S.978 - Commercial Felony Streaming Act

A bill to amend the criminal penalty provision for criminal infringement of a copyright, and for other purposes. view all titles (2)

All Bill Titles

  • Official: A bill to amend the criminal penalty provision for criminal infringement of a copyright, and for other purposes. as introduced.
  • Popular: Commercial Felony Streaming Act as introduced.

This Bill currently has no wiki content. If you would like to create a wiki entry for this bill, please Login, and then select the wiki tab to create it.

Comments Feed

Displaying 91-120 of 227 total comments.

  • Ipsip 07/03/2011 12:56am

    Ok gamers plz com down and watch and tell others about this video it tells how this bill will nit hurt gaming!!! http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=x11s8trkFzM

  • Ipsip 07/03/2011 12:57am

    Will not" srry for grammar

  • bones446 07/03/2011 1:46am

    I don’t support this bill, because it makes no sense to me. Why should it be illegal? It should either be:

    A: Companies and directors decide what they want and besides the game companies and music videos get more views and more publicity.

    Or B: We tally it up and personally I think this bill will not succeed, because of gamers and people who support gaming. Maybe even Microsoft, Sony or Nintendo. Gaming companies can take a big part in this bill. I also think there are many people who don’t want to see on YouTube: no content has been found for your results or something to that effect. Please reply if you agree to my suggestions, and theories. Thanks.

  • bones446 07/03/2011 1:59am

    I have seen people type: “Will gamers suffer from this,” and it is a yes or no question. You see if gamers like to produce feelings toward a game or what they want to advertise or show you. I support a lot of gamers such as YouTubers like: ZackScottGames, AshleyScottGames, Rozzgaming, CACox97gaming, WingsofRedemption, WoodyGamerTag, WhiteBoy7thst, FPSRussia, and of course myself: thevideogames4ever. There are many more who put up minecraft videos also. I believe that Notch may be against this, and if not then he should be. Thanks.

  • bones446 07/03/2011 2:07am

    I have seen people say this in different words: "I support the bill, exceptfor the gaming part. I agree. Vevo may suffer though. No one should be putting up videos of movies or TV unless they are allowed to. Machinima may not be affected depending on allowance and copyright laws. Overall I agree with all except the gaming part.

  • bones446 07/03/2011 2:08am

    I have seen people say this in different words: "I support the bill, except for the gaming part. I agree. Vevo may suffer though. No one should be putting up videos of movies or TV unless they are allowed to. Machinima may not be affected depending on allowance and copyright laws. Overall I agree with all except the gaming part.

  • bones446 07/03/2011 2:09am

    I made a mistake in a comment.

  • bones446 07/03/2011 2:15am

    I may also state that I have seen people say sites will crash. Such as: IGN, YouTube, Machinima, and this bill will be posted everywhere, trust me. If these sites crash, half of the world or even more (about 50-75%) will be very angry at the people who have brought this bill up. I am angry also. I have signed up just for this. I have definitely opposed this bill.

  • Alucard 07/03/2011 2:31am

    i’m sorry is the government trying to piss gamers off? i mean there’s what about 1million gamers out there and out of all of the gamers i know majority of them eather stream or watch streams of games. if this law was to even pass they’d piss of a majority of the US population. kind of like how they’re trying to pass a new rating system in California

  • Alucard 07/03/2011 2:35am

    ok then what about the streaming of video games? how the hell does that make any sense what so ever. blizzard doesn’t stream any of there games at all. in fact teamliquid is a streaming community that streams starcraft 2 while holding tournaments that blizzard even post on there own game and website. explain how in fact this law can be justified.

  • zoback 07/03/2011 2:48am

    This bill in other words is ‘stupid’. This goverment should redo the bill. I mean it was a good idea that got out of hand. I can understand cracked games (Illegal games) and illegal download of songs and movies. But something like a video from youtube that is someone playing a game that they bought legally and what not is really stupid. I don’t think the goverment should control this. I think if the music company or the video game company should have a say. If they don’t want videos of there stuff on what ever website then fine. But the goverment shouldn’t really do anything about this. It’s the companies deal if they don’t want videos of whatever on the internet.

