Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act and open source (responces mailed to Oregon Senator Ron Wyden)

The GNU General Public License (GPL) is currently free in theory only.
Since it's not a legally binding contract, open source programs like some torrants (youtube converters included) can be called programs for copyright infringement (closed source freeware as well).

I think open source programs should be free in a legal sense instead of just common sense.
Each movie studio bundle (like Disney and Dreamworks) and TV bundle (like Viacom stations) will have it's own exclusive Video Player, complete with footprints, fingerprints, watermark, original credit, and Website URL.
A link to the player download page (not the file itself) will be on a third party site, which will host the same videos without the footprints, fingerprints, and watermark (original credit and URL are not embedded in videos).
As long as the downloader has access to the exclusive player (free for non commercial use), all of it's files are fair game (advertising only on source's player).

The GPL says the file can be freely distributed if the recipient has access to the source [code] and full instructions are intact and not altered in any way.
The thing left out is the sender must have consent of the recipient (you can't just send a porn link and sex video and think it's perfectly acceptable) and optionally a request for the file.

I think this would work for file sharers, as it's pretty much what Mozilla/Grease Monkey had in mind to begin with (third party site and advertisers may not sell, disclose, or share any information about the downloader. Commercial use of videos with author's consent and purchase of license).

Tell me what you think of this plan, how it could be better, and what to do about counterfeiting.

Anyone care to respond and perhaps add to this?
You might even help the Senator save the Internet.

how will companies generate revenue?
and with so may competing players, wouldn't it be far better to adopt a single standard for a universal media player?
the way i'm understanding this is that such entertainment should be put under copyLEFT/GPL?

how will companies generate revenue?
and with so may competing players, wouldn't it be far better to adopt a single standard for a universal media player?
the way i'm understanding this is that such entertainment should be put under copyLEFT/GPL?

I'm not sure I understand your question.
Why wouldn't profit be made with competing players?

What I mean about open source, is just about using their rules:
Access to the actual source with the ability of file altering outside of the original player.
This would also be combined with my plan of a universal player/recorder (includes video games) which can edit videos/FMVs in a non censored manner (voice as well as motion), meaning the original player would play cleaned up videos and animation, but once the video is downloaded, extra customized content can be entered, like reverse filters (adult content password protected until shutdown).

Arti wrote:

how will companies generate revenue?
and with so may competing players, wouldn't it be far better to adopt a single standard for a universal media player?
the way i'm understanding this is that such entertainment should be put under copyLEFT/GPL?

I'm not sure I understand your question.
Why wouldn't profit be made with competing players?

What I mean about open source, is just about using their rules:
Access to the actual source with the ability of file altering outside of the original player.
This would also be combined with my plan of a universal player/recorder (includes video games) which can edit videos/FMVs in a non censored manner (voice as well as motion), meaning the original player would play cleaned up videos and animation, but once the video is downloaded, extra customized content can be entered, like reverse filters (adult content password protected until shutdown).

i think in my confusion i asked a question that only made things more confused.
anyone have experience in these matters or familiarity with GPL? if so, please chime in on this.

I think I can explain it better this way:
CBS, NBC, ABC, Fox, CW, WB, etc., each has it's own "virtual TV".
Profit comes from the use of this TV for renting all of the network's programs (which is where the fingerprints come in).
An unofficial Website removes these fingerprints when each program is taken off the TV.
This Website becomes a proxy for an official network, assuring anonymity for the (paranoid) visitor.
This will also be done with the movies.

I didn't really think of it, but this is not an original idea.
Someone used this plan (or something like it) once before.
RIAA request for trillions in LimeWire copyright case is 'absurd,' judge says

I don't know why the link isn't working.

Apparently there's a new one (download URL not provided).