New Bill Makes Illegal Streaming A Felony

[ace_of_something]

While I agree that theft is a crime. This is going to cost a stupid amount of money to enforce properly.

 

[Firia]

And again, unless they intend to put 10x more people than you urrently have space in jail for, in jail, then this law is useless.

Having studied the punishment and containment system in america, they are perfectly fine with jamming people past capacity for victimless crimes. :\

 

[vxicepickxv]

Ok? So now, not only are ALL misdemeanors felonies now (conspiracy [thought crime] to commit a misdemeanor is a felony, look it up), but apparently, CIVIL CRIMES, which are covered under CIVIL LAW, and are NOT subject to CRIMINAL LAW and have never been, are now subject to Criminal law and are now also felonies! What's next sending me to criminal court for a traffic violation, which is a breach of contract and not actual law.... oh wait!

That's actually possible in Florida. A police officer has the option of detaining you for traffic violations in a prison until your court date, unless you post bail.

We kept the jurisdictions of Civil and Criminal Law separate, for this vary reason, so people wouldn't serve prison times for breaches of contract and copyright violation, because, the very idea of it is absurd. But now, apparently the Constitution is worthless as the MPAA has decided to use it for toilet paper.

The MPAA isn't using it for toilet paper. The congressional representatives and senators they bought used is as toilet paper.

And go, I'm not some Glen Beck worshiping ass who brings of vague notions of the Constitution to elicit and emotional response. Look it up, the Constitution make VERY clear distinctions between Civil, Criminal, and Statutory Jurisdictions. This law is a VERY clear violation of the US Constitution.

We'll see if it ever makes it that far. First someone has to get convicted, then they have to appeal up to the Supreme Court, then they have to actually point out this information to the court, and hope they decide you're right.

It's not like they haven't decided that other things that weren't legal before are legal now. Things like who can force fair market value on a house, forcing you to sell it and move, so they can put up a Wal-Mart or Target, or whatever.

Well, until the circuses are over and the bread runs out we're stuck with this shit.

 

[deth2munkies]

I don't care at all really if they wanna crackdown on illegal streaming sites, it's been a huge loophole for a long time now (one that I have exploited) but was pretty stupid from a logical point of view.

My only concern is exactly how they plan on consistently getting this information and how easy it is to mess with IP addresses to get others in trouble, from using proxies to using your neighbor's internet, it just seems like it'd be more trouble than its worth to actually enforce unless they set up some online stings or something.

 

[Lord Devius]

Additionally, the Motion Picture Association of America states that those who "stream videos without intending to profit" will not be prosecuted under the newly amended law.

WOOHOO MY BLIP.TV ACCOUNT WITH DOCTOR WHO AND ANIME WILL NOT BE PROSECUTED.

I knew setting it to never have ads (and thus no revenue) would be a good idea.

Not to mention, less hassle for the viewers.

Hehehe... Anyway.

I think this is a good idea. I know there's absolute tons of streaming sites out there that charge you or make you watch ads, both of which would be prosecuted under this if they don't have the rights to stream the content.

 

[vxicepickxv]

And again, unless they intend to put 10x more people than you urrently have space in jail for, in jail, then this law is useless.

Having studied the punishment and containment system in america, they are perfectly fine with jamming people past capacity for victimless crimes. :\

Of course. How else would our privately owned, for profit prison system work?

 

[Jabberwock xeno]

Depends.

Does this make UPLOADING a stream illegal, or WATCHING it?

If the latter, than I think I speak for everyone when I saw:

Fuck that.

That'd be like making it illegal to watch a ongoing robbery.

 

[Ghengis John]

Note: The above is not rhetorical. I am actively calling for your opinions on the convoluted issue of copyright law (and incidentally your revenue-enhancing page views). The comments section is below, so go to it my little dollar signs!

I absolutely loved this part. So, here you go.

*Cha-Ching!* *And other satisfying cash register noises follow.*

 

[Elementlmage]

And again, unless they intend to put 10x more people than you urrently have space in jail for, in jail, then this law is useless.

Having studied the punishment and containment system in america, they are perfectly fine with jamming people past capacity for victimless crimes. :\

Of course. How else would our privately owned, for profit prison system work?

They could always go back to the old PIC system and turn inmates into slave labor? ...

 

[commodore96]

So do we get cyber police now to catch these streamers?

 

[vxicepickxv]

And again, unless they intend to put 10x more people than you urrently have space in jail for, in jail, then this law is useless.

Having studied the punishment and containment system in america, they are perfectly fine with jamming people past capacity for victimless crimes. :\

Of course. How else would our privately owned, for profit prison system work?

They always go back to the old PIC system and turn inmates into slave labor? ...

We don't have enough jail space for that, plus somebody would whine about human rights or something.

 

[dmase]

This law is sensible enough. Of course whenever you first see it you say holy fuck they are going to charge me for going to megavideo? Thats just not the truth.

 

[Duruznik]

They do know that in some places, getting legal copies of some shows is literally IMPOSSIBLE, right?

I can't get my favorite anime legally. No stores I can find stock DVDs of the shows I like, and importing electornics into Israel is impossible. What choice do I (and my friends) have? :|

 

[-Dragmire-]

I wonder if it covers 'lets play' and do donations count as "intending to profit"?

 

[Elementlmage]

And again, unless they intend to put 10x more people than you urrently have space in jail for, in jail, then this law is useless.

Having studied the punishment and containment system in america, they are perfectly fine with jamming people past capacity for victimless crimes. :\

Of course. How else would our privately owned, for profit prison system work?

They always go back to the old PIC system and turn inmates into slave labor? ...

We don't have enough jail space for that, plus somebody would whine about human rights or something.

Pfft, who needs Human Rights when we have cheap clothes and food!

 

[Johnnyallstar]

Felony? Seriuosly? I'd say a misdemeanor at best, but not a felony. Somebody streamed music, so now they can't vote? That's a bit harsh I think. Give them a misdemeanor on the level of petty theft, not full felony level.

 

[vxicepickxv]

I wonder if it covers 'lets play' and do donations count as "intending to profit"?

Not directly for the let's play alone, because with commentary and whatnot it becomes something else, as mentioned above, and with the donations it's even more questionable, because if it's to a personal account it is considered intent. If it went to a recognized charity, then no, it's not intent to profit.

 

[DJDarque]

Sorry actors and actresses, but maybe if you weren't paid hundreds of thousands to millions per movie I might buy that statement, but seeing as how a lot of you are I don't.

That's only maybe 1% (2% if you're feeling generous) of actors that make that, and ONLY on major studio blockbusters. The overwhelming majority of actors make between $100-$150 per 16 hour day and are lucky to work one week per month (speaking as an actor here). Out of the millions of actors out there, only about 5% actually make their living off of it. 1% of those are the big-money stars.

Ok. You're right. It was a pretty bad generalization, but I'm willing to guess that when most Joe Blows such as myself think of actors, despite probably knowing they're not in the majority, think of those big name actors first.

But again, you're right, and I'm sorry for generalizing.

 

[jono793]

So, Let's get this straight:

Streaming unlicensed copyright works off of YouTube can get you, potentially, five years inside.

Whereas

Google, who owns of YouTube, hosts all of that unlicensed copyrighted content and earns revenue off the back of it in the form of advertising, is effectively immune from copyright claims.

Madness!

 

[Darks63]

well im sure glad i got out of the dling anime game, but it does mean no more free wwe ppvs .