65 replies to this topic

[FnlPrblm]

Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA)

Quote

The bill expands the ability of U.S. law enforcement and copyright holders to fight online trafficking in copyrighted intellectual property andcounterfeit goods.


The originally proposed bill would allow the U.S. Department of Justice, as well as copyright holders, to seek court orders against websites accused of enabling or facilitating copyright infringement. Depending on who makes the request, the court order could include barring online advertising networks and payment facilitators such as PayPal from doing business with the allegedly infringing website, barring search enginesfrom linking to such sites, and requiring Internet service providers to block access to such sites.

Okay, I've been seeing this pop up every once in a while out there and though I've wanted to read up on it, I haven't had time.  But from what I have read, this really really does not look good.  I understand the whole copyright thing, but this really seems like it's opening Pandora's Box in a very Stalinistic approach.


Steven Colbert touched upon this.  (View a 2 minute clip here via his website.  Then followed up with this debate between Harvard Prof. Jonathan Zittrain and music manager Danny Goldberg.)




Thoughts?  Is this really a specific hammer-like-law going against the big stealers?  Or is this possibly a blanketed cover for something more?  (I'm not being paranoid with that, something just doesn't seem right, that's all.)

[Cheile]

as i recall, it was brought up awhile back.

this is uneducated congresspeople with no idea how the Internet actually works, listenign to BS from greedy mongers the likes of the RIAA and MPAA.

furthermore, the whole idea is unenforceable.  ISPs aren't going to take the time and money to cave to demands to block access to this or that.  it's ridiculous.  

[Orpheus]

Quite the opposite: they can and do cave. They have been required to do so for 15 years, since the DCMA iststuted "takedown requests" (which have be subject to great abuse since no proof of violation is required, just an assertion by anyonw who claims to represent the proper holder. This law just lowers the bar on evidence to near zero, and allows the removal of not just sites but DNS entries -- and DNS *diversion*, incidentally, has long been one of the easier ways for an ISP to take a site offline in response to a DCMA request. There were simply even easier ways.

SOPA allows a site to be taken offline *without* approaching the ISP at all. It allows the DNS entry to be removed more centrally, so a page request never even reaches the ISP or its Domain Name Server.

It's incredibly easy to fall afoul of its restrictions, Whitehouse.gov would be susceptible for allowing mention of an anti-SOPA petition in its omments, (the White House has come out against the SOPA DNS blocking, since this fact surfaced) and the re-election website of SOPA's author, Congressman Lamar Smith is in clear violation for failing to attribute (or ask permission for) use of the work of photographer DJ Schulte.

Schulte published his photo under the Creative Commons license, which would have allowed Cong. Smith's website to use it, had it only included an acknowledgement, but it didn't, so off the net it should go, as could any site that either failed to meet every dot/tittle of copyright licensing -- or *allegedly* failed to meet it in some unspecified way.

Now which do you think are likely to ACTUALLY get booted off the net for real or unspecified/unproven violations?
A) WhiteHouse.gov
B) TexansForLamarSmith.com
C) Anyone else, especially if they didn't look like they could fight back in court

[Cheile]

it still won't last more than two seconds because they'll be slapped with lawsuits for every mistake they make and that will cost more to deal with than it would to just throw this crap out altogether.  and the small guys who had a case will easily get support from the big guys who are anti-SOPA.  far as i see, it's only the greedmongers (who have no proof whatsoever of "lost profits") who support SOPA.  and they're vastly outnumbered at this point.

also that doesn't stop anyone who isn't based in the US.  foreign ISPs will laugh in the face of something like this.

the RIAA and MPAA need to get the f*ck over themselves instead of trying to censor the right to freedom of media.

[psycaz]

Craigslist has a notice about this one and it's partner PIPA.

Some of the stupidest and scariest stuff we've seen in a while. And that's saying a lot with what's been passed over the last few years.

Here is a link to the stuff on craigslist:
http://www.craigslist.org/about/SOPA

PLEASE take a moment if you aren't aware about these pieces of cr@p legislation to read what's coming next.

[Sci-Fi Girl]

English Wikipedia anti-SOPA blackout

Quote

Today, the Wikipedia community announced its decision to black out the English-language Wikipedia for 24 hours, worldwide, beginning at 05:00 UTC on Wednesday, January 18 (you can read the statement from the Wikimedia Foundation here). The blackout is a protest against proposed legislation in the United States—the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the U.S. House of Representatives, and the PROTECTIP Act (PIPA) in the U.S. Senate—that, if passed, would seriously damage the free and open Internet, including Wikipedia.

Quote

My hope is that when Wikipedia shuts down on January 18, people will understand that we’re doing it for our readers. We support everyone’s right to freedom of thought and freedom of expression. We think everyone should have access to educational material on a wide range of subjects, even if they can’t pay for it. We believe in a free and open Internet where information can be shared without impediment. We believe that new proposed laws like SOPA—and PIPA, and other similar laws under discussion inside and outside the United States—don’t advance the interests of the general public. You can read a very good list of reasons to oppose SOPA and PIPA here, from the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Why is this a global action, rather than US-only? And why now, if some American legislators appear to be in tactical retreat on SOPA?

The reality is that we don’t think SOPA is going away, and PIPA is still quite active. Moreover, SOPA and PIPA are just indicators of a much broader problem. All around the world, we’re seeing the development of legislation seeking to regulate the Internet in other ways while hurting our online freedoms. Our concern extends beyond SOPA and PIPA: they are just part of the problem. We want the Internet to remain free and open, everywhere, for everyone.

There are more links at the linked article.  (Bolding mine.)

SFG

Edited by Sci-Fi Girl, 17 January 2012 - 12:14 AM.

[Cheile]

good luck to wikipedia, though i really doubt they will care, since so many out there claim wikipedia is an unreliable source of any information.

it'd take something like google shutting down their search engine for the day--which they probly won't do cuz the Internet would revolt.

[Cheile]

looks like the greedmongers won't have their way for a while:

http://www.jacehalls...administration/

now let's hope it's permanently on the shelf.

[Tricia]

^^^
Or US Online Piracy Bill Headed for Major Makeover


Doesn't sound like they will completely give up the idea...just change it some. The link goes into a couple of the possible changes.

Quote

With public sentiment on the bill shifting in recent weeks and an implicit veto threat now emerging from the White House, Congressional staffers are resigning themselves to writing replacement language or possibly entirely new bills.

And this one throws his two cents out there--

(and I won't go into why this irritates me but we've discussed that here before)

Quote

But supporters of the legislation are just as adamant that something needs to be done. Over the weekend, News Corp. chief Rupert Murdoch, whose holdings include Fox, complained that the White House had caved.

"So Obama has thrown in his lot with Silicon Valley paymasters who threaten all software creators with piracy, plain thievery," News Corp's chairman and chief executive officer posted on his personal Twitter account on Saturday.

Edited by Tricia, 17 January 2012 - 07:00 AM.

[Omega]

These bills are utterly unacceptable, and must be stopped.

https://www.popvox.c...lls/us/112/s968
https://www.popvox.c...s/us/112/hr3261

[Peridot]

Cheile is correct; Hambil started a thread relative to this topic about a month ago, it had just slipped off the page.  It's here.

Also just to add to what Sci-Fi Girl posted, I ran across an article with an interview with Jimmy Wales from CNN.  Jimmy Wales is a co-founder of Wikipedia, and I thought that the interview was intriguing as it provided insight into how and why Wikipedia chose their course of action, as well as providing a viewpoint on SOPA.


I'm sure it was just a bizarre coincidence that while posting on this particular topic, the browser with my original post in it just disappeared. Seriously, I do occasionally just hit the wrong key.

Peridot

[FnlPrblm]

Sorry Hambil.  I did a search on here and came up empty (and had browsed the front page of OT).  Just think if all the congressional people had Invision web searches, they'd always be coming up empty too.

[Nittany Lioness]

Just an FYI - if you hit the escape key just before a Wiki page finishes loading (before jumping to it's SOPA protest page) - it keeps it on your info page just fine.  I just tried it and it worked.
And it's worth noting that what Google, Wiki, Reddit are doing is 'corporate political speech', for good or bad.  For next time it comes up.  

[Omega]

http://www.tennessea...|text|FRONTPAGE

Quote

Marsha Blackburn, R-Brentwood, an early co-sponsor of the legislation, on Tuesday said foreign-based online theft “is hurting Tennessee entrepreneurs, consumers, songwriters, and content producers” and criticized planned Internet blackouts by tech companies. “It’s shameful that the critics of this legislation have resorted to these sort of gimmicks that do nothing to help move this process forward,” she said.

What a clueless tool. Peaceful protest is not a gimmick; welcome to America. And keeping the process from moving forward is rather the point!

