I don't doubt that's how it will end up.
On the surface though, the stated goal is to stop piracy.
Website owners want to take the "I can't control what people put on my site" tactic but, in fact, they can. If you are too lazy to police your site, you shouldn't have one.
If I owned a brick and mortar needlepoint pillow shop but it was really used exclusively by my customers to pirate DVDs, my ass would go to jail.
That "THE SKY IS FALLING" website that you linked says that the man is trying to limit our free speech. I don't think stolen intellectual property is constitutionally protected.
They say it isn't fair to block add funding or not allowing online payments to your site selling stolen property because you didn't put it there but, in reality, the only reason you have any web traffic at all is because you allow stolen shit to be pirated on your website.
You're comparing apples and exceptionally bad taste -DJ
I am all about no censorship on the intertubes and I am absolutely against service providers deciding what speeds you can get depending on what sites you visit but I am A-OK with putting a stop to online theft.
Not that I'm not guilty of it. I've just come to the realization that if people don't get paid for their work, they will stop working and the only "music" we'll have to listen to is a bunch of autotune crap made by hoards of bloggers that nobody has ever read.
I can pay 99 cents for a song I like or $5 for a movie. No problem.
You're comparing apples and exceptionally bad taste -DJ
That was a good article and I see their point. It's too bad that the law would be used in ways it isn't intended but, I'm sure it would be.
I tend to be a little less "Chicken Little" in my views than the author of that article but I certainly can't say they are wrong.
I figured that would be the case. That's why I chose to say you were underinformed rather than just wrong.
I do agree that the (alleged) principle behind the bill is commendable though.
I'm just very uncomfortable with the fact that the only thing stopping the giant media conglomerates from abusing the law if it is passed is their assurances that they won't. They have a terrible track record when it comes to digital rights so far.
The fact that sites are given absolutely no recourse when these media giants decide to "shut them off" is also unsettling. Todd's site is an overwhelming success in comparison to most independent websites, and I've no doubt that he would have very little chance against someone like Time Warner if some random exec there decided to shut him down. And the record of their Cease and Desist letters has clearly shown that piracy often has little to do with earning the ire of the big media companies.
It really doesn't matter. SOPA, or something like it, will be passed eventually. There is simply too much money behind it for it to not pass.
I haven't had cable in years yet I've managed to watch all episodes of True Blood, Mad Men, Breaking Bad, Dexter, Walking Dead..etc all online for free. The amount of movies I've also watched? Who knows. Anyways of course I am guilty, guilty, guilty of what this bill is against 100%, or part of it. But when I watch the shows I watch them a day or so later, and the quality is only good for a computer. Sometimes the quality is kinda bad. I get ads that pop up while I'm watching them... People that want to see it as it airs, in HD, pay.
Aren't enough people still paying to go to the movies, still buying MP3's on itunes and going to concerts, and aren't there enough ads already on tv to keep things going with a percentage of freeloaders getting by under the radar?
A message about SOPA went up on craigslist a few days ago and that's when I first heard about it. Now the stuff about taking down craigslist because people want to sell stuff the mega corporations sell?? That's BS!
Hep, your uncharacteristic lack of apathy is disturbing. I sent a message to my representative, however the senate contact webpage is currently down. I hope it's because they are getting swamped with email.
I know, right? I promise to go back to not giving a shit once this SOPA thing fades away.
Your AV made me think of this strip I found online the other day. I'm pretty sure it's a fake, but it would have made the perfect last strip for C & H and it says a lot about how we deal with "different" kids today.
So, when the collective light of the internet shone upon them, the bought politicians scurried away like roaches, leaving their corporate benefactors bitter and resigned to making angry, hypocritical tweets on one of the very sites they sought to police.
But, much like actual roaches, they will be back tomorrow night as the corporate gluttons spread more breadcrumbs across the floor for them. Give them 4 to 6 months and some other RIAA and MPAA "sponsored" (ie, bought and paid for) bill that will basically be SOPA or PIPA under a different acronym will rear it's bestial maw, intent on devouring free speech on the internet. That's one thing about rich, old men upon which you can always count: their unrelenting desire to control everything.
Sorry about the analogy, I meant no disrespect to actual cockroaches.
It's too bad that Anon is basically a loose collective of gifted children. I'd like to see them a little more organized and focused.
Some of these corporations that are so determined to control the internet need to lose their online privileges permanently. Let's see how much they like it when some online entity to which they cannot appeal decides that their websites must be shut off.
You can still get your pr0n the old fashioned way, right?
Imagine the spike in productivity if the internet wasn't so much fun. We might be able to keep China from taking over! At least, that one guy is really afraid of that happening. Not that he's wearing a tin foil hat or anything.
People will always find ways to avoid actually working.
They've been doing since long before the internet. The internet probably makes us more productive, since we don't have to leave our desks to fuck off. In my parents day, they had to sneak out of the office to avoid work.
In all seriousness, some of the recent twitter comments from the powers behind SOPA reveal their thinly-veiled contempt for both the internet in general and the people that ultimately purchase their products.
Apparently, the the next step in the conflict is to remind them they are essentially attacking the people that keep them in hot tubs and hookers:
"Obtaining the information would only require suspicion of any crime (as opposed to child pornography specifically) and not require probable cause."
The the name is nothing but a smokescreen.
The way it is worded, a cop could suspect you of jaywalking and look up your internet usage for the past 18 months.
Or, how it is probably really intended: They can suspect you of illegally downloading copyrighted material, and look up your internet usage for the past 18 months. And by they, I mean the giant media conglomerates that own the police and are really sponsoring this bill. If you are naive enough to think that police would never allow private companies to insert themselves into a criminal investigation, read up a little on the lost Iphone prototype debacle a few years back. Local cops actually let Apple employees search a citizen's apartment.
And for those of you thinking, "So what? I don't illegally download copyrighted material," remember that high band-with usage often constitutes suspicion is these cases. So if you do a lot of online gaming, or have family members that watch a lot of Netflix, you better enjoy having law-enforcement employees (or their corporate surrogates)looking at everything you do on the internet - including your passwords, bank accounts, credit card numbers, etc.
Not to mention that the actual pirates and pedos use proxies, piggyback on unsecured wi-fi, private networks, and a multitude of other tricks to avoid being caught, so the bill isn't really going to be very effective at what it is barely pretending to be for anyway.
Lamar Smith is a shill and a scumbag. He's from Texas - which is all you really need to say, but I'll say more anyway. As Chairman of the House Committee on the Judiciary, he's been a key factor in the blocking of even allowing congress to consider any bills concerning the decriminalization or legalization of marijuana. At the same time, one of his significant contributors is the Beer, Wine and Liquor Lobby.
He has been a sponsor, or co-sponsor to almost every bill that has been fronted my media companies to control or monitor the internet usage of private citizens. In spite of massive protests by the people, he has sworn to move ahead with pushing SOPA down our throats.
Take a look at his voting record if you don't believe that he's an awful human: