Petition the U.S. government to change laws to end copyright trolling

[stinger]

I discovered an interesting page today while reviewing the white house web site that lets citizens sign petitions designed to get the government to act on things deemed necessary by the people.

I am not sure how well this works, but am wondering if there is any interest in pursuing this in the ELI community.  Here is a link to the page.  https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/

This may all be rendered moot by the next election.  However, this kind of thing is catching on around the world.  Here is an article about how the concept of getting people more involved in government is catching on in Finland.  http://singularityhub.com/2012/10/24/finlands-next-laws-to-emerge-from-online-crowdsourced-proposals/

At least this subject might be worth some discussion.

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

I've seen several of these petitions started including one on the page you reference, they never seem to get any traction, I personally don't have time to spearhead an effort to hammer away at something like this to get signatures..the other thing you have to remember, is that Getty Images is most certainly sleeping with some of these DC politicians.

[Matthew Chan]

I agree with Robert.  While well-intentioned, most of those petitions are poorly written, too narrow in scope, and don't take into consideration some of the larger issues/arguments for it to mean anything. Because of the way they are written, they also lack credibility.

This might sound a bit egotistical, but probably the only way I would actively and enthusiastically support any copyright trolling petition is one that I either wrote or was heavily involved in simply because I cannot throw my support over a petition that sounds either ridiculous, not credible, or offbase.

As far as I am concerned, fighting off the stock photo copyright extortionists is so simple now given the extensive research and reporting that has been done by ELI the last 4 years.

[Mulligan]

Petition the U.S. government to change something that is benefiting corporations and the $995 an hour lawyers working for them?

That's an exercise in futility equivalent to draining the Atlanta Ocean with a straw and a single breathful of suction. IMO, of course.

[stinger]

Sorry guys!  Some times I wear my idealist hat too long and it affects me.  Good idea, just not in this world!

[Matthew Chan]

Stinger,

We weren't putting down your idea.  It is just that the current implementations and executions we have seen were poorly done.  Nothing wrong with petitions. It is a great tool I would absolutely use in the right circumstances.  I am just not that enamored with the idea as it specifically relates to ELI's efforts.

[Jerry Witt (mcfilms)]

I was someone who didn't hold out too much hope for Greg's idea of pestering the state attorney generals. But I think that strategy has been proven somewhat effective. There is truly no "wrong way" of doing this. I think if a hundred minds (or more) are all attacking trolling from different angles, it will some day lead to the extinction of trolls.

If you DO set up a petition, I will sign it.

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

I was someone who didn't hold out too much hope for Greg's idea of pestering the state attorney generals. But I think that strategy has been proven somewhat effective. There is truly no "wrong way" of doing this. I think if a hundred minds (or more) are all attacking trolling from different angles, it will some day lead to the extinction of trolls.

If you DO set up a petition, I will sign it.

I would sign it as well, I've signed others already... I'd love to see someone actually spearhead this and put forth the effort that would be needed to get enough signatures to be meaningful, it would need to be a social media blitz, to get that momentum..

[Moe Hacken]

I would sign it if it was crafted thoughtfully and made legal sense. Here's an initiative that I like and I think could apply to images and music as well as P2P file-sharing:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/18/tech/web/copyright-alert-system/index.html

This seems fair at first blush. If a person is warned and insists on infringing, I have no sympathy for them. YouTube does something similar with the music on video soundtracks. They even give you a fair chance to dispute the claim of infringement.

I actually received a "false positive" warning from YouTube on the music soundtrack of a video I put together for a local youth sports event. I put the music together using Apple Garage Band canned loops. This is expressly permitted by Apple, even for commercial work. Some outfit claimed a copyright on the music and named some kind of electronic dance jive as the work that was being infringed.

When I corrected them about the music, they backed off without any further ado. Maybe the electronic dance jive included some Garage Band loops. I couldn't sit through the whole thing to find out where there could have been a match. 

[Jerry Witt (mcfilms)]

At first blush I liked that idea too. But it does seem a little like "Big Brother" tracking down your IP address to tell you you are suspected of copyright infringement. And I'm not sure why a person who insists they are innocent should have to pay $35 to have their case reviewed. (I know if that happened to me I would switch ISPs so fast it would make the accusers head spin.)

But that said, the process of a warning first and then escalating the communication is so much better than what the copyright trolls are doing. Their business model of "ready, shoot, aim" is nowhere near what the motion picture and recording industry are talking about here. I can't see the GI's and MFers of the world getting behind this idea. Their initial contact is pretty "grabby" making it clear that removing infringing material is not enough for them. But lets just say more legitimate businesses: content creators, publishers, and maybe even ISPs and the government may see this as a reasonable solution.

[stinger]

Tell you what, if the current administration wins the election, I will take a stab at a petition on this web site.  If not, we will wait and see what the next administration intends to do with it.

The more I look at this site, the more I think it is Obama's sorry attempt to deliver on his campaign promise of transparency in government.

Let's see where the election takes us.

[Moe Hacken]

Stinger, can't wait to read the petition! I'd like to suggest the requirement of a non-threatening cease-and-desist warning before any other action is taken. With so many orphan works and baitpaper sites out there, it would be one way to level the playing field.

[Jerry Witt (mcfilms)]

Yeah Stringer, it looks like you "elected" yourself. Please keep us posted.

[stinger]

I am going to try to get to it this week.  I will keep you all posted.

[stinger]

Am having some difficulty getting started with this.  To submit a petition, one first needs a profile.

The profile process requires the White House to send you an email which lets them verify your email address.  Have been waiting for hours to get the email that was supposed to arrive in "minutes".  I checked with spam blockers and don't see anything.

Maybe our current administration has decided to make this harder because of all the petitions they have gotten with thousands of signatures to allow states to quietly secede from the union.

While I am losing faith in this government to get this web site working, I have not lost faith in our cause.  I will keep at it.  If anyone has any suggestions, I am all ears.