Like me, you may have noticed an ad in your local paper this week from the Motion Picture Association of America. Lawsuits against those who illegally traffic in movies on the Internet begin this week, it warns. But I was particularly taken with the statement at the bottom of the ad saying that pursuant to the Copyright Act, "statutory damages can be as much as $30,000 per motion picture, and up to $150,000 per motion picture if infringement is willful."
So does that mean inadvertent infringement can cost you $30,000? Well, hey, I guess we can take the MPAA's word for what the law says. After all, given the craven way Democrat and Republican politicians alike greedily line up to feed at the trough of the Hollywood's lobbyists, you can bet the law says exactly what the MPAA wants it to say on this issue.
But that leads me to wonder. As many observers have pointed out, peer-to-peer file sharing of movies is not actually a serious problem yet, because very few people have the patience and the bandwidth required to download even one film. So when the day does come that movies can be shared in an instant, what kind of laws we can expect the MPAA to dictate to our political leaders then? Allow me to pull out my crystal ball and offer this view into the future:
"Members of the jury, it is my sad duty today to now present the closing arguments in the prosecution's case against the defendant you know as Ms. X. I say it's sad because we all hoped that the passage of new copyright statutes last year -- popularly known as the Maintaining Mickey Mouse Mandates Act of 2010 -- would sufficiently deter crimes of this nature. As we have seen in this court, that unfortunately did not prove to the case with Ms X.
"The facts here are not in dispute. On or about a week ago last Sunday, Ms. X did willfully and illegally obtain on the Internet a pirated copy of the 2008 cartoon feature 'Cinderalla Meets the Little Mermaid.' You heard the government's expert witnesses testify that secret detection technology indicated the film was indeed subsequently played on her television set. And you heard the defendant herself freely confess that she and she alone was involved in this heinous crime.
"Naturally, some of you might suspect one or all of her three children were themselves willful participants, and that she confessed to keep her children from being the ones sitting before you today. It's true that under the MMMM Act, age is no excuse. But it also specifies that parents also bear full responsibility for any act of copyright infringement committed by their children just as if they had willfully committed the crime themselves. This court, in its infinite mercy, has chosen to accept her confession, and therefore so should you.
"As this is one of the first prosecutions under the MMMM Act, you may also not understand why the defendant is not represented by counsel. Let me just assure you that the intent of Congress in this respect was very clear. Movie piracy is a crime that threatens the very fabric of American society. There can be no defense.
"Finally, I know even the most hard-hearted of you might feel the state is going little too far in asking for the death penalty in this case. But under the MMMM Act, we in fact have no choice. If the infringement is willful, it is a capital offense.
"Members of the jury, I have every confidence that you will do your duty. And that's not only because of the fact that, if you don't, things might get a little more uncomfortable for you in your own cells. So in the matter of Ms. X versus the special U.S. prosecutorial district for Anti-Copyright-Terrorism in Guantanamo Bay, I ask you to return the only verdict you are allowed to render. Guilty as charged."
Read and post comments about this story here.
11:16:09 AM 
|
|
