Comments on: Proposed new piracy penalties advance in House

House panel unanimously backs bill that would appoint new intellectual-property enforcers and allow the feds to seize equipment used to commit infringement.

[umbrae]

Wonderful...

Now modern day cartels will have a whole department in the government to support their needs. Needless to mention that more "convicted pirates" are 13 year old children and single moms. However, how can that compare to protecting the profits of a multi-billion dollar industry with dying business models?

We have no government anymore. It is no longer We the People; It is We the Corporations.

[Migraine]

I could not Agree with you more

Soon my Ipod will get me 10 to 20 years in Jail .

meanwhile BIG OIL keeps price gouging the USA and our goverment does nothing about it!

Way to go BUSH! I only hope the USA can last till your out of office!

I fear we will not make it though!

[steer99]

Read the Bill - It's not what you think

The reporter gets it wrong, the bill does not affect civil cases, and so has no effect on "13 year old children and single moms" who may be getting sued for CIVIL copyright infringement. The copyright changes in the bill only affect copyright criminals, who have engaged in pretty egregious conduct (wilfull infringement; commercial benefit or private financial gain; pre-release copies; convicted beyond a reasonable doubt; etc.).

[R. U. Sirius]

Asset Seizure?

You know, the problem I have with this is that it is using taxpayer dollars to protect big business. You know damn well that this will do nothing to protect my copyrights or the copyrights of any other small independent producer.

And let's face it, this idea of asset seizure is disturbing. The RIAA is going to have an legal orgasm over this.

[random1138]

More asset seizures for the fascist state

I think they're going to have *actual* orgasms over this, but I digress.

Do we really need yet another way for the government to seize assets? (probably without convictions, without return, and without recourse)

[hpew]

Where's the HARM?

I think there should be a distinction between copy for commercial - for profit
distribution and copy primarily for personal use.

I once watched an interview with a wise (Circuit Court) Judge who handled
primarily IP/copyright cases. His take was that if accusers could not show
harm to their product, he would generally dismiss the case.

This take was that Patent and subsequent IP laws were meant to protect the
originator from harm to their property. No harm - no foul.

[Leria]

I agree totally

If there is no real monetary harm (i.e. the person pirating stuff would never be able to afford the real thing) then the copyright cases should be dismissed.

They should ONLY be going after commercial pirates, period.

[mikele11111]

Crooked Politics As Usual

Lamar Smith is nothing but a political hack who is the tool of The RIAA, MPPA and every other lobbying group the buys off congressman with campaign contributions that are really nothing but bribes. Check Smith's list of contributors and I guarantee you will find these guys have made major payoffs (oops, I mean contributions)to him.

[Melekai]

"protect our vital national and economic interests"

Please, these buzzwords are getting tiresome.

[feliusrex]

How about corporate regulation instead?

If the House/Senate has so many extra resources that it can direct the DOJ to create whole new departments to go after imaginary property crime, how about we start doing so corporate regulation? I know of a lot of energy companies, communications companies, oil companies, ect ect that need much much more oversite. I would rather see the electric distribution sector regulated again than waste time/money/effort on increasing profits for the RIAA.