meta-roj

i sent my thoughts to my senators, and one actually took the time to reply (well, stick my name on the form letter, anyway). i thought the response was worthy of your review:

senator paul sarbanes, july 16, 2004, personal correspondence

Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition to S. 2560, the Inducing Infringement of Copyrights Act of 2004. I appreciate having the benefit of your views on this important matter.

I must frankly tell you that I am a cosponsor of S. 2560, which would expand the existing laws on liability for copyright infringement to cover those who intentionally induce others to violate copyrights. The bill specifically does not affect the common law doctrines of secondary liability and preserves the “fair use” rights of consumers. The term “fair use” refers to a limitation upon a copyright holder’s exclusive rights, which permits the public to use a copyrighted work for limited purposes, such as criticism, news reporting, teaching, scholarship or research. On June 22, 2004, S. 2560 was introduced in the Senate and referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee, where it awaits further action.

While our views may differ on this issue, I certainly appreciate hearing your concerns. I hope you will not hestitate to contact me again about matters of importance to you.

with that statement, i’d like to solicit the greater blogosphere’s thoughts on some way to get the message in under the lobbyists. can you think of/suggest any particular cluesticks that might wake the good senator up?

i was thinking of organizing a group of people to mail free culture one postcard at a time. maybe a lawyer-type reader would be willing to cook up a mock lawsuit (like the eff’s fake apple complaint) that implicates the senator as an induce-infringer?