Home

Blog

Discussion: S. 3804, The Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (194 comments ↓ | 6 wiki edits: view article ↓)

  • This item is from the 111th Congress (2009-2010) and is no longer current. Comments, voting, and wiki editing have been disabled, and the cost/savings estimate has been frozen.
  • This bill, or a similar bill, was reintroduced in the current Congress as S. 1455, The Recovery Enhancement for Addiction Treatment Act.

No discussion on this article yet.

Learn More

Visitor Comments Comments Feed for This Bill

Page 1 of 3: « First/Oldest | ‹ Previous | Next › | Last/Newest »

Jeremy Soule

September 22, 2010, 6:55pm (report abuse)

This bill is a sensible approach to major problem. As an artist, I can say that the DMCA has a "loophole" which makes repeat offending sites a total burden for artists (especially niche artists like myself with limited resources). I see tens of thousands of illegal copies of my work go out in the span of an hour, yet it takes days to get compliance for a single DMCA notification--and some sites don't comply at all with my requests. And of course, once a site does comply and removes my material, another pirate simply reposts the material on the same site and the process repeats itself. Meanwhile, I and tens of thousands of artists like me are stolen blind.

This bill stops commercial piracy! I fully support it.

Cody

September 27, 2010, 1:43pm (report abuse)

Jeremy Soule, you are such a greedy pig. You are not paid by the people who are "pirating" your crappy music. You are paid by the companies hiring you to make the music. True, a small portion of your sales may come through as people buying OST, but really, when is the last time you bought a sound track to a game? This is the worst case of censorship I have seen recently in the US. I completely oppose this bill, as should any smart body. This is an atrocity! Please prevent this from happening. Sign any petition possible, call your senator, post about this on any social medium you desire. Just stop it. This is our freedom! Not just Jeremy Soule's greed.

Angela Hernandez

September 27, 2010, 1:47pm (report abuse)

Jeremy Soule, can you honestly call yourself an artist? You are complaining about people wanting to download your music? Come on, thats what art is about. People wanting to experience something you have made. Not for money. You make money off it regardless. Also, how can you say you are a niche artist when you mention tens of thousands of illegal copies. Do you know how many that is? Much more than a niche artist would receive. Stop this nonsensical bill.

Peter James

September 27, 2010, 2:16pm (report abuse)

This bill is so vague that it will make sites like YouTube, Google, Yahoo, MSN, and about 10,000 of the other top sites on the internet vulnerable to closure just to protect corporate greed. This is an irresponsible bill.

Jamie Mathis

September 27, 2010, 2:30pm (report abuse)

This is censorship and is outrageous! This bill will allow the Attorney General to blacklist any site for any reason without proof. How can anybody willingly give away more of our freedom. This is unconstitutional and is one step closer to the USA becoming a dictatorship. I am appalled that anybody would even consider passing a bill like this.

Ed Purcell

September 28, 2010, 10:34am (report abuse)

This bill stops commercial piracy? Hardly any of the online piracy sites are commercial by any means for the offenders. If I dl a song for free and give it to someone else for free there's no commercial gain on anyone's hands. And as for most sites, "artists" seem to forget having a dedicated server costs a lot of money a month, it's by no means free, so there's generally speaking, no profit. All this will do is let companies shut down completely legal sites that speak out against them without due process. We need copyright reform to open up the public domain, not useless censorship.

Matt

September 28, 2010, 10:38am (report abuse)

Government would love to control the flow of information and ideas on the internet. An open internet is the single greatest threat to an overzealous government. This shameful bill would give government a strong foothold in censoring unwanted content.

Government also should not be able to grant retroactive or future immunity for businesses which violate the rights of the people with tortious acts.

Ron Lindsay

September 28, 2010, 10:52am (report abuse)

I am Canadian and my mindless politicians blindly follow what the states do. Stop the stupidity and work on something usefull.

Jeremy, I will not download any of your music, you are here by on my black list. Greedy boy!!

Randall Splinter

September 28, 2010, 11:03am (report abuse)

It's amusing how loudly US politicians speak out against state censorship in other countries, but then turn around and sponsor a bill like this that allows the government to shutdown websites without due process similar to those same countries they criticize.

Gene

September 28, 2010, 11:04am (report abuse)

Incredible that this bill would even make it this far. This will go down in the history books as the point the Government took control of the internet. At least in the USA. We will look back on the days of due process with warm sentimentality.

