Eric Schmidt Blasts Web Copyright Bills

CAMBRIDGE, Massachusetts (Reuters) - Google Inc Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt blasted proposed legislation to tighten online copyright regulation on Tuesday, saying the bills would lead to censorship of the Internet.

Intended to combat the trade in pirated movies and music, the two bills would give copyright holders and law enforcement officials added powers to cut off websites and require search engines, payment collectors and others to block access.

"The solutions are draconian," Schmidt said during an appearance at the MIT Sloan School of Management. "There's a bill that would require (Internet service providers) to remove URLs from the Web, which is also known as censorship last time I checked."

Schmidt said content owners like Hollywood studios have a legitimate problem, since increasing trading of pirated movies threatens their revenue.

"Their business models are threatened by theft," Schmidt said. "We don't endorse it. Please don't do it. If you're doing it, stop. I hope that's very clear."

The legislation Schmidt opposed is called the PROTECT IP Act in the U.S. Senate and the Stop Online Piracy Act in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Instead, Schmidt recommended regulations based on tracing payments spent at websites offering illegal materials.

The remarks followed a letter to lawmakers opposing the bills from a group of Internet companies including Google, AOL Inc, eBay Inc, Facebook, Yahoo Inc and Twitter.

"We are concerned that these measures pose a serious risk to our industry's continued track record of innovation and job creation, as well as to our nation's cybersecurity," the companies wrote.

(Reporting by Aaron Pressman; Editing by Richard Chang)

Copyright 2011 Thomson Reuters. Click for Restrictions.

Comments

[Donatella]

08:05 AM on 11/17/2011

It's just more corporate greed and control over our lives masquerading as justice.

[WSAY]

11:29 PM on 11/16/2011

Here is the thing people don't understand. Pirates ALWAYS figure out a way around this kind of thing. ALWAYS. This bill will negatively impact everyone BUT the pirates.

[TruEngineHearing]

08:25 PM on 11/16/2011

The 1% want more money, and they'll get it - try to stand in their way, and they'll just be reminded to get yours too...

[Lateef Murdock]

02:41 PM on 11/16/2011

My issue with all of this is this; as an artist (music) I'll be forced to sell t-shirts and other types of merch to make money. I don't want to do that. I want to sell music. If I wanted to sell t-shirts, I'd open a clothing store.

For most of these new media technologies to work, I have to give away my work for free or at a greatly reduced rate. I don't see anyone in the tech field trying to rectify that. Tech companies make millions from media content while the content creators make pennies from those same creations. How is this any different from the old record company days?

So, until I see those issues truly addressed in a way that makes an artist share of the money made from his or her creations more equitable, than I will support more laws and regulations that give me as much control as I see fit to enforce my ability to make a substantial income from my creations.

No one expects men like Shmidt to work for free or sell Google T-shirts to supplement their incomes. So, why should we be expected to? If they had no content to trade upon, they couldn't make money. But, my creations aren't dependent upon their distribution channels. But, their distribution channels are dependent on my creations to turn a profit.

Man bites dog.

[RageVsMachine]

03:10 PM on 11/16/2011

your music probably sucks because you think it should be worth money. music has been, is, and always will be free!

[Lateef Murdock]

04:09 PM on 11/16/2011

Oops, repost.

[Lateef Murdock]

04:13 PM on 11/16/2011

You are a perfect example of what I'm talking about. Why should I have to do my job for free? I'll be to you get paid for what you do. Why should I have to settle for less?

Oh, wait. It's just music. It's not really that important. If I want to make money, then I should get a real job. Right?

Also, please give me examples of how music has always been free?

[Sacchinftw]

03:19 PM on 11/16/2011

There are plenty of artists out there who put their music on the net for free and then compile an album with said music and make a ton of money.

[Lateef Murdock]

04:05 PM on 11/16/2011

Yes, and they're making that money from selling merch, not selling music. Or, they are doing shows. I'm not a performing musician. I want to sell music; period.

Look, don't get me wrong. I give away free music, also. There will be 12 songs on my new project, I'll be giving away at least an additional 3 songs just for joining my mailing list. So, I know the power of "free."

I just believe artists should be able to make more money from actually selling their music. Songs should not be a loss leader if you're a song writer.

