United States SOPA and PIPA Bills

[USS_Excalibur]

The United States is passing another bill trying to censor the Internet giving the surface appearance as an end to Piracy. But of course when you look beyond the surface, they can monitor your activities. Control what you can and cannot see, post, view, and share online. Wikipedia entered a 24-hour black out along with other sites. We should fight this because it will not affect Americans alone. It will affect anyone who uses the Internet.

Sure no one likes piracy, but who wants the US Government to watch their every move? :x

Google's Petition
Official Anti-SOPA protest site

 

[Adm_Z]

Currently the bill is shelved because of whitehouse opposition, but it is definitly something we should not forget about. Wikipedia is currently dark in protest of the bill.

 

[Atlantisbase]

Is it just me or do these bills have the same feel as the Red Scare of the 50s; it's just a little too Orwellian for me. I know they're trying to stop piracy, but this just seems too open ended; too easy to turn it into a way to kill a site for trivial reasons; too easy to abuse. If you want to stop piracy, fine, but go after the real source, not bystanders. Unfortunatly this all seems to be more about making money than protecting ownership; makes me think there's a bigger problem here than just folks over in China in a small, dark room making counterfiet DVDs.

More importantly, why should the government have to stop this, why can't the media companies solve this on their own? Maybe they should be looking for ways to beat them at their own game rather than getting the government strong man to do it for them.

Ironically, even if this did pass I have the feeling that it would almost immediatly get challenged in court and get shot down by the Supreme Court.

Currently the bill is shelved because of whitehouse opposition, but it is definitly something we should not forget about. Wikipedia is currently dark in protest of the bill

Shelved, but not dead. I'm sure the happy little lobbists will back at it in no time and they'll come up with a smaller version which will be even more slick.

 

[Majestic]

To me it's just another example of politicians being too short-sighted. They don't look at all the sides or even the consequences of what they are proposing.

A good example was here in Australia last year or the year before, the higher ups were trying to stop hoons on the roads so they suggested a ban on changing the height of a car, unfortunately they didn't look at the big picture and had 4WDers in an uproar as they weren't hooning on the roads yet they were being punished as they would no longer be able to raise their 4WD so they could 4WD offroad on some terrain that a lower 4WD couldn't go over. I was one of them as I felt if they were to do this, they may as well ban 4WDs while they are at it then they should ban fast sport cars then it would never stop. When you start down a road like that (no pun intended) it's very hard to know what should and shouldn't be banned.

The same can be said with this bill. While I understand they are trying to stop piracy, the sad fact is you'll never stop it, as long as we have a money economy or as long as companies charge so much for software (Windows and Photoshop are prime examples of overpriced software). To me this entire proposal feels more like control, trying to control people's lives say what we can and can't do, what we as parents can and not let our children see. All our ancestors who fought in the world wars for our freedom and here are the people we elected to work for us and have our best interests at heart and here they are trying to take away what our ancestors fought and died for.

I just think our politicians in all countries not just the US really need to start doing the job they are employed to do, look at all the facts, sides of an argument and see the whole picture and not be so narrow minded and above all else stop trying to put in bills and laws that trample of our rights of freedom.

 

[Atlantisbase]

Agreed on all points, only...what're "hoons"?

I suspect , though, that these bills are more the work of media industry lobbists trying to get the government to fix their problems for them. And to satisfy them, the Congress cooks up some half baked law, which won't work, but allows them to say, "Look, we did something about it." I'm sure there are plenty of other examples, the Congress is very good at coming up with laws which they think are good but in fact are disasters waiting to happen (can you say housing crisis).

As I understand it though, there are already laws to facilitate shutting down web sites that are much more directed. Regardless, I think the media groups need to understand that just disallowing access won't stop the stealing, or get them any more money than they are already getting. People will find ways around it and the theives will take their business elsewhere. Media need to start seeing these guys as competition and beat them the old fashoned way, by attracting the customer better than the other guy.

 

[Majestic]

Agreed on all points, only...what're "hoons"?

People who lower their cars, have body kits on, race around the streets as if it's a race track, drag race in the early hours of the morning. They are a danger to everyone.

