2008 Woodie Awards
Illini Media
WPGU
buzz
Illio
TechnographEditorial: Sharing isn't caring
By The Daily Illini Editorial Staff
Posted: 5/4/05 Section: Opinions
Last Wednesday, President Bush signed The Family Entertainment and Copyright Act, also known as the Artist's Rights and Theft Prevention Act (ART Act) into law. While the act takes significant strides toward punishing copyright violators and allowing for greater technological freedom for the entertainment industry, the law also threatens file-sharers with excessive punishments.
There are three significant parts to the act. The first makes using a camcorder to copy a film showing in a movie theater a felony. The second makes it a felony to distribute "pre-released" movies over the Internet. The third part allows for companies to produce products that allow users to use a device to play a movie in a "censored" format (i.e. skipping over scenes containing excessive violence and sexuality or omitting foul language).
The third part of the law should be praised for allowing parents and users greater control over the versions of movies they want themselves and their children to see, and the second part of the law is redundant because there are laws already preventing the recording of movies in theaters.
The area that concerns us is the punishment for distributing a pre-released film - that is, copies of movies that come out before the movie is formally released by the studio. Under the ART Act, putting a film online via a peer-to-peer (p2p) network such as Kazaa or BitTorrent can put away first-time offenders for up to three years in jail, plus additional fines - even if the movie was never downloaded once. Attempting to distribute a pre-released film for a commercial profit could result in a prison term of five years plus fines. Repeat offenses can range up to a 10-year sentence.
While copyright infringement is illegal and artists and producers should be paid for their work, we believe that these new penalties are excessive. Is it fair to take away an Internet user's right to vote just because he or she offered a copy of the next Tom Cruise summer blockbuster for download?
There are three significant parts to the act. The first makes using a camcorder to copy a film showing in a movie theater a felony. The second makes it a felony to distribute "pre-released" movies over the Internet. The third part allows for companies to produce products that allow users to use a device to play a movie in a "censored" format (i.e. skipping over scenes containing excessive violence and sexuality or omitting foul language).
The third part of the law should be praised for allowing parents and users greater control over the versions of movies they want themselves and their children to see, and the second part of the law is redundant because there are laws already preventing the recording of movies in theaters.
The area that concerns us is the punishment for distributing a pre-released film - that is, copies of movies that come out before the movie is formally released by the studio. Under the ART Act, putting a film online via a peer-to-peer (p2p) network such as Kazaa or BitTorrent can put away first-time offenders for up to three years in jail, plus additional fines - even if the movie was never downloaded once. Attempting to distribute a pre-released film for a commercial profit could result in a prison term of five years plus fines. Repeat offenses can range up to a 10-year sentence.
While copyright infringement is illegal and artists and producers should be paid for their work, we believe that these new penalties are excessive. Is it fair to take away an Internet user's right to vote just because he or she offered a copy of the next Tom Cruise summer blockbuster for download?
The Daily Illini encourages on-topic discussion through article commenting on its articles and blogs. It is our policy not to delete any comments based upon political or ideological point of view. However, we reserve the right to remove comments that are abusive, off-topic or use excessive foul language.
The posting of copyrighted material, including any and all content for which you are not the author, is illegal under Federal intellectual property laws. Such activity will not be tolerated. Comments containing copyrighted material will be removed, and continued violation of copyright law is grounds for being banned completely from commenting on DailyIllini.com.
If you feel any post meets these conditions or merits review, please e-mail our editors at meonline@dailyillini.com.