Update: Over the weekend, Congress sadly has passed the bill. But it's not law yet -- stay tuned for our next step.
In addition to all of the emails and phone calls they received from you, Senator Leahy and friends received a stern rebuke from the Department of Justice in response to their suggestion that the DoJ should be doing the RIAA and MPAA's dirty work.The DoJ said:
We strongly oppose Title I of the bill, which not only authorizes the Attorney General to pursue civil remedies for copyright infringement, but to secure "restitution" damages and remit them to the private owners of infringed copyrights. First, civil copyright enforcement has always been the responsibility and prerogative of private copyright holders, and U.S. law already provides them with effective legal tools to protect their rights....
Second, Title 1's departure from the settled framework above could result in Department of Justice prosecutors serving as pro bono lawyers for private copyright holders regardless of their resources. In effect, taxpayer-supported Department lawyers would pursue lawsuits for copyright holders, with monetary recovery going to industry.
(EFF has a copy of the full letter.)
In response, the text of S. 3325 has now been updated to strike out the civil enforcement provisions. This is very good news, but other nasty parts of the bill remain.
It's also time for another round of phone calls, voicemails and emails to let our senators know that the bill is still unacceptable.
Please contact your senators again, as well as:
The timing here is critical, so don't worry if it's after office hours -- you can still leave a voicemail.
When you call or write, you might say something like:
Hello, my name is NAME and I'm a potential voter in STATE. I'm contacting you to reiterate my opposition to S. 3325, "The Enforcement of Intellectual Property Act," sponsored by Senator Leahy. I know that recently the bill was changed to remove some parts that I opposed -- like those that would have had the Department of Justice filing civil suits for copyright infringement against citizens. I'm happy this change was made, but it's not nearly enough. The provisions mandating property seizure are far too broad, and would lead to substantial interference in legitimate work and to intimidation of lawful sharing. The new "Sense of Congress" section sums up exactly what's wrong with the bill -- maximizing the profits of the entertainment industry without regard to the immense negative impact these enforcement actions have on the public interest is the exact opposite of what the government should be doing. Copyright supposedly exists to promote and encourage effective ways to share knowledge and culture, not to inspire hoarding and prosecution. Please stand against the corrupting influence of the RIAA and MPAA, and in favor of the public interest -- vote no on S. 3325.
This bill is just one more in the long list of efforts by the entertainment industry to use their wealth and influence to corrupt our government. From the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) to the Broadcast Flag, they are trying harder than ever to manipulate the law against the public in order to protect their own profits and prevent competition from the rapidly emerging DRM-free culture. DefectiveByDesign will be continuing to expose their efforts and the politicians who assist them.
Thanks to our friends at 2600 Magazine for their inspiration for our image on this post.
Just read this over on the Washington Post Blogs
Reps. Rich Boucher (D-Va.) and John Dolittle (R-Calif.) introduced what they call the "Freedom and Innovation Revitalizing U.S. Entrepreneurship" (or FAIR USE) Act they say will make it easier for digital media consumers to use the content they buy.