Jimquisition: Sony, Nintendo, EA and SOPA

garjian

New member
Mar 25, 2009
1,013
0
0
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
garjian said:
How would this effect sites based elsewhere?

...couldnt you just move your business... somehow... if this only effects america?
Theres so many fucking different bills trying to do exactly the same thing so I have no idea if im right on this, but theres one that sells it as a trade embargo.

Which pretty much means Europe and everybody else would be forced to sign if the stupid fucking cunts over in the US decide this is a good idea.
hahaha...

im gonna sound so stupid in these quotes without my edit xD
oh well, fits my avatar i suppose...

as i say... im still reading about it now... ...since this is american law we dont know much about it, but it clearly effects us and not just because, obviously, the internet is a worldwide thing...
 

portal_cat

New member
Jun 25, 2009
62
0
0
they don't have a leg to stand on. And don't forget the fact the Supreme Court will probably help kill this bill because it violates the First Amendment right of free speech.

p.s don't get too mad I signed the thing against already.
 
Jan 27, 2011
3,740
0
0
garjian said:
CustomMagnum said:
garjian said:
How would this effect sites based elsewhere?

...couldnt you just move your business... somehow... if this only effects america?
Nope. The law also gives those corporations the ability to force an ISP to block sites with infringing content that come from outside the US.
yeah i just read that...
i seems it specifically targets those outside the US...

...still reading...
....Are you serious......... >: (

Ok, as someone OUTSIDE the USA (I'm Canadian), what can I do about this? I mean, I can't exactly write to my local legislators/political party, considering that they have no impact on the bill...
 

ShAmMz0r

New member
Oct 20, 2011
25
0
0
Sometimes I wonder why do this people not just honestly say that human and consumer rights are bad for their profits. Everyone with a working brain can see what they want, but still they persist in dressing it up as some noble crusade against "the pirates".

I wonder how this all will play out. I mean, nothing will stop the actual piracy, naturally, but all this corporations are going to be enjoying the backdraft from this act for years to come. And to think that they are passing it without actually understanding what the consequences will be. Fascinating. That's why we need pirate parties in our governments, people.
 

Cowabungaa

New member
Feb 10, 2008
10,806
0
0
The worst is that this isn't just American censorship. This can fuck shit up for basically everyone on this planet. Because what could happen is that this bill locks the United States off from the rest of the world, in terms of online connectivity. And that could spell bad business for both the States and the rest of the world.

Why? Because Silicon Valley is still, basically, the hub of the virtual world. And they'll get royally fucked over by this. Just take a guess at the percentage of big companies that provide the online world we know that aren't American. What's going to happen to them?

My guess is that, if this bill really turns out to be this bad, that a lot of them either go under or move their asses to greener pastures; South-East Asia and Europe specifically. Now that would sure solve the euro-crisis and put us back in the game again. Bad news for the States though.

That is, of course, the ideal situation in the worst case scenario. The absolute worst case scenario is that the internet is screwed for us all.

Now, what I just can barely comprehend, is that it's like these lawmakers, and even those game companies, just can't comprehend how important the internet is for the American company. It just boggles the mind how incredibly short sighted the people who thought all this up must be. It just...I can't...


Disclaimer:
Brought to you by someone who is barely educated on this subject and is just pissed about the very idea of this, and hopes fiercely that he's completely and utterly wrong.
CustomMagnum said:
Thankfully Obama already said he would veto it if it does pass
Really?
Now here's to hoping that, after the 2012 elections, there won't be some corporate fat-cat in the White House who'd gladly support a bill like this. Because I have the feeling that mister Obama won't be around for long to protect us against it.
 

Scrustle

New member
Apr 30, 2011
2,031
0
0
What the hell? Sony Ninty and EA are behind this!??! Like Jim said, don't they realise that they get tons of free publicity from this kind of stuff? I'm actually surprised EA would do something that dickish!
 

Elyxard

New member
Dec 12, 2010
137
0
0
I really want to hear all the major videogame companies stand up and explain themselves for this insanity of supporting this self destructive bill.

It's absolutely frightening how powerful corporations have become in just the last few years, we don't need to give them any more. It's not even about money anymore, it's all about the control because that's all that's left that they can grasp for. I'm really losing hope in the process of reversing this horrible trend of putting all of the political power in the hands of a select few CEO's. You can't win against people who have near-limitless funds to destroy opposition.

Firefox had a thing on their front page where they'll send a canned email in your name to your representatives to tell them to not let this thing pass. I've already sent it in myself.
 

Sir Shockwave

New member
Jul 4, 2011
470
0
0
CustomMagnum said:
I already did, but it actually has a scary high chance of passing. Thankfully Obama already said he would veto it if it does pass, but there's nothing to stop them from rewording the bill and trying it again and again until they get something that he thinks wouldn't be too bad.

Or supporters of this might have a chance at actually overturning the veto, if they convince (or bribe) enough senators.

Even if the law gets challenged, it can still do a lot of damage while it is on the books and the courts are going over it, not to mention that the Supreme Court has a heavy corporation bias. They did overturn the limits corporations can donate to political campaigns, after all.

Now I want to see this happen in the US. For real, not just bombing EALA with Shogun Battleships in my least favourite RTS of all time next to Stormrise.

sir.rutthed said:
Don't know why, but I feel this is appropriate in a completely non ironic way.

Buy your torches and pitchforks here -

 

Yopaz

Sarcastic overlord
Jun 3, 2009
6,092
0
0
I for one welcome this bill. Anything that brings us all closer to the way things are in North Korea means progress. I mean look at Homefront, it clearly shows that this is the way to become the next superpower.

Really though this saddens me. They want to screw up things for us and themselves by refusing us to see the games before we buy them. I have bought some games because I saw them on Unskippable, and according to this Bill Unskippable is doomed for sure. I never buy games I know nothing or little about without a recommendation or seeing gameplay footage. This is a great way to lose me as a customer. Congratulations Nintendo. I have been using your products for 17 years and now I might stop.
 

CardinalPiggles

New member
Jun 24, 2010
3,226
0
0
I'm so sorry about what effect this will have on you Jim, I have enjoyed each and every one of your videos, even if I don't always agree.

Stupid bill is stupid.
 

CustomMagnum

New member
Mar 6, 2009
90
0
0
Cowabungaa said:
CustomMagnum said:
Thankfully Obama already said he would veto it if it does pass
Really?
Now here's to hoping that, after the 2012 elections, there won't be some corporate fat-cat in the White House who'd gladly support a bill like this. Because I have the feeling that mister Obama won't be around for long to protect us against it.
Yeah, that's the other problem. There'd be nothing stopping them from introducing the same bill again if he looses the next election, or after his second term ends if he wins.
 

trollnystan

I'm back, baby, & still dancing!
Dec 27, 2010
1,281
0
0
"Sopa" in Swedish means "piece of trash". Coincidentally that's also how I feel about this bill. Let's hope Obama sticks by his word and vetoes this if it passes.
 

mic1402

New member
Oct 30, 2010
10
0
0
if the bill passes i think they can get your ISP to block outside websites. and if this goes through other countries are more likely to create similar laws.
 

Redd the Sock

New member
Apr 14, 2010
1,088
0
0
Normally this is where I sarcasticly say to not hold back and tell us what you really think, but on this issue, I don't think we can afford to be polite.

It's nice to know someone else caught MGS2's cautionary tale instead of just bitching about Raiden, and while I felt government coverups were silly, ccorporate coverups would be all too common. Listening to podcasts from people who write for anime magizines, I've heard about how companies will withold images, screenshots, or even review copies in retaliation for bad reviews, and that's more or less how this will all work out: praise everything we do or we'll bring down the heavy hand of misinterputated copyright law down on you. Fair use? What's "fair use"?

I'm against piracy, but copyright law isn't about making sure Yahtxee gives you a nickel for using your boxart in a review.
 

teisjm

New member
Mar 3, 2009
3,561
0
0
Just currious, since it's just an american bill, and not a world-wide one, won't the publishers be powerless, if the servers hosting the stuff is located somewhere outside the US?

Cause if stuff works the way i udnerstand it to work, couldn't sites like the escapist just move their servers to a different country?
Then the publishers, would have to to to the ISPs and make them block content ever so often, and that would be the ISPs choice, and since they want paying costumers, they're probably not gonna cut some content from their "store" willingly, just cause EA is bitching about some site using a picture from their game, in a review of said fucking game.

If this passes, will dev's be able choose who's allowed to review their games as well? or can they just limit them to using text, and not any imagery at all?

With all the shit thats going on, i'd love to see the world of gamers unite, get a few solid games that can hold for the time beeing, and buycot games all together, untill the indistry collapses and dies screaming, and then watch it claw it's way back, hopefully more humble than before.
 

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,909
0
0
First thing is first.

Jim, I don't know how much your acting for effect but I think you overdid it a bit this time as you seemed a little bit off your rocker and a little incoherant at times. You might want to sit back and try and re-record this message a bit calmer and elaborate a bit more.... also the whole "Streaming God Of War for Charity" thing was kind of "WTF" because honestly giving away someone elses game for a charity (which might not even be genuine despite what was claimed) would be pushing it.

That said, this bill *IS* really bad, and represents a lot of things that game and media companies have wanted to push for a long time, and it is really an Orwellian nightmare of a bill.

The issue with this is that by definition things like game reviews, let's plays, or even people doing FAQS for sites like Gamefaqs could also be considered violations. High traffic sites like Youtube which couldn't be effectively policed if they wanted to are pretty much doomed, and this is to say nothing of P2P services which do have legitimate uses other than piracy.

Strictly speaking a game company SHOULD have to go through the proper channels and specifically identify and chase down specific offenders as opposed to being able to decide "well Youtube has something we don't like, so let's lock it down". The issue of
course being that it's too time consuming and expensive to pursue things that way. Even verifying and pursueing a single case could take a lot of time and money, so it's easier to just shut down anything they find suspicious.

