SOPA Protest

[snuginarug]

Amen, archangle. Tell it like it is.

[Bert_Mathews]

This law is like saying that because some people are using drugs, the police should no longer have to have search warrants, and the accused should not have the right to a jury trial, and you no longer have to prove your case "beyond a reasonable doubt."

GREAT REMARK and Right on the POINT!!

[jabman]

There are two mass protests, one is all day tomorrow (Wikipedia, Google, my own sites, many others) - the other is Jan 24th, the day SOPA is up for a vote. Who's participating in the Jan 24 one is unconfirmed.

Just cheacked out Google and Wikipidea. The only thing google did was black out their name but wikipidea brings you to a thing to contact congress.

Edited to add: you still can search on google.

[SleepingUgly]

Just cheacked out Google and Wikipidea. The only thing google did was black out their name but wikipidea brings you to a thing to contact congress.

Edited to add: you still can search on google.

Actually on google there is a line you can click on that says "Tell Congress: please don't censor the web" and it takes you to a petition to sign.

[BlackSpinner]

You simply haven't been paying attention. Under SOPA or PIPA, a company can shut down another website with no proof whatsoever. If your web site gets shut down, it's up to you to prove your innocence. Guilty until proven innocent. No proof to any government agency is needed.

The feds are already doing this to websites, many of which do NOT actually do any piracy.

Maybe the site could win in a court battle, but it would take time and money to do so.


All with no due process. All with no recourse other than to sue.

This law is like saying that because some people are using drugs, the police should no longer have to have search warrants, and the accused should not have the right to a jury trial, and you no longer have to prove your case "beyond a reasonable doubt."

This has already been happening for years to adult websites.
And sites that sell sock yarn. Because the credit card processor decided that that many people could be spending that much money on yarn! No hearing, no warning, your bank account is frozen.
It won't hurt the big guys as much as they will be paying software developers big buck to figure a way around it (they probably already are) but the little guys? They will be dead in the water.

[jnk]

Update: http://money.cnn.com/2012/01/20/technol ... postponed/

[TalonNYC]

Update: http://money.cnn.com/2012/01/20/technol ... postponed/

Don't believe it for a second! They're delaying until the attention span of the Internet expires, at which point they'll start rushing them through again.

Either that, or they'll wait until some bigger controversy hits and THEN get them passed.

What we want is a removal of the bills from further discussion, nothing less. The co-sponsors must withdraw the bills, otherwise they'll get passed at some point.

[jnk]

. . . a removal of the bills from further discussion, nothing less. . . .

That would likely require a concerted effort by the international public to boycott big-studio-Hollywood-prodcution parent companies and big-studio-music parent companies as a whole.

Let them keep their overpriced copyrighted material. Break their present monopolies.

Occupy Hollywood and Tin Pan Alley. Support your neighborhood musicians and smaller local filmmakers (if you can find a way to do that). They put out better quality stuff than the big boys anyway.

Eh, but whadda I know?

[xyz]

SU:
> I didn't know one could still steal music off the internet (since Napster shut down, anyway).
> Could you post a link to such an existing website?

Do you actually believe that on the _Entire Planet Earth_ that there was only one website that provided illegal downloads of copyrighted material (e.g., music, videos, etc)?

The situation is so bad that the "content providers" (e.g., music and movie companies) threatened to sue colleges and universities because the illegal downloading of copyrighted material was rampant. The colleges and universities then scurried to try to stop it. Penalties include disconnecting a student's dorm room from the intranet, etc.

Google "megaupload.com".
And, FYI, it's not the "only other" illegal download website on the planet Earth. Far from it. See the Associated Press article at the bottom of this post.


BS:
> The mainstream media has been avoiding reporting on it.

That's not only not true, it's far from true.

> Gee, I wonder why?
> Could it be because they are owned by the people lobbying for it?

Ah, a conspiracy theorist. I wonder what you say when the rightwingers accuse the media of biased reporting in favor of liberals.


jbf:
> From what I've read, this law *completely* abrogates due process.

False. A court order is required.


tnyc:
>> what are the implications for my avatar?!
> Short story, if either SOPA or PIPA pass, the entire site could be shut down because of it.

You must be the guy who wrote that children's nursery story Chicken Little where "the sky is falling, the sky is falling."

Anyone who believes that "an entire site" would be SHUT DOWN because a _user_ of the site (not the owner of the site) used a certain _avatar_ needs an effective medication.

> if you're saying it's just about music piracy, you are part of the problem too.

The word "only" does not appear in my post. Do not misquote me. Nor was it my intent.

I am against STEALING copyrighted material. Are you?

> The bill is too broadly worded

Now there's something that I agree with.

That's why in my post I clearly said:
"I'm not saying that this bill is perfect. It clearly needs further refinement."
Not that the apologists for stealing copyrighted material in this forum have acknowledged that.


aa:
> If you were on some local restaurant review web site and complained that Sam and Ella's Restaurant's $11.95
> RootemTootem burger was garbage, they could claim copyright infringement and shut down the web site.

That's just idiocy.

OK, I was wrong. tnyc didn't write Chicken Little, archangle did.

> This law is like saying that because some people are using drugs,
> the police should no longer have to have search warrants

You missed it again. They would have to have a court order.
Why do you spew this misinformation?

Forget SOPA for _just one second_.
Does anyone here object to stealing on the internet?
No one has said so, exactly.

-----

From today's news:

NZ Police Raid File-Sharing Site Founder's Mansion
Matthew Barakat
Associated Press
January 20, 2012

WELLINGTON, New Zealand — New Zealand police raided several homes and businesses linked to the founder of Megaupload.com, a giant Internet file-sharing site shut down by U.S. authorities, on Friday and seized guns, millions of dollars, and nearly $5 million in luxury cars, officials said.

Police arrested founder Kim Dotcom and three Megaupload employees on U.S. accusations that they facilitated millions of illegal downloads of films, music and other content costing copyright holders _at least $500 million_ in lost revenue.

Before Megaupload was taken down, the company posted a statement saying allegations that it facilitated massive breaches of copyright laws were "grotesquely overblown."

[Note that they didn't _deny_ the charges!
They're just "overblown" lol.
"We didn't steal $500 million worth, we only stole $400 million worth."]

Several sister sites were also shut down, including one dedicated to sharing pornography files.

The five-count indictment, which alleges copyright infringement as well as conspiracy to commit money laundering and racketeering, described a site designed specifically to reward users who uploaded pirated content for sharing, and turned a blind eye to requests from copyright holders to remove copyright-protected files.

For instance, users received _cash bonuses_ if they uploaded content popular enough to generate massive numbers of downloads, according to the indictment. Such content was almost always copyright protected, the indictment said.

-------

Does anyone see Johnny giving you a "cash bonus" for using a pirated avatar?
lol

[NightMonkey]

From today's news:

NZ Police Raid File-Sharing Site Founder's Mansion
Matthew Barakat
Associated Press
January 20, 2012

WELLINGTON, New Zealand — New Zealand police raided several homes and businesses linked to the founder of Megaupload.com, a giant Internet file-sharing site shut down by U.S. authorities, on Friday and seized guns, millions of dollars, and nearly $5 million in luxury cars, officials said.

Police arrested founder Kim Dotcom and three Megaupload employees on U.S. accusations that they facilitated millions of illegal downloads of films, music and other content costing copyright holders _at least $500 million_ in lost revenue.

Before Megaupload was taken down, the company posted a statement saying allegations that it facilitated massive breaches of copyright laws were "grotesquely overblown."

[Note that they didn't _deny_ the charges!
They're just "overblown" lol.
"We didn't steal $500 million worth, we only stole $400 million worth."]

Several sister sites were also shut down, including one dedicated to sharing pornography files.

The five-count indictment, which alleges copyright infringement as well as conspiracy to commit money laundering and racketeering, described a site designed specifically to reward users who uploaded pirated content for sharing, and turned a blind eye to requests from copyright holders to remove copyright-protected files.

For instance, users received _cash bonuses_ if they uploaded content popular enough to generate massive numbers of downloads, according to the indictment. Such content was almost always copyright protected, the indictment said.

xyz, Aren't you now providing evidence against the need for a new 78-page law? Is not the story you posted proof that existing laws are sufficient to prosecute those who steal intellectual property and shut down the sites of the most egregious offenders?

If you want to go after these thiefs is it not much more effective to use exisiting laws which have a long history of successful prosecution, success on appeal, and adequate case precedent to uphold appeals?

A 78-page law will probably have many weaknesses and likely even downright loopholes that let the real bad guys get off. In fact will prosecuters even use the new laws? Will they not continue to use simple laws that say little more than, "It is a crime to steal intellectual property"?

Just asking.

[TalonNYC]

I was going to write a diatribe to the previous poster, but instead, I will just post this:

Neither SOPA or PIPA were required to shut down MegaUpload. Existing laws and law enforcement did it just fine. The new bills will do nothing but make the Internet more closed, less innovative and significantly less freely accessible. They will not stop those who want to steal media and Intellectual property. For those reasons - and those alone even if you discount every other argument - they are invalid bills that must never become law.

I have many other reasons, mostly from my work online for media companies over the years, but they pale in comparison to the cold, hard fact that bills which would impose restrictions and offer no benefits should never be permitted to grace the legislative landscape, much less become law of the land.

[So Well]

the cold, hard fact that bills which would impose restrictions and offer no benefits should never be permitted to grace the legislative landscape, much less become law of the land.

So true!

And here I thought all you New Yorkers wanted government to handle every little thing.

(I know - you thought all we left coasters did also. lol)