Gene

September 28, 2010, 11:13am (report abuse)

Now all one has to do is post infringing content on a competitor's small start-up site, and the attorney general takes it down. Free market my butt. Please realize the implications of this bill!

Steven LEach

September 28, 2010, 11:15am (report abuse)

As the owner of a small consulting company, I can vouch that no matter what laws are passed, no matter what type of force is used people will do what they want, no matter the consequences. Especially for internet access there is no way to criminalize content copying people will make a choice, and that choice will generally favor their own agenda. I have disconnected my DISH, and DirectTV because I was tired of paying for content I did not want or desire. 5 times I have rented through netflix movies that have failed to play on my DVD player, over a dozen times i have bought games that failed to run on my PC even though I have met the minimum requirements,so I only buy used games. I am fed up with companies taking my money and providing no measure of support, or other recompense when things have gone wrong.

BrianV

September 28, 2010, 11:32am (report abuse)

Let's put a stop to this before it gets out of hand. Piracy is an age-old issue that this bill can't fix, but this bill CAN take away our rights to due process. Don't let them get away with it!

Dan F

September 28, 2010, 11:58am (report abuse)

Anyone who has ever feared a slippery slope should be scared to death about this bill. It is a gross abuse of power, and something that the founding fathers of this once great country would pull out their muskets to stop. This is the type of tyranny the colonists couldn't take any more, and neither should we.

Reason

September 28, 2010, 11:58am (report abuse)

Is that the real Jeremy Soule? If it isn't, this is the worst case of impersonation and very possibly libel I've ever seen.

Assuming this IS the real Jeremy Soule, then shame on you sir. You scored some of the best-selling games in recent years, and are likely much better off than the average musician.

Also, you are British, so go impose censorship in your own country and leave the US alone.

Victor

September 28, 2010, 12:45pm (report abuse)

Censorship in it's purest forms!

Oh, and just one more thing:

"Infringement" and "Counterfeits" in one bill? I like my apples better than your oranges...

Chuck Lloyd

September 28, 2010, 1:14pm (report abuse)

Piracy is bad. I will not say that Piracy should be legal. This bill, however, fails to take in account what defines offending material. Going by its own wording, Player pianos, pen and paper, the invention of writing and reading and public speaking, would all be punishable because they can be used to infringe. its as stupid as the Canadian tax on media that assumes everyone is breaking the law. You are assuming the people who goto these sites are simply going there to do illegal things. You are assuming that people only are going to break laws and such. most of these sites also support open licenses such as Linux and artists who offer their music for free distribution. I will turn this around on the people pushing for this bill, if you assume we are all criminals, how can we trust the people who choose whats infringing and what isn't are not also criminals or even bias in their judgment? We have nothing other than your word. That is not good enough these days.

Anon

September 29, 2010, 8:55am (report abuse)

Jeremy who? First off, with all the free music going around on the internet, you should be happy that you're getting that kind of exposure. People might go out and buy a Madonna CD, but most people in this economy will not spend money on a nobody...sorry. Perhaps with that kind of exposure, someone might like your crappy music enough to pay to see you perform it or to have the actual CD. Mega artists like Courtney Love support piracy but little nobody's like you are against it.

Matt K

September 29, 2010, 9:46am (report abuse)

This bill is a non-sensible approach that is effectively giving the government the ability to censor based entertainment industry accusations. How anyone could support a bill that erodes our personal freedoms with NO DUE PROCESS. Use the court system if you are being wronged. There is no reason to blame 3rd parties for your business model problem.

Lola D

September 29, 2010, 3:27pm (report abuse)

What's next, we can lose access to the internet if we say the wrong thing or post a quote that was said by someone else? This is censorship in it's worst form and the government has way too much power. I strongly oppose this bill and if they really want to go through with it, put it up for a vote...I can guarantee it will not pass.

Dan D

September 29, 2010, 4:46pm (report abuse)

I see this more of tool to to harass, like government does, web sites that don't tow the government (or AG) line. They may never close down a web site or domain but they can certainly force change in the character and purpose of any site just through threats and accusations. This is the very type of legislation that can hurt our freedoms the most.

John Paul Jones

September 29, 2010, 9:01pm (report abuse)

You people are the worst.

Musicians and the people that help them make music have to eat and pay rent too. Do you go to your job and expect to work for free?