  • kenjis9965 07/03/2011 3:11am

    What about people who are doing reviews? Satire? Writing walkthroughs and other things that are covered under fair use, This bill turns those people into felons as well, What about people merely jerking around singing karaoke and then uploading a video of it on youtube? Those people are now felons as well

    Also you’re ignoring something, How many of those people listening to Halo on Youtube already purchased the song legally? How many are Beyonce fans who bought her merchandise, went to her concerts and etc? How many people went out and bought her album after listening to it on youtube? I dont know about you but Youtube has been a great aid to me in finding new bands for later purchase…Purchases those bands would NOT have gotten otherwise! And I’ve introduced bands to friends this way as well! Thats a marketing oppertunity, Artists should change and adapt to the technology, Not support legislation that stifles it…

  • kenjis9965 07/03/2011 3:13am

    @Zoback, The thing is for people who pirate copies of games and movies online you can already pursue legislation against them, This law is plain old stupid and useless, it serves no purpose except to create a lot of frivolous lawsuits against 13 year old twilight and justin bieber fans

  • sctartaglia 07/03/2011 3:59am

    This bill should not be past. I don’t think you guys are educated enough to know that most of this is good advertisement for these companies. If i want to buy a game i go to the internet and look at a review of it if they give good reviews i go and buy it. This will also waste more tax dollars trying to prosecute these people for streaming videos games. Please review this bill. I dont condone people actually pirating, but if the person actually bought the game to stream it on the internet, its good for that company. Lets not waste more money that we don’t have. DON’T PASS THIS BILL

  • noahcho 07/03/2011 4:33am

    Does this mean that artists on youtube won’t be able to make covers of copyrighted songs?

  • emrey35 07/03/2011 5:52am

    OK to the 10 people that support this What a shame that you support this. this law needs to be rewritten to say " for profit" why do you think youtube has become popular. this is just a way for the use government to violate our privacy. whay to turn communist. and what if the video is uploaded in another country does it make it illegal too. too brod of a bill to be passed. this is corupt politics. if this is signed, it means removing my covers that have gotton me half of my subscribers on youtube

  • asdasd123123 07/03/2011 6:52am

    AMERICA FUCK YOU!

  • Odin_the_Red 07/03/2011 9:34am

    Teen:I understand media such as movies and TV, but video games and even music require a much more in depth analysis: far more money would be lost preventing these forms of media from appearing on internet streams. If I’m not mistaken, far, far more adults and even children would end up in prison for innocently infringing on a stupid copyright. This would mean immediate prison overcrowding and taxpayer money down the drain, industries would shut down, the entrepreneurial music and video game sector would by crippled, people would be left without their jobs (professional streamers), whole school/businesses administrations would go to jail for spicing up the day… but why are we complaining about this when the whole country is piling up the biggest debt in recorded history, Greece is sinking into the sea, unstable countries have massive nuclear stockpiles and poverty/unemployment run far more rampant than previous years. If the US defaults, it will send the whole world into chaos.

  • jakemars 07/03/2011 10:38am

    If you steal a CD from a store, and get caught you’ll likely get a small fine and a misdomeanor something, not $2,500 or a felony… Bad government is bad.

  • RAVaught 07/03/2011 11:53am

    First, it is unreasonable to expect that any video or musical track that is played over open airwaves and freely viewed or listened to via the radio or television should not be freely viewed or listened to via the internet.

    Secondly, as long as the person is not making money off of a reproduction, to taking credit for the intellectual property of the artist, then the complaint is unwarranted. By this claim, you should be charged a felony for playing your favorite CD in your vehicle when four of your friends are in the car with you. You may have bought the CD, but they didn’t and so all five of you should be charged with felony crimes. You for disseminating copyrighted music in public(yes, your friends are public) and without the consent or royalties paid to the artist. Your friends should be charged for listening to the track without paying for it. There is no matter of degree here.

  • RAVaught 07/03/2011 12:14pm

    This bill is taking entirely the wrong approach to the issue. First, discovering music or other media through venues like youtube work as free advertising. Artist that otherwise might not get heard gain audience exposure without incurring the cost.

    Second, as long as people are not making money or taking credit for the copyrighted work, then what’s the concern. If you want your music to sell, make better music. Most people I know gladly pay for single songs that are good, regardless of where they heard them first.

    This bill is akin to saying that playing a CD in your car for four of your friends who have not purchased the CD should net five felony charges. One for public airing of copyrighted material and four for listening to it. Our prison and court systems simply can not handle any more of a burden than they already have. We are already near our national deficit ceiling and they are wanting to add more burdens to the national budget. Who do you think will pay for that?

