SOPA

[Terring 6,473]

All communities will be dead!

With this logic, the websites of the American government should be banned, because they use eagles in their logos... and eagles made by the Mother Nature, not by the government.

[Zelgadis 638]

Now that SOPA is dying off with its sponsors dropping like flies, we're going to need to start turning our attention to more insidious practices.

Since the big, blunt force bill did not make it, bet on the US government to start chipping away at internet freedoms little by little. They will try to tuck little bits of legislation away in places unnoticed. They'll hope the provisions are too small to get a big reaction.

Vigilance!

ISF

[emperordaniel 1,281]

I agree with you. I definitely believe that if this doesn't pass (as seems to be likely), as "they" wouldn't be able to do this all at once, they will try to, slowly but surely, accomplish exactly what SOPA attempted to do, but one freedom removed at a time (and often disguised in fancy talk), instead of blowing up the mountain all at once.

[Larks2242 251]

Who can ensure us that this stuff is only against piracy? Who can ensure us that only the American government will start banning sites for nothing? A world-wide dictatorship is coming on. Will you accept it?

I'm sure the senators withdrew their support, when they found out they could no longer vandalize their opponents wiki pages.

[Alejandro24 575]

I found this article, that says SOPA is not necessary with the actual laws against piracy:

http://www.informador.com.mx/tecnologia/2012/351598/6/ni-eu-ni-mexico-requieren-ley-sopa-si-se-cumplen-leyes-existentes.htm

Corruption in the governments?

[Jazzmaster 716]

All communities will be dead!

With this logic, the websites of the American government should be banned, because they use eagles in their logos... and eagles made by the Mother Nature, not by the government.

Sorry, but this argument doesn't make any sense. Under the argument you just made, Simtropolis would be sued because the colour of the banner is mostly blue, which is the same as the colour of the sky on a clear sunny day and we've no rights to it.

I understand that people are passionate about how hurtful this law is, but let's not get so far into it that we start making our own incorrect arguments and fallacies just to spite the other side.

Now that SOPA is dying off with its sponsors dropping like flies, we're going to need to start turning our attention to more insidious practices.

Since the big, blunt force bill did not make it, bet on the US government to start chipping away at internet freedoms little by little. They will try to tuck little bits of legislation away in places unnoticed. They'll hope the provisions are too small to get a big reaction.

Vigilance!

ISF

Bringing the frog to a boil, as they would say.

But, you're right. My Facebook (yes, lol) exploded with protest about SOPA. Many of them changed their profile pictures to stop signs but with 'STOP SOPA' printed on them, or similar. One question I had for all of them was "well, it's great that we are acknowledging this now, but are we going to engage in the political efficacy and law abiding methods(let's face it, piracy is a huge problem, and without it this bill may not have even been thought of), or are we going to just temporarily emerge because the government might go after our precious internet, and then go back to burying our heads in the sand? I certainly hope it's the former. The only reason I ask this is because the NDAA is equally as concerning and threatens our rights just as much, but the absence of concern for that bill compared to SOPA makes it even more alarming. At least to me.

  Edited January 20, 2012 by Yoshiisland  

[nas786 104]

Now that SOPA is dying off with its sponsors dropping like flies, we're going to need to start turning our attention to more insidious practices.

Since the big, blunt force bill did not make it, bet on the US government to start chipping away at internet freedoms little by little. They will try to tuck little bits of legislation away in places unnoticed. They'll hope the provisions are too small to get a big reaction.

Vigilance!

ISF

This is what I'm afraid of. At least for now we're good. I hate the thought of the internet becoming the same propaganda machine as the corporate controlled US media/gov't. I think the whole anti-piracy thing is just a smoke screen.

[Alejandro24 575]

All communities will be dead!

With this logic, the websites of the American government should be banned, because they use eagles in their logos... and eagles made by the Mother Nature, not by the government.

Well not all the comunities, fortunately for people who is outside the US, like me and you, can use the .onion -or other- protocoles, because we're outside, while inside with SOPA that could be illegal.

Also in that way of logic, everything is possible, but Mother Nature doesn't need a law for claiming its rights in the world.

...

This is what I'm afraid of. At least for now we're good. I hate the thought of the internet becoming the same propaganda machine as the corporate controlled US media/gov't. I think the whole anti-piracy thing is just a smoke screen.

A smoke screen, for what? What could be behind that somke screen? Only US-American citizens could know it, but Sí el río suena, es porque agua lleva.

[hym 358]

People who think that SOPA only affects those inside the US are wrong. The US doesn't have exclusive control over the internet, but it controls a vast majority of the infrastructure that makes the global internet possible. For example, all of the internet traffic that AT&T handles for Asia (and AT&T handles a lot of Asia's internet traffic) routes through a single set of servers in a single room on a single floor of a single building in Los Angeles. If AT&T was so inclined, it could throw a single power switch and isolate a huge portion of Asia's access to the rest of the global internet infrastructure. Through the government and the private sector, the US controls nearly all of the major communications systems that allow Asia, the Americas, and Europe to communicate with each other. If the President was ever given an "internet kill switch" as was discussed a while back, he could more or less shut down the global internet.

[Zelgadis 638]

I don't believe that piracy is as big a problem as the industry associations say it is. A recent Swiss study suggested that people spend no less on entertainment than they used to, so the question becomes, where's that money going?

It's simplistic to categorize piracy as being the same as stealing. I know a good number of people who use it to sample before purchase. Then there's a grey area of pirating something that one would never have spent money on in the first place. Something in which that person only had a fleeting interest. I discovered my favorite singer ever, Tarja Turunen, on Youtube when someone used one of her songs as BGM to a video. I now have all of her CDs. I've never heard her on radio. I've never seen her advertised. Her CDs are tucked away in an obscure section of the record store. I discovered an entire new genre of music I like because of her and because of Youtube, something SOPA and similar legislation would effectively kill.

No doubt there are absolute pirates out there who simply want to get out of paying for anything. I don't think that number is near as big as the industry associations say they are.

Years ago, Krispy Kreme doughnuts dramatically overexpanded, stretched its resources too thin, and nearly collapsed. The incompetent CEO attributed the sharp drop the the Atkins diet to cover for bad management. Honestly, I think the MPAA and the RIAA are similarly blaming pirates for their spectacular bad management and utter failure to adapt to new economic realities. They don't understand it, so they want to kill it instead of finding a way to harness it.

I still buy CDs, but nowhere near as many as I used to. Most of the CDs I buy are relative unknowns nowadays. What can I do? Ever since New Kids on the Block, the record industry has, more and more, been pushing talentless, manufactured, autotuned crap in my face. Hey, Queen may have been glam rock, but at least Freddie had wicked mad skills. Sadly, good talent is made-over, remanufactured, and resold until it's unrecognizable from anything resembling talent. And the RIAA wonders why I'm so jaded.

As for the MPAA, spend less on movies! I can't remember a time, ever, when the person starring in a movie has influenced my decision to go see it. I'm much more interested in the Director. Save $100m, at least, by hiring good actors and let Tom Cruise retire in Crazyland in peace.

ISF

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Likewise, cause of the loose language, ST is also affected. Make a building with a popular brand on it like say a fast food chain? The bill can be used to sue the site out.

Electronic Arts can also sue us for using SimCity 4 screenshots in the first place. D:

If this bill passes, I predict SC4 will be mostly dead by the end of the year.

I think that this site and the STEX especially would be considered to be free advertising for most of the companies involved. Nonetheless, the legal beagles will try to convince business that we are bad for them so they should sue. Hopefully, the masters at law (you do have them in your court system don't you?) should kill any such frivolous suits. The courts are busy enough as it is.

There is enough clout in the current copyright law to take care of pirates anyway. They are simply thieves dealing in stolen goods. Should be covered by state law and federal law if the commerce is across state lines. Why do they need special legislation, other than to glamorize some pols, and make a fuss when none is needed?

[FreewayofFlight 41]

Wouldn't this law contradict the Fair Use Doctrine of the Copyright Law of 1976?

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Wouldn't this law contradict the Fair Use Doctrine of the Copyright Law of 1976?

Don't know. Care to quote the passage that is relevant?

Statute law has two bad things about it: there are too many of them; and they override precedent.

[Alejandro24 575]

Breaking news, Megaupload is Offline: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-16642369

[Meg 368]

My internet has been out of service most of the day. It would be paranoid to think that this outage is related to my anti-SOPA recent activities, wouldn't it?

[Easy Bakes 253]

All communities will be dead!

With this logic, the websites of the American government should be banned, because they use eagles in their logos... and eagles made by the Mother Nature, not by the government.

Well not all the comunities, fortunately for people who is outside the US, like me and you, can use the .onion -or other- protocoles, because we're outside, while inside with SOPA that could be illegal.

Also in that way of logic, everything is possible, but Mother Nature doesn't need a law for claiming its rights in the world.

...

This is what I'm afraid of. At least for now we're good. I hate the thought of the internet becoming the same propaganda machine as the corporate controlled US media/gov't. I think the whole anti-piracy thing is just a smoke screen.

A smoke screen, for what? What could be behind that somke screen? Only US-American citizens could know it, but Sí el río suena, es porque agua lleva.

Mabey the kids would spend time outside instead.

[hym 358]

My internet has been out of service most of the day. It would be paranoid to think that this outage is related to my anti-SOPA recent activities, wouldn't it?

Considering I signed the petition and haven't had any problems, I think it might be a little bit paranoid.

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

My internet has been out of service most of the day. It would be paranoid to think that this outage is related to my anti-SOPA recent activities, wouldn't it?

Considering I signed the petition and haven't had any problems, I think it might be a little bit paranoid.

Agreed. What has your ISP been saying about it?

[nas786 104]

...

This is what I'm afraid of. At least for now we're good. I hate the thought of the internet becoming the same propaganda machine as the corporate controlled US media/gov't. I think the whole anti-piracy thing is just a smoke screen.

A smoke screen, for what? What could be behind that somke screen? Only US-American citizens could know it, but Sí el río suena, es porque agua lleva.

A smoke screen for the internet companies to have total control over what they want to show. See the way the u.s. media works is very interesting, about 6 major corporations control OVER 99% of ALL media, including tv, radio, newspapers, and magazines. So, for examploe, although People, AOL, and CNN may sound like separate companies, they are actually all owned by Time Warner. Now if all of these or most of these 6 companies all have a common interest they can very easily pick and choose what kinds of stories to run or not run in mass media in order to sway public opinion. Also these companies have ties with other big corporations, so for example a company like lockheed and martin (a weapons manufacturing company) has an objective to sell weapons to the u.s. gov't (using taxpayer money), and they can help push their agenda through media and try and sell war to the public. Its a common tactic that's been being used since the mid 20th century. I'm not sure how the rest of the world is, but in the u.s. the mass media is VERY filtered. This is how you end up with a population in which over 50% of the citizens support going to war with Iraq, for example. So although on the surface it looks like if you watch fox news vs nbc you're getting to completely different view points, really its not the case. The bigger agenda is all the same.

The one bright spot in all of this is the fact that the internet is "free". So although you may have to dig around a little bit, at least we have access to other media outlets, to see the opinions or viewpoints of everyone else around the world. As a corporation trying to create obedient consumers, this is counter productive. So I guess now they're trying to have total control to what information we do and don't have access too.

I'm sure there are also other facets to this, but this is the one I'm most worried about.

  Edited January 20, 2012 by nas786  

[Alejandro24 575]

My internet has been out of service most of the day. It would be paranoid to think that this outage is related to my anti-SOPA recent activities, wouldn't it?

Considering I signed the petition and haven't had any problems, I think it might be a little bit paranoid.

Agreed. What has your ISP been saying about it?

I don't know If it have relation, but I've readed about the same kind of comments but in Taringa: the internet is not working correctly in Argentina. A comment says about the DNS. Of course this is a note, not a paranoid.

Here is the sign againts SOPA for foreigners -that's I've readed-: http://sopastrike.com/strike

[2farnorth 26]

Surely this contradicts the Bill of rights, and they couldn't just block half of the worlds internet. Stand against SOPA, and protect free speech!

[Meg 368]

SOPA action delayed in House until ‘wider consensus’

By Hayley Tsukayama, Friday, January 20, 11:17 AM

The main sponsor of a House bill targeting online piracy announced Friday that he will postpone further action on the measure that has triggered fierce protests, blackouts from Internet sites and some rethinking among lawmakers.

The action by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Tex.) on the Stop Online Piracy Act came a couple of hours after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said that he would delay a cloture vote on a similar Senate bill, the Protect IP (Intellectual Property) Act.

. . . . .

Internet protest stalls online piracy bills in Congress

Washington (CNN) - In the wake of a high profile and stunningly effective protest by some of the biggest brand names on the Internet, congressional leaders announced Friday they would shelve two online piracy bills that once had broad bipartisan support.

Top Democrats in the Senate have known for days that the bill was unlikely to survive the protest, which was supported by web mainstays like Google, Twitter, and Wikipedia. That became even clearer after the blackout of some websites Wednesday when a flood of lawmakers from both parties changed their positions and said they would no longer vote for the bill unless it was reworked.

. . . .

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

^ Blah, blah, blither, blither. Watch out for those guys. If they could slip in the NDAA, they'll find some way to slip in SOPA/PIPA with the original wording if they are not watched. Cunning little illegitimates. Janus is the god of all politicians.

[Ocram's Razr 964]

My electricity went out earlier this week so I moved to my grandmother's house. Now I am at my Dad's house. The power will not be restored in her neighborhood until next week. US copyright law is partially despicable and partially laughable. Megaupload was taken down even though the vast majority of files on it are legitimate and legal and it is endorsed by celebrities that are typically pirated.

[Meg 368]

^ Blah, blah, blither, blither. Watch out for those guys. If they could slip in the NDAA, they'll find some way to slip in SOPA/PIPA with the original wording if they are not watched.

True, we have won a battle but not the war.

FYI, the response I received from my congressman:

Thank you for contacting me to express your concerns about H.R. 3261, the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA). I appreciate hearing from you about this important issue and welcome the opportunity to respond.

I believe that SOPA in its current form is unworkable. The internet has been a vital tool for innovation, creativity and economic growth for individuals and communities. I believe that it is critical we put in place an online regulatory framework that ensures the relationship between online consumers and industry is fair and equitable -- all the while ensuring we do not unintentionally stifle the ingenuity and openness that has enabled the internet and online commerce to thrive. However, online piracy is a real problem and internet commerce should not be a mechanism for abusive business practices, violations of individual privacy rights or copyright infringement. To that end, I strongly believe intellectual property and privacy laws should apply to all forms of commerce.

H.R. 3261 would authorize the Department of Justice or a copyright or trademark holder to seek a court order blocking a rogue site committing or facilitating online piracy. It would also require online service providers, Internet search engines, payment network providers and Internet advertising services to carry out certain preventative measures including withholding services or blocking access to infringing sites. In particular, I believe the legislation, as written, is overly broad and could place unintended limits on free speech and threaten legitimate web sites. As this legislation proceeds, it will be critical that we settle on a policy that strikes the right balance between the protection of online intellectual property and the promotion of an open and free internet. SOPA has been referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. Although I do not serve on this committee, I will be sure to keep your views in mind should the full House of Representatives consider H.R. 3261 or other relevant legislation.

