Study Finds Americans Opposed to RIAA Suing Direct Infringers - INDUCE Act (IICA) Supporters Cheer

Legal website Findlaw has released the results of a study about Americans' attitudes toward the RIAA lawsuits against filesharers. Read the press release: FindLaw Survey Reveals RIAA Lawsuits Unpopular with Americans. The survey found that:

According to the national survey by FindLaw, 56 percent of American adults oppose the lawsuits. Thirty-seven percent support the industry's legal actions. Seven percent of those surveyed had no opinion. One thousand adults were surveyed, with results accurate plus or minus three percent.

Problem. The questions were apparently regarding the RIAA suing downloaders. Downloaders. Even survey firms are still so clueless they can't distinguish between downloaders and uploaders. I imagine the percentages would be somewhat different if the questions were framed regarding uploaders, though I'm sure the lawsuits will still be unpopular.

That's not the important point, however. In the near term, this survey will lend support to those trying to get the INDUCE Act (née IICA) passed. One of the major reasons that the RIAA, MPAA and BSA ostensibly support the INDUCE Act is because they claim to not want to sue end-users but only the P2P companies. This survey will lend their argument support. For example, let's see what Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) had to say about this issue when he introduced the Act:

In theory, a rule that immunizes inducement still permits enforcement against those induced to infringe. At first, this remedy seems viable because copyrights have traditionally been enforced in lawsuits against direct infringers who actually make infringing copies of works.

But a fallacy lurks here: The “direct infringers” at issue are not the traditional targets for copyright enforcement. In fact, they are children and consumers: They are the hundreds of millions of Americans – toddlers to seniors – who use and enjoy the creative works that copyrights have helped create.

There is no precedent for shifting copyright enforcement toward the end-users of works. For nearly 200 years, copyright law has been nearly invisible to the millions who used and enjoyed creative works. Copyright law was invisible to consumers because the law gave creators and distributors mutual incentives to negotiate the agreements that ensured that works reached consumers in forms that were safe to use in foreseeable ways. Now, those incentives are collapsing. As a result, artists must now waive their rights or sue consumers – their fans.

Worse yet, artists must sue their fans for the sin of misusing devices designed to be easy and tempting to misuse. That is unfair: When inducement is the disease, infringement can be seen as just a symptom. Yet artists must ignore inducers who profit by chanting, “Hey, kids, infringement is cool, and we will help you get away with it.” Instead, artists can only sue kids who succumb to this temptation. They must leave Fagin to his work – and sue Oliver Twist....

Today, artists are suing high-volume filesharers who cannot be identified until late in the process. One filesharer sued for violating federal law over 800 times turned out to be a 12-year-old female honor student. This otherwise law-abiding young girl and her family then faced ruin by the girl’s favorite artists. The public knew that something was wrong, and it was outraged. So the people who gave that girl an easily misused toy – and profited from her misuse of it – exploited public outrage with crocodile tears about the tactics of “Big Music.” And then, I imagine, they laughed all the way to the bank.

With regard to this study, Hatch will be laughing all the way to a vote on the Senate floor.

via Tech Law Advisor