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 1-30 of 227 total comments.

Spam Comment

Spam Comment

CurtisNeeley 01/25/2012 8:49pm

Internet wire communications users think these bills needed to be passed to work. SCOTUS ruled the Berne Convention selected by Congress in 1994 is the authority on copy[rites] and ruled this constitutional and not disturbing free speech or anything else. See Golan v Holder, (10-545)

p12 REPLY BRIEF <<<<

“3. The sweeping international impact of this case will, no doubt, require further consideration of the relevant issues but several factual issues will require trial. The Supreme Court will eventually be faced with requiring wire communications disguised as the Internet to be regulated by the FCC. This injunctive relief requested currently from the Eighth Circuit will, in fact, increase the Free Speech nature of wire communications as well as making wire communications more internationally accessible.”

super31jake 01/23/2012 2:02am

if this bill had gone unoticed and been passed, then i wouldn’t be able to watch my little pony. and if if the government made it illegal for me to watch my little pony, then i’d go march to the capital and do things make che guevera look like a quiet hippy with a picket sign. nobody gets in the way of my ponies, especially not the government.

CurtisNeeley 01/06/2012 7:46pm
in reply to abbeyroad119 Nov 28, 2011 7:46pm

“this is only protecting the artist/creator.” – - ?

The Copy[rite] Act has never protected author or inventor rights as is specified in the Constitution.

I have filed in the Eighth Circuit and asked it be recognized as unconstitutional and DEMANDED the FCC regulate wire communications called “the Internet for disguise.
Pending before the judges since Sept 19, 2011.

PDF APPELLANT BRIEF (56 pages)
PDF APPELLEE BRIEF OF NAMEMEDIA INC (19 pages)
PDF APPELLEE BRIEF OF Google Inc (14 pages)
PDF APPELLANT REPLY BRIEF PDF (16 pages)

CurtisNeeley 01/06/2012 7:30pm

Making downloading a felony will HALT illegal downloading after the first 10-20 unsuspecting people like you are sent to prison without internet for five years!

Punishing crimes worked to get rid of drugs, rape, and murder already and will end illegal downloading much quicker!

shortlittlerebel 01/06/2012 2:50pm
in reply to tonygottlieb Jun 23, 2011 7:42am

Agreed. Take this in combination with the new Internet Piracy act (ie, internet takeover) bill and what you get is not only the government (actually one guy: Eric Holder)‘s ability to limit or delete websites & info. deemed ’piracy’ with no requirement of any proof. After they take your information or site down for unproven ‘piracy’, I guess they will use this bill to throw you in jail for five years as well. Be very, very careful Americans. These bills sound great on the outside, but they are full of treachery. Stay informed and vote smart. Don’t do the knee jerk reaction. Always ask yourself, “Who wins with this?” Never think politicians do anything unless they get something out of it.

Spam Comment

Spam Comment

Spam Comment

abbeyroad119 11/28/2011 7:46pm
in reply to DMSlayer Nov 23, 2011 12:33am

The original copyright law lacked enforcement ergo this bill had to be put in place. This bill is not a snowball effect on censorship and freedom of speech this is only protecting the artist/creator.

DMSlayer 11/23/2011 12:33am

You have any idea how many people this will effect, and not meaning for direct pirating, Just circumstance issues…

It’s one thing if people are making revenue due to these infringements, However those laws are already in place. This Bill needs to be torn up and trashed.

Spam Comment

Chunmeista 11/17/2011 3:47am
in reply to Chunmeista Nov 17, 2011 3:45am

Nevermind, Google has NOT opposed this bill, but has opposed another bill that pretty much deals with the same thing. You get my point.

Chunmeista 11/17/2011 3:45am

As shown, Google opposes this bill. Enough said there.

I can imagine the Internet as a nation in itself. Its citizenship includes millions, even billions of people from countries across the world. On the internet, people decide what is right and wrong, be it voicing their opinions, or even liking or disliking a comment. It’s simple and true democracy, at its finest. As such, the Internet has an efficient form of self government, where everyone can vote.

If any nation attempts to censor the internet, I’d say it’s comparable to an act of aggression on another country.

The Internet is the one true “land of the free and home of the brave,” where the citizens of the world can freely express their ideas and opinions. Let’s keep it that way!

Ajscott123 11/16/2011 10:34am
in reply to greatumpire83 Jun 17, 2011 2:15pm

So how would it be fixed? Is it as simple as the bill being revised for more specificity, and if so, how should it be revised? Or is it too small to warrant revisions?

molonlabe 11/04/2011 7:56pm
in reply to ScottCorner Jun 16, 2011 5:33pm

Are you against radio stations too. What about libraries?

You seem to feel that listening to copyrighted songs on youtube is immoral. Yet you admitting doing it. Are you supporting this bill so that the government will save you from hypocrisy?

SuperAelita 11/01/2011 7:26pm
in reply to ScottCorner Jun 16, 2011 5:33pm

Not all of us are satisfied just making home movies – there are a lot of serious YouTubers who are upset by this. It is actually very hard to avoid copyright. (Even the “Happy Birthday” song is copyrighted!) If this is passed, I would be in jail because of background music/sound effects in my vlogs. And I’m still in high school!

