tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12505562.post725223963729609027..comments2024-03-15T11:42:21.265-04:00Comments on The Patry Copyright Blog: Over-Criminalizing CopyrightWilliam Patryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12987498082479617363noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12505562.post-29514186932917608402007-08-14T21:31:00.000-04:002007-08-14T21:31:00.000-04:00Criminalizing civil matters, such as copyright inf...Criminalizing civil matters, such as copyright infringement, is an abuse of society where commercial interests bring the power of the state and its virtually limiteless resources to bear in the most heavy-handed way in order to extort a settlement on pain of a criminal record for the alleged offender who will settle, guilty or not, to avoid the risk of conviction even though they may be innocent.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12505562.post-56485318781931769802007-06-20T11:01:00.000-04:002007-06-20T11:01:00.000-04:00Then again, having a federal crime on your record ...Then again, having a federal crime on your record -- even a misdemeanor -- can be a big handicap.<BR/><BR/>Hmmm. Looks like I'll have to give this more thought.<BR/><BR/>The funny thing is that before I started reading this blog, I was certain Copyright went too far. Now I've settled in to "Copyright's not perfect, but it's not the worst law ever." Looks like I'm about ready to change my opinion to something more like "Copyright could use major revisions, and soon."Max Lybberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13935322217857952629noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12505562.post-87278339156736841212007-06-19T16:38:00.000-04:002007-06-19T16:38:00.000-04:00Max, there are copyright misdemeanors.Max, there are copyright misdemeanors.William Patryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12987498082479617363noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12505562.post-5608462757810197272007-06-19T16:05:00.000-04:002007-06-19T16:05:00.000-04:00In comments to the previous blog post, I suggested...In comments to the previous blog post, I suggested that criminal actions should be able to seize funds beyond lost licensing revenue.<BR/><BR/>To clear things up, when I made that suggestion, I was thinking about the fact that some crimes are classified as misdemeanors -- or rather that a misdemeanor is defined as a crime punished by up to a year in jail.<BR/><BR/>Thinking things over, however, the hefty fines and, IIRC, five year jail sentences associated with criminal copyright infringement aren't something I would want in most copyright infringement cases.<BR/><BR/>I don't know if such an animal as "misdemeanor copyright infringement" exists, but it seems that it ought to.Max Lybberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13935322217857952629noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12505562.post-83441920229695141842007-06-19T13:21:00.000-04:002007-06-19T13:21:00.000-04:00There are two ways to set citizen Gulliver free fr...There are two ways to set citizen Gulliver free from the Lilliputian publishers' web of bonds.<BR/><BR/>1) Persuade the Lilliputians that Gulliver should be released a free man.<BR/><BR/>2) Persuade the Lilliputians that Gulliver should be ever more harshly punished each time he struggles or snaps one of his bonds.<BR/><BR/>I think we're looking at a win-win situation here.<BR/><BR/>The question that most intrigues me:<BR/><I>Is this by design?</I><BR/><BR/>Are publishers on the side of the public and deliberately hastening the demise of their own privileges?<BR/><BR/>Perhaps publishers are philanthropists after all?<BR/><BR/>Maybe they know that the only power able to wrest copyright away from them is in the hands of a provoked people.<BR/><BR/>One can conclude that increasingly criminalising copyright is a clue to the cartel's cunning, that there is a conscientious conspiracy among them to contrive its collapse.<BR/><BR/>Any other alternative presents publishers as a mob of morons running a protection racket. I suspect they're a little more intelligent than that.<BR/><BR/>Or rather, perhaps <I>most</I> are morons, but there is a cabal of altruistic crypto-abolitionists pushing for ever more draconian legislation in full knowledge that it's the easiest and quickest way to set the people free.<BR/><BR/>Conspiracy or catastrophe? <BR/><BR/>Either way, the Leviathan awakes...Crosbie Fitchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06554471152790988479noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12505562.post-88792577558505839712007-06-19T12:41:00.000-04:002007-06-19T12:41:00.000-04:00I see this as yet *another* attempt by large corpo...I see this as yet *another* attempt by large corporate copyright holders to shove fair use protections out the back door.<BR/><BR/>As Justice Laddie sagely points out, many people are willing to balance the simple business risk of possibly paying a retroactive license fee when fairly reusing someone else's content. But I doubt too many people want to risk going to jail over it. And certainly corporate management and boards are going to look much harder at what they're doing if they have personal criminal liability for what some graphic designer way down the totem pole is doing.<BR/><BR/>Make no mistake, a clear threat of jail time will kill fair use, which is likely the real intent here.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com