You're not fooling anybody with this "censorship" bs. It isn't censorship in the slightest. You just want to continue to be able to take someone else's work for free and not have to worry about getting busted.

YOU'RE the greedy pigs.

Not Jeremy Soule

September 30, 2010, 12:05am (report abuse)

Name dropping aside, I doubt Jeremy Soule is posting on the comment section.

The issue here is why Americans want to become like the Chinese with its censorship. People should start asking some serious questions as to how the media companies can get something like this into the fast track. The only reason this kind of thing happens in the current Congress is money. Somebody is getting a fat paycheck for this one.

Juniper Bush

September 30, 2010, 4:01am (report abuse)

Dude, you musicians need to chill out. Greedy piggies. How about making music because you love it? Oh wait, it's not about that any more. It's about making some crap song that MIGHT make it big and land you a crap record deal with a corrupt label. Thinking that it's right to "tour" for a few months every other year and make millions, and STILL ask for more. You're kidding, right? You make way more than you'll ever need, and you still beg for more. This bill isn't just about you crappy musicians either. It's about sites being censored at will by the government, and the people having no say in it at all. It's basically going the same way that Iran and China have in regards to internet policy. Get a grip, dude. It's not all about you. The only ones that are pushing for this are the rich greedy slobs that run these corrupt companies.

Pirate Mommy

September 30, 2010, 8:45am (report abuse)

I agree with Juniper and the other sensible commenters. Why should the top 1% of americans be the only ones to have a say in this? Look at the poll! There are SO many americans that oppose it. I can GUARANTEE that it's not just dems and independents taking up space in that red bar, because I find it hard to believe that only 3% of americans are republicans (And oh how I wish that were the truth). Come on, you so-called artists, open your eyes, this bill is not going to help you. If they remove your "copyrighted" music from the internet, how are people who have never heard of you ever going to? How do you think most record companies make their deals? Seriously, F*CK OFF.

Rob Thomas

September 30, 2010, 3:46pm (report abuse)

I am a musician and am totally against this bill. Read the facts. Totally UN-American.

Bob Ross

October 1, 2010, 1:54am (report abuse)

I Thought This Ridiculous Bill Was Gonna Be Decided Thursday, What Was The Result?

Paul P Miller

October 1, 2010, 3:13am (report abuse)

Welcome to China, State sponsored censorship at its worst.

VaderHater

October 2, 2010, 1:19am (report abuse)

Umm... to the musicians that say they aren't getting paid... how's about you get a real job... wouldn't that be great?

AU Oxides

October 2, 2010, 11:03pm (report abuse)

You can be pretty certain that this bill is not going to pass. It will also be against the constitution to censor sites as long as they have something like a blog to read along with whatever content they are giving out. That way they can't censor the "media" regardless of what else is on there due to free speech! As for you musicians, you still don't get it do you? If someone downloads music, or software and it's liked by the people that downloaded it, they will go out and buy it since crippleware is far from decent test bed for anything! I buy just about everything I like after I try it first. I know others that do as well. The only ones you are going to try and stop is the 12 year old kid that doesn't have the means to buy it, probably isn't going to use it, and just downloaded it to see what it was. I don't know many 12 year olds that are going to purchase a full version (or any for that matter) of photoshop or adobe suite for $900-$1000! Get a job if you want/need money so bad!

china jr

October 3, 2010, 11:15pm (report abuse)

go china 2.0!!!!

Canadian Movie Lover

October 4, 2010, 12:19am (report abuse)

What I'd really like is to be able to BUY virtual movie tickets for the same price as a theatre ticket and watch current movies in the privacy of my home.

Watching a new movie with two-hundred inconsiderate strangers is not my idea of fun or value.

mop

October 5, 2010, 5:00am (report abuse)

This censorship bill has been postponed for now. The corrupt officials behind it are possibly waiting for the public to forget, and then they'll reintroduce it like it's brand new. Jolly trolly!

Des

October 9, 2010, 8:16pm (report abuse)

I make music, I create art and design and one thing I will say about Soule the first post is this back in the day your music would play on the radio, and everyone had the ability to hit that little record button. No one ever complained about that did they? Not to mention its free publicity so you should be paying them for taking your music then telling their friends it was good. I am sorry but greed is the only reason this is coming about. I used to get pissed about having to pay for 15 songs when there was only 1 good one on the cd how about that? how much money do the artists owe me for having to buy crap to get 1 piece of worthy art. anyways you get my point so i think i will ~ end rant

Des

October 9, 2010, 8:26pm (report abuse)

THIS IS CENSORSHIP! CONTROL! and GREED! THIS ISN'T ABOUT PIRACY!

DISKWARRIOR

October 14, 2010, 3:27pm (report abuse)

I fully support this bill.

You want art? Make it yourself or pay for it!

Would any of you work for free?

This has nothing to do with censorship. I has everything to do with punishing thieves.

You questions Jeremy's integrity as an artist? You call him Greedy?

If you're stealing work IT'S YOUR INTEGRITY that's questionable. You want to take something for nothing? THAT'S GREED!

LOL.

October 18, 2010, 9:14am (report abuse)

This will stop nothing anyway. Dedicated pirates always find a way. This is really about CONTROL. The major media companies want to dictate everything you listen to or watch. Look at what has happened to radio over the years. This is just another way to silence the competition. They do not want you to have access to independent artists or make choices about what you want to watch or listen to. Any reasonable artist knows that it's the likes of the RIAA along with the labels and studios that are REALLY ripping off the artists (as well as the consumers). The musicians in a majority of cases get a mere pittance for their work when it comes to cd sales. Many artists whose albums sell millions are broke and or in debt while the label makes millions. Piracy is the BEST advertising.

Speeder

October 19, 2010, 11:08am (report abuse)

It's hard to enforce laws against shoplifting, speeding, and spitting in the street, and yet we have them. The greedy want artists to be their slaves, to produce and produce and produce, to entertain like trained seals, and to be grateful for crumbs. Everyone makes money on pirated art EXCEPT the artist. Advertisers, online service providers, EVERYONE but the artist. Artists can't live on love. Copyrights protect our ability to profit from our work. This "censorship" canard appeals to histrionic anti-copyright ideologues who have a vested interest in exploiting content they have no intent of paying for, taken from people they don't ever intend to respect. They treat artists worse than street sweepers. At least garbagemen get paid by the hour. Artists only get paid for what they sell, and many books receive little or no advance against royalties. Months and months of labor for which artists get $1000 or less. Shame on greedy consumers who have turned the art scene into slave labor.

JJ Biener

October 19, 2010, 11:29am (report abuse)

What have we come to when most of the comments on this thread are from people who not only tolerate theft, but feel morally justified in stealing the property of others. It is not "censorship" to write laws to to help prevent you from stealing copyrighted material any more than laws against car theft are "restraint of trade". Both concepts are equally absurd.

Spare us your outrage. The music an artist creates belongs to him just as your car belongs to you. He deserves to be compensated for his efforts every bit as much as you deserve to be paid for the work you do.

If you don't want to buy a whole CD because you only like one song, THEN DON'T BUY IT. Do without.

Stop whining like little kids and grow up. If music has value to you, pay for it. If it has no value, you don't get to just steal it. Honestly, did your parents raise you to be thieves? You people are pathetic.

JJBiener

October 19, 2010, 1:22pm (report abuse)

What seldom gets mentioned in discussions like this is the unseen costs of widespread theft of intellectual property. A post above suggested that musicians get a "real job." Well, that's what most musicians are doing these days. Guess what happens while these pople are busy working "real jobs". They aren't producing music. It is impossible to calculate how many songs have not been written, recorded and performed because you greedy people want music for free. I refer you to a certain proverbial goose and its golden eggs.

A word of advice: before using a word like "censorship", you should really understand what it means.

Mark Darley

October 19, 2010, 4:27pm (report abuse)

OK, so how many of you who are against this bill make your own music/images/intellectual products? Or do you just use those made by others?

Those of you who support theft of intellectual property belonging to the photographers and musicians who create it, should consider this:

How are these creatives going to be able to continue to fill your world with works of art (which apparently you want) if , by stealing their source of income, you force them to spend all their time at another job to feed their families.

Yes, creating music or any other form of art takes time and effort and skill, and is a job and it supports our families.

Why should it be fine to steal music or images made with hard work and care, when we recognize that it is a crime to steal food or any other product made with hard work?

I agree with JJBiener. If you are prepared to steal it presumably you want it. So pay for it, or make your own!

I fully support this bill.

Mark Darley

October 19, 2010, 4:29pm (report abuse)

A professional photographer for 30 years.

