A tax on copyright owners?

Mark Cuban suggests charging a tax on copyright holders to help mitigate court costs incurred by the taxpayers for copyright enforcement. He makes a strong case. If you don’t read Mark Cuban, you really should. It’s easy to see why he’s been so successful. Some Support for the RIAA – A Music Tax – Blog Maverick

MPAA continuing its assault on the Broadcast Flag

The MPAA has, predictably, drawn up draft legislation to hand to some patsy Congressman or Senator. Basically, this legislation would extend the FCC’s power to regulate something like the Broadcast Flag. The legislation would allow the FCC to “have authority to adopt regulations governing digital television apparatus necessary to control the indiscriminate redistribution of digital television broadcast content over digital networks.” Prevailing theory, at least from the News.com article, is that everyone is in a holding pattern, waiting for the outcome of the Grokster case, and we will see legislative activity beginning in earnest, depending upon who loses the case. I still don’t see any representative, other than Fritz Hollings, willing to introduce this legislation. It’s one thing to get un-elected representatives to do your bidding, but Americans really don’t want the people they’re voting for fucking with their TV and their right to record off of it.

Lessig on NYTimes Editorial in MGM v. Grokster Case

Lawrence Lesssig Says:

An insanely poor editorial by the NYTimes about Grokster.

I tend to agree and disagree at the same time. On one hand, I am firmly in the camp that content creators have the right for their intellectual property to be protected and for them to be compensated for their work. However, I think in the particular case of Grokster, who is merely creating the forum for people to do the copyright infringement, I don’t see how they can be held liable. They have no ability to control the content which is shared on their network. The content creators are prosecuting the wrong parties because it’s easier to go after one entity than thousands.

I mostly take issue with the NY Times saying that the Constitution establishes copyright. It doesn’t, at least not by name. The NY Times says “The founders wrote copyright protections into the Constitution because they believed that they were necessary for progress.” However, the clause of the Constitution which establishes the ability for Congress to create laws such as copyright, Article I, Section 8, Clause 8, states “To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.” The Senate’s own website states “Copyright and patent protection of authors and inventors are authorized by this clause, although it uses neither word.” Shame on the NY Times for misappropriating the Constitution. The Constitution is held in high regard by all Americans, and I doubt nearly so many people would rally to the cause of the Copyright Act of 1976.