I suspect , though, that these bills are more the work of media industry lobbists trying to get the government to fix their problems for them. And to satisfy them, the Congress cooks up some half baked law, which won't work, but allows them to say, "Look, we did something about it." I'm sure there are plenty of other examples, the Congress is very good at coming up with laws which they think are good but in fact are disasters waiting to happen (can you say housing crisis).

I wouldn't be at all surprised if the media industry companies are behind this. Instead of finding new innovative ways to tackle this they're trying to do exactly what the businesses here in Aust tried to do last year. They weren't getting much business due to the hard financial times (including the high interest rates) so they wanted the government to put a hefty tax on all online and overseas buying and imports, to make it more expensive to buy online so Aussies would find it cheaper to go into their stores and buy. Instead of finding ways to lower their costs, cut into their profits etc they decided to act like a bunch of babies and make it even harder for their customers, and they wonder why people buy online.

As I understand it though, there are already laws to facilitate shutting down web sites that are much more directed. Regardless, I think the media groups need to understand that just disallowing access won't stop the stealing, or get them any more money than they are already getting. People will find ways around it and the theives will take their business elsewhere. Media need to start seeing these guys as competition and beat them the old fashoned way, by attracting the customer better than the other guy.

Indeed the tighter they strengthen their grip the more people are going to rebel against them and the worse it will get.

 

[Paul]

Both these arent worth the paper its printed on....let alone the time taken to write it !. Its a poorly disguised bill to censor the internet, it wont defeat the pirates since they will just move to another site (Like Spammers, even if you ban one 10 more will appear). Im not in the US but if this passes then other country's will follow its lead, its just too great a chance for the rest to shut down what they dont like

I heard about this some time ago, Gamers are furious about it with some major developers speaking out (Bungie, Epic, Riot ect) even tho the Entertainment Software Association supports it. This thing would destroy not only the net but also affect real life stuff like some jobs (Company's are saying this will affect game development....not sure why tho).

Wikipedia has the whole lot in a article, including its affect and whats happening with it thus far. Makes for some interesting reading (Here's a link)

Censorship is just sidesteping the problem, its like banning weapons because they can kill....the criminals will just use something else. Censoring the net will backfire bigtime....wonder if Anonymous has launched any attacks yet....somethin to look into when Wiki is back up i guess lol

 

[Andre27]

Could this bill potentially also affect modding sites? If it does, i think it may kill half the gaming industry.

Mods are what has kept many games alive

 

[Adm_Z]

Yes, this could definitly affect Modding sites. Just look at ModDB and all the BSG related mods that were taken down because they were taking customers from BGO.

There were even rumors that parts of this bill were backed by paramount which is suing Youtube. If this bill were passed it would allow them to shut down youtube completely. This bill and others like it is just more ways that the they are trying to institute more government control on our lives. The socio-progressive agenda at its finest.

 

[Terra_Inc]

I don't know who came up w/ this, but it appeared on facebook, and consecutively, failbook.

‎"The average age of Senators at the beginning of the 112 Congress was 62.2 years" - Great, so our parents want to run the internet. How could anything go wrong?

I agree wholeheartedly.

 

[Adm_Z]

In many internet users case, that might be closer to their grandparents.

 

[CABAL]

People who lower their cars, have body kits on, race around the streets as if it's a race track, drag race in the early hours of the morning. They are a danger to everyone.

In Eugene, we call them idiots. If they're more dangerous than average, we call them other things that I can't post on a family friendly site.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if the media industry companies are behind this.

Wikipedia lists a ton of media companies, like the MPAA, Viacom, and NBCUniversal as supporters. Naturally, the opposition is 99.99% of the internet.

I don't know who came up w/ this, but it appeared on facebook, and consecutively, failbook.

‎

"The average age of Senators at the beginning of the 112 Congress was 62.2 years" - Great, so our parents want to run the internet. How could anything go wrong?

I agree wholeheartedly.

In many internet users case, that might be closer to their grandparents.

Yeah, that's closer to my grandparent's age. Ironically, they're all pretty good with computers...

 

[Majestic]

In Eugene, we call them idiots. If they're more dangerous than average, we call them other things that I can't post on a family friendly site.

Hoons are what we call them, though idiots are what we also call them sometimes, along with many more colourful words. In one state in Australia if they are caught and have committed the offence a couple of times, they get their cars crushed in front of them, something that needs to be adopted nationwide. Would discourage at least some of them.

