RIAA & MPAA wishlist to screw the consumer

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) might have a slight bias when it comes to reporting on stuff that is happening on the web but when they have post that is basically highlighting the responses to the Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator’s request for submissions regarding its Joint Strategic Plan for intellectual property enforcement it’s worth looking at. Especially when you read the obvious wishlist from entertainment trade organizations (mouthpieces) like the RIAA and MPAA.

While there are days where what comes out of these organizations doesn’t surprise me in the least (hint: ACTA) this laundry list of ways that the RIAA and MPAA want to screw the consumer even more does surprise me considering how blatant the attempt is.

Here’s the list courtesy of the EFF:

  • Anti-infringement software for home computers – in other words they want the legal right to install spyware on your computer that will scan and identify infringing files – and possible delete the files automatically.

    There are several technologies and methods that can be used by network administrators and providers…these include [consumer] tools for managing copyright infringement from the home (based on tools used to protect consumers from viruses and malware).

  • Pervasive copyright filtering – to force network operators to institute filters on their networks to filter out any infringing files.

    Network administrators and providers should be encouraged to implement those solutions that are available and reasonable to address infringement on their networks. [This suggestion is preceded by a list of filtering methods, like protocol filtering, fingerprint-based filtering, bandwidth throttling, etc.]

  • Intimidate and propagandize travelers at the border – to be given the right to have border guards seize and search all electronic devices like iPods and laptops for ‘pirated’ material.

    Customs authorities should be encouraged to do more to educate the traveling public and entrants into the United States about these issues. In particular, points of entry into the United States are underused venues for educating the public about the threat to our economy (and to public safety) posed by counterfeit and pirate products. Customs forms should be amended to require the disclosure of pirate or counterfeit items being brought into the United States.

  • Bully countries that have tech friendly policies – The idea here is to force countries like Canada to copy and enforce all the guidelines and laws that the US has in regards to copyright and intellectual property. This is also one of the reasons that ACTA came into being in the first as a way to end run local country laws and force draconian laws on countries that normally wouldn’t do so.

    The government should develop a process to identify those online sites that are most significantly engaged in conducting or facilitating the theft of intellectual property. Among other uses, this identification would be valuable in the interagency process that culminates in the annual Special 301 report, listing countries that fail to provide adequate and effective protection to U.S. intellectual property rights holders. Special 301 could provide a focus on those countries where companies engaged in systematic online theft of U.S. copyrighted materials are registered or operated, or where their sites are hosted. Targeting such companies and websites in the Special 301 report would put the countries involved on notice that dealing with such hotbeds of copyright theft will be an important topic of bilateral engagement with the U.S. in the year to come. (As noted above, while many of these sites are located outside the U.S., their ability to distribute pirate content in the U.S. depends on U.S.-based ISP communications facilities and services and U.S.-based server farms operated commercially by U.S.-based companies.)

  • Federal agents working on Hollywood’s clock – the use of ‘deputized’ Federal agents, including the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security to provide muscle during the big summertime blockbuster season because we all know those cammers out there are a dangerous bunch.

    The planned release of a blockbuster motion picture should be acknowledged as an event that attracts the focused efforts of copyright thieves, who will seek to obtain and distribute pre-release versions and/or to undermine legitimate release by unauthorized distribution through other channels. Enforcement agencies (notably within DOJ and DHS) should plan a similarly focused preventive and responsive strategy. An interagency task force should work with industry to coordinate and make advance plans to try to interdict these most damaging forms of copyright theft, and to react swiftly with enforcement actions where necessary.

Gee doesn’t that leave you all warm and fuzzy inside knowing that the money we spend on movies and music is being spent in such a great way .. not to mention tax-payer dollars.