Germany Accepts Strict Piracy Law 478
A beautiful mind writes "The TimesOnline is reporting that Germany has accepted a new piracy law, currently the toughest in Europe, which comes into effect on January 1, 2007. From the article: 'Germans risk two years in prison if they illegally download films and music for private use under a new law agreed yesterday. Anybody who downloads films for commercial use could be jailed for up to five years.' Many politicians defended the new law, amongst them Günther Krings, the Christian Democrat legal affairs spokesman, who claimed: 'There should be no legal distinction between stealing chewing gum from a shop and performing an illegal download.'"
Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Privacy (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:AAAaaarrrghh! (Score:2, Insightful)
Why would I "pirate" something, you couldn't PAY me to see!
Correction (Score:3, Insightful)
And dont be suprsied if we dont get those laws here in the US, or worse... Remember the WTO? They will mandate all other members follow suit.
Re:Wow (Score:4, Insightful)
It just shows how ineffective and out of context the lobbied laws are.
real street crime hurts society, wheras "pirating" is more or less socially acceptable. (at least alot more than shoplifting)
Re:well, if that's what you do to gum thieves (Score:5, Insightful)
Prohibition? (Score:3, Insightful)
If you overstep your bounds against the populace, you'll find that, while they might stretch at first, they will soon 'spring back' and you'll find yourself in a worse position than before.
Re:This is not justice (Score:2, Insightful)
Is entertainment a necessary good and/or service in your mind?
Is this 'group of thieves' (who produces and sells entertainment, that apparently you believe is a necessity) morally worse than people who infringe upon their rights? Is this infringement done in the name of good in your mind?
What is just about taking the results of someone's hard labor and giving them nothing in return for it?
I anxiously await your answers.
germany's copyright laws have been privatized (Score:5, Insightful)
Many people believe that this is due to corruption, it can no longer be attributed to "goodwill" towards the industry and stupidity alone. In any case, it goes way beyond being irresponsible and neglecting the government's duty to take care of its citizens and the long-term effect of this will be civil disobedience and loss of respect for laws in general.
When lawmakers suffer from future shock (Score:3, Insightful)
That is outrageous! (Score:3, Insightful)
Most popular music out today isn't even worth a stick of chewing gum!
Re:AAAaaarrrghh! (Score:3, Insightful)
That's the whole problem - people feel that a lot of the stuff out there isn't worth the asking price. The "asking price", for a couple, is a LOT more than the ticket price ... and it doesn't help that the theatres don't make any money on the screening itself, so they have to gouge on the food concessions.
Lower the price to $5 a head, give half to the theatre so they can charge reasonable prices for eats, and make it up in volume. So Jim Carey won't get $20 million for his next movie unless its really good. The solution to THAT problem is obvious - make better movies.
Re:well, if that's what you do to gum thieves (Score:5, Insightful)
Insanitiy and Stupidity and the lawmaking process (Score:3, Insightful)
Brigitte Zypries said it right there though: She can't be bothered bugging the decision boards with such minor details as seperating IP control and access/market control and thus doesn't care about the effects. Politicians have other things to worry about - like the deficit. When asked if it where a proactive DRM circumvention if copying a CD on PC Linux (where current DRM is unaffective) she said something like "Well, in that case I would say, sort of, that if DRM is unaffective it's not there so it's no circumvention in this case."
It boils down to the courtroom again, where it's up to the judge to introduce sanity into the process again. I understand there are some US judges that have ruled the DMCA as unapplicable in some cases, as it's against the american constitution.
Goes to show what we all should never forget: Laws are made by humans and should be subject to perpetual scrunity.
Re:well, if that's what you do to gum thieves (Score:4, Insightful)
Still, those people who do murder someone should be jailed and it costs a lot of money. Thus, cost can't be a factor in prison sentences. If not cost, then what?
Justice. It is why this law in Germany is so bad - because it is not just.
Re:well, if that's what you do to gum thieves (Score:1, Insightful)
If you are on probation.
Piracy: max. 2 years
Rape: max. 5 years
Obviously, women are now worth twice as much as DVDs.
Like in most countries, charges are dropped by the state attorney if it's a small offense (shoplifting of small items)
Re:well, if that's what you do to gum thieves (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is that it won't be enforced (Score:5, Insightful)
By sneaking in these laws, they prosecute one or two people in the country every now and then. The laws stay in place, people don't care about them because they figure it "won't happen to them", and the movie/music companies are able to bribe politicians into creating even more ridiculous laws.
If only they would attempt to enforce this law en-masse, they would end up with at least 10% (probably more) of the population in jail. Then people would start caring about this and everything would be set right.
