The US Copyright Office is inviting comments on whether to introduce a requirement that all online services must filter all communications by users accused of copyright infringement.

This has major implications for not only censorship but it would cement tech and media giants' dominance thus killing smaller websites in the process.

Cory Doctorow (@pluralistic) makes the case into why creators and creators’ groups should oppose this:

· · Web · 3 · 8 · 4

If you saw the mess over at the EU, it's inevitable that the US is likely going down this route much like the EU has. This is a first major step in doing that.

Following up: here's some analysis from Jason Scott on this very issue.

It's very clear that the US is going for the kill.

@joeo10 @pluralistic I don't think it filters specific users - it filters ALL users for specific content. So, if I come along and say "I have a copyright claim on this" - then everything, to everyone, has to be filtered.

This is a bad idea for several reasons. What a way to take down small websites in a single fell swoop.

@chance @pluralistic Yeah. If you saw what happened in Europe with their copyright directive, you know the deal. This would be a first major step for the US to go down this path.

Especially people who blast copyrighted music out their windows using their mobile devices connected to bluetooth ghettoblasters. They are giving away free music to anyone who will listen and that's got to cost the RIAA lawyers like 10 billions. Maybe 100 billions. So the perpetrator should permanently lose phoning privileges and spend their whole lives paying the lawyers.
Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon @ SDF

"I appreciate SDF but it's a general-purpose server and the name doesn't make it obvious that it's about art." - Eugen Rochko