LS asks: if this happened in the early part of the last century, would we now be able to listen to popular music on the radio?

US Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), a long-time ally of the RIAA and MPAA, has formally introduced the INDUCE Act to the US Senate Judiciary Committee. Following in the footsteps of the Pirate Act, the INDUCE Act would give the green light for copyright holders to sue the creators of peer-to-peer applications. . . .

US Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), a long-time ally of the RIAA and MPAA, has formally introduced the INDUCE Act to the US Senate Judiciary Committee. Following in the footsteps of the Pirate Act, the INDUCE Act would give the green light for copyright holders to sue the creators of peer-to-peer applications. His rationale? The companies are profiting by turning our nation's youth into thieves and pirates:

"It is illegal and immoral to induce or encourage children to commit crimes," Hatch, a Utah Republican, said in a statement. "Tragically, some corporations now seem to think that they can legally profit by inducing children to steal. Some think they can legally lure children into breaking the law with false promises of 'free music.'"

If enacted, the bill would open up new inroads for litigation, allowing copyright holders to so bring legal action against any entity that a "reasonable person" would believe "intentionally aids, abets, induces or procures" violation of copyrights. This would mark a new, lower standard for infringement, as it currently applies only to "contributory or vicarious copyright infringement." This would mean that instead of demonstrating that creators of P2P software either were themselves guilty of copyright violations or directly induced someone else, plaintiffs would merely have to convince a jury that P2P companies could be inducing consumers to copyrighted content by developing the software itself.

The link for this article located at arstechnica.com is no longer available.