February 23, 2010

Sometimes copyright critics so reflexively fall over themselves to criticize that they laughably leave the facts behind.  So it was with this bemusing blog post by Public Knowledge that claimed, in commenting about a recent “State of Net” panel about the role of Internet Service Providers (ISP) and copyright theft policies:

Yesterday, the MPAA and RIAA made a giant political misstep by refusing to participate in a debate about three strikes. In doing so, they exposed the public and a number of US policy makers to policy that would strip Internet subscribers of their constitutional due process rights….

Noticeably missing on the panel were the US associations that represent large content holders, like MPAA and RIAA, or even their DC coalition groups like Copyright Alliance or Arts+Labs. It’s not like their representatives were busy, many were in the audience listening. No, they are actively trying to keep a low public profile on three strikes arrangements in the US while they work on back-room deals.

 
Sounds damning right?  Only problem is that the conference organizers had approached us and we suggested a representative from IFPI, Shira Perlmutter, our sister organization that represents the major music labels throughout the world.  Because, well, the conference was about anti-theft policies and ISPs throughout the world.   That hardly seems like “refusing to participate” or actively trying to keep a low profile” (never mind that the RIAA recently participated in a recent Broadband Breakfast panel on these very issues.  You can watch a video of one of the organization’s senior executives “keeping a low profile” here.  
 
Throw in the fact that the RIAA has not called for a “three strikes and you’re out” approach.  What we have encouraged -- as a sensible alternative to litigation -- are graduated response policies that call generally for escalating sanctions against offenders caught repeatedly engaging in illegal file sharing, an approach already contemplated by existing law (DMCA) and the ISP terms of services already agreed to by the user.    

We’re all for a healthy debate about the best way to protect the jobs of the millions of American workers who depend on intellectual property businesses to make their living, but we owe to those citizens to check our facts.