Please help stop Internet Censorship.

[The WH]

http://americancensorship.org/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protect_IP_Act

This act is Bad bad bad.

It would allow the government to effectively shut down any website that they deem to be violating any type of copyright law.

And my objection to this has nothing to do with downloading media. This has all to do with me not wanting a Chinese Internet.


Business and innovation issues A legal analysis by the Congressional Research Service (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_Research_Service) (CRS) notes concerns by opponents such as American Express (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Express) and Google (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google) that the inclusion of a private cause of action would result in stifled Internet innovation, protect outdated business models and at the cost of an overwhelming number of suits from content producers.[45] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protect_IP_Act#cite_note-44)
"Legislation should not include a private right of action that would invite suits by 'trolls' to extort settlements from intermediaries or sites who are making good faith efforts to comply with the law," Google vice-president and Chief Counsel Kent Walker has said in Congressional testimony. [46] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protect_IP_Act#cite_note-45)
"Rogue sites jeopardize jobs for film and TV workers," according to the Motion Picture Association of America, which cites several government and independent industry studies on the effects of online piracy, including a report[47] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protect_IP_Act#cite_note-46) by Envisional Ltd. that concluded one quarter of the content on the internet infringes copyright.[48] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protect_IP_Act#cite_note-47)[49] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protect_IP_Act#cite_note-48)[50] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protect_IP_Act#cite_note-49)
The Recording Industry Association of America points to a 2007 study[51] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protect_IP_Act#cite_note-50) by the Institute for Policy Innovation that found that online piracy caused $12.5 billion dollars in losses to the U.S. economy as well as more than 70,000 lost jobs.[52] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protect_IP_Act#cite_note-51)[53] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protect_IP_Act#cite_note-52)
"If we need to amend the DMCA, let's do it with a negotiation between the interested parties, not with a bill written by the content industry's lobbyists and jammed through congress on a fast track," urged venture capitalist and Business Insider (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Insider) columnist Fred Wilson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Wilson_(financier)) in an October 29th editorial on the changes that the current House and Senate versions of the proposed legislation would make to the safe harbor provisions of the DMCA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_Act). "Companies like Apple, Google, Facebook, and startups like Dropbox, Kickstarter, and Twilio are the leading exporters and job creators of this time. They are the golden goose (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Goose_That_Laid_the_Golden_Eggs) of the economy and we cannot kill the golden goose to protect industries in decline," he said. [54] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protect_IP_Act#cite_note-53)



That bold part is all it is designed to do. Prop up old declining industries at the expense of our future.

[SteelerEmpire]

From taxing the hell out of internet purchases to censorship that will result in lawyers making more money as a result of law suits, the government is really after the web these days. The days of internet serenity are coming to an end.

[suitanim]

I would have no problem with this if it was going after the real perpetrators, namely the Chinese themselves. THEY are the ones stealing and reproducing (at great profit to themselves, effectively steaing revenues and royalties from US) our intellectual property.

[X-Terminator]

From taxing the hell out of internet purchases to censorship that will result in lawyers making more money as a result of law suits, the government is really after the web these days. The days of internet serenity are coming to an end.

You didn't really think that was going to last, did you? The government has been trying to undermine the Web for the past 15 years, and especially in the last 5. The internet is the last bastion of freedom left, meaning not completely controlled or ruined by government policy, and we can't have that. Instead of using the technology to their advantage, they'd rather destroy it in order to protect old-guard and outdated business models. The rest of the world is laughing their asses off at our stupidity.

[suitanim]

This, like most things, comes down to lobby and PAC dollars.

[The Patriot]

You didn't really think that was going to last, did you? The government has been trying to undermine the Web for the past 15 years, and especially in the last 5. The internet is the last bastion of freedom left, meaning not completely controlled or ruined by government policy, and we can't have that. Instead of using the technology to their advantage, they'd rather destroy it in order to protect old-guard and outdated business models. The rest of the world is laughing their asses off at our stupidity.

This 100%!

I already emailed my Congressman.

[zulater]

You didn't really think that was going to last, did you? The government has been trying to undermine the Web for the past 15 years, and especially in the last 5. The internet is the last bastion of freedom left, meaning not completely controlled or ruined by government policy, and we can't have that. Instead of using the technology to their advantage, they'd rather destroy it in order to protect old-guard and outdated business models. The rest of the world is laughing their asses off at our stupidity.

