Copyright infringement has been a crime since Elizabethan times. And yes, you can go to prison for it.
This law is just going to make it easier to get convictions for people who stream content regularly and for a profit. Most likely because some congressman got a nice payment from the anti-piracy pressure groups.
Whoever got the idea that this would ban all gaming videos and brickfilms from youtube is stupid. Way back when Notch was a one man team he made it pretty clear that anything you made using minecraft is yours and not his. It's not breaking copyright to upload it. And LEGO clearly supports brickfilming. Then there is fair use which covers the rest of the stuff you're talking about.

Gaming vids and Brickfilms are basicly Adds for the game or lego anyway...

Looks like there's going to be a surge in jail population.     Absolutely ridiculous is this actually happens.

You'll be walking da green mile bro!

Probably not.

I've actually thought about the same thing, Bionicle Hero, However, I am somewhat worried about the little hings on all the studs that say LEGO on them.

Fun fact: a study from the GfK (Society for Consumer Research) showed, that movie pirates visit a real cinema more often than the average moviegoer. They even pay more money for their tickets (weekend). Surprise, surprise... maybe because they really love films
A copyright law is nothing bad, there are lots of good reasons, why we need one, but it should be based on the reality of the 21st century and not the 18th or 19th century. When Gutenberg came up with letterpress printing the old medieval scriptoria really were pissed and they did everything to change the times back to the old system. Well, today we don't write books by hand anymore and the monopoly of the scriptoria is long gone. When they don't want to accept the changes, the copyright mafia will die as well. There are enough new systems like crowd funding or creative commons coming up.

You're right. Lego is trademarked, not copyrighted. Stop worrying, everyone. If this bill passes, we'll still be able to make brickfilms.

We just can't make brickfilms with copyrighted stuff like Star Wars in them, that's all.

The Lego name is a trademark as well, so don't worry.

People create peace. The government enforces it.

What this boils down to is pretty simple: someone owns something and doesn't want someone else to profit from it. This bill isn't designed to knock brickfilmers off the internet. It's designed to protect someone's intellectual property. How would you feel if someone took one of your films, posted it to Youtube, and started earning money off of it? Don't give me the whole, "but they're big companies and we're just po' little folk", because it's their stuff you are using if you are violating this bill, regardless of whether they are making $1 or $1,000,000. Theft is theft.

Yes, there is some very imprecise language in the bill that could translate to a company pressing charges over Let's Plays or content within a brickfilm, but there's more to it than that. The general consensus around here seems to be "...but Let's Plays are free advertising, anyone who would reject that is a stoopid head!". I want you to consider something: why do companies put so much effort into PR and advertising? Brand image. Now consider something else: brand image can be destroyed by any 12 year old with a Youtube account and a few subscribers. If someone dubbed over one of your films with a load of incest and sodomy jokes, I doubt many of you would say, "Hey this is great, I'm getting free advertising!". The government isn't going to be the one pursuing these cases, that responsibility will fall to the company. You're right, a good Let's Play can be a great form of product promotion, but you can bet that any company worth their salt will jump at the chance to crush anything that promotes their product in a way they don't agree with. And the kicker is that they can do this right now. LEGO can take you to court for making brickfilms right now. The bill doesn't give them the power to do that- they already have it.

This bill was created to crack down on a form of piracy that has been difficult to regulate in the past. Yes, it gives another avenue for a property holder to challenge your right to make a piece of media incorporating their material, but that's nothing new. If you don't stream copyrighted material without permission, nothing will change. None of us have had the right to use someone's stuff without permission, so I don't see why people are crying about a bill that just defines the punishment for doing so a tad more.