SOPA and LPSG

redneckgymrat

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Posts
1,479
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
73
Location
Texas
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Quite the opposite, actually...but there is a huge difference between theoretical policy, and practical implementation when dealing with real people.

And, to turn the argument around, it seems that the argument coming from "your side" is that people should be so micromanaged that we have no rights whatsoever, functionally shredding the Constitution, while ignoring basic human nature.

SOPA, the way it is written, is BAAAAD! And, though it sounds a bit conspiratorial, I genuinely do believe that it is merely an excuse to put into place some policies that could/would be exploited, long term, to seriously curtail many of our fundamental rights, starting with the first amendment.

Government should not have that much say in the flow of information. It has the potential for abuse...BIG time abuse.

And, before it turns this direction, I would be against SOPA no matter which side wrote it...in fact, if memory serves, it was proposed by a Republican from Texas...much to my horror.
 

travis1985

Expert Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Jun 22, 2011
Posts
835
Media
1
Likes
103
Points
288
Location
Coeur d'Alene (Idaho, United States)
Verification
View
Sexuality
50% Straight, 50% Gay
Gender
Male
And, to turn the argument around, it seems that the argument coming from "your side" is that people should be so micromanaged that we have no rights whatsoever, functionally shredding the Constitution, while ignoring basic human nature.
So that we have no rights whatsoever to do what? Abuse copyright? It seems to me that "your side" is forgetting that it's illegal anyway. Websites with clean hands have little to fear.

And, before it turns this direction, I would be against SOPA no matter which side wrote it...in fact, if memory serves, it was proposed by a Republican from Texas...much to my horror.
I'm a Republican, too, and one thing that has been fascinating about this whole thing is that it appears to be a truly bipartisan issue, without a clear division of which side is liberal and which side is conservative. It threatens to make people think for themselves.
 

redneckgymrat

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Posts
1,479
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
73
Location
Texas
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
So that we have no rights whatsoever to do what? Abuse copyright? It seems to me that "your side" is forgetting that it's illegal anyway. Websites with clean hands have little to fear.

You see, that argument doesn't work. ALL web sites have something to fear. ALL journalists, all authors, all publishers, all, all, all.

Assume for a moment it's journalism we were talking about, since this is the framework used historically for first amendment questions. Let's use a relatively recent example...Bill Clinton perjuring himself about whether he had "sex with that woman." There is no question that he perjured himself, and at the time it was viewed as a fairly important story.

In this example, we'll pick on ABC and CBS.

ABC breaks the story that the President of the United States has just committed a Federal offense, by perjuring himself. This reflects badly on the President, and his administration.

CBS breaks the story that the President is just being picked on, persecuted by those wascally Republicans, and that his sexuality is his own business.

CBS is "towing the party line," and thus has nothing to fear...they're playing along. ABC, in this example, is breaking a potentially important story, but one which embarrasses the current administration...

SOPA grants the US government sufficient power to obliterate ABC's ability to distribute this message, by shutting down their distribution channels and *blocking* the public's ability to even find their site, through DNS redirection.

*This* is the problem I have with SOPA. It shuts down the distribution channels for what has often been referred to as the 4th branch of American politics. Play along, or we remove all traces of you from the internet.

???

I agree, wholeheartedly, that intellectual property infringement is a problem. I do not agree that shredding the Bill of Rights is the way to address it...and yes, I do view this approach as a shredding of the Bill of Rights. My intention is not to protect copyright thieves...my intention is to point out how ridiculous the overreaction is, and that it puts into place the framework which could *SO* easily be used to implement wholesale censorship.

While it's still legal to do so, let me quote Orwell. "If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — forever."

John Mayer may have said it even better in his song Waiting on the World to Change, when he said "Cause when they own the information, oh
They can bend it all they want."

SOPA effectively gives unilateral ownership and control of the information *distribution channel* to the US government. Danger, danger, danger Will Robinson!

I'm a Republican, too, and one thing that has been fascinating about this whole thing is that it appears to be a truly bipartisan issue, without a clear division of which side is liberal and which side is conservative. It threatens to make people think for themselves.

