Live data from Hacker News

Tillis Releases Text of Bipartisan Legislation to Fight Illegal Streaming

tillis.senate.gov

461–470 of 509 posts

Re: Tillis Releases Text of Bipartisan Legislation to Fight Illegal Streaming

#461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> what business does any of this have in a Coronavirus relief bill? We didn’t have a coronavirus relief bill until yesterday. Bridging votes is part of policy negotiation.

5,500 pages of bridging votes? A bill that's so large that people literally don't have the ability to read it before they vote on it? Policy negotiations are normal. This is not normal. I mean, heck, why bring up separate bills in Congress at all? Let's put off all legislation for the entire year and then we'll pass everything as one bill when it comes time for the spending bill. We don't even need to meet during the…

> 5,500 pages of bridging votes?

I'm not defending omnibus bills here nor was I above. I was defending pork. Even small bills are susceptible to legislation unrelated to the headline title sneaking in. That isn't always a bad thing.

> there are obvious lines we can cross where there's no reason for a bill to be so bloated and discordant

Conciseness takes work. Messes are easy. Rushed bills are heavy because the work of whittling it down hasn't been done.

In this case, I happened to be close to a senior Senate staffer as this bill was getting wrapped up. The way it works is each team takes a section and masters it. Tracks it from start to finish, keeps tabs on interested and affected parties, and reaches out to experts for clarification where necessary. This gets compiled into notes for senior staffers who distill it into policy and negotiating points for the elected. When I asked detailed question about the bill, knowledgeable answers came back within minutes. There is no Gell-Mann amnesia, at least not on this Senator's team. Anybody claiming they didn't have time to review the legislation is lying, unprepared or incompetent.

I agree something is given up by not having any single person with complete knowledge of the bill. But in a crisis, you don't have a choice between a concise non-existent bill and the hodgepodge. It's between the uncased sausage and going hungry. This was a self-inflicted crisis. There were months to do what was pushed against a deadline. In that, I find institutional failing. But given the deadline and the process, a big bill with some junk in it is not a bad outcome.

Re: Tillis Releases Text of Bipartisan Legislation to Fight Illegal Streaming

#462
post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but the claim being made was that this is a crime. In many places there are two types of law civil and criminal. In the US copyright infringement is unlawful but it's almost always civil law.

The DMCA has both civil and criminal penalties. The criminal penalties include fines and jail time.

Yes, but again: why is this criminal and not civil infringement?

Can you point to the section of DMCA that you think turns this into a criminal offence rather than just civil infringement?

Re: Tillis Releases Text of Bipartisan Legislation to Fight Illegal Streaming

#463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

5,500 pages of bridging votes? A bill that's so large that people literally don't have the ability to read it before they vote on it? Policy negotiations are normal. This is not normal. I mean, heck, why bring up separate bills in Congress at all? Let's put off all legislation for the entire year and then we'll pass everything as one bill when it comes time for the spending bill. We don't even need to meet during the…

> 5,500 pages of bridging votes? I'm not defending omnibus bills here nor was I above. I was defending pork. Even small bills are susceptible to legislation unrelated to the headline title sneaking in. That isn't always a bad thing. > there are obvious lines we can cross where there's no reason for a bill to be so bloated and discordant Conciseness takes work. Messes are easy. Rushed bills are heavy because the work…

> But given the deadline and the process, a big bill with some junk in it is not a bad outcome.

It's a terrible outcome, you just may have not had a better one available to you. But let's not mince words, a 5500 page bill that no one has read in its entirety and that Congresspeople are blindly voting on because they literally do not have any other choice except to shut down the government during a pandemic -- that is a bad outcome.

> There were months to do what was pushed against a deadline. In that, I find institutional failing.

I strongly agree. I think where we differ is that I'm looking at the end result of that process as the fruits of that institutional failing, not as some kind of heroic last-minute turnaround that saved the day.

I don't mean to disparage the work you or others put in here, but you can have a multi-month project that gets ignored until the last week and you can accurately say at that point that there's no other choice but to throw something together in a few days to satisfy the requirements, and you might even do something incredible to get any finished project at all. But that doesn't mean the result isn't terrible.

I'm not giving anybody kudos over this, people should be looking at this result and saying, "something is seriously wrong with our political system that a bill like this is what we ended up with." That should be the main takeaway. A political system that only works during crisis, and that can only get the legislation passed when there's no other choice except to shut down the government -- that's a broken political system. It's not something anyone at any point in the process should be proud of.

Re: Tillis Releases Text of Bipartisan Legislation to Fight Illegal Streaming

#464

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could, you know, just stop paying attention to sports you don't find it worth paying for. I did that with nfl when they upped rates. Just watch the recaps, so you can chat about it. Baseball, which I like, seems to be a pretty good deal to me, ends up being about .97$ a game for 3 hours of content. So I choose to pay for it. My only real complaint is I can't watch it offline.

Baseball is an exceptional deal if you're an out-of-market fan since you can see nearly all of your team's games. It was even better a few years ago when, during commercial breaks, they just threw up a logo and offered silence.

I find that they're all over the place on what actually has the commercials and what doesn't. The network broadcasts are the worst.

