Re: Verdict: The Pirate Bay Guilty

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Ronald J Riley \(RJR Com\)" <rjr () rjriley com>
Date: April 18, 2009 2:40:40 PM EDT
To: <dave () farber net>, "'ip'" <ip () v2 listbox com>, "'Andy Oram'" <andyo () oreilly com 
>
Subject: RE: [IP] Re:   Verdict: The Pirate Bay Guilty

I very much agree with Andy Oram's position on copyright.  This is  
notable
because I firmly believe that people and companies who produce  
intellectual
property regardless of rather it is copyright, trademarks, or patents
deserve fair compensation.

So why should copyright have criminal sanctions and statutory damages  
when
other forms of intellectual property do not?

Specifically, where patents are concerned why not have mandatory  
enhanced
damages?  How about at least double for willfulness and treble for
committing fraud on the court as RIM did in the NTP case and Microsoft  
did
in the Eolas case?  Better yet, why not multiply each enhancement when  
more
then one factor is involved?

Both of these companies are members of a group of serial infringers  
calling
themselves the Coalition for Patent Fairness.

Ronald J. Riley,

Speaking only on my own behalf.
President - www.PIAUSA.org - RJR at PIAUSA.org
Executive Director - www.InventorEd.org - RJR at InvEd.org
Senior Fellow - www.patentPolicy.org
President - Alliance for American Innovation
Caretaker of Intellectual Property Creators on behalf of deceased  
founder
Paul Heckel
Washington, DC
Direct (202) 318-1595 - 9 am to 8 pm EST.

-----Original Message-----
From: David Farber [mailto:dave () farber net]
Sent: Friday, April 17, 2009 9:29 AM
To: ip
Subject: [IP] Re: Verdict: The Pirate Bay Guilty



Begin forwarded message:

From: Andy Oram <andyo () oreilly com>
Date: April 17, 2009 9:17:46 AM EDT
To: dave () farber net
Subject: Re: [IP] Verdict: The Pirate Bay Guilty

Up until 1997, copyright infringement in the US was a civil matter. If
you hurt me in some way, I can sue you; it doesn't have to be a
criminal act. That view was applied implicitly to copyright
infringement. If someone abuses your copyright, you sue.

It's a different matter when something is a crime: now the government
is forced to police the territory and expend precious resources
enforcing the law. I reported on this change in the US in a 1998
article (I don't know the history in Europe):

 http://www.praxagora.com/andyo/ar/copyright_theft.html
 The Gifts That Keep On Giving--Copyright Revenues

I do believe that massive unauthorized sharing of copyrighted material
is a crime. But we drug runners murdering people in the streets,
thousands of workers being cheated out of wages by scufflaw employers,
and all kinds of serious crimes that really threaten lives. It's not
in the public interest to turn copyright infringement from a civil
offense to a criminal one. And it leads to violations of privacy and
civil liberties in ever-more desperate attempts to enforce laws.

Andy




-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com





-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com