Instead, they're going to slowly introduce even worse laws, but only prosecute a tiny percentage of the population. It is an unfortunate situation.
Re:well, if that's what you do to gum thieves (Score:5, Insightful)
The original statement said it costs more to jail someone than the DVD is worth.
It did not say it costs more to jail someone than it costs to DOWNLOAD a DVD.
Punishment should be DIRECTLY related to the cost/impact of he crime.
Re:Reality check (Score:1, Insightful)
This of course assumes that every law is just. So you never think about whether this whole intellectual property business is good for a society as a whole? Politicians must love you.
Re:This is not justice (Score:2, Insightful)
Thanks for replying in a rhetorically bankrupt fashion in an attempt to bolster a point that wasn't even related to mine. Hijacking legitimate questions does work against lesser minds. It doesn't work against me. In general, it doesn't work on Slashdot. Go troll Digg with that crap.
Re:Reality check (Score:1, Insightful)
As RMS pointed out, anyone who uses the term intellectual property is either confussed or trying to confuse people. The prase "Itellectual Property" is a blanket that encompasses copyright law and patents, and it also pervays this idea of ownship of ideas. Copyrights are very different from patents, and the two should never be lumped together. Intellectual Property also perpetuates a concept that ideas can be owned. That if two people come-up on the same idea it "belongs" to whoever gets there first, regardless of if any 'copying' actually took place. How can you own an idea, anyhow? It's not a phyical thing. If I give the idea to you, I still have it; unlike a physical product (say, beer).
That isn't to say that I disagree with Copyright. I believe that Copyright is needed; but, the current system is broken. Patents, on the other hand, don't make sense for software.
Re:well, if that's what you do to gum thieves (Score:2, Insightful)
Even cooler, in California you can get 25 to life. Did you have any specific point?
Re:Same as stealing chewing gum? (Score:1, Insightful)
If you aren't willing to pay the asking price, do without but don't try to justify theft by playing logic games. The creator of the work went to the expense of creating it with an expectation of being compensated by those who enjoy the work. If you enjoy the work (that is it has value to you), you should be willing to pay for it. If you aren't willing to pay for such entertainment, stick with what is legally available for free.
my wages havent increased 12% yearly... (Score:4, Insightful)
Since my wages havent increased 12% yearly over the last 10 years like many govt people, I hereby
like to claim a 'stolen' amount of cash of $100,000 . The corporates who earned massive returns
have the cash, I would like to see them locked up and my cash returned, because in an infaltion economy
everyone DESERVES inflated revenue, even if their business models are crap.
So wheres my tax discounts eh?
Re:well, if that's what you do to gum thieves (Score:4, Insightful)
Overkill (Score:3, Insightful)
Even from the other side of the equation it makes no sense at all. I've spent the last couple of years or so working on some games [eveparadox.com]. This is my baby, the result of me working my ass off. The thought of someone depriving me of potential income by downloading a cracked copy does make my blood boil. An appropriate consequence of them getting busted with it? Compensation for the loss, yes. Some sort of fine or community service, yes. But jail time? For duplication of an entertainment product!? You can't be freaking serious.
This is greed, pure and simple. Perhaps a demonstration of a massively overinflated sense of self importance (defy our will eh?.. off to jail with you, consumer!). It is also a demonstration of the very, very dangerous consequences of letting a powerful lobbying organisation get their way with the laws. I hope this doesn't remain on the books for long.
PS. Copyright infringement has never been, and will never be, theft. The former deprives someone of potential future income, and the latter deprives someone of something material immediately. Equating copyright infringement with the forced boarding, theft and murder of a ship at sea is an arrogant and flawed analogy.
Rant off.
Levy should be repealed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:well, if that's what you do to gum thieves (Score:3, Insightful)
Tell a man about a new band, he'll know another band. Teach a man how to discover new bands, he'll discover new bands for a lifetime.
Music sharing is also the ability to know what you may want to buy before you actually buy it, it's the ability to make informed choices about buying the first CD of that little band that isn't aired on TV or radio instead of buying the current top album with a crappy single and 7 even crappier other tracks that get all the air time.
Considering that... (Score:3, Insightful)
Go ahead, take a year off. Other people will gladly step up that don't have contracts that seem to love what they do and are actually GOOD and produce something worth listening to/watching for a change.
Re:well, if that's what you do to gum thieves (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Germany's Nazi past rearing its head again (Score:1, Insightful)
There is no sense or debate in the government that this may have a chilling effect on free speech or be used for selective enforcement.