The ironic part is it's the Democrats who always look for ways to take away existing freedoms. All the while painting Republicans as being jack booted Nazi's, because some conservatives are uncomfortable with things such as Gay marriage, and giving a free ride to illegal immigrants in things such as health care.

[X-Terminator]

This 100%!

I already emailed my Congressman.

I did as well.

Bumping this because time is of the essence here. The Internet is under attack, and this bill needs to be stopped dead in its tracks.

[BlacknGoldBabe]

Talk about one "hand washing the other!" Those "lawmakers" are mostly lawyers. All lawsuits do is make those snakes in the grass richer off the backs of Joe Public.

[The Patriot]

It's amazing how this interest group "Fight for the Future" has been fighting the bill. I think I signed a petition of theirs and now I keep getting emails. On Christmas they said they were organizing a boycott of GoDaddy.com (a major supporter of the bill), and now two days later GoDaddy is apparently dropping their support of SOPA after they lost 21,000 domains! Last time they emailed me, they said SOPA failed to get out of committee in the House. But I think it's back after the Senate version PIPA failed.

[GoSlash27]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wsRhKovIFc
/ just sayin'.

[The WH]

If Ron Paul makes those 3 items his absolute main platform....he might make the next election very interesting.

Not that that matters though. If he makes too many people with too much money uncomfortable he'll join James, Abe, John and William in a very elite club.

[The Patriot]

To anyone on this board who feels strongly about this issue, Wikipedia is considering completely blacking out their website next week to protest the internet censorship bills. This would really shake things up!

This group is trying to organize people to pledge to donate $1 to Wikipedia if they blackout to support their overhead costs. You only give your email address and wait for Wikipedia to ask you to donate later. Pledging also automatically sends an email to your Senator and House Rep which you can edit to say whatever you want.

This is a "progressive" group, but I don't think what they're doing is really that partisan/ideological. You might have to unsubscribe from their email list though.

http://www.wikipediablackout.com/

[smokin3000gt]

To anyone on this board who feels strongly about this issue, Wikipedia is considering completely blacking out their website next week to protest the internet censorship bills. This would really shake things up!

This group is trying to organize people to pledge to donate $1 to Wikipedia if they blackout to support their overhead costs. You only give your email address and wait for Wikipedia to ask you to donate later. Pledging also automatically sends an email to your Senator and House Rep which you can edit to say whatever you want.

This is a "progressive" group, but I don't think what they're doing is really that partisan/ideological. You might have to unsubscribe from their email list though.

http://www.wikipediablackout.com/

Also facebook, google, amazon, ebay, twitter, and a number of others have been talks about going black as well.

[The WH]

As if this weren't something we could all figure out for ourselves.

http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/12/21/sopa-supporters-are-cashing-the-medias-checks/

[The Patriot]

As if this weren't something we could all figure out for ourselves.

http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/12/21/sopa-supporters-are-cashing-the-medias-checks/

I can't tell you how much that angers me. :mad2:

Rather than innovate their products to keep up with technology, the Media and Entertainment industry are trying to cripple the internet just so they can save a buck, and they're buying out our politicians to do it.

It's like taxing emails to save the post office.

[X-Terminator]

I can't tell you how much that angers me. :mad2:

Rather than innovate their products to keep up with technology, the Media and Entertainment industry are trying to cripple the internet just so they can save a buck, and they're buying out our politicians to do it.

It's like taxing emails to save the post office.

That's that I was talking about earlier. Forget trying to get with the times, let's instead keep up with the status quo. :mad2: It should be no surprise that the bill's sponsor is not only in Big Media's back pocket, but that said sponsor "vows to push ahead" with passage of the bill. Got to keep those checks coming in, after all.

Hopefully this bill gets killed, but regardless, this joker needs to be voted out of office in shame. People need to wake the fuck up about our government doing everything it can to put the screws to us. And it makes no difference which side of the aisle you support.

[Craic]

I've noticed all these links in this thread (though I didn't look through everything). What I didn't notice in the ones that I read, was a link to the actual bill itself.

With all the rhetoric of "It's censorship!" and "Stop Piracy!" - the actual bill is probably a good thing to read, imo. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.R.3261:

I (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.R.3261:) did notice a few things. One, it's focused on OVERSEAS piracy and mainly deals with American websites that facilitate it. Secondly, there are domestic things that fall under this, or could, like tv being broadcast (think- the preseason games).