Wikipedia lists a ton of media companies, like the MPAA, Viacom, and NBCUniversal as supporters. Naturally, the opposition is 99.99% of the internet.

And that 99.99% are their customers, or perhaps former customers now. They are pretty narrow minded. They want to stop piracy lower their prices, it's as simple at that. Take longer before they release thing's on DVD's and get movie tickets lower and they'll make more money and there will be less piracy as it's cheap enough it's not really worth doing it.

Yeah, that's closer to my grandparent's age. Ironically, they're all pretty good with computers...

My parents for me, both in their mid-late 50's.

Could this bill potentially also affect modding sites? If it does, i think it may kill half the gaming industry.

Mods are what has kept many games alive

The only gaming that will survive is console gaming because as you said modding is the one thing that keeps PC gaming alive. I think that's a reason Sony is behind this as they aren't doing as well as Microsoft and Nintendo even more so now after the hacker attack last year. Sad thing is they are just making it worse and alienating even more of their customers and potential customers.

 

[Majestic]

Double post, but worth it. I found some new news on this.

Quoted for ease of reading:

[highlight]Megaupload file-sharing site shut down[/highlight]

Megaupload, one of the internet's largest file-sharing sites, has been shut down by officials in the US.

The site's founders have been charged with violating piracy laws.

Federal prosecutors have accused it of costing copyright holders more than $500m (£320m) in lost revenue. The firm says it was diligent in responding to complaints about pirated material.

The news came a day after anti-piracy law protests, but investigators said they were ordered two weeks ago.

The US Justice Department said that Megaupload's two co-founders Kim Dotcom, formerly known as Kim Schmitz, and Mathias Ortmann were arrested in Auckland, New Zealand along with two other employees of the business at the request of US officials. It added that three other defendants were still at large.

"This action is among the largest criminal copyright cases ever brought by the United States and directly targets the misuse of a public content storage and distribution site to commit and facilitate intellectual property crime," said a statement posted on its website.

Third-party sites
The charges included copyright infringement, conspiracies to commit racketeering, copyright infringement and money laundering.

A federal court in Virginia ordered that 18 domain names associated with the Hong Kong-based firm be seized.

The Justice Department said that more than 20 search warrants had been executed in nine countries, and that approximately $50m in assets had been seized.

It claimed that the accused had pursued a business model designed to promote the uploading of copyrighted works.

"The conspirators allegedly paid users whom they specifically knew uploaded infringing content and publicised their links to users throughout the world," a statement said.

"By actively supporting the use of third-party linking sites to publicise infringing content, the conspirators did not need to publicise such content on the Megaupload site.

"Instead, the indictment alleges that the conspirators manipulated the perception of content available on their servers by not providing a public search function on the Megaupload site and by not including popular infringing content on the publicly available lists of top content downloaded by its users."

Before it was shut down the site posted a statement saying the allegations against it were "grotesquely overblown".

"The fact is that the vast majority of Mega's internet traffic is legitimate, and we are here to stay," it added.

"If the content industry would like to take advantage of our popularity, we are happy to enter into a dialogue. We have some good ideas. Please get in touch."

Blackouts
The announcement came a day after thousands of websites took part in a "blackout" to protest against the Stop Online Piracy Act (Sopa) and the Protect Intellectual Property Act (Pipa).

The US Chamber of Commerce has defended the proposed laws saying that enforcement agencies "lack the tools" to effectively apply existing intellectual property laws to the digital world.

Industry watchers suggest this latest move may feed into the wider debate.

"Neither of the bills are close to being passed - they need further revision. But it appears that officials are able to use existing tools to go after a business alleged to be inducing piracy," said Gartner's media distribution expert Mike McGuire.

"It begs the question that if you can find and arrest people who are suspected to be involved in piracy using existing laws, then why introduce further regulations which are US-only and potentially damaging."

To me this is starting to look like, if we think you've done it, you've done it. It's rather disgusting and to me against the freedom of individuals. Hell the owners aren't even US citizens but from New Zealand. To me this is just going to cause a lot more problems, it's not just about piracy it's about the removable of the concept of innocent until proven guilty, they were arrested on circumstantial evidence. Yes there may have been some pirated software, but shouldn't the individuals who uploaded it be the ones arrested? No single owner of a web-site can be responsible for everything on their site, hence why so many have disclaimers stating that the individuals themselves are responsible to what they post.