Morphoto

October 19, 2010, 4:47pm (report abuse)

In the face of more intelligent and salient posts it seems all the IP thieves have gone elsewhere to spread there poison. In today's world, Intellectual Property (IP) makes up 40% to 50% of the US GDP. With that in mind I wonder how much revenue piracy costs rights holders and in turn the IRS tax base. That's a pot load of money thst could help pay down that debt we have. It's hard for non-creators to respect and understand the value of IP until someone wants it. The concept of having rights for personal use of IP (music, photo, book, etc) but not owning it is difficult for some to grasp. But it's not any different than owning a widget, the widget maker would not take kindly to making copies and distributing the counterfeit widget without permission. It's just easier with digital IP to rip and re-rip. If this bill were to pass it would help but certainly not fix a problem that is a moving target, could be good ammunition though.

Cris

October 19, 2010, 5:40pm (report abuse)

Who's greedier...the artist asking for a pittance for the use/enjoyment of his skills, or the 'customer' who refuses to pay for the luxury he wants? The censorship lies in disallowing an artist to defend their own intellectual property. If you want it, PAY FOR IT. Or make your own dang music. Harrumph.

Indie Game Developer

October 19, 2010, 7:22pm (report abuse)

As an independant game developer, I don't like copywright infringement as much as the next guy but this bill does nothing good for me or anyone else. We already have the DMCA and it is getting more effective every year. Bottom line is, the internet was created by the people, under the constitution, to facilitate 90%(Just guessing) of our right to free speech. If this infrastructure is limited by a government that does not abide by the rules set down by our forefathers, then I have no reason to abide by the rules set down by it without proper time to vote or without allowing the average citizen to become aware of what this is all about. WE NEED TO RISE AGAINST THIS BILL and vote it down. Where do I sign up!? (Or rather, sign down this bill)

David Seger

October 20, 2010, 12:02pm (report abuse)

I wholeheartedly support this bill and would like to echo everything Jeremy said in his post.

If you want to call me greedy for trying to eat and pay my rent, go for it. Only a greedy spoiled little child would refuse to compensate someone for hard work.

Leigh Harrison

October 20, 2010, 1:34pm (report abuse)

I wholeheartedly support Jeremy (& all the other musicians) in this. Due to the work done by the major performing rights associations, WE also stand with every artist in America who is tired of being ripped-off by thieves who assume we're rich. Why does everyone think all of us are affiliated with greedy music companies that rip off the consumer along with musicians? Most of us who write the music you love, and the songs you listen to are struggling to survive as independent artists, with no (major) record company affiliation, only our own personal one-man (or woman) operations. The record company I'm in has three artists -- the one who started the company, and two friends.

Artists have a right to be paid for their work, just as carpenters and teachers are paid. When did we devolve into a world where a small group of misguided consumers think everything on the internet must be free? It isn't censorship to stop thievery -- it's an honorable and fair business practice.

Loves Reading

October 22, 2010, 5:15pm (report abuse)

I love novels, and I want writers to keep writing them.

Pirates are taking such a big bite out of sales that some writers are quitting.. They make far less per book than a musician per song, and they certainly can't perform to make ends' meet as musicians do.

Save the creative people! Stop piracy!

Miriam Newman

October 22, 2010, 5:29pm (report abuse)

As an author writing electronic books, I watch them come up on so-called pirate sites almost as soon as published. If someone came into my office while I was writing and took money from my wallet, they'd be arrested. They can do it online without any consequences. Why? When did I become a disenfranchised citizen, no longer entitled to protection under the law?

Rosalie Stanton

October 22, 2010, 5:34pm (report abuse)

As an author who has lost money due to e-book piracy, I heartily support this bill. This is not merely a reflection of piracy in the music industry; it includes people like me with limited income. I'm not Stephen King; I don't make fantastic money of my books, and in this economy every little bit helps.

I make less than 20k a year. Writing is my favorite pastime, regardless of what I'm paid...but piracy drains the creative process. It's so disheartening that people disrespect your work so much, especially when (and this has happened to me numerous times), you ask the offenders to remove the material and they greet you with derision.

Alexandra

October 22, 2010, 5:52pm (report abuse)

Entertainment is not the same as information. It is a luxury and no one has a right to books, music, movies, or games any more than they have a right to caviar, diamonds, or Ferraris. Taking something without paying for it is stealing, plain and simple.