But, a couple things that are usually left out of the discussion 1. The government can't just shut something down. It has to go before a judge, and go through the process of law. 2. If someone is accused maliciously, the site accused has the ability to sue for damages.

Personally, I'm split over this issue. I don't want the government having any more authority than necessary. However, on the otherside - violating copyrights is theft, and also has a serious financial impact on our economy and 2. The entire internet construct, is originally a US Military/Military Industrial complex communication device anyway. The govt. has always retained the top level control to some degree (reviews of ICANN), or at least it did until 09, which I personally thought was a big mistake to give up.

I guess in the end, I don't see this as the "Freedom of speech" issue or the "hindering internet growth" issue that many are making it out to be. I am wary of the abuse that can come from it, however. But that is true of any legislation, and does not justify allow the neglect of copyright laws either.

I really am split on this issue, can you tell?

[The WH]

You say that it would go through a court of law like that is something that isn't influenced by the big bucks...

as you can tell I am someone who believe that the system is wholly corrupt.

[SMR]

That's that I was talking about earlier. Forget trying to get with the times, let's instead keep up with the status quo. :mad2: It should be no surprise that the bill's sponsor is not only in Big Media's back pocket, but that said sponsor "vows to push ahead" with passage of the bill. Got to keep those checks coming in, after all.

Hopefully this bill gets killed, but regardless, this joker needs to be voted out of office in shame. People need to wake the fuck up about our government doing everything it can to put the screws to us. And it makes no difference which side of the aisle you support.

Right on! Enough is enough already.

[The Patriot]

But, a couple things that are usually left out of the discussion 1. The government can't just shut something down. It has to go before a judge, and go through the process of law. 2. If someone is accused maliciously, the site accused has the ability to sue for damages.


They're trying to, Preach. We currently have the court/judge process to prosecute online piracy. They're trying to give the attorney general the power to shut down websites at will. They will emphasize that they are targeting foreign sites, but being the tricky lawyers that they are, they know how to redefine terms like "foreign sites" to include "domestic sites" in the language of the bill.


(a) Definition- For purposes of this section, a foreign Internet site or portion thereof is a `foreign infringing site' if--

(1) the Internet site or portion thereof is a U.S.-directed site and is used by users in the United States;

(2) the owner or operator of such Internet site is committing or facilitating the commission of criminal violations punishable under section 2318, 2319, 2319A, 2319B, or 2320, or chapter 90, of title 18, United States Code; and

(3) the Internet site would, by reason of acts described in paragraph (1), be subject to seizure in the United States in an action brought by the Attorney General if such site were a domestic Internet site.

Plus, they're still writing the bill and things are being taken out and put back in pretty often right now. There are also other version of the bill floating around like PIPA. If a bill passed that specifically said the attorney general needed a court order to prosecute an American website, I would have much less of a problem with it. The fact is, the Media and Entertainment companies lobbying Congress are trying their very best to have this law apply to domestic sites.

[Craic]

They're trying to, Preach. We currently have the court/judge process to prosecute online piracy. They're trying to give the attorney general the power to shut down websites at will. They will emphasize that they are targeting foreign sites, but being the tricky lawyers that they are, they know how to redefine terms like "foreign sites" to include "domestic sites" in the language of the bill.



Plus, they're still writing the bill and things are being taken out and put back in pretty often right now. There are also other version of the bill floating around like PIPA. If a bill passed that specifically said the attorney general needed a court order to prosecute an American website, I would have much less of a problem with it. The fact is, the Media and Entertainment companies lobbying Congress are trying their very best to have this law apply to domestic sites.

I would love for a law to be passed that says No law can be passed untl a bill has been finalized for 90 days. From the Healthcare fiasco to this, our govt. has become a banana republic. Not because of this particular bill, but because of the antics used to write and pass bills.

As far as courts are concerned, I read through it and believe I read that it has to have court approval - I'll go back and check it out after reading what you said. If there is no court approval, then I'm less inclined to agree with it. However, I also want to know how the digital millenium legislation works, because they have to be in violation of laws passed in that legislation for this one to kick in (and one other legislation - maybe the DM again).

[The WH]

We did it!!

http://mashable.com/2012/01/20/sopa-is-dead-smith-pulls-bill/

Though I'm sure that it will be re-framed as something that defends against "Online Terrorism" and the 90% of people who don't know their ass from hole in the ground will vote for it. RABBLE RABBLE TRRRRRISM!!