Comments on: Backers of stronger copyright laws form lobby group

Copyright Alliance draws applause from Hollywood Democrat Howard Berman, who heads a key House panel that writes intellectual property laws.

[EnvoyPV]

Apparently, I'm an Extremist

I'm so disgusted by what some of these people have done with copyright, it makes me nearly speechless. Disney is at the top of that list. Just a few thoughts:
fair use, patron/artist relationship, public domain.

How much would your life truly be diminished if Law and Order had never been broadcast?

[alflanagan]

Gee, me too

I've always believed that artistic works belong to the public, and copyright is a limited right to control distribution for a short period of time. Silly me, I guess I should be paying Shakespeare Inc. every time I quote Hamlet.

[Arrgster]

I'm tired of this

Why is it a singer, or song writer somehow deserve to make millions of dollars off something they spent a small amount of time working on? There should be a cap on the profit of a copyright. If you write a song and make a million from it then that copyright should expire. If you want to make more then go out and perform it. I'm an average Joe, who works 50 hours a week and I'm lucky to get a %4 raise at the end of the year, yet somehow my congressman is more concerned about the guy who made millions last year doing nothing but singing a stupid freaking song!! I'm over it!

[Commander_Spock]

Perhaps....

... you should write software programs that are better that Microsoft's and then you will become the next Bill Gates. And, don't forget there are "dead" folks that are making much, much more than you. Re: The King! LOL.

[perfectblue97]

World's smallest violin

Id have a lot more sympathy for copyright holders if....

1) The big business interests behind it were actually paying their creative talent (artists, writers etc) based on the profits derived from copyright, rather than on a contractual basis, whereby record label can haul in money for decades by re releasing songs as soundtracks for movies etc without paying the song writers any more money, etc.

2) Big business wasn't charging so much money for lukewarm rehashings of products, and derivative products designed for the lowest common denominator.

[befuddledms]

Youv'e got that right

"1) The big business interests behind it were actually paying their creative talent (artists, writers etc) based on the profits derived from copyright, rather than on a contractual basis, whereby record label can haul in money for decades by re releasing songs as soundtracks for movies etc without paying the song writers any more money, etc."

If most people knew how little the actual artist gets from the sale of a CD or whatever medium their art is on they would be outraged.

[paulej]

Stronger Intellectual Property Rights?:

Just what does "stronger" mean? Does it mean they want to punish people with longer jail sentences or they want copyright laws to allow a copyright to last 1000 years?

Either way, this seems silly.

Copyright does not need to extend forever. We already stretch copyright protection longer than other countries, I believe.

As for punishment for violating, those who are serious copyright infringers already serve years in jail. What more do they want? Do they want everybody to serve a year in jail just for good measure?

I have a very serious question: just how much piracy exists inside the borders of the United States. I often hear numbers quoted from the music industry and software industry, as examples, and I can only believe that those very high numbers consider all international piracy. Let's forget what happens outside the US, because Congress has no control over it. Just what level of piracy do we see inside the United States?

(Regardless of the answer to that question, do we not already have laws to cover such piracy?)