AALL Action Alert
September 28, 2004
Stop Induce--Mark-up Sept. 30th
Calls/Emails Urgently Needed NOW to Members of the Senate
Judiciary Committee
BACKGROUND:
AALL has opposed S. 2560, the "Inducing Infringement of
Copyrights Act" (Induce Act) since it was introduced by Senate
Judiciary Chairman Orrin Hatch and Ranking Member Patrick Leahy
in June. The bill is strongly supported by Hollywood and the
recording industry because of their concerns about peer-to-peer
(P2P) file-sharing networks which they say are used mainly by
consumers to illegally share copyrighted materials.
If enacted, S. 2560 would make companies and other Internet
service providers (ISPs) liable if their software or technology
"induces" users to violate copyright laws. AALL is a member of a
large, diverse coalition that opposes this bill because we
believe strongly that the solution is not to ban technology
simply because it can be used to “induce” consumers to make
illegal copies. S. 2560 outlaws technology, not bad conduct, and
P2P technology is in fact used for many important legal purposes.
The bill is so broadly drafted that it has many unintended
consequences far beyond targeting those who infringe copyright.
ACTION NEEDED:
S. 2560 has undergone many revisions, and a substitute bill will
be marked-up this Thursday, Sept. 30th. Please contact your
Senator immediately, by phone or email, if he's listed below as a
member of the Judiciary Committee.
Express your grave concerns about:
1. THE PROCESS. There have been no hearings on what is now the
fourth version of the Induce Act. Rushing a bill that implies a
fundamental realignment of our intellectual property system
through mark-up and to the Senate floor with no hearings is
wrong.
2. THE SUBSTANCE. If enacted, this bill could constitute the
greatest threat to date to the innovation processes that the
copyright and patent laws were intended to promote.
• The proposed legislation defines “induces” as
simply manufacturing a product or offering a service; therefore
it wrongly targets commerce rather than conduct.
• The narrow exceptions it provides to this
extremely broad definition of inducement are full of loopholes;
therefore it will not provide meaningful protection to legitimate
businesses and services.
MEMBERS OF THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Orrin G. Hatch, Chairman (R-UT)
Charles E. Grassley (R-IA)
Arlen Specter (R-PA)
Jon Kyl (R-AZ)
Mike DeWine (R-OH)
Jeff Sessions (R-AL)
Lindsey Graham (R-SC)
Larry Craig (R-ID)
Saxby Chambliss (R-GA)
John Cornyn (R-TX)
Patrick J. Leahy, Ranking Democratic Member (D-VT)
Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA)
Joseph R. Biden, Jr. (D-DE)
Herbert Kohl (D-WI)
Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)
Russell D. Feingold (D-WI)
Charles E. Schumer (D-NY)
Richard J. Durbin (D-IL)
John Edwards (D-NC
If your Senator is listed as a member of the Judiciary Committee,
you'll find a link to his/her email address at http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
If you prefer to call your Senator's office, the U.S. Capitol
Switchboard is: 202-224-3121
1. Paul on September 28, 2004 8:01 PM writes...
I'm sure I remember reading something not too long ago about a court case that tried to sue the manufacturers of handguns for contributing to murders - because obviously that's the only reason you have a gun - and it was dismissed.
Using the same mentality as the induce act the case would have been a shoe in!
Permalink to Comment