micro$haft wants your assets

[Andy Green]

Jim Cornette wrote:

> The link mentioned to start this thread is just a minor example.

Couple of other interesting US IP law articles I read today

''...Why does the U.S. insist on these rules? Quite simply, American
drug, software, and media companies are furious about the pirating of
their products, and are eager to extend the monopolies that their
patents and copyrights confer. These companies are the main advocates
for such rules, and the big winners. The losers are often the citizens
in developing countries, who find themselves subject to a Draconian I.P.
regime that reduces access to new technologies....''

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/financial/2007/05/14/070514ta_talk_surowiecki

''...
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is pressing the U.S. Congress to enact
a sweeping intellectual property bill that would increase criminal
penalties for copyright infringement, including "attempts" to commit piracy.

 "To meet the global challenges of IP crime, our criminal laws must be
kept updated," Gonzales said during a speech before the U.S. Chamber of
Commerce in Washington on Monday.

...

 The IPPA would, for instance:

 * Criminalize "attempting" to infringe copyright. Federal law currently
punishes not-for-profit copyright infringement with between 1 and 10
years in prison, but there has to be actual infringement that takes
place. The IPPA would eliminate that requirement. (The Justice
Department's summary of the legislation says: "It is a general tenet of
the criminal law that those who attempt to commit a crime but do not
complete it are as morally culpable as those who succeed in doing so.")

 * Create a new crime of life imprisonment for using pirated software.
Anyone using counterfeit products who "recklessly causes or attempts to
cause death" can be imprisoned for life. During a conference call,
Justice Department officials gave the example of a hospital using
pirated software instead of paying for it.

 * Permit more wiretaps for piracy investigations. Wiretaps would be
authorized for investigations of Americans who are "attempting" to
infringe copyrights.

 * Allow computers to be seized more readily. Specifically, property
such as a PC "intended to be used in any manner" to commit a copyright
crime would be subject to forfeiture, including civil asset forfeiture.
Civil asset forfeiture has become popular among police agencies in drug
cases as a way to gain additional revenue, and is problematic and
controversial.

 * Increase penalties for violating the Digital Millennium Copyright
Act's anti-circumvention regulations. Currently criminal violations are
currently punished by jail times of up to 10 years and fines of up to $1
million. The IPPA would add forfeiture penalties too....''

http://news.com.com/8301-10784_3-9719339-7.html

I think the core issue is, these laws are proposed and cheerled by folks
that only see the crazy level of punishment - life imprisonment? -
pushed on to others ('subhumans') outside their socio-economic group,
while they themselves expect to see direct or indirect financial benefit
from the laws.  In that way it seems to be a side-effect of the equally
crazy income inequality happening in the US and to a lesser extent in the EU

''...As The New York Times reported Thursday, the nation’s richest
300,000 Americans make as much money as the bottom 150 million.
Calculations based on 2005 tax data, the latest available, average
incomes for people among the bottom 90 percent of Americans that year
declined 0.6 percent, while the incomes of those in the top 10 percent
increased about 14 percent.

And that is not just a one-year blip. Since 1970, based on data posted
on Saez’ website, while the annual average wage, adjusted for inflation,
increased 15.2 percent between 1970 and 2005, the average wage for the
nation’s top 100 CEOs in that period increased a whopping 2,193 percent
...''

http://www.inteldaily.com/?c=139&a=1518
http://elsa.berkeley.edu/~saez/pikettyqje.pdf

-Andy