[Infowarrior] - MPAA begs Obama for help

[Richard Forno]

http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/12/mpaa-obama

December 11th, 2008
MPAA Asks Obama for More Copyright Surveillance of the Internet
Legislative Analysis by Tim Jones

As part of their commitment to transparent and open government, the  
Obama Transition Team is posting the lobbying agendas of the groups it  
meets with for public review and comment. One of the more interesting  
documents to be found there is the Motion Picture Association of  
America's "international trade" agenda.

Some of the MPAA's agenda is reasonable, such as cracking down on  
commercial optical disc piracy. But much of it, if adopted, would  
result in a substantially less free and safe internet, at little or no  
actual benefit to the artists and workers the MPAA claims to represent.

Of course, this may not be immediately clear when reading the  
document, since it's all couched in DC lobbyist-speak. Here, then, is  
a guide to understanding what's really being talked about.

First:

     "Achieving inter-industry cooperation in the fight against online  
piracy, including through automated detection and removal of  
infringing content is imperative to curb the theft of online content...

This kind of automated-detection technology has long been a favorite  
fantasy of the MPAA and affiliates. They've pushed for it on US  
campuses, in US states, in US trade law [PDF], and in Europe, so it's  
hardly surprising to see them pushing for country-wide requirements at  
the federal level.

The MPAA's faith in "filtering" is pure magical thinking. It  
presupposes invading the privacy of innocents and pirates alike by  
monitoring every packet on the Internet (which is bad enough when the  
NSA does it). And it ignores the reality of strong encryption, which  
will utterly defeat network filtering techniques (thus necessitating  
more intrusive alternatives — how about a copyright surveillance  
rootkit on every PC?). Sacrificing our privacy for the pipe-dreams of  
one industry is a bad idea.

These reasons and more were outlined by EFF in a 2005 white paper, and  
again last January in a memo to European lawmakers [PDF].

Next up:

     "MPAA views recent efforts by the Governments of France and the  
United Kingdom to protect content on-line and facilitate inter- 
industry cooperation as useful models.

Here, the MPAA is advocating for a number of things, the most  
problematic of which is a "three strikes" internet termination policy.  
This would require ISPs to terminate customers' internet accounts upon  
a rights-holder's repeat allegation of copyright ingfringement. This  
could be done potentially without any due process or judicial review.  
A three-strikes policy was recently adopted by legislation in France,  
where all ISPs are now banned from providing blacklisted citizens with  
internet access for up to one year.

Because three-strikes policies do not guarantee due process or  
judicial oversight of whether the accusations of copyright  
infringement are valid, they effectively grant the content industry  
the ability to exile any individual they want from the internet. Lest  
we forget, there is a history of innocents getting caught up in these  
anti-piracy dragnets. (Copyfighter Cory Doctorow has wondered what  
would happen if the MPAA's erroneous notices were subject to a similar  
three-strikes law.)

Thankfully, members of the European Parliament vehemently rejected  
these measures, resolving that "The cut of Internet access is a  
disproportionate measure regarding the objectives. It is a sanction  
with powerful effects, which could have profound repercussions in a  
society where access to the Internet is an imperative right for social  
inclusion." Let's hope the US government's decisions on this are as  
wise.

EFF outlined these concerns and more in our September 2008 comments to  
the US Trade Representative [PDF].

And, finally:

     "MPAA has identified the following countries for priority trade  
policy attention in 2009: Canada, China, India, Mexico, Russia and  
Spain.

Translation: Not satisfied with wrecking the internet for US citizens  
alone, the MPAA would like the US government to pressure foreign  
governments to adopt the same harmful measures. This is made explicit  
by a look at, for instance, the International Intellectual Property  
Association's 2008 one-sheets on Canada [PDF] and Spain [PDF]: The  
MPAA wants these governments to institute mandatory internet filtering  
and three-strikes laws. Canada is being singled out by the MPAA  
because of its sensible rejection of the Canadian version of the US's  
deeply flawed Digital Millenium Copyright Act. In Spain, the MPAA is  
frustrated with rulings in 2006 that failed to punish Spanish citizens  
sufficiently harshly for file-sharing.

This week in the San Jose Mercury News, Ed Black, CEO of the Computer  
& Communications Industry Association, described how adoption of the  
MPAA's international trade demands would deeply set back US innovation  
and foreign policy.

How the Obama administration will react to these demands remains to be  
seen. The adoption of a Creative Commons license for Change.gov  
content indicates that there just might at long last be a seat at the  
table in the White House for smart thinking on copyright issues.  
Hopefully the Obama Administration will prove strong enough to stand  
up to the MPAA's lobbying, and instead institute positive reforms of  
US copyright law.

If you'd like to share your thoughts on this matter with the Obama  
Transition Team, the MPAA's agenda is open to public review and  
comment on Change.gov.