The sight of pre−haircut Justin Bieber locked behind bars is a shocking one, and it's the Photoshopped image FreeBieber.org has decided to use to publicize the fight against a new, potentially draconian copyright bill. In recent months the Commercial Felony Streaming Act, or bill S.978, has been making its way through Congress. The bill proposes to elevate the penalty for streaming pirated content to a felony.
Currently, it's a felony to copy, reproduce or download a copyrighted work. Steaming of copyrighted content is not currently a felony. So, while it's a felony to copy and download movies, it's not a felony to stream content on YouTube or MegaVideo.com.
Bill S.978 would up the ante and turn the current misdemeanor into a felony punishable by a maximum five−year prison sentence for any offense that "consists of 10 or more public performances by electronic means, during any 180−day period, of 1 or more copyrighted works" if the total value of the performances exceeds $2,500 or if the cost of licensing the works exceeds $5,000.
It should be noted that it only targets those doing the streaming, not those watching or listening to the stream.
The reasoning behind the Free Bieber campaign is that Bieber made a name for himself posting videos of him singing covers of copyrighted songs. If he did that after the bill was passed, he could be jailed, the site's creators argue.
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D−Minn.), a sponsor of the bill, tried to assuage concerns about the reach of the bill, saying that the bill is focused only on targeting individuals and websites that profit from illegally streaming content, and someone like a young Bieber would never be targeted.
The bill's stated goal is a noble one that we support. It's hard to argue in favor of people who profit while circumventing the rights of a piece of content's original creators.
Bieber himself joined in on the argument, saying Klobuchar should be "locked up — put away in cuffs." That's rather harsh. However, for this bill to make sense, it needs to be much more focused in its targeting of serial for−profit illegal streaming offenders.
Bill S.978 does not serve to redefine what constitutes copyright infringement, but considering the severity of punishment this bill technically allows to be implemented, it needs to come with clear stipulations about what copyright infractions would constitute a prison sentence.
