Protect IP Act (PIPA - S.968) and Stop Online Privacy Act (SOPA – H.R.3261) and all that Megaupload

[berrywoman]

THIS NEEDS TO BE BUMPED!!!!!

 

The lead sponsor of the U.S. Stop Online Piracy Act, a controversial copyright enforcement bill, will remove a much-debated provision that would require Internet service providers to block their subscribers from accessing foreign websites accused of infringing the copyrights of U.S. companies.

 

Representative Lamar Smith, a Texas Republican, said he will remove the ISP provision from the bill, called SOPA, so that lawmakers can “further examine the issues surrounding this provision.”

 

 

 

http://www.macworld.com/article/164827/2012/01/sopa_author_to_remove_isp_blocking_provision.html

 

 

I say bring on the protest!!! JAN 18TH.... SOPA BLACKOUT!!!

[Black Rose]

Welcome to the great firewall of America, stronger than the firewall of China

[Keddie]

On the subject of constitutionality, has anybody ever considered that the constitution might not be the best thing to look to for every single decision, as it was written over 200 years ago by politicians with no knowledge or experience of the issues a modern-day US faces? I think this is a major flaw of this type of legal paper. Can it really bode relevance hundreds of years after it was written? Is it still going to be what we base all of our decisions on in the year 3012? Do you really want it to be? Food for thought....

[Keddie]

I haven't taken the time to read the details of what these bills will do, or even look into their likelihood of passing, but I'm going to make some predictions:

 

1. Both bills will pass and be signed into law by Obama.

 

(and another slightly unrelated prediction)

 

2. Obama's health care law, even though it was written in-part by Justice Kagan (an Obama appointee to the Supreme Court) will be held up as constitutional and Justice Kagan will refuse to recuse herself from the case.

 

Alright those are my predictions, let's see how quickly this nation can slide into the pit of lawlessness! :smash:

http://geeks.thedailywh.at/2012/01/14/obama-opposes-sopa-of-the-day/

[Kiame]

Well hopefully when China do surpass the USA as the most powerful nation on Earth they adopt a better Foreign Policy than the US.

 

Somehow I am cynical about a country that has no moral qualms about slave labour and keeping most of its populace in poverty would adapt a peaceful foreign policy if they found themselves in a militarily powerful situation.

 

As far as super powers go, the USA hasn't been that bad. They've certainly been the most peaceful super power of the last few hundred years. That's not saying much, I know.

[Keddie]

Also, calling it a "healthcare" law is a bit misleading. It has nothing to do with increasing the number of doctors or hospitals. It's just a law that forces people to buy health insurance (from private insurance companies).

actually nope not misleading at all because healthcare is an actual thing and has never been defined as "the number of hospitals and doctors"

 

"It's just a law that forces people to buy health insurance"

once again, wrong:

http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2011pres/12/20111214b.html

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/health/diseasesconditionsandhealthtopics/health_insurance_and_managed_care/health_care_reform/index.html

[Saffire]

On the subject of constitutionality, has anybody ever considered that the constitution might not be the best thing to look to for every single decision, as it was written over 200 years ago by politicians with no knowledge or experience of the issues a modern-day US faces? I think this is a major flaw of this type of legal paper. Can it really bode relevance hundreds of years after it was written? Is it still going to be what we base all of our decisions on in the year 3012? Do you really want it to be? Food for thought....

 

The principles enshrined in the Constitution are key to any nation's prosperity, because they are timeless.

 

Granting a small group of individuals the power to rule over many millions of people inevitably leads to corruption, bribes, favoritism, and economic inefficiencies. Governments are, in their essence, monopolies. Therefore the Constitution tries to point us toward decentralizing power and spreading it out. This has the effect of increasing politicians/police/troops' accountability.

[Saffire]

actually nope not misleading at all because healthcare is an actual thing and has never been defined as "the number of hospitals and doctors"

 

"It's just a law that forces people to buy health insurance"

once again, wrong:

http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2011pres/12/20111214b.html

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/health/diseasesconditionsandhealthtopics/health_insurance_and_managed_care/health_care_reform/index.html

 

Right, neither article you linked to show an actual increase in the supply of doctors or hospitals. Only an increase in the demand.

 

An increase in demand and a steady supply leads to higher prices.

[Black Rose]

With reference to the healthcare bill, it will force people to buy health insurance at stupid prices and when they need to use the health insurance the insurers will try any trick in the book to refuse paying out (you didn't declare that when you were 4 you were admitted to hospital after suffering a broken finger, therefore your claim for your leg is rejected)

[Keddie]

The principles enshrined in the Constitution are key to any nation's prosperity, because they are timeless.

 

Granting a small group of individuals the power to rule over many millions of people inevitably leads to corruption, bribes, favoritism, and economic inefficiencies. Governments are, in their essence, monopolies. Therefore the Constitution tries to point us toward decentralizing power and spreading it out. This has the effect of increasing politicians/police/troops' accountability.

Wrong, as usual. The writers of the Constitution were almost entirely Federalists, people in favor of more government.

Right, neither article you linked to show an actual increase in the supply of doctors or hospitals. Only an increase in the demand.

 

An increase in demand and a steady supply leads to higher prices.

The funny thing here is that I already told you that the term healthcare as we know it in a governmental sense does not relate to the total number of hospitals or doctors.

 

And as always, you're missing the entire point. The goal of the healthcare reforms is to make healthcare more accessible to everyone, so no, the cost will not be increased for many people.

[Keddie]

With reference to the healthcare bill, it will force people to buy health insurance at stupid prices and when they need to use the health insurance the insurers will try any trick in the book to refuse paying out (you didn't declare that when you were 4 you were admitted to hospital after suffering a broken finger, therefore your claim for your leg is rejected)

Actually no, that's how it is now.

 

The goal of the reform is to make healthcare more affordable and force health care providers to give more coverage and will take away much of their ability to play those kinds of games with people.

[berrywoman]

With reference to the healthcare bill, it will force people to buy health insurance at stupid prices and when they need to use the health insurance the insurers will try any trick in the book to refuse paying out (you didn't declare that when you were 4 you were admitted to hospital after suffering a broken finger, therefore your claim for your leg is rejected)

 

Actually it would keep the costs down because that the point of having healthcare for all.... well wait, bad choice of words.... not 'low cost' but 'fairly cost'? I can't explain... :( But I think it would cheapen the quality of care (already poor) even more... :(

 

 

my battery is dying.... I'll be back! ta! :D

[Kiame]

I haven't taken the time to read the details of what these bills will do, or even look into their likelihood of passing, but I'm going to make some predictions:

 

1. Both bills will pass and be signed into law by Obama.

 

(and another slightly unrelated prediction)

 

2. Obama's health care law, even though it was written in-part by Justice Kagan (an Obama appointee to the Supreme Court) will be held up as constitutional and Justice Kagan will refuse to recuse herself from the case.

 

Alright those are my predictions, let's see how quickly this nation can slide into the pit of lawlessness! :smash:

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/jan/16/sopa-shelved-obama-piracy-legislation

 

..."the White House said it would not support legislation that "reduces freedom of expression, increases cybersecurity risks or undermines the dynamic, innovative global internet."

 

SOPA has no chance of passing.

[Cobalt]

The White House says many things.

[getithom]

Is anyone joining the blackout on Wednesday?

[Saffire]

The White House says many things.

 

Bingo.

 

NDAA was a great example of this.

[Kiame]

Bingo.

 

NDAA was a great example of this.

 

The White House says many things.

 

 

Oh, pull the other one. The White House has released official statements telling congress they won't endorse the bill and it's going to be shelved. There is no hope in hell of SOPA passing as it stands. You know the sad thing? You just want it to pass - because then you can go around telling everyone how evil the government is and how right you are. That's what you really want to happen here.

 

The real enemy here are private corporations such as numerous publishers and film studios. Oh, and News Limited - who have recently pasted media on twitter, print and TV attacking Obama and his opposition towards the bill. These are the real people who are behind the bill and they are using certain Congress members as puppets to get what they want.