[2crudedudes]

10:24 AM on 11/16/2011

The USA will effectively become China (and Iran, and...) in terms of internet policy if either of these things are approved. Once in place, there is nothing restricting their use to copyright-only cases.

[SnapLake]

09:30 AM on 11/16/2011

Guess what? Its a big club and me and you arent in it. I'll have to forward an email to Anonymous because getting any action from politicians is pointless. At least Anonymous will pick up a weapon and stand and fight unlike any politician I know.

[mike1tofa]

06:31 AM on 11/16/2011

As a copyright holder, and a publisher, I want to get paid for my ownership rights. The Internet is just a delivery system. They don't get special rights to break the law, or deny people who have a ligitimate claim to get paid for their property. Copyright holders, and publishers have a hard enough time, as it is to make money. Should we let the Internet decide our rights, or us?

Even with billions of dollars in your coffers, does not give any special rights to skirt the law. I mean, that is what laws are about, right? Protecting everyones right, not getting them out of the way. I think it's crazy this should even be a topic. The copyright laws are for the Internet too.

[Phils Stamps]

05:54 AM on 11/16/2011

Another great idea that will pose a challenge to the Chinese to enhance their copying technologies.

[Zephersand]

03:34 AM on 11/16/2011

The law will give and law enforcement officials the ability to cut off websites and require search engines, payment collectors and others to block access.
I remember the Patriot act being used for things it was not intended to be used for, will this eventually give law enforcement a way to get what ever information they want about your internet activities without a court order.
I see the beginning of more abuse of or constitutional rights. Once more we have a law to restrict the rights of the citizen in order to protect the profit of the corporation.
Are corporations here to serve WE THE PEOPLE of the United States or are we the people just employees here for the soul purpose of being the workforce that keeps the machines working until a cheaper replacement can be found.
I fear we will soon have a country that makes the USSR look like a bright and shining star.

[mike1tofa]

06:36 AM on 11/16/2011

There is a simple solution to all of this. If everyone does right, and does no wrong, then it is very simple. You need to change anything. Only need to change peoples thinking about right, and wrong.................Wrong is good now, as long as you get caught. When you get caught, you try to say you are being persecuted...............................what a joke. Every only has to follow what's right, not create new laws.

[Desolati0n]

07:31 AM on 11/16/2011

I'm not even going to pretend like I could almost comprehend your post.

[Westof405]

03:22 AM on 11/16/2011

Google want the right to copy anything it wants and put it up on their websites to make money without paying the owners for it. Why do people think they have the right to take anything they find on the net? It's called stealing, whether it's from a multinational corporation or a 1 person record company. You don't walk into Best Buy and start carting out loads of CD's, DVD's and video games do you? Well, maybe some of you do, but that doesn't make it right. Neither is taking something off someone's lawn just because you can. The Internet is no different. If a band wants to give away it's music, I'm sure the band members will tell you so. Otherwise, support them by buying their music, not stealing it.

[stupidllama]

11:14 AM on 11/16/2011

you have no idea what your talking about, shut up and let the adults handle this, google does not "put things up on there websites" like you state, people do. We already have a mechanism for removing those things, and its already abused by big content providers. If you dont believe that big corps will abuse the authority to have entire site yanks from the web(sort of) simply because it makes them look bad and is not necessarily in any violation of copyright then you are just a tool, not to mention a fool.

[Sacchinftw]

03:21 PM on 11/16/2011

You realize that there is code you can put into any website that will tell Google to not index your site, right?

[paulgrins]

01:23 AM on 11/16/2011

The funny thing about this bill is that there are countless ways to circumvent it because this will just cause the entire American internet infrastructure to move offshore into the cloud. This mind you will make some country like India the #1 country for tech and internet and will turn every single domestic American internet user into third class steerage in the global web economy while the foreigner internet user gets the first class stuff.

The progression in America is that for every regulation you add one more industry leaves the country and goes offshore. Haliburton moved offshore and is based in Dubai despite being Dick Cheney's company and he was a "Patriot" right? Just imagine the panic and regret that Congress will feel when Google and the rest of the web/software giants like Microsoft fire almost all their domestic workforce and migrate to India or Europe!

SOPA Score Card:
America - lose lose lose
World - win win win

[mike1tofa]

06:41 AM on 11/16/2011

The price you pay for either greed, or sefishness land hard work? What happened to unity, and the can do spirit that this country was built on? Everyone forgot about that?