Again, I appreciate hearing from you. Please do not hesitate to contact me about other issues of concern to you in the future.

[Cobraroll 138]

People who think that SOPA only affects those inside the US are wrong. The US doesn't have exclusive control over the internet, but it controls a vast majority of the infrastructure that makes the global internet possible. For example, all of the internet traffic that AT&T handles for Asia (and AT&T handles a lot of Asia's internet traffic) routes through a single set of servers in a single room on a single floor of a single building in Los Angeles. If AT&T was so inclined, it could throw a single power switch and isolate a huge portion of Asia's access to the rest of the global internet infrastructure. Through the government and the private sector, the US controls nearly all of the major communications systems that allow Asia, the Americas, and Europe to communicate with each other. If the President was ever given an "internet kill switch" as was discussed a while back, he could more or less shut down the global internet.

The thing is, for how long? Do you really think the rest of the world would start crying and say "Oh no please America, give us our Internet back!"? I think that even if the US went to a massive legal action against the Internet, it would take a month or so for it to be up again. We have the means to build the necessary infrastructure outside the US too, you know. Yes, the newborn Net would be a whole lot of sites smaller, a huge amount of services lacking compared to what it has today, but it would quickly be up and kicking again. If, say, YouTube went down, it would create a tremendous gap in the market, dying to be filled. I'm quite sure an European or Asian service would be able to fill that gap rather quickly. Same with Facebook. PayPal. Twitter. Tumblr. Flickr. Whatevr. Heck, the new Twitter could actually be Chinese, seeing as their micro blogging service Weibo has about 450 million users already.

Then you'd have the existing companies moving out of America. I'm pretty sure that for instance Google could simply shut down their American branch and take the entire shebang across the pond, given some time for preparations. The worst-case SOPA nightmare isn't about the Internet passing away. It would be the Internet leaving America. And even the most die-hard Republicans would hate to see that happen.

Pretty sure that piracy would survive, though. Face it, you can't beat a creative and motivated populace through legal action alone. Unmasked suppression, 1984-style, would be needed to keep a population your size in check.

[Alejandro24 575]

People who think that SOPA only affects those inside the US are wrong. The US doesn't have exclusive control over the internet, but it controls a vast majority of the infrastructure that makes the global internet possible. For example, all of the internet traffic that AT&T handles for Asia (and AT&T handles a lot of Asia's internet traffic) routes through a single set of servers in a single room on a single floor of a single building in Los Angeles. If AT&T was so inclined, it could throw a single power switch and isolate a huge portion of Asia's access to the rest of the global internet infrastructure. Through the government and the private sector, the US controls nearly all of the major communications systems that allow Asia, the Americas, and Europe to communicate with each other. If the President was ever given an "internet kill switch" as was discussed a while back, he could more or less shut down the global internet.

The thing is, for how long? Do you really think the rest of the world would start crying and say "Oh no please America, give us our Internet back!"? I think that even if the US went to a massive legal action against the Internet, it would take a month or so for it to be up again. We have the means to build the necessary infrastructure outside the US too, you know. Yes, the newborn Net would be a whole lot of sites smaller, a huge amount of services lacking compared to what it has today, but it would quickly be up and kicking again. If, say, YouTube went down, it would create a tremendous gap in the market, dying to be filled. I'm quite sure an European or Asian service would be able to fill that gap rather quickly. Same with Facebook. PayPal. Twitter. Tumblr. Flickr. Whatevr. Heck, the new Twitter could actually be Chinese, seeing as their micro blogging service Weibo has about 450 million users already.

Then you'd have the existing companies moving out of America. I'm pretty sure that for instance Google could simply shut down their American branch and take the entire shebang across the pond, given some time for preparations. The worst-case SOPA nightmare isn't about the Internet passing away. It would be the Internet leaving America. And even the most die-hard Republicans would hate to see that happen.