 

[Katala]

Found this on the Against the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) Facebook page

Against the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA)
In retaliation of the Megaupload shutdown, Anonymous has shut down the Universal Music & Recording Industry Association of America sites.

And this: Revenge

 

[Atlantisbase]

To me this is starting to look like, if we think you've done it, you've done it. It's rather disgusting and to me against the freedom of individuals. Hell the owners aren't even US citizens but from New Zealand. To me this is just going to cause a lot more problems, it's not just about piracy it's about the removable of the concept of innocent until proven guilty, they were arrested on circumstantial evidence. Yes there may have been some pirated software, but shouldn't the individuals who uploaded it be the ones arrested? No single owner of a web-site can be responsible for everything on their site, hence why so many have disclaimers stating that the individuals themselves are responsible to what they post.

Found this on the Against the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) Facebook page

And this: Revenge

For the love of God, how bloody stupid can they be! All of them! :x

Can the government not see that this was a horrible idea at this time; and can't the Anons see that what they did will only fan the flames (unless of course this is what they want).
That said, it looks like Megaupload was shut down more because they believe certain elements were promoting, if not facilitating, the distribution of pirated material. However I do agree that we increasingly seem to be overlooking the concept of innocent until proven guilty and we seem to have an awful lot of guilt by association. Although from the sounds of it, the originators are probably in China and heaven forbid if the U.S. tried to stretch it's muscles there; so instead we'll just go after the whole site and disrupt all those using it legally. In case you haven't noticed Mr. Justice Dept., Sir, this won't stop the piraters, they'll just go to another upload site - in fact they're probably already there.

Am I the only one who thinks this will spiral out of control very quickly.

 

[Zelph]

I'm semi-admiring what Anon did there. But kind of annoyed that they're releasing Senator Dodd's personal information though, as well as the names of his kids, with contact information for their home. That's just wrong...

 

[Majestic]

Am I the only one who thinks this will spiral out of control very quickly.

No I too can see this becoming the disaster the Mayans predicted for 2012.

Edit: More news on this:

Sopa and Pipa protests not over, says Wikipedia

After a 24-hour blackout, Wikipedia has returned to full working order but declared: "We're not done yet."

The site had blocked its content for 24 hours in protest at proposed anti-piracy legislation in the US.

The encyclopaedia said the site had been viewed 162 million times, with eight million people following instructions to contact politicians.

The protest led to eight US lawmakers withdrawing their support for the proposed bills.

Two of the bill's co-sponsors, Marco Rubio from Florida and Roy Blunt from Missouri, are among those who have withdrawn their support after "legitimate concerns".

But backers of the legislation, led by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), described the action as an "irresponsible" publicity "stunt".

The Stop Online Piracy Act (Sopa) and Protect Intellectual Property Act (Pipa) have caused considerable controversy among internet users and businesses since the plans were proposed in October last year.

'Melted servers'
Wednesday's co-ordinated action was intended to raise the profile of the debate to those outside of the tight-knit technology community - an objective Wikipedia said had been met.

"More than 162 million people saw our message asking if you could imagine a world without free knowledge," the site said.

"You said no. You shut down Congress's switchboards. You melted their servers.

"From all around the world your messages dominated social media and the news. Millions of people have spoken in defence of a free and open internet."

Elsewhere, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg deemed the occasion worthy enough to post his first tweet in almost three years.

"Tell your congressmen you want them to be pro-internet," he wrote, linking to a longer statement on Facebook.

He continued: "We can't let poorly thought out laws get in the way of the internet's development.

"Facebook opposes Sopa and Pipa, and we will continue to oppose any laws that will hurt the internet."

Google, which urged its US visitors to sign a petition against the bills, said more than 4.5 million signatures had been gathered.

Advertising campaign
Supporters of the bill were quick to condemn the actions of the websites. Ex-Senator Chris Dodd, MPAA's chief executive, described the blackouts as an "abuse of power".

Ahead of the day's action, Mr Dodd said: "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."