For everyone calling the writers, artists, and musicians who want to get paid for their work "greedy piggies", I suppose you go into your 9 to 5 job just for the pleasure and satisfaction?

These people work hard at their given profession. They should be entitled to the same right to compensation as everyone else.

Rowena Cherry

October 22, 2010, 6:08pm (report abuse)

I support everyone's right to have their contracts honored and the laws enforced. Right now, many OSPs have a Catch 22 to protect the infringers.

Copyright owners who want to give their works away free can do so with a Creative Commons license (which is not the same as public domain). Those who cannot afford to work for nothing ought to be able to be paid for legal sales.

Thieves on auction sites burn hundreds of copies of e-books onto CDs and sell them week after week, making thousands of dollars and paying the authors nothing.

Just because someone says an ebook is "free" or "freely available" does not mean that it is legal to download it. If the author is alive, their copyright is probably being infringed.

The existing law ought to be made clear. Every OSP ought to put a clear statement (not buried in a long agreement) explaining what copyright means.

The worst pirate sites, really ought to be shut down if they cannot and will not enforce their own TOS and abide by the laws.

Crystalthestrugglingauthor

October 22, 2010, 6:12pm (report abuse)

Don't anybody dare call me greedy for wanting to be paid for copies of my books sold. My books are not free. If you don't pay for them, you can't have them. Simple as that. Go read that crap posted on free sites like Bookrix if you want a free read. What's that? It's sh*tty reading, you say? Then quit b*tching about professional authors wanting to be paid for their books.

Kate Douglas

October 22, 2010, 6:34pm (report abuse)

I guess I'm not surprised by those who think content should be free, but for those of us who survive economically by producing that content, pirates sharing our work illegally is the same as coming into our homes and stealing money out of our wallets.

I'm an author who works very hard writing books with the intention of being paid for the sale of each one, and yet thousands are downloaded illegally at pirate sites around the world. This affects my ability to earn a living. It's theft, folks. Pure and simple theft. Don't call it by any other name and don't tell me I'm greedy for wanting to earn something for the twelve hour days, seven days a week that I spend creating my stories.

I fully support this bill, and I also agree with JJBiener. If you are prepared to steal it presumably you want it. So pay for it, or make your own!

Published Author

October 22, 2010, 6:44pm (report abuse)

I get a half dozen Google alerts every day that my books are available for illegal download. If people can't afford books, they can get them from the library or buy them cheap at used book stores or borrow from a friend. But an electronic copy can be duplicated an unlimited number of times. The author gets paid nothing, the publisher gets paid nothing, and as more people steal these stories, fewer authors will be able to write them because we'll have to go back to our old jobs in order to support our families.

I think most people who illegally download books don't understand that what they are doing is stealing. I think most people are generally law-abiding citizens who would be stunning to realize that artists--musicians and authors--are suffering because of illegal downloads.

But the worst of the pirates know what they're doing and they do not care and steal anyway.

I don't know if this bill is the best solution, but it is a step in the right direction.

Faith V. Smith

October 22, 2010, 7:01pm (report abuse)

As an author I slave over my work. I do not want someone else to have the right to just steal it and make money off of it.

Ryder Islington

October 22, 2010, 7:11pm (report abuse)

We live in a world where millions want money without putting in the hard work. These people have no right to make money off the work I do. One thing I have the right to is to own my own words. No one should be able to use them without my permission

Fiona McGier

October 22, 2010, 7:34pm (report abuse)

I DO work at 2 other jobs! And I have family obligations. But I love to write, and I truly enjoy when other people read and enjoy what I wrote. But if I have to add a third job, because I make no money from the sales of my creations because someone else has stolen my words to make money off of them, then I won't have the time to write anymore. We are all diminished. Support this bill if you value creativity.

Changeling Press LLC

October 22, 2010, 7:35pm (report abuse)

As a publisher we spend hundreds of dollars a month fighting cybercrime. While I strongly support this bill, enabling legislation is needed to provide funding for the Department of Justice/FBI to investigate and enforce not only this legislation, but the related copyright laws that already exist. These agencies are badly in need of staffing to handle the thousands of complaints they already receive. The last time I spoke to an agent at the Department of Justice I was told they had a backlog of hundreds of thousands of complaints, and two agents to investigate them.

