4 ms·

The House Votes in Favor of Disastrous Copyright Bill

43 points by Elof 7y ago

AnimalMuppet 7y ago
Is this description really accurate? Some random person can wind up owing $30,000 because some bureaucrat decides that they do? Without a court proceeding? That seems... almost certainly unconstitutional, and absolutely certainly a terrible idea. Then there's the little matter of malicious misuse or harassment. I mean, forget swatting someone, you could cause serious havoc by "mistakenly" dropping a few of these accusations on someone. What's the best way to persuade senators that this is a terrible idea (or at least a politically toxic one)?
- rayiner 7y ago
  The description isn’t inaccurate. Instead, in what has become an EFF norm, it’s selectively accurate. The CASE Act creates a voluntary small claims court procedure for low value copyright claims: https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/judicial/466742-the-case-for-the-case-act https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/judicial/466742-the-.... That is currently impossible today because the Copyright Act requires claims to be brought in federal court. Parties can, at their election, proceed before the Copyright Office, with or without lawyers. There is still an adjudication of sorts, but the procedures are relaxed just as they are with small claims. Parties can also exercise their right to go to federal court. The EFF has some legitimate concerns here. The CASE Act lowers the barrier to asserting copyright claims, which might be a bad thing. The same point could have been made in an article that didn’t read like a Trump tweet series.
  - gurumeditations 7y ago
    So EFF’s description is accurate.
lonelappde 7y ago
I thought HN banned blatantly editorialized headlines. EFF Deep Links is reliably extremist in its interpretation of news. Here's a more neutral report: https://www.billboard.com/amp/articles/business/8531531/case-act-supporters-passage-senators-reservations https://www.billboard.com/amp/articles/business/8531531/case... And a pro-CASE opinion from the President of the American Bar Association: https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/judicial/466742-the-case-for-the-case-act https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/judicial/466742-the-...
- AnimalMuppet 7y ago
  You expect Billboard to be neutral on this? That seems possible, but unlikely.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

43 points by Elof 7y ago

Is this description really accurate? Some random person can wind up owing $30,000 because some bureaucrat decides that they do? Without a court proceeding? That seems... almost certainly unconstitutional, and absolutely certainly a terrible idea. Then there's the little matter of malicious misuse or harassment. I mean, forget swatting someone, you could cause serious havoc by "mistakenly" dropping a few of these accusations on someone. What's the best way to persuade senators that this is a terrible idea (or at least a politically toxic one)?

rayiner 7y ago
The description isn’t inaccurate. Instead, in what has become an EFF norm, it’s selectively accurate. The CASE Act creates a voluntary small claims court procedure for low value copyright claims: https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/judicial/466742-the-case-for-the-case-act https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/judicial/466742-the-.... That is currently impossible today because the Copyright Act requires claims to be brought in federal court. Parties can, at their election, proceed before the Copyright Office, with or without lawyers. There is still an adjudication of sorts, but the procedures are relaxed just as they are with small claims. Parties can also exercise their right to go to federal court. The EFF has some legitimate concerns here. The CASE Act lowers the barrier to asserting copyright claims, which might be a bad thing. The same point could have been made in an article that didn’t read like a Trump tweet series.
- gurumeditations 7y ago
  So EFF’s description is accurate.

lonelappde 7y ago

I thought HN banned blatantly editorialized headlines. EFF Deep Links is reliably extremist in its interpretation of news. Here's a more neutral report: https://www.billboard.com/amp/articles/business/8531531/case-act-supporters-passage-senators-reservations https://www.billboard.com/amp/articles/business/8531531/case... And a pro-CASE opinion from the President of the American Bar Association: https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/judicial/466742-the-case-for-the-case-act https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/judicial/466742-the-...

AnimalMuppet 7y ago
You expect Billboard to be neutral on this? That seems possible, but unlikely.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]