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 181-210 of 227 total comments.

Curt93 07/02/2011 4:14am

see book, 1984, i call it a first hand look on communism. seeing author george orwell did base it on communism.

Bill978Sucks 07/06/2011 7:21pm

TRU DAT THIS BILL IS WAY TO STRICT THESE RICH ASS COCKS WILL NOT TAKE AWAY OUR GAMEPLAY COMMENTARIES AND MONTAGES

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

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 10/31/2011 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.

Spam Comment

Spam Comment

redvsbluefan 07/10/2011 11:45pm

this bill is a black eye to fans of video games and there developers everywhere. people of popular channels of youtube like machinima and website like rooster teeth will lose there jobs and houses because some one wants money

when Rooster Teeth first became famous, bungie, who created the game known as halo, (which is what Red vs Blue uses and based off of for there show) said its alright to use halo and all its likenesses to make capital and thrive off it. isnt that enough! no it isnt because some one wants there money in there pockets and give every fan a big “screw off”

you cant say that only now after the fact that you can say “no” after things like walkthroughs, parodies (like Brentalfloss), speed runs, and most of all machinimas like Freemans Mind and RvB have been on the internet for years

they are cultural phenomenons and the government doesnt care. shame on them.

thank you for your time

Spam Comment

s978opposer 07/05/2011 3:21am

I’m adding onto my previous comment.
Think of the economical downsides to this bill. People would lose their jobs. WHOLE COMPANIES would be shut down. Machinima, IGN, and many others would lose their jobs. Think of the unemployment now, and think of it after a few more thousand or a couple dozen of thousands lose their jobs and have no way of finding a job, due to them being scoured and leeched dry by others who beat them to it? Think of all the advertising people would lose and MORE people would lose their jobs. Video Game creators, musicians, artists, even actors and performers. This act is sickening to my mind. This could trigger even worse of an economical breakdown than is going on right now. We need to FIX the economy! Not break it more! People WILL physically react. I know several people who claim to react violently or by leaving the country, or other things if this bill passes. Their jobs? Gone. Their entertainment? Gone with it. Their hope for America’s future? Gone with it.

crazyalan1988 08/04/2011 11:56am

This bill could stop people from posting youtube videos of a lot of things, which would include things like independent games. That would be a major blow to those independant game developers, like Mojang’s Minecraft, where that is one of the strongest way that they advertise. Meanwhile, it sounds like if you even have a small clip of copyrighted video or material in your stream, it could hit you even with that. I don’t see what they are trying to accomplish except to stop people from illegally posting movies or shows that are supposed to be paid to be shown. What needs to happen with this bill is that it needs to become more focused, and not set up to cause half of youtube’s videos to become felonious.

kenjis9965 07/03/2011 12:29am

Agreed with this 100%

jakethesnake22 07/02/2011 12:16pm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hytigOSjJxc please listen to what he has to say he makes soe very good points

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.”

DustTiger 07/06/2011 1:19pm

Many people will suffer if this bill is passed. Some people make a living off of what this bill prevents.

XxIDTIBxX 07/01/2011 4:21pm

PREACH… I AGREE

wwpmmedianet 10/21/2011 9:03pm

This is nothing more than promoting the 1% of this country.

I am one of these Internet broadcasters who believe we pay too much in broadcast royalties as it is. We should be paying less, not more. If this bill is passed, the new media industry will die. Internet broadcasters will only be able to play music from independent bands and listeners will complain about a lack of variety.

This is NOT the era of AM/FM radio. That died years ago with Internet podcasting and Internet broadcast stations launched. We started our stations to get away from censorship and we pay more than our fair share to be legal. We shouldn’t be punished for this.

It’s another opportunity to screw over small businesses and the 99%.

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.

Norseman055 10/25/2011 8:47pm
in reply to athenaboggs Oct 25, 2011 7:56pm

what, you mean the few thousand donated against the bill doesnt match a single million dollar donation by a LAW FIRM? explain what law firms stand to gain from this other than a.) assisting in tightening the copyright laws, and b.) making a crap ton of money from prosecuting the cases for music firms as soon as it passes and thousands of people are put on trial for felonious charges?

Norseman055 10/25/2011 8:48pm
in reply to athenaboggs Oct 25, 2011 7:56pm

btw, i was agreeing with you. didnt mean to sound so aggresively against your idea, i think youre on the right track.

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.

Moderated Comment

lneves 10/24/2011 5:48pm

that still makes it the wrong approach

Moderated Comment

bones446 10/28/2011 10:42pm

Oppose it PEOPLEZ!

NathanKButh 07/05/2011 7:06am

this wouldn’t even cut down piracy, most people who download music illegally do not use youtube, they use torrents. well i sent a good paragraph to senator amy klobuchar and i hope she reads it. i recommend that anybody else against this does the same, but please be intelligent about it so that it actually helps.

jarm2608 07/05/2011 2:00am

Not only I’m disgusted at seeing this kind of bill, I am furious over seeing such a ridiculous proposal! Five years in prison for this?!! Aren’t the prisons over crowded enough and now they want them filled with people who uploaded the wrong song on a video!!? I got a better idea, how about putting any congressman out of office who even has the audacity to vote for this bill!? There is no justifiable excuse for this since it would ruin online companies and individuals who are barely trying to earn a living in this recession. It would obliterate anyone just trying to get a foot in the door to making a better life then you want throw them in prison over it? That’s sickening! I am totally against this bill! Highly unfair and too strict, congress really needs to rethink this one! 50,000 online radio stations were swept away at least five years ago over a similar law and it hurt a lot of people. ENOUGH!! Dinosaur corporations hurting people to keep the status quo! Follow the money!

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)

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!


Vote on This Bill

1% Users Support Bill

25 in favor / 2102 opposed
 

Send Your Senator a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments