From fork-admin@xent.com Mon Aug 26 15:31:28 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: yyyy@localhost.netnoteinc.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by phobos.labs.netnoteinc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D129F4415C for ; Mon, 26 Aug 2002 10:25:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phobos [127.0.0.1] by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0) for jm@localhost (single-drop); Mon, 26 Aug 2002 15:25:54 +0100 (IST) Received: from xent.com ([64.161.22.236]) by dogma.slashnull.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7NN0WZ11779 for ; Sat, 24 Aug 2002 00:00:32 +0100 Received: from lair.xent.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xent.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 842DE2940F4; Fri, 23 Aug 2002 15:58:08 -0700 (PDT) Delivered-To: fork@example.com Received: from crank.slack.net (slack.net [166.84.151.181]) by xent.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A04E4294099 for ; Fri, 23 Aug 2002 15:57:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by crank.slack.net (Postfix, from userid 596) id 6913F3EDB5; Fri, 23 Aug 2002 19:01:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by crank.slack.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 674703ED5C; Fri, 23 Aug 2002 19:01:45 -0400 (EDT) From: Tom To: fork@example.com Cc: vox@mindvox.com Subject: The GOv gets tough on Net Users.....er Pirates.. Message-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: fork-admin@xent.com Errors-To: fork-admin@xent.com X-Beenthere: fork@example.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Friends of Rohit Khare List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 19:01:45 -0400 (EDT) X-Pyzor: Reported 0 times. X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.7 required=7.0 tests=KNOWN_MAILING_LIST,ONLY_COST,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01, USER_AGENT_PINE version=2.40-cvs X-Spam-Level: from http://www.arstechnica.com/ "There has mostly been talk thus far and little action, but the Department of Justice says it may be ready to file criminal lawsuits against individuals [1] who distribute or receive unauthorized copyrighted material over the Internet. Deputy Assistant Attorney General John Malcolm believes that "criminal prosecutions of copyright offenders are now necessary to preserve the viability of America's content industries." Malcolm also believes that people who trade copyrighted material think they are participating in a legal activity. I certainly think people who download copyrighted works understand that such distribution--barring provisions such as fair use--is not authorized, and it is not surprising to see businesses continue to look for means to discourage distribution of copyrighted works. "Some prosecutions that make that clear could be very helpful...I think they would think twice if they thought there was a risk of criminal prosecution," said [RIAA President Cary] Sherman, who was on the same conference panel. I'm not too confident that lawsuits would have the effect Sherman is hoping for. Although infrequent, there have already been civil suits or warnings issued to private individuals, and they have served as minor deterrents to the file-sharing community at large. Criminal lawsuits carrying with them the possibility of prison sentences may generate further animosity against groups such as the RIAA and may be difficult to initiate because of the "schooling" effect of millions of systems participating in file sharing. Only servers would seem to stand out from the crowd. The article cites the No Electronic Theft (NET) Act [2], which defines illegal activity and maximum penalties for copyright infringement: Criminal infringement: Any person who infringes a copyright willfully for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain, or by the reproduction or distribution, including by electronic means, during any 180-day period, of 1 or more copies or phonorecords of 1 or more copyrighted works, which have a total retail value of more than $1,000.... For purposes of this subsection, evidence of reproduction or distribution of a copyrighted work, by itself, shall not be sufficient to establish willful infringement. ... The term "financial gain" includes receipt, or expectation of receipt, of anything of value, including the receipt of other copyrighted works. Therefore, receipt of a work of value would be defined as "financial gain" even if no money is involved. The NET Act excerpt does not clarify how the value of a work is determined; an album or movie could be worth only $15 to millions of dollars depending on whether the value is assessed from the perspective of the consumer or copyright holder. The statute of limitations: 507. Limitations on actions (a) Criminal Proceedings.--No criminal proceeding shall be maintained under the provisions of this title unless it is commenced within five years after the cause of action arose. (b) Civil Actions.--No civil action shall be maintained under the provisions of this title unless it is commenced within three years after the claim accrued. The penalties are too extensive to list here, but they can be found in Section 2319: Criminal infringement of a copyright. In general, first-time criminal offenses will carry a maximum prison sentence of 1 year. I'm still not sure where the DOJ would start in choosing people to prosecute because of the aforementioned "schooling" effect, but my guess would be that, just like speeding, primarily the most prominent individuals who operate large servers or transfer the most data will be targeted in order to discourage more recreational file sharers. Thanks to MonaLisaOverdrive for pointing out this story. " [1] http://news.com.com/2100-1023-954591.html?tag=fd_top [2] http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/17-18red.htm http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork