Group Uses Justin Bieber to Counter Anti-Piracy Bill

October 20, 2011 -

Using Justin Bieber (of all people) as a focal point for their message an advocacy group has created a campaign to warn U.S. citizens of the dangers found in an anti-piracy bill pending in the Senate. The bill, which was approved in the Senate Judiciary Committee approved the bill in June, would make it a felony for users to post unlicensed content online 10 times in 180 days. The bill is backed by the Recording Industry Association of America, the Motion Picture Association of America and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

So why use Justin Bieber for the campaign? Because, as the group points out Justin Bieber began his career by posting YouTube videos of himself singing other people's songs. Under the proposed law, he'd do five years in prison. Of course realistically Justin Bieber wouldn't spend five years in prison because he's a minor, but you get the point.

"Those videos are still on the Internet, so if Bieber doesn't pull them all down right away, he could be prosecuted and sent to the slammer for five years on felony charges," Fight for the Future claimed in a press release.

The bill, sponsored by Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), would make it a felony for users to post unlicensed content online 10 times in 180 days. The bill is strongly supported by the usual suspects: the Recording Industry Association of America, the Motion Picture Association of America and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Linden Zakula, a spokesman for Sen. Klobuchar, tells The Hill that this bill would not send Justin Bieber to jail.

“The bill language specifically targets people who willfully engage in copyright infringement for commercial advantage or private financial gain," he said. "The bill does not criminalize uploading videos to YouTube or streaming videos at home.”

Fight for the Future disagrees.

"What's genuinely troubling is that this bill applies to a massive slice of social media activity," said Fight for the Future co-founder Holmes Wilson.

The group claims that the legislation would apply to karaoke videos, footage of people dancing to music and videos with music playing in the background.

Fight for the Future is using FreeBieber.org to make its point. The site features digitally-altered photos of police hauling Bieber away in handcuffs and the pop star in an orange jumpsuit sitting in a prison cell. The site's headline reads: "Justice faces 5 brutal years in prison."

As much as some people would like to see the teen pop sensation do some hard time behind bars, the point the group is trying to make is that - if this law were in place a few years ago - Justin Bieber would go to prison (or at the very least a seedy reform school).

Source: The Hill


Comments

Re: Group Uses Justin Bieber to Counter Anti-Piracy Bill

Oh man, hard choice.

 

Between Justin Bieber and the American criminal justice system being used to strip people of their voting rights and label them the same as a violent offender or sex offender for something as difficult to explain to someone as copyright law...

 

Such a tough choice!

Re: Group Uses Justin Bieber to Counter Anti-Piracy Bill

Pirate more to send Bieber to jail? HELL YA!!!


Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Let's renegotiate them.

---

http://zippydsm.deviantart.com/

Re: Group Uses Justin Bieber to Counter Anti-Piracy Bill

For once, I agree. This Bieber fiend must be stopped.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Did Microsoft pay too much ($2.5 billion) for Minecraft developer Mojang?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Michael ChandraBut when the mountain obviously exists...09/18/2014 - 5:49pm
Michael ChandraMind you, if someone makes a mountain out of a molehill with a secret agenda as motive, it'd be fine.09/18/2014 - 5:48pm
Andrew EisenOkay, so I guess I'm not making sense of #notyourshield because it doesn't make any sense.09/18/2014 - 5:28pm
Andrew EisenI'd really only count three as being "death of gamer" articles and only one as arguably going a bit far with "gamers are young white dudes" stuff.09/18/2014 - 5:17pm
Andrew EisenMost are really just a look at the crap that happened the previous day when Sarkeesian's new video came out and almost all are exceedingly clear that they're talking about the specific gamers who are being obnoxious.09/18/2014 - 5:17pm
Andrew EisenKrono - Yep, I had only seen two. I looked at the 12 you sent and while I had seen a few of them, I didn't think to count them. Some aren't about gamers at all. One's just highlighting two others. One is a Gamasutra community member blog post.09/18/2014 - 5:15pm
Michael Chandrawould clearly not apply, since they weren't used as shield. It's more "hey, just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I'm CISWASP."09/18/2014 - 5:08pm
Michael ChandraIn comparison though, the more extreme views would be fairly countered with "you don't speak for me". But the batshit crazy people tend not to even use others as the shield to defend their batshit crazy ideas and insults, so at that point #notyourshield09/18/2014 - 5:06pm
Michael ChandraWhich is of course real silly because when there are so many horrible stories and statistics too, it's utterly irrelevant whether some don't mind.09/18/2014 - 5:00pm
Michael ChandraIn this context it would be women claiming they don't see a problem with the stuff, so stop claiming women don't like it!09/18/2014 - 5:00pm
Michael Chandra"You don't speak for me. I am not your shield. You cannot use me to defend your own opinion."09/18/2014 - 4:59pm
Michael ChandraAE, if we leave aside the falsehoods some use with the term, the idea is regarding minorities and such.09/18/2014 - 4:58pm
Michael ChandraKrono did just a bit earlier in the shoutbox prh99.09/18/2014 - 4:56pm
Andrew EisenI still don't get the what #notyourshield is supposed to mean. Who is unfairly using who as a shield for what?09/18/2014 - 4:43pm
prh99Didn't said anything about #notyourshield or it's origins. Assuming your comment was directed at me.09/18/2014 - 4:28pm
prh99Leigh Alexander is right though, no one has to cater to them (trolls). I think a lot of them would likely continue playing even if scantily clad women were omitted or protagonist was female.09/18/2014 - 4:21pm
Michael ChandraSo no, normal gamers feeling attacked was not what sparked #notyourshield and only a fool would suggest otherwise.09/18/2014 - 4:21pm
Michael Chandra#NotYourShield was kickstarted by 4chan people, so don't go and make nonsense claims about that.09/18/2014 - 4:20pm
prh99those toxic individuals conduct their trolling under. It could have easily been under the Men Rights banner etc, they are just generally unpleasant and angry people who can't stand people disagreeing with them. 09/18/2014 - 4:00pm
prh99The whole gamer identity is the scapegoat some have latched onto in the wake of gamergate. I am sure it will fade, only to be replaced with the next thing, it always is. I am not so sure removal of identity will fix the problem, it's just the banner..09/18/2014 - 3:55pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician