SOPA Storms Back

[boag]

So, your way of dealing with foreign thieves that do 'sooooo much harm' on your economy is by putting people out of jobs, thus lowing the total tax dollars you are going to receive per year. Huh. That's logic.

Dont you know that Tax dollars are delivered by Magic Fairies?

The only thing the Government has to do is approve a spending increase and raise the debt ceiling and they can spend as much money as they want.

http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/subjects/n/national_debt_us/index.html

Of course anyone that is running with a campaign based around responsible economics and budget cuts, is a crazy rich nutjob that wants to steal money from the poor people and give it to corporations.

http://www.chicagonow.com/publius-forum/2011/12/ron-paul-conspiracy-nut-anti-semite/

/sarcasm


but seriously, that bill, youd think the senate would have taken the hint by now, lets hope the internet blackout helps out a litlle.

 

[Seldon2639]

Technically, if I posted on a blog about a game and talked about it, under Sopa I could be under arrest. Its not attacking the pirate bay its attacking the interenet. This site would be gone and due to this site being very big on copy right infringement, every single person that has talked about a game here would make the owners liable for it. Thus meaning legal repercussions such as lawsuits and the police getting involved.

I don't know where you're getting your information, but "technically" that's incorrect. Discussing (especially for purposes of criticism) copyrighted material would not raise any liability, much less criminal charges. This site would not be at all threatened given that it polices itself well, and avoids copyright infringing content, or links to content, to appear on its forum.

Piracy isn't like regular theft, and as such shouldn't be treated the same. Imagine a copier, now you make a painting and that copier can make a exact duplicate and give it off for free over the web. Sopa isn't exactly aiming to stop piracy, since thats physically impossible to stop. People will always give out the expensive for free, people will always share media with their friends, you can't stop it.

Perhaps. But imagine you own a widget. This widget is worth nothing to you, its only value is that you can sell it. Now, let's assume the only person you could possibly sell it to is me. If I take that widget for myself, have I stolen from you? Why? I haven't taken anything of value to you, all I've done is make it impossible for you to profit from it.

Now, let's say my friend steals the widget for me, and gives it to me. Should what he did be considered "theft", even though there was no intrinsic value to what he took from you, the only "harm" to you was the loss of a sale to me?

SOPA's main push is for the protection of buisnesses, not of the people. Using the hot topic button that is piracy, they just want to be able to censor anything. "I hated XXXXXX Movie because it was XXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX XXXX XXXXXXX." Do you understand what I mean? They could do that, since I mentioned and talked about the movie, if they don't like my opinion, they can take it away.

That is patently untrue. There is nothing in SOPA which would allow a post (much less an entire site) to be "censored" on the basis that an individual criticized a movie. Wherever you're getting that misinformation, you need to tell them to check their sources.

 

[him over there]

I read through the bill and it isn't tightly worded in slightest. Apparently, one of us is lying out of their arse. It will basically shut down any and all posters of copyright without discrimination, all that needs to be filed is a claim of copyright infringing, site shuts down and persecutors I.E. the staff have a chance to be put in jail.

Apparently doll you haven't read it through enough, or read in between the lines. A tightly worded bill would have every gap covered, here, if I say that this person took something from Cartoon Network, without even a thought, bam, the site is dead in the ground, at least under Sopa thats what will happen.

Where on earth does the Bill suggest that could happen? Did you read it or are you repeating what other sites and people have said under the guise of having read it because you seem to have completely missed the need for the site to be dedicated to theft, and the definition of what a site dedicated to theft is. Can you give me lines and page numbers where you think the bill will shut down all posters?

Seriously, you really want me to go fetch my printed version of the bill and find the line plus page number? Look, I'd rather not fetch it, since I only read it since it came out, and my memory is not that great, like I've said before.

My point is that the wording of the bill is to general, not tight enough. I can't remember if they changed the wording since then but I don't exactly like the fact that they can put you in jail for copy right infringement.

Or just use the online version?
The wording is not general though not to mention there are not one, but two clauses to prevent misuse of the bill. What's wrong for imprisoning pirates? They are as good as thieves so why should they be treated any differently?

I'm going to make this clear for some people, the clause showing there must be evidence of dedication to copyright infringement is not part of due trial. The evidence is not presented in court, it is a direct interaction between corporation and internet service provider. The accused never factors into it and the evidence never has to be presented in court unless the wrongfully accused appeals. This leads into the second problem that lawsuits cost upwards of thousands of dollars in some cases, especially when a huge corporation has huge stockpiles of money for lawyers and legal fees to simply and it becomes a matter of stretching it out long enough that the accused can no longer afford the legal fees and they settle out of court. The law is totally backwards and relies on action being taken first without due trial and having the accused prove their legality rather than the plaintiff proving the accused illegality, Citizens are guilty until proven innocent essentially.

 

[Ruedyn]

Well, it'll die soon enough. In the meantime, do I want to stay in Canada or Norway. I have family in both.

 

[Aprilgold]

Technically, if I posted on a blog about a game and talked about it, under Sopa I could be under arrest. Its not attacking the pirate bay its attacking the interenet. This site would be gone and due to this site being very big on copy right infringement, every single person that has talked about a game here would make the owners liable for it. Thus meaning legal repercussions such as lawsuits and the police getting involved.

I don't know where you're getting your information, but "technically" that's incorrect. Discussing (especially for purposes of criticism) copyrighted material would not raise any liability, much less criminal charges. This site would not be at all threatened given that it polices itself well, and avoids copyright infringing content, or links to content, to appear on its forum.

Piracy isn't like regular theft, and as such shouldn't be treated the same. Imagine a copier, now you make a painting and that copier can make a exact duplicate and give it off for free over the web. Sopa isn't exactly aiming to stop piracy, since thats physically impossible to stop. People will always give out the expensive for free, people will always share media with their friends, you can't stop it.

Perhaps. But imagine you own a widget. This widget is worth nothing to you, its only value is that you can sell it. Now, let's assume the only person you could possibly sell it to is me. If I take that widget for myself, have I stolen from you? Why? I haven't taken anything of value to you, all I've done is make it impossible for you to profit from it.

Now, let's say my friend steals the widget for me, and gives it to me. Should what he did be considered "theft", even though there was no intrinsic value to what he took from you, the only "harm" to you was the loss of a sale to me?

SOPA's main push is for the protection of buisnesses, not of the people. Using the hot topic button that is piracy, they just want to be able to censor anything. "I hated XXXXXX Movie because it was XXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX XXXX XXXXXXX." Do you understand what I mean? They could do that, since I mentioned and talked about the movie, if they don't like my opinion, they can take it away.

That is patently untrue. There is nothing in SOPA which would allow a post (much less an entire site) to be "censored" on the basis that an individual criticized a movie. Wherever you're getting that misinformation, you need to tell them to check their sources.

They could take down youtube, and this has been covered by several people, if there is a copyrighted song in the background, or a movie poster in the back, the video wouldn't be held responsible, the people hosting it would. There is also no due process here, no legal proceedings, its straight up the copy right owner going "Yeah, I heard this song on this domain, take this domain down. I own the song, and don't want it here." Under Sopa, at least. Here, youtube isn't held responsible, or reddit because the copy right owner can inform the domain that X person is hosting their content and they don't appreciate it, youtube takes down the video and the world spins.

Theres a loss of sale, which is my point. But since I didn't say that it cost this much, you really want to take up a metaphor here, its a fucking metaphor for piracy, which is one of the harder things to explain. My piracy metaphor is still there. Lets say I take a painting thats worth 100$, make a copy of it that is the cost of 0$ and give out the copy of the 100$ painting to everybody via the internet. Essentially, I'm giving away the 100$ painting for 0$ without the consent of the painter, therefore, the people who are taking the the copy are at no harm, but I should be sentenced to jail time for doing this act.

While I didn't phrase it the best. I might as well go back to my youtube example. Someone like TotalBiscuit would lose his job, not only because hes doing all of his things without the consent of the copyright holders. They won't just call up Total Bisuit and tell him to delete all of his videos, they'll just step it up a notch and just shutdown youtube.

Also, don't say partially untrue, then don't point out the true bit.

 

[Zen Toombs]

American Legislative system, I am very disappoint. *Shakes head sadly*.

 

[BoredRolePlayer]

....how is it protecting the customers?

 

[magicmonkeybars]

The real irony here is that the biggest export the US has is it's own culture.
Maybe the USA shouldn't sell its creative content over international borders before it starts to make laws that demand other nations should adhere to its copyright laws.
Maybe we foreigners should just shun attempts by the USA to sell us their culture.
If they're so protective of their creativity they should stop whoring it out to everyone and anyone.
Perhaps the only real solution for the problem that is international piracy is the removal of international borders and the creation of a global legal system everyone has to adhere to or face total isolation.
The best way to protect US citizens from piracy is to disband the USA and all other countries in favour of a global government where we won't have to worry about national borders and the conflicts that arise as a result.

 

[Rikkano]

Honestly, this seems a little desperate from his side. He already proposed the bill and met so heavy resistance they had to delay it. Now he tries the patriotism approach?

 

[Adam Cammock-Sands]

even if it passes, i doubt Anonymous will let it slide.
then they'll REALLY regret passing the bill.

 

[Totes]

-Comment removed by SOPA

 

[Tjebbe]

a bipartisan bill to the White House that saves American jobs

What jobs is he talking about? Won't SOPA destory all kinds of jobs like some of the ones people on the escapist have?

Yes it will. But those jobs aren't paying his campaigns (and hence his position, and hence his income), so he couldn't care less about those.

I have read somewhere that a long time ago, most politicians at least had the decency to be ashamed of their corruption.

 

[GoddyofAus]

Andy Chalk is a far right disgrace who takes cheques from Big business to peddle their agenda in Congress. With the U.S debt crisis getting worse every year, don't they have much more important shit to worry about?

Obviously not.

 

[CrazyGirl17]

I hope to God this thing never passes, and if it ever does, then the massive backlash will send legislators back-peddling.

At least, I hope that's what happens, 'cause I don't have the money to leave the country...

 

[oZode]

My god they just don't give up do they?

I only hear opposition of the bill from everyone I meet, not praise. It is a losing fight and they know it.

 

[ckam]

Foreign thieves... I don't understand how restricting American citizen's rights would combat foreign thieves. Actually, the bill really helps them out, a lot.

Up top for government [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8KP9_KyA7I]!

 

[JasonKaotic]

...Did they seriously pull out the race card?
SOPA, you continue to amuse my disappointment. I hope your houses spontaneously fall down on top of you.

 

[StreetPizza]

"Save American jobs"? "Foreign thieves"? What a buzz-word-tacular load.

 

[ReinWeisserRitter]

...Did they seriously pull out the race card?
SOPA, you continue to amuse my disappointment. I hope your houses spontaneously fall down on top of you.

The irony is that "foreign thieves", fictitious entities or not, aren't the ones to be punished by preventing US citizens from accessing a free internet.

It's sure going to open up a market for people selling an uncensored internet to us, though; certain entrepreneurs are already setting plans in motion to capitalize on our government's foolhardiness. Way to combat piracy by helping to invent a new form of it, Congress. Truly, you are a boon to the people.

I'd also be interested to see how many people would flat out leave the country over this.

 

[foxtrot3100]

Have you guys heard of the big push to not attend E3 because of SOPA? A lot of people over at Penny Arcade say that they won't be attending or covering E3 because it is the ESA's main source of revenue and the ESA supports SOPA. I think the escapist should join in.