 

Take Rupert Murdoch for example, who has not only attacked Obama for his opposition towards SOPA - but Google too!

 

Get your priorities right. Obama does not want this bill to pass - if he did, he wouldn't have issued an official statement saying he won't sign it. Saying "Oh well the white house says a lot of things!" isn't an argument at all.

 

Obama does not support SOPA. End of story.

 

EDIT:

 

Lmao. This just in:

 

http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2012/01/sopa-shelved-for-now/

 

"Congress’ indefinite postponement of SOPA comes hours after SOPA’s sponsor – Republican Lamar Smith – agreed to drop the controversial ‘internet blocking’ provision from the bill"

 

So there you go, after Obama's release Smith has shelved SOPA and it will not go to Congress as it stands.

 

What's next? More paranoid cynicism from you two? Are they simply lulling us into a sense of security?

 

I think the chances of Safire admitting his prediction was wrong at this stage are a million to one.

 

We aren't completely out of this mess yet - but SOPA will not pass with the fascist internet blocking powers.

[Wyrd]

Is anyone joining the blackout on Wednesday?

:awesome: I think I will (even though I am not US hihi)

 

I saw wikipedia.org joins as well :cool:

 

http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/English_Wikipedia_anti-SOPA_blackout

[Cobalt]

Oh, pull the other one. The White House has released official statements telling congress they won't endorse the bill and it's going to be shelved. There is no hope in hell of SOPA passing as it stands. You know the sad thing? You just want it to pass - because then you can go around telling everyone how evil the government is and how right you are. That's what you really want to happen here.

 

The real enemy here are private corporations such as numerous publishers and film studios. Oh, and News Limited - who have recently pasted media on twitter, print and TV attacking Obama and his opposition towards the bill. These are the real people who are behind the bill and they are using certain Congress members as puppets to get what they want.

 

Take Rupert Murdoch for example, who has not only attacked Obama for his opposition towards SOPA - but Google too!

 

Get your priorities right. Obama does not want this bill to pass - if he did, he wouldn't have issued an official statement saying he won't sign it. Saying "Oh well the white house says a lot of things!" isn't an argument at all.

 

Obama does not support SOPA. End of story.

 

EDIT:

 

Lmao. This just in:

 

http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2012/01/sopa-shelved-for-now/

 

"Congress’ indefinite postponement of SOPA comes hours after SOPA’s sponsor – Republican Lamar Smith – agreed to drop the controversial ‘internet blocking’ provision from the bill"

 

So there you go, after Obama's release Smith has shelved SOPA and it will not go to Congress as it stands.

 

What's next? More paranoid cynicism from you two? Are they simply lulling us into a sense of security?

 

I think the chances of Safire admitting his prediction was wrong at this stage are a million to one.

 

We aren't completely out of this mess yet - but SOPA will not pass with the fascist internet blocking powers.

 

Obama signed NDAA even though he 'had reservations' about part of the bill... going by that, well...

 

"This just in" likely means I haven't read it yet, way to go for assuming 'lol paranoid looneys'. Though we still mustn't be eager to claim victory... it is possible SOPA may be back soon with different provisions. These may be good or bad.

 

You know the sad thing? You just want it to pass - because then you can go around telling everyone how evil the government is and how right you are. That's what you really want to happen here.

 

What the fuck is with this though? Why do you think I am so worried about it passing somehow if I WANT it to pass? Sod off with your ridiculous assumptions, honestly, I'm not going to continue in any discussion if you're going to shit-fling like that.

[Saffire]

What the fuck is with this though? Why do you think I am so worried about it passing somehow if I WANT it to pass? Sod off with your ridiculous assumptions, honestly, I'm not going to continue in any discussion if you're going to shit-fling like that.

 

Get used to it, this is the way she handles people who disagree with her. Clearly their disagreement must be solely based on their desire to win the argument, rather than their desire to be right!

 

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111209/13013417024/good-bad-new-open-bill-wyden-issa.shtml

 

Here you can see our Congress is already working on a new bill called "OPEN", which promises to do many of the same things SOPA would do.

 

Governments typically work via an incrementalist approach, sometimes taking a step back and biding their time. But their destination is always the same - complete control.

[Keddie]

Obama signed NDAA even though he 'had reservations' about part of the bill... going by that, well...

Having reservations is by no means the same as an official statement released from the White House. As it is right now, it is NEVER going to pass, no matter what paranoid ideas you have about it.

[chuck kottke]

Peter Gabriel and MC Hammer are against PIPA and SOPA! Tomorrow’s anti-SOPA/PIPA blackout will be an unprecedented event – NPI Advocate

But the undercurrent which is pushing for laws such as these is the real issue - if our democracy is really all about representative government, why does it take mass protests to get those elected who represent us to do what we the electorate want? I think this is one more example of why we must become root strikers, getting the buying of elections to end, and no more revolving doors from Washington to lobbying firms.

[busybeeburns]

Viewpoints: Sites go offline in US piracy laws protest

 

 

Viewpoints: Sites go offline in US piracy laws protest

 

A number of high-profile websites are taking part in a 24-hour "blackout" to protest against two bills being considered by Congress to tackle copyright infringement.

 

The House of Representatives' Stop Online Piracy Act (Sopa) and the Senate's Protect Intellectual Property Act (Pipa) are designed to block access to sites containing unauthorised copyright material. Content owners would be given the power to request court orders to shut down sites associated with piracy and advertisers and ISPs would be forbidden from doing business with infringers based overseas.

 

Sopa would also require search engines to remove suspect foreign sites from their results. The English-language site of Wikipedia, the user-generated news site Reddit and the comedy website network Cheezburger are all taking part in the protest.

 

The WordPress blog system is also taking its homepages offline and has urged the owners of the 70.4 million sites that use its service to join in. The BBC asked some of the parties involved in the dispute to explain their positions.

 

Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia

 

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soFbuQGFmMI]Jimmy Wales Wikipedia Founder Explains Why Stop Online Piracy Act ( SOPA ) Is So Bad - YouTube[/ame]

 

At Wikipedia we are very strong defenders of freedom of speech and the open internet. We believe that if you want to combat piracy then measures that ask search engines to delist things or DNS services that block things are the wrong approach.

 

The right approach is to follow the money. To go after the people who are engaging in large scale criminal enterprises rather than burdening the entire internet with a regime that doesn't have very much promise of working.

 

And things could get really bad if we get into a situation where some of the worst burdens of these rules go through. We have strong indications from venture capitalists that they would find it hard to invest in new start-ups in the user-generated content space.

 

Certainly innovations like Wikipedia would become very difficult if it were necessary for us to police everything that users were doing against some blacklist of websites. In the worst case scenario we could have a situation where the US creates a Chinese style firewall in which sites can get blacklisted merely on an accusation. Some of the variations of the bill make it a little harder to get blacklisted, but in general we just think the entire approach is the wrong one.

 

Bad US law affects people all around the world. Look at the case of Richard O'Dwyer [the British student who created TVShack - a site which provided links to other pages containing pirated material]. The young man is being threatened with extradition to the US over alleged violations of US copyright law even though he lives in the UK and everything he did was on servers based in the UK.

 

A big part of Sopa is about dealing with overseas websites. That will have a huge impact on the very exciting UK IT internet start-up scene if it becomes likely that on a single complaint from a US movie studio some promising young British firm would be shut down.

 

We think it is a global issue because the US has such a strong impact on the internet. Many of the supporters of this bill portray those of us who are against it as being somehow pro-piracy. That is absolutely false. We are pro-freedom of speech. Many of us, including me personally, are quite anti-piracy. I just want to fight piracy in a way that will really work and make a real difference.

 

Mr Wales is the co-founder and promoter of Wikipedia

 

Matt Mullenweg, WordPress

 

 

I've built my life on a free and open internet. As the co-founder of WordPress.org, a free software project that aims to democratise publishing, and the founder of Automattic, the company behind WordPress.com that hosts blogs from around the world in pursuit of the same goal, the proposed US legislation to regulate and censor the free and open foundation of the internet makes my mouth go dry with fear.

 

The rise of the web over the past two decades and the freedom to publish and express yourself online will be looked back upon as a cultural revolution.

 

We have gone from a world split between gatekeepers and media "consumers" to a world in which anyone regardless of geography, finances, social class, race, gender, or any other demographic identifier is free to engage with the rest of the world on their own terms.

 

That freedom is of paramount importance and must be protected. That's why we're blacking out our websites on the 18th to raise awareness of this issue, and giving our users tools to do the same. The tech world is fiercely competitive and companies seldom agree on anything, when you see so many united in solidarity on a single issue, you know there's something to it.

 

What concerns me the most about Sopa and the Protect IP Act is not that media companies and legislators want to have measures in place to protect copyright - for example we reply to and comply with DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) takedown notices on WordPress.com when we receive them, it works well for everybody - it's that the authors of the legislation don't seem to really understand how the internet works.

 

The definition of domestic versus foreign sites shows a woeful lack of comprehension about how domains are used and how traffic flows on the internet.

 

Where do I stand? On the side of publishing freedom.

 

What do I hope for? That these pieces of legislation be set aside, and that any future legislation in this arena be drafted by people who understand how the internet works - and how it won't if they do the wrong thing.

 

Mr Mullenweg is the founding developer of WordPress

 

Michael O'Leary , Motion Picture Association of America

 

 

There is a growing problem that entertainment and technology companies face across the world: rogue websites that profit from stolen content and counterfeit goods.

 

Many countries have taken reasonable measures to target this activity. Intellectual property laws have allowed commerce, innovation and free speech to flourish on the Internet.

 

In the United States, criminal websites located in other countries are engaging in destructive behaviour but are currently beyond the reach of our courts and law enforcement agencies. So, there should be nothing controversial about taking measures to limit the access of these foreign rogue websites - that engage in behaviour that is illegal for domestic websites - to American consumers and the American market

 

Measured legislation, the Stop Online Piracy Act and the Protect IP Act, has been introduced in Congress to address rogue websites and has been modified to address the concerns of the technology industry.

 

The importance of this legislation is evident in its broad support. It has the rare bipartisan support of Democrats and Republicans, the AFL-CIO (American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations) and Chamber of Commerce as well as a large coalition of businesses, unions, law enforcement officials and elected leaders from across the country.

 

The bills will encourage innovation while preserving millions of jobs that depend on intellectual property protection, including about 2.2 million Americans whose jobs depend on the film and television industries.

 

Unfortunately, opponents of the legislation have resorted to attacking the legislation without engaging in a real discussion of the provisions of the bill. Hopefully, this is not a stalling tactic to avoid targeting these foreign rogue websites and the profits they create for American companies that facilitate their illegal behaviour.

 

Recently, the Obama Administration stated that it looks forward to working with all parties to pass legislation this year to combat foreign piracy. All industries should work together to pass the legislation.

 

Every day that Congress fails to act on the legislation, American jobs are at risk and more consumers are vulnerable to criminal and malicious behaviour.

 

Mr O'Leary is the MPAA's senior executive vice-president of global policy and external affairs.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-16604990

[Saffire]

Having reservations is by no means the same as an official statement released from the White House. As it is right now, it is NEVER going to pass, no matter what paranoid ideas you have about it.

 

So I suppose that makes Wikipedia, Google, et al full of a bunch of raving paranoids then, right? After all, they are making a big stink about a bill that will supposedly never pass.

[DefDazz]

If this "does" pass you would see Coldplaying.com go offline very quickly along with every other Fan Forum with outside links - media pics etc in it.

 

Coldplay.com would also be blocked due to the Exhibition Room and it's links to YouTube videos.

 

They would be forced to remove every link on there and many of the links they post in news updates.

 

Which of course would help solve the Piracy problem that the evil coldplaying.com and coldplay.com are happy to be involved with...

 

Just to relate this to Coldplay for a moment.