I will say that nfl does have a nice feature (it's like $25 for the end of the season so I can watch stuff delayed) where about an hour or 2 after the game (editing time) they actually just auto-cut the broadcast so there are no commercial breaks.

Re: Tillis Releases Text of Bipartisan Legislation to Fight Illegal Streaming

#465
post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, other people are unilaterally making up rules and applying them to me. I would happily live in a society without IP, but am not permitted to do so. Those who support IP demand it globally, at the barrel of a gun.

All you have to do is not make copies of content the creators don't want to give to you. It costs you nothing to not infringe. Do you also want to live in a society without personal property? Can I come to your home to borrow anything you aren't using at the moment?

> Can I come to your home to borrow anything you aren't using at the moment?

If I could have it back instantly when I wished, it's not private (like my diary), and it's impossible for you to damage it, sure, why not?

Re: Tillis Releases Text of Bipartisan Legislation to Fight Illegal Streaming

#466

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They don't care about paying artists more They are like any other corporation in not wanting to pay more. My employer doesn't want to pay me more. No one has yet used that as a justification for taking our product off the shelves and sticking it into their backpack. > they don't care about working to provide a platform to curb piracy That's usually where the 'tying in knots' comes in. "Why should I pay for a huge p…

> No one has yet used that as a justification for taking our product off the shelves and sticking it into their backpack. Yes people have and do. Many people think it's morally fine to shoplift from large corporations in part because they exploit their workers. An example of this is illegalism: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegalism This type of thing is common in many variants of anarchism.

That's interesting!

I'll still guess that few people who support digital piracy in general would also support illegalism.

Re: Tillis Releases Text of Bipartisan Legislation to Fight Illegal Streaming

#467
post #453
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone can start a news or media organization in the US. Is it the high barrier of entry that limits these businesses? HN likes to talk about industries ripe for disruption. I would argue then that the media or news sectors are primed for a new breed of journalism. Can media ownership be decentralized when the gateway to media consumption is owned by Google and Facebook?

Yes, anyone can start one. > Is it the high barrier of entry that limits these businesses? No. Entering isn't hard, it's surviving, particularly if you are good. It's the near impossibility to compete against the big players because of copyright and patent laws. Without abolishing these unfair laws, you cannot disrupt them. You cannot displace them. When I was at Microsoft I saw the advantages first hand. If I had th…

[deleted]

Re: Tillis Releases Text of Bipartisan Legislation to Fight Illegal Streaming

#468
post #453
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone can start a news or media organization in the US. Is it the high barrier of entry that limits these businesses? HN likes to talk about industries ripe for disruption. I would argue then that the media or news sectors are primed for a new breed of journalism. Can media ownership be decentralized when the gateway to media consumption is owned by Google and Facebook?

Yes, anyone can start one. > Is it the high barrier of entry that limits these businesses? No. Entering isn't hard, it's surviving, particularly if you are good. It's the near impossibility to compete against the big players because of copyright and patent laws. Without abolishing these unfair laws, you cannot disrupt them. You cannot displace them. When I was at Microsoft I saw the advantages first hand. If I had th…

If information and copyright laws create an unfair advantage to the established large players, then removing them should create a more level playing field. Is that right? Wouldn't we still have a winner takes all outcome due to network effects, and users would eventually prefer one search engine or one internet portal? Even if new players could compete, they would still encounter existing large protected companies. Protected by a data and high monthly active user moat.

I suppose without copyright laws, the small players could coexist but remain small...

Re: Tillis Releases Text of Bipartisan Legislation to Fight Illegal Streaming

#469
post #326
post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like if I, e.g. have a podcast where I play and review songs (without permission), I can be charged with a felony if I, say, take paid ads on the podcast. Perhaps simply a monetized streaming channel where I dance to the current hits is enough to put me in jail... it’s certainly seems enough to at least put me on trial. I think you have to wonder: what’s insufficient about the civil and criminal laws? What is…

Yes, if you are the one distributing the podcast directly on a platform you control and the platform is primarily to distribute music you don't own the copyright to, it doesn't matter if you happen to be dancing while the music is playing, that is copyright infringement and under this law would be criminal. You can always have a podcast that reviews songs, and people have been reviewing songs for as long as there has…

> that is copyright infringement and under this law would be criminal.

Whoa. This is crazy. Laws are stupid in that they can't be custom tailored for the situation of the accusation at hand. If I come out with a 0-day that allows me to bypass encryption of say Netflix that allows me a pristine copy of a video source that I then later stream on a paid-for streaming platform, then yes, that would be stealing. Therefore, criminal.

However, if you're some YT streamer, podcaster, etc that happens to receive money from ad share revenue and you have a segment with some copyrighted music in the background, then that is a far far way off from a criminal act. Civil maybe, but come on.

Laws need to be written so the punishment fits the crime/offense.

Re: Tillis Releases Text of Bipartisan Legislation to Fight Illegal Streaming

#470
post #460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could use PopcornTime for showing copyright-free videos, they exist

The fact that one has to point out that they exist at all, is indicative of how popular or significant they are on that platform.

Or how popular they are NOT depending on your viewpoint
Post reply on HN