U.S. Congress Shelves SOPA

[Auesis]

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

 

[Coldster]

Hooray! It is good day to be internet user!

 

[theheroofaction]

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]

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.

 

[xPixelatedx]

This is disgusting. Almost all the criticisms were based on lies. The fact that this is seen as some sort of victory is appauling and shows how few have bothered to read the bill and how mass ignorance has controlled the internet and will simply harm the industries we love so much.

Yeah tell me about it. Youtube killed my family, and internet movie/game critics vandalized my small business. I would have been happy to see those scumbags go! Oh well, we'll get them next time! *fist shake*

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

And now all we need to do is stop PIPA. Let's keep this going!

 

[aoi287]

Huzzah!

 

[Crazy]

It doesn't matter if SOPA was right or wrong, for it has heard the fat lady's song. Want it or not, its no longer around. I hope it's ending can set thing abound.

 

[Agayek]

SOPA is down, but the government has yet to comment on PIPA, which to be honest is even worse.

Pretty much this. It's not over til PIPA is stopped too.

 

[Anthony Wells]

all the arguing going on in this thread is funny. i like how people are constantly stating to COol kid the flaws in his arguments and he ignores them and constantly just repeats the argument over and over again. He must have been wronged horribly by pirates before to defiantl;y stick with his flawed argument over and over despite more and more poeple siding against him.

for the record i never voted for or against sopa i basically couldnt have cared less.. i would have felt bad for those affected but i try to stay as far from politics as i can.

 

[Miles000]

SOPA isn't dead!

It's simply been hidden under the rug until people look away again.
The only way to kill it, at this stage, is to vote out it's founder! Rep Lamar S. Smith. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamar_S._Smith]

PIPA is still going ahead!

The PROTECT IP act is a Senate bill. SOPA was a House bill.
That means a completely different set of people are in charge of it.
SOPA was dropped to take attention away from PIPA!
Sadly, it seems to be working...

One the positive side though...
Wikipedia is joining the blackout! [http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71500.html]

Don't let this think we've won. It's another scam to get us to drop our guards!
Just like the removal of DNS. This hasn't solved anything!

EDIT: Imgur is joining the blackout, along with many smaller sites!

 

[Xman490]

I now forgive Obama for the National Defense Authorization Act. After all, he apparently wants to cement his reputation as the most "terrorist-downing" President and beating W Bush at Bush's own Presidential "game".

 

[Scars Unseen]

Well looks like all the fuss was for nothing and it turns out the sky, is indded, not falling after all. The bill never had a chance from the get go of making it out of The House (as I said it wouldn't multiple times over). I won't dispute it was horrible but it has absolutely ZERO chance of being put into law.

I guess now the internet can take a rest and get themselves ready for the next Bill/Law that gets them all in a collective tizzy and screaming about the end of days. At least watching people grossly over react is amusing I suppose. . . .

It's an election year. Why do you think the White House waited so long to take a stance? The fuss was absolutely not for nothing.

 

[BehattedWanderer]

?That is not dead which can eternal lie,
And with strange aeons even death may die.?

SOPA only rests. It will return.

And now I await the South Park episode on this. Though, Cthulhu as a metaphor for horrendous legislation? Well, it does drive one to madness just thinking about, this is true...

 

[JoesshittyOs]

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.

Now, to address something you brought up:

Yes, you can persue damages for false action using the bill, however by the time you seek redress IT'S TOO LATE because that action has already resulted in the complete shutdown of your domain at a fundamental level.

Good luck funding your lawsuit, because your income has been stripped of you, along with your domain name, and any ways for you to do perfectly legal business.

It puts the onus onto the content provider to prove his content is legal before he can show it, rather than putting the onus on the copyright holder to prove the content is illegal. This is, of course, ASS BACKWARDS.

In order for holders of intellectual properties to stop, they have to display in the courts, using a preponderance of evidence, that their rights are being infringed. SOPA and PIPA give them a weapon that allows them to skip the requirement of preponderance of evidence, and go straight into action before it's been examined in a court of law. This goes against the central concepts of civil law.

Uh... What this guy said. In a Capitalist society like we are in, this law straight up doesn't work. It's essentially handing power right into the Billion dollar corporations' hands and saying to the small simple man "Good luck, have fun getting into the ring with this guy"

Jesus, I'm glad I don't have to jump into this argument....

OT: Yay!

But what about that PIPA thing?

 

[enzilewulf]

This is nice and all but Obama doesn?t exactly have a good track record when it comes to keeping promises.

I couldn't keep promises either when my hands are tied.

This is great news. I am sure PIPA will fall to the same type of opposition

 

[bootz]

Epic wow Mr. Obama won my vote the next election . I'm doing my happy dance. Is wikipedia.org and other sites still going to black out that day?

 

[Cain_Zeros]

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.

Focus on section 103 parts 4, 5 and 6. The other Bills are available on the net so it's just a quick bit of google-ing to solve those mysteries.
Please tell me what is confusing about:

(1) DEDICATED TO THEFT OF U.S. PROPERTY.?An Internet site is dedicated to theft of
3 U.S. property if-

the U.S.-directed site is primarily designed or operated for the purpose of, has only limited purpose or use other than, or is marketed by its operator or another acting in concert with that operator for use in, offering goods or services in a manner that engages in, enables, or facilitates- (I) a violation of section 501 of title 17, United States Code; (II) a violation of section 1201 of title 17, United States Code; or (III) the sale, distribution, or promotion of goods, services, or materials bearing a counterfeit mark, as that term is defined in section 34(d) of the Lanham Act or section 2320 of title 18, United States Code;

Seems straight forward. This Bill is very, very simple reading, so much so that if you tell me what parts, be specific, you don't understand, I'll explain them to you.

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.

Pirating resulted in the PC gaming industry to lose over $1 billion. How are you working out that that is not costing them money? Do you really believe that if pirating wasn't available, none of them would buy the games?

You don't need a law degree to understand law, or a Bill. Show the part you don't understand and I'll explain it. Or just use google and a dictionary. Law grads are humans with brains, like you, therefore you can do the same things as them, including understanding a straight forward Bill. Though as I understand it and you don't, isn't it ironic you are telling me I'm the one with no credibility and yet you are arguing against a bill that you don't understand?

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.

So Section 103.4, 5 and 6 are nothing to do with SOPA enforcement. Right. I think you want to re-read the Bill and get back to me on that one as section 103.4 SPECIFICALLY STATES you do need evidence...

Allow me to show, as many others have, exactly what's wrong with SOPA.
http://www.extremetech.com/computing/109533-how-sopa-could-actually-break-the-internet

Now, I recommend you actually read that, instead of assuming there are no issues because you chose to interpret the incredibly open-to-interpretation legalese in a harmless way (;et's face it, it's rarely going to be interpreted the way you interpreted it by the people who can actually use it).

 

[2012 Wont Happen]

Now I know who I'm voting for next year.

So Obama, the same Obama who coauthored and signed into law a bill allowing him to detain American citizens without charge, now that he has said he won't sign a bill that would infringe some concept of internet based "rights" is a person to vote for?

How are people really fooled by this? SOPA was never going to pass. It was a media trick to distract people from NDAA, and it worked. Everybody is celebrating that they can watch youtube while they should be outraged at living in an authoritarian system with a Corporatist economy (for which there is a word: Fascism).

That isn't to say that the Republicans are much better. In a choice between laissez-faire advocates and Fascists my favorite option is always "fire and more fire". It is just to say that acting like Obama is good for this is pretty naive.

 

[Zydrate]

I am /very/ happy about this.

Go team!