Meanwhile, Creative America - a group which represents many big names in the movie business including Disney and Warner Bros - has launched an advertising campaign in the US.

A banner advertisement was shown in New York's Times Square offering advice on "what to do during an internet blackout". It suggested reading books, listening to music or watching a movie.

News Corporation chairman Rupert Murdoch, a vocal supporter of Sopa, continued to spar with users on Twitter.

He tweeted: "Seems blogsphere has succeeded in terrorising many senators and congressmen who previously committed. Politicians all the same."

Watching closely
In the UK, the plans around Sopa and Pipa have been keenly watched, particularly by those worried about the effect the measures could have on internet companies in the country.

Peter Bradwell, a campaigner with the Open Rights Group, told the BBC: "It's explicit that [Sopa advocates] want to tackle foreign websites.

"We're concerned about the jurisdiction that gives over the kind of things you or I do on the internet in the UK - and the power that gives US copyright holders over the things that we do here."

Mr Bradwell recounted the comments made by Ed Vaizey, Minister for Culture, Communications and Creative Industries, who in July last year said he was looking at some anti-piracy measures being discussed in the US.

"Hopefully, what the storm around this has helped do is highlight why we are so concerned about proposals for new website blocking powers.

"I hope it really helps them understand how they shouldn't make policy, and really should drive home some of the complaints that we've been making."

'Startling'
The Department for Culture, Media and Sport said it did not wish to comment on the protests, nor on the details of Sopa and Pipa.

Eric Van Der Kleij, chief executive of the Tech City Investment Organisation, told the BBC: "We know that it is important for UK companies but it is definitely something for the US government. I am watching the situation closely.

"Regarding UK regulation, our position is that we are completely committed to an appropriate regulatory environment that protects rights but does not stifle innovation."

The UK's "digital champion" Martha Lane Fox said the blackout technique was surprising.

"Neutrality and equality of access is one of the fundamental principles of the internet," she told the BBC.

"So (while) I understand the concern that many US companies have about the restrictive Sopa law, blackouts are a startling way to show their frustration."

Constructive debate
Echoing the statements of rights holders in the US, Richard Mollet, chairman of the Publishers Association, criticised the blacked-out websites for not engaging "constructively" in the piracy debate.

"They should say: 'OK, there's a problem with copyright infringement. We, as internet companies, have a role here. What can we do to fulfil that role and help rights holders reduce infringement?'"

He argued that while Wikipedia was a valued resource, it would be more noticeable to the world if rights holders were to switch off their content for a day.

"Think what you would lose.

"If you walked around the streets of America or Britain with no creative content available to you, because rights holders had decided to shut up shop, you would be deprived of the BBC, cinemas, radio, bookstores and so on.

"What's at stake when rogue internet sites are available to people and revenues are deprived is a great deal more than the excellent but nevertheless more limited Wikipedia."

 

[Andre27]

I'm semi-admiring what Anon did there. But kind of annoyed that they're releasing Senator Dodd's personal information though, as well as the names of his kids, with contact information for their home. That's just wrong...

There's a right way of doing things and a wrong way. In my opinion anon persists in doing it the wrong way.

 

[Terra_Inc]

There's a right way of doing things and a wrong way. In my opinion anon persists in doing it the wrong way.

In my opinion, the supposed "creative community" persists in enforcing their copyright the wrong way. But that doesn't mean that I support the Anons. It just goes to show you that a civilized discussion isn't really possible anymore. This battle is being fought with weapons that are far beyond civilized discussion.

 

[Andre27]

In my opinion, the supposed "creative community" persists in enforcing their copyright the wrong way. But that doesn't mean that I support the Anons. It just goes to show you that a civilized discussion isn't really possible anymore. This battle is being fought with weapons that are far beyond civilized discussion.

That i agree with.

 

[Hellkite]

that usually the way it is when both sides are wrong and not completely right

 

[Majestic]

[highlight]US Threatened To Blacklist Spain For Not Implementing Site Blocking Law[/highlight]

In a leaked letter sent to Spain’s outgoing President, the US ambassador to the country warned that as punishment for not passing a SOPA-style file-sharing site blocking law, Spain risked being put on a United States trade blacklist . Inclusion would have left Spain open to a range of “retaliatory options†but already the US was working with the incoming government to reach its goals.