  • newbienomsfewds 07/03/2011 12:21pm

    This is BULL. CRAP. Not everyone can buy music— a lot of us don’t have the money. (Yes, actually, not everyone has a dollar to spare on music.) In fact, YouTube is a way of FINDING MUSIC! Now it’s not just the fake musicians and all of those people ruining music— It’s the government! You CAN NOT do this! In the words of Christofer Drew Ingle “set the music free”! I mean, REALLY!? Another issue is the games! So what? Now cr1tiKaL is going to get arrested!? NO! You need to leave these people alone. If you aren’t making money off of someone else’s work, then it should be fine! Now, I am boycotting YouTube. I hope others will join me until this is gone for good. This is just another way the US government is taking away OUR RIGHTS and we are gladly GIVING THEM AWAY for the ILLUSION of safety. I am officially ticked off. Thank you, stupid freaking people. This is why I would rather be in Mexico than in America— at least they are somewhat honest about what’s going on down there.

  • teenagedirtbag 07/03/2011 12:42pm

    this entire bill is invalid.
    music is a freedom of speech to artists and emotions of others.
    for someone to seek relevance in a song, giving and acknowledging complete credit to the artist/composer, also the stating of “no intent of copyright infringement” being added, what is the controversial issue here?
    it’s like music is a crime now.
    shouldn’t our country be worried about bigger things like the legalization of marijuana (which should be legalized)?
    all natural things in this country are wrong.
    this is just ridiculous.

  • newbienomsfewds 07/03/2011 12:43pm

    Oh!! I almost forgot. We have enough people in prison! It costs more to put people in prison and feed them than it does to let them upload freaking videos! Ugh. I am irritated.

  • newbienomsfewds 07/03/2011 12:46pm

    okay, sorry, hate to be spamming here, but another thing is, YouTube is WHY I buy the music! I find the artist on YouTube, listen to their songs, and then, once I have the money, I buy the song so I can listen to it anywhere, with no need of internet.

  • Jeffman12 07/03/2011 1:24pm

    Youtube has ability to find which track is playing in videos and then adds link to the description to buy the song on iTunes, either that or the uploader does this. If a song is found in violation of an agreement with youtube, the audio is replaced.

    The thing about internet piracy is that there are three types of pirate. 1. Those who download because they can’t afford something but would pay if they could. A lot do when they can. 2. People who want to demo a product, determine if they like it to make informed decisions. They tend to delete whatever they downloaded once they obtain a legitimate copy or find themselves dissatisfied. 3. Those who never planned on buying the product and won’t, regardless.

    Nothing can be done about group 3, this bill may make some think twice, but won’t stop a thing. It’s stupid to target them anyways, don’t represent significant loss of revenue. This just makes the taxpayers have to pay for the legal process and added incarceration instead of companies.

  • Longhorn1919 07/03/2011 4:04pm

    Frankly, It’s ridiculous. Major Movie companies proposed this bill to basically acquire more money, which is understandable. However, they don’t need it. And even if, it should be separated from YouTube etc. because music companies have YouTube channels, Vevo, which is a major youtube channel, is paid through the YouTube partnership program and then pays the artist. Also certain artists have their own channel as well like Deadmau5 and Skrillex. It’s an unnecessary bill that would take away jobs from hardworking people and give more money to large corporations. It’s a waste of time and resources. They need to go back to fixing the economy.

  • Kirk007 07/03/2011 4:38pm

    This bill is down right criminal yes lets punish someone who streamed a video or showed a video game worse then a rapist or drug dealer.
    I looked at the money trail and it’s down right sicking and any congress person should be ashamed of themselves to be supporting such an awful bill backed by corporate payoffs.
    Personally I feel internet copyright violations should not even be criminal matter they should only be a civil case.
    This bill must be blocked not only is it unfair and opressive it’s down right embarrassing.

  • Kirk007 07/03/2011 4:52pm

    Bullsh— they have not lost a cent to you tube and if they have it should not be a felony nor should it be a criminal matter at all.
    If they have a problem with it it should be a civil case prison should be reserved for real criminals.
    Anyone who supports a bill like this should be ashamed of themselves.

  • Kirk007 07/03/2011 4:54pm

    I could not agree more with that statement.


Vote on This Bill

1% Users Support Bill

25 in favor / 2101 opposed
 

Send Your Senator a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments