College Publisher Test Site

The war against online file-sharing and counterfeit goods is about to change, giving copyright owners the backing of the federal government, in what has been a long drawn out battle.

Ever since file sharing gained mainstream attention with the demise of Napster in 2000, copyright owners have waged a battle not unlike the war against terrorism. With the near world wide spread of the Internet, the ones actually distributing the source files have been hard to find and even harder to prosecute.

On Oct. 13 President Bush signed into law the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights Act of 2008, also known as the Pro-IP Act. The act authorizes additional resources for the Executive Office of the President and the Department of Justice to enforce intellectual property laws and to reduce counterfeiting and piracy of protected intellectual property.

The new bill sets out to wage a war against cyber criminals, counterfeit goods and services on a global scale. In this effort the act aims to protect United States businesses from lost profits and consumers from counterfeit goods. It will create a new position, an IP czar to enforce the act. All the while the act hopes to do this on a relatively small projected budget of $429 million over the 2009-2012 period, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The act also imposes no costs to state or local governments. At first glance it doesn't sound like a bad idea, but there always seems to be a catch.

In section 506a of the act it states that, "The attorney general may commence a civil action." In essence saying that the government may file civil suits on behalf of the copyright owner, putting in question exactly whose copyright gets protection. With the amount of money big organizations such as the Recording Industry of America and the Motion Picture Association of America have to throw at Washington, small companies fear their copyrights may not be protected with the same caliber. This provision also leaves question to ethics. Should the government be allowed to file civil suits on the behalf of copyright owners? What should be the job of the copyright owners has now been passed onto tax payer dollars. In the same section it states that the attorney general may also file a criminal suit after the civil suit, creating nothing less than a headache for the Department of Justice.

With this new power to bring on civil suits it also raises question if those really responsible for the act of piracy will be those charged. In the past the RIAA has targeted those downloading pirated material from a peer to peer source. This method distributes files between users, so that the file exists on no permanent location. It makes the user also upload portions to others, becoming a distributor of pirated content themselves. While these individuals were breaking the law they were not the ones who originally pirated the material and posted it online. Those who post pirated material are known as scene release groups and even carry their own catchy names. Bringing to question why these groups who bring pirated content to the masses have yet to be pursued on the global scale.

Whether this is another ploy to induce fear into would be file-sharers and counterfeiters will have to wait until 2009 when the new president appoints the first IP czar. If the attorney general abuses this new civil suit power in favor of big business it could raise even more questions about whose money is really behind and in the pockets of the operation.

Article Tools