Page 3 of 7 [ 111 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

18 Jan 2012, 9:03 pm

Quote:
WASHINGTON, D.C. - For the past several months, Sen. Rand Paul has opposed and led the charge against both the PROTECT IP Act (PIPA) and the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA). Today, Sen. Paul issued the following statement.

"The Internet, as we know it, has had a profound impact on job creation, the global economy and prosperity. It has accelerated wealth creation and facilitated a more connected world. But the Internet's development is based on the free flow of information, innovation, and ideas, not central government control," Sen. Paul said.

"Both PIPA and SOPA give the federal government unprecedented and unconstitutional power to censor the Internet. These bills enable the government to shut down websites that it deems guilty of violating copyright laws. While we support copyright protections, we are also concerned about websites being shut down without their day in court, and making innocent third parties bear the costs of solving someone else's problems."

Sen. Paul concluded, "I will not sit idly by while PIPA and SOPA eliminate the constitutionally protected rights to due process and free speech. For these reasons, I have pledged to oppose, filibuster and do everything in my power to stop government censorship of the Internet."


I believe Ron Wyden(D-OR), Jerry Moran(R-KS), and Maria Cantwell(D-WA) have also pledged to to filibuster.



Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

18 Jan 2012, 10:42 pm

Jacoby wrote:
I believe Ron Wyden(D-OR), Jerry Moran(R-KS), and Maria Cantwell(D-WA) have also pledged to to filibuster.


Well damn, it's about time Maria Cantwell did something I agreed with.


_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez


Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,398

18 Jan 2012, 11:36 pm

visagrunt wrote:
I just want one anti-SOPA/PIPA activist to acknowledge that copyright and broadcast rights are legitimate infringements on free expression, and present some alternate means whereby artists can protect their works.

Again. It is a complete and outright lie (UTTER BS in fact) that artists currently have no means to "protect their works".

The current internet is kind of free and copyright holders already have plenty of tools to protect their works. Even megaupload will delete uploads that violate your copyright if you report it. And of course, then we have the other sites, some of which are even ridiculously pro-active in making copyright holders happy. Universal can delete any youtube video without any proof of ownership, and they have already done it.

It is not the collective's problem that some copyright holders are so lazy that they would rather prefer the web to be destroyed than them do their job. The advantages of holding a copyright come with the price that you have to work to protect it.

It would be insane and non-sensical to expect anyone other than the copright holder to protect the work. Because there are millions and millions of songs and videos out there. We, the people, cannot know all the copyrighted things in existence. It makes sense for the people that benefit from copyright protections to spend their own time looking and reporting for misuse of their work.



Quote:
A free internet should not be purchased using the livelihoods of artists--

I have priorities. If it is up to me, these "artists" can drop to bridges if their livelihoods require the destruction of the free internet.

Quote:
especially small artists who lack the capacity to exercise their existing rights.
This is more complete and utter bull. There is a big reason why SOPA, PIPA and STUPIDACRONYM laws are pushed by big copyright lobbies that are already too massive. These laws will preserve their monopolies and cause discomfort tol the small artists. Small artists who right now actually using the free internet to their advantage.

The big offense, the big blasphemy against big disc labels is not that the free internet allows copyright infrigement (as mentioned, they already have plenty of means for them to fight copyright infringement). What really boils their bloods is that new, small artists are using things like youtube and facebook to publish their new works and are able to jump to popularity without any help from them. The internet makes disk labels irrelevant. You may ask Justin Bieber about this.


Quote:
If we take away the few remaining incentives to being a professional artist we will do our collective cultures an enormous disservice.

Culture has existed and has been rich for ages way before copyrights were invented.



Quote:
Now that's not to say that SOPA or PIPA are appropriate tools, I agree that they are spectacularly blunt instruments. But I have no tolerance for the person who cries "free internet" and remains wilfully blind to the consequences of that call.

Oh sure, the free internet has consequences. Take a look at Egypt.



--------

New technology kills industries. It is a fact of life. Scribes had to lose their jobs once they got obsolete. Giant record companies shall suffer a similar fate if they are unable to adapt. Scribes could not stop print.


_________________
.


LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 49
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

19 Jan 2012, 12:19 am

Most members of congress are uniquely ill-equipped to make any laws regarding the internet, given that most of them are functionally computer-illiterate. They might or might not even be able to check their own email.

Many people who did not grow up using computers still seem to see computers and internet use as frivolous and/or evil; they should not be the ones to try to make laws to protect IP, and simply allowing the enormous media companies to write billls for them because they don't know a URL from an ISP (which is basically where SOPA and PIPA came from) is far too one-sided.



snapcap
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,328

19 Jan 2012, 12:29 am

LKL wrote:
Most members of congress are uniquely ill-equipped to make any laws regarding the internet, given that most of them are functionally computer-illiterate. They might or might not even be able to check their own email.

Many people who did not grow up using computers still seem to see computers and internet use as frivolous and/or evil; they should not be the ones to try to make laws to protect IP, and simply allowing the enormous media companies to write billls for them because they don't know a URL from an ISP (which is basically where SOPA and PIPA came from) is far too one-sided.


Rod Blagojevich said he could type even though obviously he couldn't. I wouldn't take the word of anyone in Congress about knowing how the tubes work.


_________________
*some atheist walks outside and picks up stick*

some atheist to stick: "You're like me!"


Oodain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,022
Location: in my own little tamarillo jungle,

19 Jan 2012, 2:01 am

snapcap wrote:
LKL wrote:
Most members of congress are uniquely ill-equipped to make any laws regarding the internet, given that most of them are functionally computer-illiterate. They might or might not even be able to check their own email.

Many people who did not grow up using computers still seem to see computers and internet use as frivolous and/or evil; they should not be the ones to try to make laws to protect IP, and simply allowing the enormous media companies to write billls for them because they don't know a URL from an ISP (which is basically where SOPA and PIPA came from) is far too one-sided.


Rod Blagojevich said he could type even though obviously he couldn't. I wouldn't take the word of anyone in Congress about knowing how the tubes work.


"if you stop the tubes, they will back up and explode,
you dont want that, the internets are highly toxic to unprotected skin O_o"

relevant, i promise :lol:


_________________
//through chaos comes complexity//

the scent of the tamarillo is pungent and powerfull,
woe be to the nose who nears it.


Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

19 Jan 2012, 2:01 am

LKL wrote:
Most members of congress are uniquely ill-equipped to make any laws regarding the internet, given that most of them are functionally computer-illiterate. They might or might not even be able to check their own email.

Many people who did not grow up using computers still seem to see computers and internet use as frivolous and/or evil; they should not be the ones to try to make laws to protect IP, and simply allowing the enormous media companies to write billls for them because they don't know a URL from an ISP (which is basically where SOPA and PIPA came from) is far too one-sided.


That may be true for some but I don't think ignorance is a legitimate excuse for most. I think it mostly comes down to money, the people pushing this are people that have been bank rolled by the big media companies. I know one of Senator Bob Casey's bigger backers is Charter Communications who is a pushing SOPA/PIPA.

Harry Reid has a connections to the media industry out in Nevada.

The current head of the MPAA is former senator Chris Dodd.

There is some hardcore lobbying going on to get this passed.



TheKing
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,100
Location: Merced, California

19 Jan 2012, 2:43 am

visagrunt wrote:
Obres wrote:
It's not the small artists who are complaining. It's in their best interest to take any exposure they can get. If 9 people pirate their work but it gets their work out, and 1 person buys it and pays for it, they're still ahead. It's only the major corporations and established artists who are complaining about this.


Nonsense. On both fronts.

The choice of whether or not to distribute their work for free to gain exposure is the privilege of the artist, not the consumer. If I think that it is in my best interest to put my work out there, I will do it. But if I want to control the art that I create, then it is my right to do so. "Free internet"ers telling artist, "This is for your own good," is the ultimate hypocrisy.

And yes, SOPA is driven by Hollywood. Much of its abuse (and I acknowledge that it is abusive) addresses the interests of Hollywood, rather than small artists. But that does not mean that small artists do not see the internet as a threat to their livelihood.


if you don't want people to share it, don't post it on the internet. remember nothing ever leaves the internet once its on here, its my belief that the purpose of the internet is for free quick sharing of information and ideas


_________________
WP Strident Atheist
If you believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, have accepted him as your lord and savior, and are 100% proud of it, put this in your sig.


TheKing
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,100
Location: Merced, California

19 Jan 2012, 2:51 am

they say its about pirating but if you look at it and think you will realize its all about control. they want to control and regulate what we are learning to make us easier to control, its what they done for nearly 100 years now. if i was a better hacker i would definitely join Anonymous in their crusade, anyone remember China a few years back when they censored their internet? Google threatened to leave China if they didn't stop censoring it because the hackers were attacking them in response to the censorship, same thing will happen here but on a MUCH larger scale because this is America


_________________
WP Strident Atheist
If you believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, have accepted him as your lord and savior, and are 100% proud of it, put this in your sig.


phil777
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 May 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,825
Location: Montreal, Québec

19 Jan 2012, 4:00 am

Actually, one can wonder what will be the point of internet anymore! We could probably just cancel our respective internet subscriptions in protest (if even temporarily). =/



WilliamWDelaney
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Apr 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,201

19 Jan 2012, 6:57 am

As long as piracy is considered to be "wrong" because of some trivial harm it may or may not inflict on the interests of billionaires, it will remain wildly popular and sought-after by just about everyone, including several of the affected billionaires (who lead the charge on populist notions more often than most people realize). When it is associated with penny-pinching, its esteem should undergo a sharp decline.



LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 49
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

19 Jan 2012, 5:01 pm

Jacoby wrote:
LKL wrote:
Most members of congress are uniquely ill-equipped to make any laws regarding the internet, given that most of them are functionally computer-illiterate. They might or might not even be able to check their own email.

Many people who did not grow up using computers still seem to see computers and internet use as frivolous and/or evil; they should not be the ones to try to make laws to protect IP, and simply allowing the enormous media companies to write billls for them because they don't know a URL from an ISP (which is basically where SOPA and PIPA came from) is far too one-sided.


That may be true for some but I don't think ignorance is a legitimate excuse for most. I think it mostly comes down to money, the people pushing this are people that have been bank rolled by the big media companies. I know one of Senator Bob Casey's bigger backers is Charter Communications who is a pushing SOPA/PIPA.

Harry Reid has a connections to the media industry out in Nevada.

The current head of the MPAA is former senator Chris Dodd.

There is some hardcore lobbying going on to get this passed.

I agree - I was trying to imply such, but left out the bolded part of 'allowig the media companies to write bills for them because the media companies pay them $K's of money.'



Jeffrey228
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 23 Apr 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 152

19 Jan 2012, 8:48 pm

Master_Pedant wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
Wikipedia is down I have become 70% dumber.


Well, increase your knowledge level by reading one article that still is up.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act


Well apparently I would blame Christian communists, they want people to learn the Dictionary Books we have and not the internet, they also Religion can also be a bad thing too, reason they keep giving the Bible Books out, No offense.



iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

19 Jan 2012, 10:17 pm

The title of the bill makes me think of a pastry at Pancho's buffet.



Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

19 Jan 2012, 10:38 pm

Try and wrap your heads around this statement from the chairman of the MPAA:

Chris Dodd wrote:
It is an irresponsible response and a disservice to people who rely on them for information and use their services. It is also an abuse of power given the freedoms these companies enjoy in the marketplace today. It’s a dangerous and troubling development when the platforms that serve as gateways to information intentionally skew the facts to incite their users in order to further their corporate interests.

http://www.unitedliberty.org/articles/9 ... um=twitter

He thinks sites blacking out in protest is abusing their power. As the full linked article details, this from a guy who was once described as one of the most corrupt members of congress who passed through the infamous "revolving door" to become a lobbyist. Scary, huh?


_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez


marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

20 Jan 2012, 12:36 am

LKL wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
LKL wrote:
Most members of congress are uniquely ill-equipped to make any laws regarding the internet, given that most of them are functionally computer-illiterate. They might or might not even be able to check their own email.

Many people who did not grow up using computers still seem to see computers and internet use as frivolous and/or evil; they should not be the ones to try to make laws to protect IP, and simply allowing the enormous media companies to write billls for them because they don't know a URL from an ISP (which is basically where SOPA and PIPA came from) is far too one-sided.


That may be true for some but I don't think ignorance is a legitimate excuse for most. I think it mostly comes down to money, the people pushing this are people that have been bank rolled by the big media companies. I know one of Senator Bob Casey's bigger backers is Charter Communications who is a pushing SOPA/PIPA.

Harry Reid has a connections to the media industry out in Nevada.

The current head of the MPAA is former senator Chris Dodd.

There is some hardcore lobbying going on to get this passed.

I agree - I was trying to imply such, but left out the bolded part of 'allowig the media companies to write bills for them because the media companies pay them $K's of money.'


I'd say our entire political system is morally bankrupt. Congress has been completely overrun with idiots and cronies. Either demand campaign finance reform immediately or make controversial bills like this pass a national public referendum.