I'll also be blunt in saying that I think the current issues with Metacritic have a lot to do with this as well, albiet indirectly. Simply put, the game industry is realizing that while it can sway professional reviewers and ensure no product with a decent investment of cash gets lower than say an 8/10 rating in most cases, it can't do this reliably with specific users or independant reviewers who have no financial stake, not even so far as them being able to threaten to pull advertising revenues. Given that some popular reviewers on things like Youtube can pull truely massive numbers of hits, and actually do sway opinions, the gaming industry is doubtlessly also considering that they could shut these sources down. Someone like Whiteythereviewer, or Danae from Checkpoint Basement Level could get Youtube shut down as a whole just by showing footage from a game they are playing to illustrate a point.

I also know that there has been some talk fairly recently about the problem with online FAQS and walkthroughs, because game companies and cluebook publishers increasingly want to charge $20 or more for digital strategy guides, and really there is no point to buying a digital strategy guide when a month or two after the game comes out (tops) someone can just hop on Gamefaqs and find a guide there, or even find a dedicated wiki to the game in some cases. This bill could be used to basically shut down their competition here, and close every cheat/strategy site and fan page/database on the internet which I'm sure some bean counter is drooling about as I write this as they count digital cluebook sales figures in their heads.

This is a lot of stuff I'm talking about here, but the bottom line is that as I understand this, this is going to be a very bad thing. This law exists to basically circumvent the existing system because companies find it inconveinent to play by the rules.

Of course a lot of this also gets into intellectual property laws to begin with, and I think a lot of these problems started when they made them so tight knit for the owner of an IP. Technically according to the definition something like a FAQ should be illegal despite the long-term existance of such things... and that's part of the problem. When we're dealing with properties that are pure information (as opposed to say information used to make an actual product like a patent or copyright) I think there needs to be a lot of limitations put in place because there is more at stake than the information itself, but people's very freedom to communicate when you get down to it. In the case of IPs I think it's a problem when say China takes the formula for a drug like Viagra, makes an actual physical product using it, and then sells it. In this case though your pretty much saying that a picture of a game being used for review purposes, or even just text and descriptions talking about content in the game, could be considered theft. This is more akin to me telling someone that Viagra exists, or my experiences with the drug rather than stealing an actual, physical product. Games DO need to be protected from someone copying the entire thing and giving it away for free (or selling it) but this is far too inclusive to my understanding, and Jim is right that this law could shut down pretty much the entire internet gaming community, or at the very least turn it into a paranoid police state with everyone running a website being terrified to let anything be said for fear of being shut down. Just imagine a situation where a spoiler might not just ruin a bit of a game for someone, but actually be a felony because you've revealed protected information.
 

CustomMagnum

New member
Mar 6, 2009
90
0
0
teisjm said:
Just currious, since it's just an american bill, and not a world-wide one, won't the publishers be powerless, if the servers hosting the stuff is located somewhere outside the US?

Cause if stuff works the way i udnerstand it to work, couldn't sites like the escapist just move their servers to a different country?
Then the publishers, would have to to to the ISPs and make them block content ever so often, and that would be the ISPs choice, and since they want paying costumers, they're probably not gonna cut some content from their "store" willingly, just cause EA is bitching about some site using a picture from their game, in a review of said fucking game.

If this passes, will dev's be able choose who's allowed to review their games as well? or can they just limit them to using text, and not any imagery at all?

With all the shit thats going on, i'd love to see the world of gamers unite, get a few solid games that can hold for the time beeing, and buycot games all together, untill the indistry collapses and dies screaming, and then watch it claw it's way back, hopefully more humble than before.
Nope, they'll be perfectly in fine. They have the power to demand that the ISPs block the sites entirely, without any sort of oversight at all, without even having to state what the site is doing at all.

And yeah, they will. Heck, for all we know, they'll probably be able to claim using the very name of the game is copyright infringement, and force a bad review to be taken down. Remember, this bill gives them corporations the ability to censor the internet without any oversight at all.

And it's not just games, but movies and music industries as well. This is the same type of stuff that China does to censor non-government sanctioned opinions.
 

Nurb

Cynical bastard
Dec 9, 2008
3,078
0
0
This proves once and for all that Sony, EA, and Nintendo aren't worth supporting, and as far as I am concerned, they deserve all the piracy they get. They screw us with DRM and DLC and they're screwing us again by supporting a vague oppressive law. They don't care about customers, only about how much they can shake out of your pockets while holding you upside down by the ankles.

 

Baresark

New member
Dec 19, 2010
3,908
0
0
Everyone will be happy to know that this thing is pretty much dead in the water. People have been trying to do things exactly like this for a lot of things for a very long time. For instance: When I was 17 and training in Jeet Kun Do, our instructor had us write our congressman for the express purpose that people were trying to pass a bill that would allow a central agency to dictate what martial art schools were and were not allowed to teach. I was scared to death at the time (and a little excited at the prospect of secretly training people in a forbidden martial art).

Things like this never get anywhere. It's worth watching, but there are enough responsible representatives in the House and Senate to see this thing never make it. And thank god they aren't all completely useless twits.

While no one should be for piracy, the shitty part is that this would not prevent piracy. It will be harder maybe, for a little while at least, but it won't stop. And the backlash from the destruction of internet freedom would hurt them badly I think.