Entertainment Industry

« Previous | Company Town Home | Next »

Hollywood rallies behind Senate bill to combat online piracy

Hollywood studios gave two thumbs up Monday for a new federal bill that aims to crack down on the widespread problem of Internet piracy.

The bill, introduced Monday by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) and senior Republican member Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), would give the Justice Department more tools to track and shut down websites devoted to providing access to unauthorized downloads, streaming or sale of copyright content. The Justice Department, for example, would have authority to seek a court order to block credit card payments and advertising on illegal websites.

The Motion Picture Assn. of America said the legislation, called the Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act, would "combat efforts to steal the lifeblood of one of our nation's most important industries."

Such sites are "increasingly sophisticated and take on many of the attributes of legitimate content delivery sites, often deceiving consumers into believing they are legitimate," the MPAA said.

Still, as anyone who has ever watched "Schoolhouse Rock!" knows,  it's a long way before a bill introduced in committee becomes the law of the land.

-- Richard Verrier

 
Comments () | Archives (3)

This is nothing more than broad censorship sponsored by Hollywood backed Democrats. (Hatch is the lone R, but he swings wildly Democrat when it comes to intellectual property)

Someone needs to remind these Senators that Hollywood does not rule the planet, and I'm sorry, but free speech is way more important than protecting Hollywood copyrights.

I approve of this bill entirely. Billions of dollars and millions of jobs are generated for the economy through the games, movies, music, books, and software industries. There exists no law to appropriately address the sites whose rampant piracy leeches of the hard work of copyright workers.

I hope that as this is a bipartisan effort, the Senate will approve it quickly and enthusiastically. It is about time.

In response to Proposed Legislation "Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act" (COICA)

Our company MiMTiD Corp., provides copyright infringement protection services to a diverse group of media companies in the US. Our sister company Blues Destiny Records has sued Google, Bing and Rapidshare in the U.S. for repeated infringement of that Company's works. We send out thousands of conforming infringement notices on behalf of our customers to hundreds of infringing companies including Google and Bing. Many of the sites that would be the target of this new legislation, (e.g. Rapidshare and Hotfile) have only recently began to respond at all to these notices. We surmise that this is a direct result of the recent activities of Congress and the Department of Justice.

Google and most search engines, who largely ignore notices, though their ad syndication networks provide the framework and financing for widespread, commercial infringing activities globally. 60% of the infringing activity noticed on our system is to sites that are ad sharing partners with Google and other search engines. Google and others are systematically monetizing infringed content by efficiently locating the infringed content and steering potential consumers through search results to the location where the infringed content can be obtained. And then monetizing, through advertising, all of the traffic that is generated from this loop of activity. Most of these sites provide no functioning DMCA agent access and do not respond to notices. When a notice is sent to Google and Bing to remove an infringing link to these sites, they are largely ignored or not processed for weeks or months.

This is due to the confluence three factors:

a. The Construct of the DMCA as it relates to Search Engine Safe Harbor. The term "expeditiously" has no affirmative legal meaning or reliable precedent.

b. The inability of a rights holder to bring a "civil action for infringement" until receipt of the copyright certificate is in hand under 411a.

c. The two years it takes for the copyright office to process a certificate.

If Congress would focus on better articulating a.and b., it is our opinion that favorable, systemic behavioral change would result.

1. The search engines would no longer be able to formulate defenses based on the ambiguous ruling across the 11th and 5th Circuits related to 411a.

2. With search engine owned ad networks being the principal conduit of monetization of global infringment activity, the result of very minor changes to 411a would afford victims broader access to perfected rights under U.S. Copyright Law.

3. Rights holders would be able to effectively prosecute the search engine's refusal to act expeditiously concerning the removal of infringed links at the very point of consumer access if the term expeditiously is precisely defined.

It is our opinion that a modification of search engine response to infringement notices would result due to the imminent risks of the loss of Safe Harbor in the cases of inaction without the buffer of judicial ambiguity as stated above.

Ultimately, the ability for infringing sites to monetize traffic would diminish resulting in a decrease of global infringement and be a benefit to the public and rights holders, globally.

It is our opinion that the DMCA should work. Congress could more effectively legislate meaningful, less controversial change if it would close the loophole enabling the search engines to ignore notices by addressing the deficiencies of 411a.

Sincerely,

David Wallace Cox
Chairman
MiMTiD Corp.


Advertisement
Connect

Recommended on Facebook


In Case You Missed It...


Photos: L.A.’s busiest filming sites

Video





Categories

Companies


Archives