In increasingly technocratic societies, you will find that (for better or worse) that more laws are needed. As a result, the legal system becomes insanely complex and it becomes so to such an extent that its hard not to break a law doing something in everyday life. Richard Nixon used the IRS and its insanely complex tax code to scrutinize his political enemies. And, as long as laws exist, its pretty hard to stop selective enforcement.
However, I fail to see how this law specifically, on its own, significantly contributes to the detriment of free speech.
If you want to talk about German laws that stifle free speech and expression, just look at their laws against untolerable political opinions such as neo-Nazism or holocaust revisionism. Laws exist to specifically FORBID these kinds of speech yet I do not see you or anyone else here speaking out about those on a regular basis.
And, make no mistake about it, while in the US, laws like this may be on the books as a deterrent and rarely enforced or even effectively invalidated by the courts, the German legal system will enforce them regularly.
Says who? The DMCA gets enforced pretty regularly. Our drug laws are enforced very strongly. California (and others?) even have the "three strikes" law - three felonies and you get life in prison.
I'm glad the German military has been defanged to the point where that nation can't impose its blind sense of order and trust in authority on other nations. Unfortunately, the legal precedent that this sets will probably still harm people in other nations.
Everyhing works best when other nations do not diddle in the affairs of others, regardless of their domestic policies. I really don't see how German law affects law elsewhere.
Re:well, if that's what you do to gum thieves (Score:4, Insightful)
No it shouldn't. That's why we have murder and manslaughter. In both places the victim ends up dead, but the pushisment is different, and rightly so.
Re:well, if that's what you do to gum thieves (Score:4, Insightful)
Someone else has already pointed out the murder/manslaughter distinction, so I'll leave that. There are other distinctions too, where the end result is the same but the exact circumstances of the crime can make a large difference to the punishment.
Even ignoring that, however, there's another factor that can greatly increase the punishment - the perceived ease of commiting the offence and likelyhood of getting away with it. If it's seen as not really being of any consequence, and is hard to detect and prosecute people, you're going to get more people thinking "why not?" and doing it. To help combat that, you make the punishment harsh; the theory being that people will think "I probably won't get caught, but if I do... it's not worth it". That's part of the reason why these laws all have such stupidly high penalties. It's not just the companies lobbying for unrealistic punishments, it's meant to bea deterrent too.
Re:well, if that's what you do to gum thieves (Score:3, Insightful)
These statistics make more sense if you approach them from a CDs per household point of view. Married people very often share things like CDs.
Germany actually used to 'export' CDs from their retail industry: many Swiss and Dutch used to buy CDs in Germany because they are cheaper there. I can imagine this market has largely disappeared because of P2P technology and integration of the European market.
I guess not that Germany is a completely a western country, they must learn that the best way to grow a bussiness is to supply products the people want. And, of course, if artificial barriers are erected to try to force consumers to buy stuff they don't want, then those consumers will just find another way to get they stuff they do.
Considering that Germany is the biggest exporter of the world, and that music and film is one of the sectors where they are relatively unsuccesful and foreign (read:American) products dominate the home market, I really fail to see your point.
If the Germans had a protectionist inclination they would not help the American entertainment industry to collect their money in Germany by discouraging piracy. They would instead legalize piracy and use the (higher) fee collected on blank media to subsidize their own entertainment industry exclusively.
European countries should have much less worries about piracy than the US if they approach it from a strictly economic protectionist point of view. The English language market always proportionally suffers the most from piracy, because of:
- economy of scale: finding an uploader of the thing you want is the easiest in the biggest market.
- lack of empathy: artists in smaller language markets make less money, even if they are equally successful in the smaller market. People are more inclined to pay for the CD of an artist that speaks your language, regularly appears on your TV, and is not filty rich.
Legalizing piracy probably increases the market share of the non-English entertainment industry in many countries.
Re:Ask a librarian. (Score:3, Insightful)
Let me counter-propose another VERY common scenario:
What we don't realize, is that his kid found the movie on the shelf at his house, ripped a copy, and uploaded it to the 'Net for thousands of others to download and enjoy, for free.
Who is the violator here? Who gets the bill when the MPAA comes-a-calling? Who broke the law?
This kind of sitation happens a LOT more than people realize, with not just movies, but music and software as well. Sure, my friend's kid is truly the violator, but since he never "owned" the movie to begin with, and I never broke the law by loaning it to him (only 1 copy in circulation at once), and my friend wasn't an accomplice to the infringement, where do the fingers point?
Right, back to me.. because I legally bought it and loaned it to him to watch.
I can't control what people do within the confines of their own homes, nor do I care to. I don't police them, and I don't expect them to police me.