Susan Andersen

October 22, 2010, 7:43pm (report abuse)

We work hard to create our books and have the same bills to pay as anyone else. Piracy is beginning to have a bottom line impact on our industry. And I agree wholeheartedly with Changeling Press LLC sentiments.

Anna Campbell

October 22, 2010, 7:58pm (report abuse)

I make my living from selling what I write - people who take that without paying for it nothing more than thieves. It's no different to stealing from a store or knocking someone down in the street and snatching their wallet. I strongly recommend the passing of this bill!

Renee Nelson

October 22, 2010, 8:20pm (report abuse)

Writer's work should be protected. Piracy - whether stealing books, artwork, photography or music needs to be stopped. I support The Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act.

Sandra Williamson

October 22, 2010, 8:27pm (report abuse)

I am a struggling author and I agree that something must be done to curtail piracy.

I have received too many Google alerts that my work is being pirated, as well as ebooks that belong to my peers. Hundreds if not thousands of copies.

How is stealing an ebook any different than stealing money or goods from a merchant?

Please, vote to make a difference. Stand up to piracy.

Stephanie Williams

October 22, 2010, 8:31pm (report abuse)

A writer's work not matter what form it's in, should be protected, and people who steal, and piracy is a form of stealing should be prosecuted - PERIOD!

HeatherFL

October 22, 2010, 8:56pm (report abuse)

I don't care how much something costs... software, music, books... if you feel it's too expensive, then guess what? You can't have it. Or you save for it. You don't steal it. What's the difference between the $1 song or the $10 book vs a car? I mean if you can't afford a car, and one is just sitting there, are you going to take it? Probably not. So why is it so easy to steal intellectual property? And why do people feel like they DESERVE it and the artist should just give away the art because the artist creates for the of creating? That's bull... artists need to eat and feed their families. As someone else said, if artists can't feed their families, they have to go do something that will, which means they are no longer creating, and the people downloading can no longer enjoy it.

This bill may not be the answer, but I just cannot believe so many people defend piracy! How much revenue is lost on each posting? It has to be staggering. Especially for higher-ticket items like software.

DMAC

October 22, 2010, 8:56pm (report abuse)

It took me ten years and two unsold manuscripts to learn enough craft to finally, finally sell a book to New York for a small advance. Within months of it being released, pirates were offering copies of it for free.

I'm sure the people offering the book somehow think I should be flattered that my story is so good - so many copies have been downloaded. I'm not flattered, I'm angry.

Being an author is not all profit, there are expenses, conferences, travel costs, research costs, computer costs. Those aren't free. I can't (and won't) steal them. Royalties on those pirated books would help me break even so don't talk to me about greed.

I support Changeling Press's comments.

Raine Delight

October 22, 2010, 9:03pm (report abuse)

As an author, I write because I love it and enjoy creating stories for readers to enjoy. I enjoy getting that royalty check and seeing that I made sales BUT I don't like it when I get 20 google alerts onmy books for pirated copies. As a single mom, each penny is counted and that little bit of a check goes to my kids for extras like after school events, a movie night or a new book from the bookstore. I should NOT have to have pirates steal my work because they figure I won't miss it.Hate to break it to you but stealing from me and other authors, musicians, etc is plain wrong, illegal and immoral. This isn't censorship, it's our basic right as an artist to be paid for our work.

Stealing is stealing in any culture and those who feel we need to get a 'real job'? I already work two....how many more do you want me to work to make up the difference that pirates steal from me?

Considering Embezzling

October 22, 2010, 9:03pm (report abuse)

I think most of the people who commented in favor of piracy would not go into Barnes & Noble and steal books, but it's okay to them as long as the theft is done on computer.

I guess that means I could go in and steal money from their bank accounts and say, "It's okay. I didn't rob the bank in person. I used my computer... You greedy bastards! How dare you want your money back that I took fair and square from your account. By the way, get a second or third job to support yourself so I can continue to steal money from your account every month."

Kay Sturm

October 22, 2010, 9:16pm (report abuse)

copyright infringement is theft. Stand up for authors and artists whose creative talents add so much to our loves.

Julie

October 22, 2010, 9:17pm (report abuse)

Those of you complaining about censorship and control and the greediness of artists - you aren't creating anything anyone wants to steal, are you? You're happy to steal someone else's work under the guise of freedom. Theft is theft and why should this be tolerated because you don't want to pay for it? If you wanted a car, you couldn't just go up to a car lot and take one, that would not be tolerated. This is the same principle. Musicians, composers, authors - we all deserve to be compensated for our work. If you want to listen to our songs, or read our books - then buy them.