[Sacchinftw]

03:10 PM on 11/16/2011

What's "land hard work"? Is it different from "sea hard work" and "air hard work"? And is there such thing as "space hard work" or have we not ventured far enough for that phrase to be used yet?

How about "underwater hard work" or maybe "underground hard work"? When is it necessary to indicate the environmental conditions of the "hard work"?

[RageVsMachine]

03:12 PM on 11/16/2011

everyone has forgotten about unity and is wallowing in a bastardized, isolated sea of individuality.

[FreelanceWriter]

01:09 AM on 11/16/2011

Maybe it's just me, but I find it laughably ironic that -- of all people -- Schmidt is the one out claiming that the new law would lead to "censorship" of the Net...

...When it was only a few months ago -- at a Net conference -- that he was siding with Randi Zuckerberg (Facebook's Marketing Director) that "online anonymity" had to be completely eliminated. So that companies like -- gee, what a shock! Like Google! -- could track you 24/7.

Why? Because somehow in Schmidt's mind, Google could provide "better services" if they could follow you ALL the time online, as well as keep track of EVERY single thing you do.

Riiiiiiiiiiiight. As if tracking the online activity of someone 24/7 wouldn't give people cause for worry, and ultimately stifle free speech and create a chilling air of censorship all its own.

THAT SAID...the proposed bill is a total CROCK and would put WAY too much power in the hands of corporations and such. Bottom line -- this isn't about stopping piracy. This is a flat-out land grab by the major media companies to lock down the Net to THEIR benefit for generations.

Which is why anyone who cares about TRUE free speech and an open Net should absolutely, positively oppose this proposed bill...

[mike1tofa]

06:52 AM on 11/16/2011

More people should build smaller, private services, and do the same as the big companies. Link to the internet, and just be responsible. Everyone doesn't think about being a billionaire. Some just want to provide good service................Just that.

[Stoopid American]

12:54 AM on 11/16/2011

So pathetic. The record labels still have not figured out how irrelevant they are. They blame piracy for their drop in revenue. The simple fact is that musicians do not need them any more.

[mike1tofa]

06:46 AM on 11/16/2011

That's not true. Labels don't work by themselves, and it takes many other services, as well as spending, worldwide to even make money. It's easy saying musicians don't need labels, and need only the Internet. Haven't seen many breakout Interstart stars. Have you? You just have substandard musicans who don't have the ability to put out good work, is the problem. Everyone has an excuse for why they didn't make it................Many don't realize they aren't talented enough to make something a lot of people want........................simple as that.

[Desolati0n]

07:48 AM on 11/16/2011

Are you familiar with Tyler, The Creator, Tech N9ne, Mac Miller, Chris Webby, and Justin Bieber?

Mac Miller, he put out music with his friends, and he's now a very popular rapper. Justin Bieber, he was found on youtube. Tyler, The Creator, and Tech N9ne, they make their own beats, record their own stuff, and then advertise themselves. Chris Webby, same thing.
So I don't know what you are even ranting on about. Sounds like blasphemy to me.

[SnapLake]

09:23 AM on 11/16/2011

I dont think you know what your talking about. It is recording companies that created the industry paradigm that more or less made it unprofitable to go indy. Its an inter-connected web of advertising corps, financing corps, distributors and lawyers that wasnt created by artists. Try to get a major radio station to play an indy produced song... good luck. And now they want MORE!!

[Mikeeee]

12:33 AM on 11/16/2011

This has always been the case. Corporate profits will always take precedence over peoples freedoms.
Has anyone else noticed that for entities (corporations) that are recognized as persons, just how few laws that apply to you and me are ever applied against corporations.
Funny that.

[jflorish]

12:16 AM on 11/16/2011

Of course Schmidt is "blasting" copyright laws, he copied the iphone so why not copy everything else.

[Sacchinftw]

03:15 PM on 11/16/2011

Ya know, if Apple would just put their code out then the world would be able to see how much of Android was copied from them, but since Android is open source and Apple can already see how similar the two operating system are, maybe they just don't want to embarrass themselves...

[jflorish]

06:44 PM on 11/16/2011

No way, don't need all the security problems android has.