U.S. Congress Shelves SOPA

DracoSuave

New member
Jan 26, 2009
1,685
0
0
The Cool Kid said:
DracoSuave said:
The Cool Kid said:
So you have read the bill then? If so then please tell me what the problem is with making sure pirating doesnt happen and increasing the penalties on importing dangerous and illegal goods.
If you truly cared about poltics and America you wouldn't wield false dichotomies like a cavalry rider wields his saber, cutting through intellegent discourse left and right with calculated cunning and unmitigated lust for slaughter.
If you truly cared about politics, you'd quote the Bill rather then using abusrd metaphors that essentially are of no value.
If you have a problem with SOPA, please tell me the exact part which is the problem, with page number.
So far, all you've done is quoted numbers and used false dichotomy. You haven't presented an argument, and the ONLY point you've made, I've editted my post to address. You're the one making a point, so fucking MAKE YOUR CASE. Don't rely on 'Just read it, no really just read it' and condescend to people and assume you've made an argument. You actually haven't.

SPecifically: Your argument consists solely of an appeal to authority, ad hominem, and false dichotomy. By those standards, your argument fails on a fundamental level and should not even be debated. So, I would entreat you to further expound on your points, so a proper debate can flourish.

Failure to do so means you've forfeited your argument, as you are not engaged in debate, but political rhetoric and jibberjabber.
 

Sizzle Montyjing

Pronouns - Slam/Slammed/Slammin'
Apr 5, 2011
2,213
0
0
The Cool Kid said:
You have eyes and a brain therefore you can read and understand the Bill. It really isn't that complex - give it a read. It's not like asking a toddler to do quantum mechanics.
Complex? Please quote the part or parts you are finding difficult as I found it a breeze to read so I'll help you where I can.
You're a very clever person, and i respect that. You're argument styles constantly changing.

However, i still disagree with you on SOPA, i like the internet the way it is and even if there was only a 1% chance that this bill would cause the effects you seem to believe as false, it's still not a risk I'm willing to take.

The layout of this bill, the wording of the bill, the fact that i can hardly find any substance to this bill and the need to refer back to past paragraphs make it a ***** to read.

However, you do act like a politician, you still haven't answered my question.
Do you have any sort of law degree/ education in law?
 

Auesis

New member
Mar 10, 2011
32
0
0
The pro-SOPA arguments are a little ridiculous. Regardless of how "beneficial" this would be to the big corporations supposedly suffering due to piracy (there's even a piracy margin in most companies' fiscal mappings, it's not like they're being caught off-guard), that 5-10% of benefit it might bring is NOT worth risking breaking the entire internet infrastructure just by smashing some edits in to DNS all willy-nilly because VEVO doesn't like Lady Gaga being promoted on dodgy Turkish web pages.

I am all for bringing down piracy, but SOPA is NOT the way to do it. Leave the DNS alone and tackle the pirates head-on by a re-write of the DMCA, and tighten the loopholes that websites like TPB tear open to stay alive.
 

TakeyB0y2

A Mistake
Jun 24, 2011
414
0
0
I read that while listening to My Hands by Leona Lewis (Final Fantasy XIII's ending theme, for those that weren't aware). Made this news twice as epic!

OT: Ahem.... HOORAY!!!! Props to the White House. To think the first words to come out of their mouths about this deal was... Well, that. Yay!
 

Rabid Toilet

New member
Mar 23, 2008
613
0
0
The Cool Kid said:
You have eyes and a brain therefore you can read and understand the Bill. It really isn't that complex - give it a read. It's not like asking a toddler to do quantum mechanics.
Complex? Please quote the part or parts you are finding difficult as I found it a breeze to read so I'll help you where I can.
Okay, I've read the bill. I can safely tell you that I have no idea what exactly it will do.

There's some stuff about blocking foreign sites and preventing copyright infringement, but as to the exact details on what would happen if it were passed, I don't have a clue. The bill has so many references to other sections or to other bills, not to mention all of the confusing legal jargon, that getting real details as to what it all means is a pretty big task. Your average joe wouldn't have a clue what the bill was about.

That's why you need actual lawyers to go through these bills. Someone with an honest to goodness law degree would be able to tell you whether a section of the bill would actually do what it seems to say. That's why people are choosing to trust the word of software engineers and internet lawyers who say that this bill is bad news.
 

Ariyura

New member
Oct 18, 2008
258
0
0
Haakong said:
There couldnt have been any other outcome. SOPA wouldve ruined internet, not only in the US but globally:

http://www.extremetech.com/computing/109533-how-sopa-could-actually-break-the-internet

OT: Still good news :D
I'll add to this that it will interrupt and interfere with the new protocols that they're working on for increased internet security.

http://www.securitynewsdaily.com/congress-sopa-protectip-break-internet-1333/
 

Sizzle Montyjing

Pronouns - Slam/Slammed/Slammin'
Apr 5, 2011
2,213
0
0
The Cool Kid said:
Can you point out the part about SOPA you don't like? The internet at the moment is costing the entertainment industry billions of dollars. That simply isn't fair.
Skip to Section 103; that's where the good stuff is, mainly parts 4, 5 and 6.
No I don't have a degree in law, but I can read and the bill is simple enough to understand that the criticisms of it, or at least a lot of them, are simply lies. See the link to the thread above.
Look, any credibility you had has just gone out the window.
First of all, you act like these corporations are 'victims' (which they aren't).
I mean, you say the internet is costing them-
No, it's not.
Piracy maybe, but they still make huge amounts of profit, but the internet? You've got to be joking.

Second point, if you don't have a law degree, then you can't really claim to know what it's talking about, you could easily misinterpret or not fully understand the implications.
Also, read Rabid Toilet's post about legal jargon, because that's what it is.

Third point- I'm seriously beginning to suspect that you've been hired or something, the way you defend these mega businesses, your undying hatred of piracy (i don't like it either, but people are free to make that choice) and your avoidance of questions.
 

DracoSuave

New member
Jan 26, 2009
1,685
0
0
The Cool Kid said:
Well read it. The fact you are trying to comment on something you haven't is alarming. My point has been clear from the start that the criticisms are false.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.338370-The-truth-about-SOPA
That's my point. Almost all the criticisms are based on ignorance.
I have rebutted the points you have made. You have refused to acknowledge their existance.

You have forfeited the argument, and your side is wrong by default.

Good day, sir.

Protip: Spamming a link to other posts you have made is not an argument.

However, you're pointing out PARTS of SOPA that do not actually address others' concerns. The fact is, it's the ENFORCEMENT aspects that people find wanting. It's not the fact that you need evidence that has people in a tizzy, it's the process by which such evidence is examined that people have problems with.

It's not the fact that you can enact legal proceedings against wrongful use of the law that people are worked up about, it's the fact that the plaintiff does NOT need to use the courts to enact the law in the first place.

Thus the burden of proof becomes on the defendant to prove legality, rather than on the plaintiff to show illegality, in the courts. It circumvents the courts and thus discussion of 'evidence' and such is nonsense--evidence is ONLY evidence when it is tested in the courts.

There's no -preponderance- of evidence, and thus, the law is flawed.

Do you not understand that?

If you do not understand what 'Preponderance of evidence' means, you, yourself, do not have the knowledge required to continue this debate.
 

DracoSuave

New member
Jan 26, 2009
1,685
0
0
The Cool Kid said:
Can you point out the part about SOPA you don't like? The internet at the moment is costing the entertainment industry billions of dollars. That simply isn't fair.
Appeal to emotion, the premise does not involve the conclusion. Argument is invalid.
 

GeorgW

ALL GLORY TO ME!
Aug 27, 2010
4,806
0
0
I have a vuvuzela sitting right next to me and every fibre in my being wants to blow it in celebration. However, it's 00:33 ATM and I don't think that'd go over well. So, I'll just have to do it here.

BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!
 

Auesis

New member
Mar 10, 2011
32
0
0
GeorgW said:
I have a vuvuzela sitting right next to me and every fibre in my being wants to blow it in celebration. However, it's 00:33 ATM and I don't think that'd go over well. So, I'll just have to do it here.

BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!
OH GOD, MY HEAD. GET IT OUT, GET IT OUT!

You're lucky I'm in the celebratory mood, too, or consequences would never be the same :O
 

theheroofaction

New member
Jan 20, 2011
928
0
0
Well that was... anticlimatic.
Seriously, does anyone else realize that real life just pulled a Deus Ex Machina.

Any how, this calls for celebration.

 

Pandaman1911

Fuzzy Cuddle Beast
Jan 3, 2011
601
0
0
Hooray, a week-long reprieve, or at least however long it will take for the hundreds of thousands of lawyers working for the corporations who made this shit to drum up something new that does the same thing but puts it a little less threateningly.

Or however long it takes to bribe everyone. Either way.