Hollywood is pushing a bill in California (California Assembly Bill 2735 and California Senate Bill 1506) that would require anyone but a copyright-holder who knowingly transmits commercial audio or video over the Net to attach their true name and address. From the bill:

This bill would provide that it is a crime, punishable by a fine not exceeding $2,500, imprisonment in a county jail for a period not exceeding one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment for a person who is not the copyright owner to knowingly electronically disseminate a commercial recording or audiovisual work without disclosing his or her true name and address, and the title of the recording or audiovisual work.

…

This bill would also provide that a court may order the forfeiture and destruction of articles upon which sounds or images can be stored, electronic files, and electronic and other devices in connection with a violation of these provisions.

There are a few exceptions for distributing to one’s immediate family and over a household network, but it doesn’t exempt fair use or even allow a copyright holder to grant permission for anonymous distribution. As I read it, it includes iTunes-sharing at work and even over-the-network backup.

EFF is seeing their “evil pirates” card and raising them one “protect the children” card:

“These California anti-anonymity bills would force everyone — including children — to put their real names and addresses on all the files they trade, regardless of whether the files actually infringe copyrights,” said EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn. “Because the bills require Internet users to post personally identifying information, they fly directly in the face of policy goals and laws that prevent identity theft and spam and protect children and domestic violence victims.”

Mr. Fantastic, are you out there?

The New York Times is rattling their legal sabers at a blogger who posted a parody corrections page, causing his ISP to force him to remove the post under threat of the DMCA. Looks like the Times is less upset about the parody and more about the fact that its author, Robert Cox of The National Debate blog, copied their HTML verbatim including live links to the nytimes.com website and banner ads. Worse yet, he included (horrors!) instructions on how to create your own parody page. I won’t reprint the instructions here for fear of legal repercussions, but it involves use of the “view source” menu option and a text editor. Even so, as Kevin Drum at Calpundit posted, “you’d think the publisher of the Pentagon Papers would show a little more respect for free speech and a little more tolerance for criticism.”

I’d add that you’d think after the Fox News v. Franken debacle the Times would realize trying to suppress a parody online is like smashing a blob of Mercury. As is becoming the standard for rerouting around censorship on the Net, Cox posted the following on his site:

While I want to “fight the good fight”, discretion is still the better part of valor and so I feel compelled to take down my parody of a New York Times Columnist Correction page. I have not, however, given up.

Today, I am announcing the creation of THE NEW YORK TIMES COLUMNIST CORRECTION POLICY PROJECT. I am looking for volunteers who are willing to mirror my fake Times web page. The original page will serve as a directory to the mirrored sites. I will list the home page and the mirror page of all project participants. For those who get a “cease and desist” letter from The Times I would ask you to avoid a conflict with The Times and remove the page. I will then list your home page in the “Fallen Heroes” page.

So far he has 14 mirrors spanning four countries, and more importantly the fight is starting to get reported in the mainstream media. To quote Cox, “Whoever said ‘never get into an argument with people who buy ink by the barrel’ never heard of the Blogosphere.”

The Indy Channel reports that George Michael (half of the hit 80’s duo Wham) has announced that after his next album he’s quitting the music industry — and shifting to giving away his music for free download:

“I’ve been very well remunerated as they say for my talents over the years, so I really don’t need the public’s money,” said Michael. “I’d really like to have something on the Internet with charitable donation optional, where anyone can download my music for free. I’ll have my favorite charities up there and people will hopefully contribute to that.”

Michael said that he expects this move will lower his public profile, since few people will care about him if he’s “not making money for someone.” He also believes he will enjoy the process of making music much more, once he is not contractually bound to release albums on a pre-determined schedule.

Michael is one of many high-profile artists with a bone to pick with the music cartel, having practically stopped his career after a bitter legal battle with his label, Columbia. Hopefully the few winners from the previous system will be able to blaze a new trail that newcomers with more to lose can follow.