An excellent point, actually. I've noticed the same thing. It's not often that I'm on the same side of an issue with the liberals, but obviously it *can* happen. :)
 
Last edited:

travis1985

Expert Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Jun 22, 2011
Posts
835
Media
1
Likes
103
Points
288
Location
Coeur d'Alene (Idaho, United States)
Verification
View
Sexuality
50% Straight, 50% Gay
Gender
Male
CBS is "towing the party line," and thus has nothing to fear...they're playing along. ABC, in this example, is breaking a potentially important story, but one which embarrasses the current administration...

SOPA grants the US government sufficient power to obliterate ABC's ability to distribute this message, by shutting down their distribution channels and *blocking* the public's ability to even find their site, through DNS redirection.

*This* is the problem I have with SOPA. It shuts down the distribution channels for what has often been referred to as the 4th branch of American politics. Play along, or we remove all traces of you from the internet.
I'm still fully hearing you, but you're still making a leap from the fact that things would be quickly shut down due to copyright abuse to "anyone who ruffles anyone's feathers for any reason or no reason at all, even if there is no copyright issue to be spoken of will be wiped out and never heard from again." You must admit you're hopping across an unbridged river.
 

travis1985

Expert Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Jun 22, 2011
Posts
835
Media
1
Likes
103
Points
288
Location
Coeur d'Alene (Idaho, United States)
Verification
View
Sexuality
50% Straight, 50% Gay
Gender
Male
yeah my bad,
not the violators per say, SOPA just starts shooting if anyone on a given site might be violating copyright.
But is it really too much to ask that no one distribute material they don't own? Copyright problems are not difficult to avoid unless one is playing footsie with them.
 

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Whether or not the lengthening of copyrights is responsible for the widespread acceptance of piracy is debatable, but they are still separate issues. It makes no difference why people feel the desire to break laws.
well you asked for it. Nazi execution of jews was carried out according to law. You are saying this was correct. If the Nazis had won ww2 this would have continued and very like become the norm in europe at least, maybe in the US too by now. The simple fact that some idiot writes a law does not make it right. Every tyrany in history has been overthrown by civil disobedience. Civil disobedience, such as the recent blackout demonstration, is an important tool in justice. (Real justice that is, not what governments define to be justice, which varies wildly)

So while we are on the subject of justice rather than law, copyright is a pure intellectual invention. Consider also patent law, which I think came first. A patent is an exclusive right to exploit some invention for a period. The idea of a patent is that the inventor tells everyone about their invention so that they can benefit from it, but in return gets a limited right to use it exclusively, or license it. Patents do not last very long, maybe 20 years? Copyright now has got so out of control it can last for 150 years and owners are still demanding it should be lengthened. The public has had enough of this. We demand the right that having bought a disc once we can copy it onto tape, or cassette, or cd or ipod as the technology changes. We demand not to be ripped off paying a company over the odds for creating a disc we could now burn ourselves or distributing it on the internet. The public is in rebellion over copyright because it has got out of control and allows owners to make vast profits indefinitely. Law is there to create a fair balance between people and copyright no longer does this.
 

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
But is it really too much to ask that no one distribute material they don't own? Copyright problems are not difficult to avoid unless one is playing footsie with them.
This law turns website owners into policemen. You are sending the postman to jail because he delivered a bootleg cd to your address. More, you are banning him from being a postman until he pays a big fine (how much will it cost to get an injunction lifted, even if you have sorted out the situation?) The law is wide open to using copyright as an excuse to attack websites. For example, wikileaks. Someone must own copyright on those documents, so a claim can be made in a US court that a British government copyright document has been posted on wikileaks...and good bye wikileaks. All links to it banned in the US! BBC news shows a leaked document from France, French gov complains...and good bye BBC in the US?
 

Redwyvre

Cherished Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2011
Posts
608
Media
0
Likes
320
Points
128
Location
Minneapolis (Minnesota, United States)
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
yes! shoot all speeders on sight!

IMO the Internet is like the US interstate highway sysytem and it is fundamentally changing our society. Sure we haven't figured everything out yet, but we shouldn't shut it down because of some accidents or illegal behavior. I don't know. Then again it would be a fairly easy system to shut down. I've been told all the Internet traffic in the US passes through just a couple of buildings in various metro areas.
 

redneckgymrat

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Posts
1,479
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
73
Location
Texas
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
I'm still fully hearing you,

First off, thank you for a most enjoyable discussion. Political debates often turn nasty, and this one hasn't...I appreciate that. It speaks very highly of the participants in this thread.

You must admit you're hopping across an unbridged river.

And, by the same token I ask that you recognize that this particular river is only an inch across, 1/4 inch deep, and presents exceedingly little barrier.

I freely admit I'm making a slippery slope argument. But, when the only reassurances we have involve the phrase "trust us, we won't abuse it," I will *always* cry foul.

Government should not be involved in the distribution of information. Period. (Don't give me the Federal airwaves argument...it's not the same thing.) And a single government (even the USA) should not be able to unilaterally seize control like this.

It's wrong.

And their "protect intellectual property" argument, I *genuinely* believe, is merely an excuse to put into place this dubious framework. The fact that you happen to see a personal benefit to it, merely makes it more palatable.

I truly believe that you, and others like you, are being used as pawns, in a much longer and bigger game that is designed to nullify our freedoms. Yeah, I sound like a conspiratorial nut...but if you *read* what SOPA actually authorizes, it's downright scary.
 

Randll86

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Aug 10, 2006
Posts
614
Media
80
Likes
3,224
Points
598
Location
Tampa (Florida, United States)
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Quite simply put the powers that be, the man, what ever you care to call the people pulling the strings in this world hate the INTERNET because it scares the shit out of them.

This piracy, copyright shit is just a front to try and control information and knowledge and people sharing ideas. Because if enough people figure out what is really going on and start to actually think, they are fucked.
 

aninnymouse

Cherished Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Posts
2,812
Media
0
Likes
349
Points
553
Location
In My Own World
Sexuality
60% Gay, 40% Straight
Gender
Male
@Travis1985:

The problem with the SOPA law as it stands, is that for just an allegation, a site can be shut down, WITHOUT DUE PROCESS. Basically, someone makes an allegation that a site violates copyright; and Bam that site can cease to exist, without any kind of evidence that it was violating someone's copyright.

That's what's so scary. The potential it has to be a vehicle for government and corporate censorship. That's why so many people VEHEMENTLY oppose SOPA. Even ones who are in support of copyright enforcement.
 

hud01

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2009
Posts
4,983
Media
0
Likes
104
Points
133
Location
new york city
Sexuality
80% Straight, 20% Gay
Gender
Male
But is it really too much to ask that no one distribute material they don't own? Copyright problems are not difficult to avoid unless one is playing footsie with them.
Do you know how different these laws were. In the past if someone blogged on youtube with copyrighted music playing in the background, the artist or media company could do a DCMA. The new laws would allow the govt to shutdown youtube without any court rulings
 

redneckgymrat

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Posts
1,479
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
73
Location
Texas
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Well said. And major cuddos for bucking the oldschool redneck stereotype!

Oh, sorry, let me get back into character. Git'r done! Moonshine, God and guns...yee haw!

(You do realize this is a Hollywood fabrication, with little to no basis in reality, right? Real rednecks are nothing like the supposed stereotype.)

Seriously, thank you for the compliment.
 

hud01

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2009
Posts
4,983
Media
0
Likes
104
Points
133
Location
new york city
Sexuality
80% Straight, 20% Gay
Gender
Male
Whether or not the lengthening of copyrights is responsible for the widespread acceptance of piracy is debatable, but they are still separate issues. It makes no difference why people feel the desire to break laws.
Ahhh there you go, the laws are already on the books as was proven with the website shutdown which occurred the other day, so these new ones are not needed
 

Redwyvre

Cherished Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2011
Posts
608
Media
0
Likes
320
Points
128
Location
Minneapolis (Minnesota, United States)
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
But is it really too much to ask that no one distribute material they don't own? Copyright problems are not difficult to avoid unless one is playing footsie with them.
Could you provide us with an example where, a) Something with a copywrite has been illegally distributed on a website? b) How should it be distributed legally so that the copywrite holder is paid royalities.