It's time to crack down on these selfish pirates - they are no more than common criminals.

Cari Quinn

October 22, 2010, 9:22pm (report abuse)

I fully support this bill. Everyone deserves to be compensated for their work.

Patricia Wilcox

October 22, 2010, 9:23pm (report abuse)

Taking someone's else's stuff for free is stealing. That is simple. If someone wants to read something someone has written to sell, they need to pay for it.

Schuyler Thorpe

October 22, 2010, 9:26pm (report abuse)

This bill makes me nervous. I'm an independent writer, but who's to say what will happen if someone sees my work posted online and tries to lay claim or ownership for it because of a couple of words? Or a sentence? Or even a THEME?

The government could order every one of my site hosters to shut down my blogs, and everything connected to my work!

And I'd lose out on 15 years of hard work in promoting and advertising myself and my books!

Or I could be sued and not even be able to contest it because I don't have any money for legal fees!

Piracy is a serious problem, but not when it's at the expense of our First Amendment rights!

I can't support something that will target people like me because I so happen to have an idea that someone just doesn't like or thinks I'm trying to steal.

I WANT my freedom of expression to be left intact!

Jan

October 22, 2010, 9:26pm (report abuse)

I work and write books. I wish I didn't have to work, but even with over thirty eBooks on the market, I don't make enough money to quit my day job. I have to work 16 hour days. And while I love writing, it isn't always fun.

For whatever reason, my books are pirate bait. Once I found 14 different books being shared on a single site, and on any given day I can find at least two. I'm not flattered someone wants to read my stories bad enough to steal them. Not even a little.

I want to write full time, and at this rate it's not going to happen. Pirates aren't just stealing my books, they're taking away my dreams.

Gwynn Morgan

October 22, 2010, 9:33pm (report abuse)

As an author I have a vested interest in protecting my work. Intellectual property is still PROPERTY and to use it without compensation is theft just the same as taking material objects. If artists get no recompense for their work what it the point of creating anything? Literature. music and art will DIE if not protected and rewarded. It is not public property to be enjoyed for free by anyone who chooses to. Piracy-- illegal sharing and distribution--must be sotpped!! This law will do it or at least help greatly.

Jae

October 22, 2010, 9:37pm (report abuse)

Pirating is not a victimless crime or sticking it to the big, greedy corporations. Pirates are stealing from people who are trying to make a living and support their families. Would you say it was okay to steal a book from a book store? Pirating is stealing. Even if this bill isn't perfect, it's needed and a step in the right direction as we move into the digital age.

Erika Tracy

October 22, 2010, 9:37pm (report abuse)

I didn't read the bill with a lawyer's eye for details, graned, but I didn't see due process being violated here. As an author, watching periodicals and publishing houses coming and going for want of profit, I support this bill -- as an author who needs to buy dog food and diapers, too.

Rhonda McCafferty

October 22, 2010, 9:47pm (report abuse)

No one has a right to steal. Keep e-book privacy. I am working on writing a book and hoping some day to be successful. I hope that copyright is protected.

Schuyler Thorpe

October 22, 2010, 9:52pm (report abuse)

I *realize* that authors need to protect the sanctity of their work at any costs, but what I got a sense from this bill is that it allows the US government to crack down on every social and net-working site there is by shutting them and charging the person or the site with illegal copyright or infringement.

Hasn't the Chinese already done this to their people?

Why can't we come up with a bill that targets PIRACY in itself and goes over international lines and imposes hefty fees or severe penalties?

A Concerned Editor

October 22, 2010, 10:03pm (report abuse)

For some odd reason, some people are under the impression this is a bad

thing...think again.

The bill specifically targets INTERNET SITES DEDICATED TO INFRINGING

ACTIVITIES. Those would be sites like Astatalk, Demonoid, Underground and

individuals who make links to their personal storage sites publicly

available.

In no way does this target free speech or LEGAL sharing.

I voted yes because I believe copyrighted work, your work, should be protected from pirating.

Page 1 of 3: « First/Oldest | ‹ Previous | Next › | Last/Newest »

RSS Feeds for This Bill

Keep yourself updated on user contributions and debates about this bill! (Learn more about RSS.)