cancel2 2022
Canceled
I think we will need one of these vampire slaying kits to stop these bastards.
Stop SOPA!
- Thread starter Damocles
- Start date
cancel2 2022
Canceled
There appear to be a few on here who do not have the imagination or knowledge to understand why SOPA and PIPA are so potentially damaging. Maybe this will help?
cancel2 2022
Canceled
What Would a Post-SOPA Internet Look Like?
The reason everyone's getting so upset about the Stop Online Piracy Act is because it isn't just meant to crack down on those of us illegally downloading the new Adele single or watching that HBO show on Megavideo. SOPA casts such a wide net that it would affect the entire online experience as we know it, in ways that reach far beyond the goal of preventing file-sharing. It's easy to feel overwhelmed by the possibilities amid the kerfuffle—words like "censorship" and "felony" have been throw around a lot lately. So we're telling you about some concrete changes that SOPA would set in motion. What would a post-SOPA internet look like? Here's a glimpse of a dystopian future.
Let's start with the personal: Your Tumblr, Twitter feed, or Facebook page could be "executed" at any time. A fair number of us have online homes these days, whether it's a Wordpress blog with half a dozen readers or a Twitter page with half a million followers. If you happen to post copyrighted material on one of these sites—and you almost certainly do, especially if it's not monetized—your domain could be blocked, just like that. In the past, the copyright holder could invoke the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which would warn the site to take the material down. There are no such warnings with SOPA.
Google searches would never be the same. Search engines are slanted as it is, burying certain sites they deem inappropriate or irrelevant. SOPA would put this bias on steroids. Any site that may contain copyright-infringing material wouldn't appear in the search results. Even direct searches for domain names may turn up blank pages. Worst of all, the decision to block content is at the discretion of the internet service provider, leaving little recourse if a site owner believes he's been blocked unfairly.
Comments sections would die and take websites down with them. Not only would a blogger or site provider be responsible for her own content, she'd be responsible for her commenters' behavior, too. That means if a commenter posts an entire article from another site onto your blog, you're paying the price. The inevitable result? People would simply remove their comments sections for self-preservation, effectively ending online exchanges and conversations. (Same goes for Facebook pages: Would you let just anyone screw you over with one infringing post?)
It could create sneaky company wars, and ideological ones, too. Not everybody would post copyrighted content on a site accidentally. Rival companies could try to snuff out each other's sites by posting illegal content in their comments and on their forums. And what about political or religious crusaders? Anti-abortion activists could write a copyright-violating comment on Planned Parenthood's blog to shut the site down. Creationists could write a letter to the editor of an online science magazine that's riddled with plagiarized content. President Obama's staff could post copyrighted paragraphs on Mitt Romney's site. And so on.
Wikis and photo sites would be things of the past. Who would risk exposing a site to literally billions of users who could accidentally or deliberately post copyrighted content? Wikipedia, Wikileaks, even Flickr and other photo sites would be too much of a liability for site proprietors.
Kids (and a lot of normal people) would be cut out of the internet. The wonderful thing about the internet is that it democratizes information and entertainment by being so user-friendly. It's one of the few places where everyday people—especially kids—actually have a voice, whether they're singing or laughing or crying or pontificating. SOPA would take them right offline, since many of us won't know the ins and outs of complicated copyright laws.
The internet would become a time capsule. When it comes to the internet, sharing is what spurs innovation. Sometimes that sharing needs to be scaled back (ahem, Napster), but the web's history is founded upon the dissemination of information. Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Dropbox, MediaFire, and so many other sites would have never been invented if SOPA was in place a few years ago. The law would stop innovation in its tracks. Sound good? Didn't think so. Luckily, there are some alternatives brewing. In the meantime, let Congress know what you think of SOPA.
http://www.good.is/post/what-would-a-post-sopa-internet-look-like/
The reason everyone's getting so upset about the Stop Online Piracy Act is because it isn't just meant to crack down on those of us illegally downloading the new Adele single or watching that HBO show on Megavideo. SOPA casts such a wide net that it would affect the entire online experience as we know it, in ways that reach far beyond the goal of preventing file-sharing. It's easy to feel overwhelmed by the possibilities amid the kerfuffle—words like "censorship" and "felony" have been throw around a lot lately. So we're telling you about some concrete changes that SOPA would set in motion. What would a post-SOPA internet look like? Here's a glimpse of a dystopian future.
Let's start with the personal: Your Tumblr, Twitter feed, or Facebook page could be "executed" at any time. A fair number of us have online homes these days, whether it's a Wordpress blog with half a dozen readers or a Twitter page with half a million followers. If you happen to post copyrighted material on one of these sites—and you almost certainly do, especially if it's not monetized—your domain could be blocked, just like that. In the past, the copyright holder could invoke the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which would warn the site to take the material down. There are no such warnings with SOPA.
Google searches would never be the same. Search engines are slanted as it is, burying certain sites they deem inappropriate or irrelevant. SOPA would put this bias on steroids. Any site that may contain copyright-infringing material wouldn't appear in the search results. Even direct searches for domain names may turn up blank pages. Worst of all, the decision to block content is at the discretion of the internet service provider, leaving little recourse if a site owner believes he's been blocked unfairly.
Comments sections would die and take websites down with them. Not only would a blogger or site provider be responsible for her own content, she'd be responsible for her commenters' behavior, too. That means if a commenter posts an entire article from another site onto your blog, you're paying the price. The inevitable result? People would simply remove their comments sections for self-preservation, effectively ending online exchanges and conversations. (Same goes for Facebook pages: Would you let just anyone screw you over with one infringing post?)
It could create sneaky company wars, and ideological ones, too. Not everybody would post copyrighted content on a site accidentally. Rival companies could try to snuff out each other's sites by posting illegal content in their comments and on their forums. And what about political or religious crusaders? Anti-abortion activists could write a copyright-violating comment on Planned Parenthood's blog to shut the site down. Creationists could write a letter to the editor of an online science magazine that's riddled with plagiarized content. President Obama's staff could post copyrighted paragraphs on Mitt Romney's site. And so on.
Wikis and photo sites would be things of the past. Who would risk exposing a site to literally billions of users who could accidentally or deliberately post copyrighted content? Wikipedia, Wikileaks, even Flickr and other photo sites would be too much of a liability for site proprietors.
Kids (and a lot of normal people) would be cut out of the internet. The wonderful thing about the internet is that it democratizes information and entertainment by being so user-friendly. It's one of the few places where everyday people—especially kids—actually have a voice, whether they're singing or laughing or crying or pontificating. SOPA would take them right offline, since many of us won't know the ins and outs of complicated copyright laws.
The internet would become a time capsule. When it comes to the internet, sharing is what spurs innovation. Sometimes that sharing needs to be scaled back (ahem, Napster), but the web's history is founded upon the dissemination of information. Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Dropbox, MediaFire, and so many other sites would have never been invented if SOPA was in place a few years ago. The law would stop innovation in its tracks. Sound good? Didn't think so. Luckily, there are some alternatives brewing. In the meantime, let Congress know what you think of SOPA.
http://www.good.is/post/what-would-a-post-sopa-internet-look-like/
Last edited:
SmarterthanYou
rebel
people's first mistake is thinking that the government actually cares if it abides by the constitution. it doesn't.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
I just got the following back from my congressman.
January 23, 2012
Mr. Mott The Hoople
7000 Starry Starry Lane
Dublin, OH 43017
Dear Mr. Hoople,
Thank you for contacting me regarding your concerns with intellectual property. I appreciate this opportunity to correspond with you.
As you may know, on October 26, 2011, Congressman Lamar Smith (R-TX) introduced H.R. 3261, the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA). This bill would combat the theft of U.S. intellectual property by allowing the U.S. Justice Department to seek injunctions against foreign websites that traffic in pirated goods. Moreover, the bill would prevent online thieves from selling counterfeit goods in the U.S. The bill would allow the Attorney General to shut down websites that enable or facilitate copyright infringement.
I have heard concerns about possible unintended consequences of the bill including lawsuits being filed against parties who were unknowingly providing counterfeit products through their website. You will be happy to know that I oppose this bill. However, most critics of this bill, including myself, believe it is important that our government protect against counterfeiting which hurts businesses, innovators, workers, and consumers. In recent years, counterfeiting has grown rapidly costing America hundreds of billions of dollars a year. But, I do not think the SOPA bill, as introduced, is the answer to this problem.
This bill is currently being considered by the U.S. House Judiciary Committee. While I am not a member of this committee, I will certainly continue to monitor this issue closely.
Thank you again for taking time to contact me about this issue. Your opinions are important, and I appreciate you taking the time to share them with me. If I may be of assistance in the future, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Patrick J. Tiberi
Representative to Congress
PJT/kb
January 23, 2012
Mr. Mott The Hoople
7000 Starry Starry Lane
Dublin, OH 43017
Dear Mr. Hoople,
Thank you for contacting me regarding your concerns with intellectual property. I appreciate this opportunity to correspond with you.
As you may know, on October 26, 2011, Congressman Lamar Smith (R-TX) introduced H.R. 3261, the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA). This bill would combat the theft of U.S. intellectual property by allowing the U.S. Justice Department to seek injunctions against foreign websites that traffic in pirated goods. Moreover, the bill would prevent online thieves from selling counterfeit goods in the U.S. The bill would allow the Attorney General to shut down websites that enable or facilitate copyright infringement.
I have heard concerns about possible unintended consequences of the bill including lawsuits being filed against parties who were unknowingly providing counterfeit products through their website. You will be happy to know that I oppose this bill. However, most critics of this bill, including myself, believe it is important that our government protect against counterfeiting which hurts businesses, innovators, workers, and consumers. In recent years, counterfeiting has grown rapidly costing America hundreds of billions of dollars a year. But, I do not think the SOPA bill, as introduced, is the answer to this problem.
This bill is currently being considered by the U.S. House Judiciary Committee. While I am not a member of this committee, I will certainly continue to monitor this issue closely.
Thank you again for taking time to contact me about this issue. Your opinions are important, and I appreciate you taking the time to share them with me. If I may be of assistance in the future, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Patrick J. Tiberi
Representative to Congress
PJT/kb
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
holy crap....you live on starry starry lane?!!?!!?
Wait, that's not Topspin?
Billy the Great Khan
Uwaa OmO
The Dude is topspin.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
LOL No, I changed the name to protect the Hooples!
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
BTW, In case you didn't no, my Rep, Pat Tiberi, is a Repub and yes, I voted for him.LOL No, I changed the name to protect the Hooples!
Airstrip One
Completely Effed
Wow, his opponent must have been a real monster!! 
Yeah, I meant the avatar.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
She was a young and inexperienced Democrat and Tiberi isn't exactly a wingnut teabagger. He's been a fairly responsible Republican and one of hte few moderates left in the party. His record of constituent service is good and he has a good track record of bringing federal dollars into our district. In short, he's a pretty good legislature.Wow, his opponent must have been a real monster!!