RIAA Attorney Says Copyright Protection is Too Weak
The RIAA has just announced dissatisfaction with the way the Digital Millennium Copyright Act has been interpreted by courts. RIAA attorney Jennifer Pariser says the burden of protecting copyright should be placed on the Internet Service Providers that are making money off of pirated material, not the copyright holders.
This comment follows on the heels of the Protect IP Act (PIPA) being passed in the senate and the E-Parasite Act (PDF) passed in the House, and lawsuits in Europe that hold British Telecom accountable for filesharing. The two bills before Congress, if passed by both chambers and signed by the President (a big if), might include provisions like making copyrighted violations a felony, giving ISPs or the government the ability to shut down web sites suspected of sharing copyrighted material, or requiring web services, like paypal, to cut off support for web sites that are suspected of distributing illegal material, creating what some are calling the great firewall of the U.S.
The real problem with these policies is enforcement. In order for an ISP to protect copyright without a complaint based process, all network traffic would have to be monitored. This means every packet sent through your service provider would be reviewed, and the ISP would be accountable for ensuring that your communication is legal. This would obviously blow what little illusion of privacy online we have out of the water.
Any policy that is as embedded in technology as copyright policy is bound to have secondary effects and unintended consequences. From an information warfare and corporate competition perspective, imagine the denial of service opportunities some businesses would have if we create a mechanism that will allow a central authority to "shut down" sites on the Internet based on an accusation.
Follow Technorati