DuncanW02 10/31/2011 10:35pm
in reply to greatumpire83 Jun 17, 2011 2:26pm

I also think that the music industry has taken a wrong term, that all big label companies care about is profits, not quality. I think if an artist really cared about the music they were producing, they wouldn’t care about money. They would only care about getting their music spread far and wide.

abbeyroad119 10/31/2011 9:58am
in reply to Singtome Oct 31, 2011 4:49am

Why don’t people understand that you can secure the rights to cover a song. Ever see the disclaimer notice before a football game, it says “This copyrighted broadcast is the property of the National Football League. Any rebroadcast or reproduction without the consent of the NFL is strictly prohibited.” The music business should work the same way.

Singtome 10/31/2011 4:49am

Since the greedy music business won’t ever listen to “heart” talk lets look at this financially. Lets say this bill was in place before Justin Beiber, there would be a lot of money lost to that because he didn’t just get famous from making his own songs, he got it from doing a cover. When he got famous all you corporate types got income. But if this bill was in place before Beiber than you would have gotten nothing. You are silencing those in America…wait a second what happened to free speech? Your not Americans, we are proud and free. You communists just want to put these laws up to prevent us from having a voice and to gain money cause you have no vision for tomorrow. whats next? Are you going to behead me for thinking differently? You have no right to be in this country so get out I hear China calling for you. As for the people leading this country you have enough on your plate trying to get this country back into its rightful place as number 1.

abbeyroad119 10/30/2011 7:41pm
in reply to MopeyJoe Jul 05, 2011 9:42am

I don’t usually resort to nitpicking on inaccurate statements because i just disregard what they say involving that statement but in this case i will. Twinkle twinkle little star is written by Mozart and is listed as public domain.

abbeyroad119 10/30/2011 7:11pm

I support this bill because it gives credit to where credit belongs. Replication of copyrighted material involves people going through hoops, I know some of them are rediculous but by doing so, they give credit to the original thought. I just wish people would realize that there is work involved to get ahead in life, like jumping through the legal hoops in between point a and point b. So please, could people think about an issue from another point of view other than their own.

bones446 10/28/2011 10:42pm

Oppose it PEOPLEZ!

thunderchild 10/27/2011 9:09pm

I signed up to comment on just this bill, so how’s that for how much I hate it? YouTube is a US company, yet it has users from all over the world. How do you think they’ll feel when the US says they can’t post the video because of one of their laws even if the person is in Germany? I can see no good in this. Basically, this bill will turn the United States into an uncreative cesspool of poverty, destruction, and no innovation. I have seen so many extremely talented people make covers of songs or make fan films for Star Trek or Portal, and these will be shoved under the boot of the government!!! I’ll bet the sponsors have never even heard of Machinima, let alone VEVO or anything else. I have also seen cool music videos that use footage from copyrighted works, but only snippets, put to copyrighted songs. Is that wrong? This bill is another step towards communism, and anyone who knows anything can see what has happened to commie countries! (Russia, anyone?)

thunderchild 10/27/2011 8:42pm

This bill is just wrong. First of all, doesn’t the federal government have more pressing matters to deal with than this? They’re wasting their time and money for something that is already being addressed. I don’t approve of streaming movies and TV shows on YouTube, but video game footage, music videos, and anything else copyrighted? This is not right. The only industries being hurt are the film and TV, while the video game and music industries prosper. Someone sees a Portal 2 Let’s Play, they like it, they go out and buy the game. Bing! Valve just made $30. Someone watches a music video someone made with shots from Star Trek DS9 to the song “Europa” by Globus, they buy the song on iTunes and go out and buy the sixth season of DS9! Besides, YouTube already has an anti-piracy system, and companies can also ask them to take a video down. This is a classic example of the government poking its nose into other people’s business and hurting more than they’re helping!

perpl3x3d 10/27/2011 7:43am

Before you propose a bill to “attempt” to eliminate copyrighted works from being streamed by scaring individuals from uploading them, you should do your homework.

Instead of deterring people from continuing to stream, you are forcing them to become more anonymous about how they go about uploading. This will not affect the number of music/video available for streaming

So I essentially see the same thing happening with or without this bill being passed. YouTube takes down the copyrighted videos via copyright holder request. Just like they’ve been doing for years. Maybe 1 or 2 people will be the scapegoat, but this bill will NOT be effective in any manner.

Go home, do your homework, and come back with something reasonable, reliable, and non-intrusive of basic freedoms.

perpl3x3d 10/27/2011 7:29am

This bill is pointless. Even if it were to be passed, then instead of user accounts with multiple videos, you’ll have multiple anonymous accounts uploading and streaming just as if this bill wasn’t even passed. I’m sure YouTube isn’t too excited for this bill, it just means a hell of a lot more work for them.

Stop wasting your time, this bill is so corporate-minded it’s not even funny.

6AWoolen 10/26/2011 12:11am
in reply to greatumpire83 Jun 17, 2011 2:15pm

to add tot that, theres really no loss in revenue for the youtube views, because the video is making money FROM the views and ads

Moderated Comment


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