Pretty sure that piracy would survive, though. Face it, you can't beat a creative and motivated populace through legal action alone. Unmasked suppression, 1984-style, would be needed to keep a population your size in check.

Well, this is a true. If SOPA and related is approved there will be data heavens outside the US. Despite as foreigners from the US at the start this law will affect us a lot, but we can reborn the net, including with new comunication protocols, correcting errors of the past, and re-adapting our law codes avoiding cases like Sinde, Hadopi, Döring and SOPA... in the best scenario. Here the US is in the risk to go to a dark age.

I suppose the confusion with hym is because I said that this law will not affect us at all, as we can use Tor and the US users not because will be illegal.

  Edited January 20, 2012 by Alejandro24  

[Ganaram Inukshuk 906]

Pretty sure that piracy would survive, though. Face it, you can't beat a creative and motivated populace through legal action alone. Unmasked suppression, 1984-style, would be needed to keep a population your size in check.

Agreed, and I (and at least one other person has did the same) have been making references to American Alcohol Prohibition. Ban booze production and distribution, and you end up with an "underground" economy doing what's supposed to be banned.

And I'm quoting this from a similar post I made on another site:

So long as the people have the power, it's all good. How to suck out all of that power until the people are just shells of people is probably as impossible as drawing blood out of alchemically converted lead using a stone that you killed using two birds.

People already know enough, probably too much, if you wanna take it into that context. This is the kind of stuff that could potentially break an entire planet, but in my opinion, it would take far more government power in the entire world to even enforce SOPA. And SOPA is mere child's play; There are a lot of bigger things that can break a planet, and they don't have to be copyright or piracy laws... All it has to do is concern the population, that's it.

You're forgetting (or maybe not) that the US is a democracy, a representative democracy, for that matter. The people have the power to vote in people to do the governing for them, and if the people don't like that person, they can simply vote for someone else in the next election. Well, what do you know? It's 2012. And you know what that means,...

[Easy Bakes 253]

SOPA action delayed in House until ‘wider consensus’

By Hayley Tsukayama, Friday, January 20, 11:17 AM

The main sponsor of a House bill targeting online piracy announced Friday that he will postpone further action on the measure that has triggered fierce protests, blackouts from Internet sites and some rethinking among lawmakers.

The action by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Tex.) on the Stop Online Piracy Act came a couple of hours after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said that he would delay a cloture vote on a similar Senate bill, the Protect IP (Intellectual Property) Act.

. . . . .

Internet protest stalls online piracy bills in Congress

Washington (CNN) - In the wake of a high profile and stunningly effective protest by some of the biggest brand names on the Internet, congressional leaders announced Friday they would shelve two online piracy bills that once had broad bipartisan support.

Top Democrats in the Senate have known for days that the bill was unlikely to survive the protest, which was supported by web mainstays like Google, Twitter, and Wikipedia. That became even clearer after the blackout of some websites Wednesday when a flood of lawmakers from both parties changed their positions and said they would no longer vote for the bill unless it was reworked.

. . . .

Yes Wider Consensus means when they can slip it past unnoticed like they tried to do this time.but this time we noticed and public opinion swayed them to do the right thing. the voters spoke.

now remember the names of these bills sponsors and vote them out in November even

if they with drew their support.remember they only withdrew their support when they were forced too.

[Tarkus 6,932]

Electronic Arts can also sue us for using SimCity 4 screenshots in the first place. D:

If this bill passes, I predict SC4 will be mostly dead by the end of the year.

There's really nothing for them to gain by doing so, and in fact, the continued posting of SC4 screenshots promotes their game and helps their bottom line. They're still actively promoting SC4 even 9 years after its release--they took the Herman Cain 9-9-9 plan and ran with it, started selling it on Steam, and places like this and SC4D further foster those efforts.

It is also worth noting that EA pulled its support of SOPA around the start of the month, at the same time Nintendo did.

-Tarkus