Can I have another representative, please?

[Nonny]

Neil Gaiman's Journal: An open letter to Washington from Artists and Creators

Quote

... We, along with the rest of society, have benefited immensely from a free and open Internet. It allows us to connect with our fans and reach new audiences. Using social media services like Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, we can communicate directly with millions of fans and interact with them in ways that would have been unimaginable just a few years ago.

We fear that the broad new enforcement powers provided under SOPA and PIPA could be easily abused against legitimate services like those upon which we depend. These bills would allow entire websites to be blocked without due process, causing collateral damage to the legitimate users of the same services - artists and creators like us who would be censored as a result.

We are deeply concerned that PIPA and SOPA's impact on piracy will be negligible compared to the potential damage that would be caused to legitimate Internet services. Online piracy is harmful and it needs to be addressed, but not at the expense of censoring creativity, stifling innovation or preventing the creation of new, lawful digital distribution methods....

Quite a few signatures on this.

Edited by Nonny, 18 January 2012 - 04:53 PM.

[Cheile]

most recent updates that i am finding:
Sen. Orrin Hatch (who co-sponsored this mess) has changed sides!

Quote

"Our Founding Fathers understood that protecting people's ideas is essential to a robust and healthy democracy. With the advent of the Internet, intellectual property theft is a real and growing problem that everyone acknowledges must be combated," Hatch said in a statement. "After listening to the concerns on both sides of the debate over the PROTECT IP Act, it is simply not ready for prime time and both sides must continue working together to find a better path forward."

"Despite the concerns about the unintended consequences of this legislation, the Senate remains on a path to consider this bill next week. Rushing something with such potential for far-reaching consequences is something I cannot support and that's why I will not only vote against moving the bill forward next week but also remove my cosponsorship of the bill. Given the legitimate vocal concerns, it is imperative that we take a step back to allow everyone to come together and find a reasonable solution."

more Republicans follow suit

Quote

A freshman senator, Marco Rubio of Florida, a rising Republican star, was first out of the starting gate Wednesday morning with his announcement that he would no longer back antipiracy legislation he had co-sponsored. Senator John Cornyn, the Texas Republican who heads the campaign operation for his party, quickly followed suit and urged Congress take more time to study the measure, which had been set for a test vote next week.

“As a senator from Florida, a state with a large presence of artists, creators and businesses connected to the creation of intellectual property, I have a strong interest in stopping online piracy that costs Florida jobs,” Mr. Rubio wrote on his Facebook page. “However, we must do this while simultaneously promoting an open, dynamic Internet environment that is ripe for innovation and promotes new technologies.”

Support for the legislation on Capitol Hill eroded throughout the day. Another Republican co-sponsor of the Senate bill, Roy Blunt of Missouri, withdrew his support in the early afternoon. Other senators who issued concerns about the legislation as written included Republican Senators Mark Kirk of Illinois and Jim DeMint of South Carolina. Senator Scott Brown, Republican of Massachusetts, had said on Tuesday that he would vote against the measure.

[Cheile]

a congressman named Issa has this idea--i can't understand the legalese but the bits i can make a little more sense.

http://www.keepthewebopen.com/

what do you all think?  just as bad?  better?  worse?

[DWF]

 400542_330702030294048_144479548916298_1059542_1543063048_n.jpg   32.63K   5 downloads

Wiki has turned into the internet version of PBS asking for more money every so often, it might be better for them to police their own site and keep it as accurate as possible. As for the bills, I haven't heard of any major news networks making a big deal of them.

[Peridot]

FnlPrblm, on 18 January 2012 - 01:11 AM, said:

Sorry Hambil.  I did a search on here and came up empty (and had browsed the front page of OT).  Just think if all the congressional people had Invision web searches, they'd always be coming up empty too.

{{{{{{{Fnl}}}}}}}

I just happened to notice the thread when he first started it, and remembered both who the starter was, and that the thread title didn't refer to SOPA directly, though the OP did.  I don't know that I could have found it by a search either; I scanned visually to locate it.

Peridot

[Cheile]

uhh, DWF, what major news networks are you following??  

two CNN stories

google says (if i'm reading this correctly) 8208 related articles at CNN.

here's some at msnbc.

i'm sure ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox, etc would bring up lots more.  so color me confused....what major news networks aren't covering this?  

Edited by Cheile, 18 January 2012 - 11:04 PM.