A ridiculous law is ridiculous. Don't pass it off as if it's okay, just because your strikes reset and it takes 10 strikes. Keep giving up rights you have and pretty soon you'll have none left.
Click to expand...
Well if your little newsletter wants to stir people up with half truths and fact omissions forgive me for questioning their credibility.

In any event, I've already come around on this bill. I myself didn't have all the facts. As for my rights my rights are fine. I don't see my right to free entertainment guaranteed in the constitution. What I did think though was that a reasonable law needs to be emplaced regarding streaming content. Streaming a movie or a song is considered a "performance" under letter of the law, when nothing is being performed. You don't maintain the media on your computer, but you are still obtaining something for nothing. The current status is frankly out of whack. So long as people are losing money on it, streaming will be a target. But this bill isn't a change for the better.
 
Copyright and Patent law in general is hugely convoluted.

Some other things that would be effected by this law:

"Let's Play" recordings
Karaoke, covers, and fandubs via Youtube.
Music in general on Youtube.
Actually, now that I think of it about 90% of youtube would go down the drain considering the sheer amount of things that are copyrighted.

Some less obvious things that could be effected:
Non-affiliated sports commentary (The assorted leagues have copyrights to accounts of their games)
 
Ghengis_John said:
Well if your little newsletter wants to stir people up with half truths and fact omissions forgive me for questioning their credibility.
Click to expand...

Saying condescending things like "little newsletter" and "half truths" don't earn you any credibility. You're merely trying to make yourself look better.

And, as is usual, political groups will come up with extreme examples or downplay the downside to bills to influence people to their side. While the karaoke / cover / music example does stir people up, it is not a half-truth nor a fact omission.

Regardless, it's a bill that if not read in its entirety can be misunderstood. I don't have a problem stirring people up to the point that they at least read the bill and take action. Whichever side they choose is really their choice; as long as people bother to form an opinion and make an informed choice about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top