I think we're screwed with many more things higher on the list than a copyright law. Health care, economy, energy...etc etc etc.
Jimmy CraicHead TV Video Podcast about Sailing, Travel, Craic and Cocktails www.jchtv.com --- On Thu, 2/5/09, Heath <heathpa...@msn.com> wrote: > From: Heath <heathpa...@msn.com> > Subject: [videoblogging] Is Obama pro copryright? Are we screwed? > To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com > Date: Thursday, February 5, 2009, 8:09 AM > Well, in case anyone was wondering where our new president > stood on > copyright laws and how best to change them....look no > further... > > Understand this is a big deal, a really big deal, this was > they guy > who got the court to agree that putting your songs on your > computer > and "making them availible" on a peer to peer > network violated the > law, yes that was overturned but now this guy is in the > Justice > Department... > > Change we can believe in?.....time will tell... > > http://tech.yahoo.com/news/cnet/20090205/tc_cnet/83011357831015738138 > > "Obama's DOJ pick is RIAA lawyer who killed > Grokster" > > - President Obama is continuing to fill the senior ranks of > the U.S. > Department of Justice with the copyright industry's > favorite lawyers. > > Donald Verrilli announced Wednesday that he had been named > associate > deputy attorney general. Verrilli is the lawyer who pulled > the plug > on Grokster, sued Google on behalf of Viacom, and > represented the > Recording Industry Association of America against a > Minnesota woman > named Jammie Thomas who's accused of illicit file > sharing. > > This follows a string of other pro-copyright industry picks > that > Obama has made. Last month, there was Obama's selection > last month of > a top RIAA lawyer--currently squaring off in court with > Harvard > University's Berkman Center--to be third-in-command at > the Justice > Department. > > Vice President Joe Biden has long been an ally of the > recording > industry, urging the criminal prosecutions of > copyright-infringing > peer-to-peer users and trying to create a new federal > felony > involving playing unauthorized music. And another senior > Justice > Department post has gone to the top antipiracy enforcer for > the > Business Software Alliance, a strong supporter of the > Digital > Millennium Copyright Act's anti-circumvention rules. > > Obama's latest choice, Verrilli, is a senior litigator > in the > Washington, D.C. offices of the Jenner & Block law > firm. > > In technology circles, he's probably best known for > arguing the > Minnesota case called Capitol v. Thomas. In that case, the > RIAA > convinced the judge to accept jury instructions saying that > > the "making copyrighted sound recordings available for > electronic > distribution on a peer-to-peer network" violated the > law, even if > none had actually been transferred. > > Verrilli won the first round, with a federal jury saying in > October > 2007 that Thomas had to pay $220,000. But then the judge > threw out > the verdict, concluding the jury instructions he approved > were > misleading; the RIAA is hoping to hold on to the initial > verdict and > is currently appealing. > > One reason why this case is especially relevant to > Verrilli's new job > is that the Justice Department intervened in the Thomas > case on > behalf of the RIAA. > > That has already caused some tech lobbyists to wonder > privately about > whether or not Verrilli will recuse himself from matters > that affect > their former clients. Another example of a relevant case > involves the > Supreme Court asking the Justice Department for input on a > case > involving Cablevision--another lawsuit that Verrilli was > part of on > behalf of copyright holders. > > A Jenner & Block press release says that Verrilli > "led the Jenner & > Block team that is pursuing a $1 billion copyright case on > behalf of > Viacom Inc. against Google and YouTube, alleging massive > violations > of Viacom's copyrighted motion pictures and television > shows." Last > year, Viacom CEO Philippe Dauman even called YouTube a > "rogue > company." > > The lawsuit filed in New York in March 2007 accuses YouTube > > of "massive intentional copyright infringement" > and seeks more than > $1 billion in damages. Other plaintiffs include Country > Music > Television, Paramount Pictures Corporation, Black > Entertainment > Television (all of which are Viacom affiliates). > > From a legal perspective, Verrilli's zealous defense of > large > copyright holders reached its apogee in the Grokster case. > > MGM had sued Grokster, saying that it effectively induced > its users > to commit copyright infringement. When the Supreme Court > heard > arguments on March 29, 2005 in the most important copyright > case that > decade, MGM chose Verrilli to represent its side. > > "The recording industry has lost 25 percent of its > revenue since the > onslaught of these services," Verrilli told the > justices. "And that's > particularly critical, because, remember, this is really... > a venture- > capital business. Most of the records we put out don't > make money. A > few make a lot of money. Well, what do you think's > getting traded on > Grokster and StreamCast and the rest of them? It's the > few that make > all the money." > > It worked, or at least worked pretty well. The Supreme > Court ruled > that operators of peer-to-peer networks could be held > liable for > copyright infringement, and Grokster quickly settled with > Hollywood > studios and the record labels. > > During the campaign, when CNET News asked Obama for his > views on > copyright, he replied: "As policymakers, we are in a > constant process > of examining our laws to ensure that the protections we > place on > intellectual property are sufficient to encourage invention > without > hindering innovation that builds on previous work or > unfairly > limiting consumers from using the goods they purchase in a > way that > is fair to creators." > > That was, unfortunately, rather vague. Now it's a bit > more clear > where he stands. > > Heath > http://heathparks.com