United States government interference in Spain’s intellectual property laws had long been suspected, but it was revelations from Wikileaks that finally confirmed the depth of its involvement.

More than 100 leaked cables showed that the US had helped draft new Spanish copyright legislation and had heavily influenced the decisions of both the government and opposition.

Now, another diplomatic leak has revealed how the US voiced its anger towards outgoing President Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero last month upon realizing that his government was unlikely to pass the US-drafted Sinde (site blocking) Law before leaving office.

In a letter dated December 12th and sent by US Ambassador Alan D. Solomont to the Spanish Prime Minister’s office, the US expressed “deep concern†over the failure to implement the SOPA-style censorship law.

“The government has unfortunately failed to finish the job for political reasons, to the detriment of the reputation and economy of Spain,†read the letter obtained by El Pais.

Racing against the clock in the final days of the government, Solomont had one last push.

“I encourage the Government of Spain to implement the Sinde Law immediately to safeguard the reputation of Spain as an innovative country that does what it says it will, and as a country that breeds confidence,†he wrote.

But along with the pleas came the stick.

In the letter, which was also sent to Minister of Culture Ãngeles González-Sinde after whom the law is named, Solomont noted that Spain is already on the Special 301, the annual report prepared by the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) detailing ‘trade barriers’ based on intellectual property issues.

Solomont’s threat was that should Spain not pass the Sinde Law (described by some as the Spanish SOPA) then the country would be degraded further and placed on the Priority Watch List. This serious step would mean that Spain was in breach of trade agreements and could be subjected to a range of “retaliatory actionsâ€.

In the event Zapatero’s government left office without passing the law, but the incoming Partido Popular (People’s Party) were quickly pressured by the US to take the necessary action.

In another media leak it’s now been revealed that American Chamber of Commerce in Spain chief Jaime Malet wrote a cautionary letter to incoming Spanish Prime Minister, Mariano Rajoy. He warned of the potential flight of foreign investment from Spain and urged him to take action on the protection of intellectual property once in office.

“[The law's] lack of approval before the elections has been a blow to the country’s seriousness in this matter of such importance,†said Malet, while urging Rajoy to “to retrieve the consensus reached.â€

Rajoy’s government quickly responded and fully implemented the legislation within 10 days of taking office.

This is really getting out of hand, if one can trust these news sites, it's showing that the US government is making a push to control the world, piracy is just the smoke screen and people of the world must stand up to this. Like with Megaupload being closed down and it's staff and owners arrested (even though they aren't US residents and the server wasn't in the US), they did this without the law, think what they'll do once it's in place. Your site has an opinion, part of free will in most countries of the world and even part of the US' own founding constitution, an opinion that they don't like. Like with the circumstantial, vague and even manipulative facts that were put out of context with the Megaupload event, they can simply shut you down and even arrest you and all they have to say is that it is hosting piracy software. Hell soon if this law is past mods and images will be considered piracy and illegal so even MSFC will be targeted and shut down.

This is what we, everyone everywhere must fight. The US government is turning into the very thing they fought in WW2, Hitler who took control of Germany under and iron fist and then moved onto the world. This is what they are becoming, and like our forefathers we must make a stand, it's no longer (at least at the moment) about force of arms but through bills and legislation and the battleground is the internet.

While I can say that these hackers who attacked and pulled down various sites may have gone overboard, and it is an illegal action, maybe that is what the US government needs to know, that people will not stand and have their freedom and way of life trampled on. After all I view what the US government is doing as illegal with this suggested law and this Megaupload event so why not fight fire with fire? Something I myself wouldn't do even if I had the capabilities but if it's good enough for them why not for the hackers? The government has only turned these hackers from people that many dislike, mistrust etc imto modern day heroes on part with figures like Robin Hood. While it's not take from the rich and give to the poor, it is making a stand for the people, to show thy government that they need to remember they serve the people and not the rich and greedy cooperation who have them on their payroll. Just another example of corruption.

All other governments need to get a backbone and tell the US government where to go, cancel their trade agreements with the US, close their boarders until the US government realises that while they may be the most powerful nation in the world, they are not a world government and that each government has their own laws and governments and what the US introduces doesn't mean it's world wide they have no right to arrested or close down any site that isn't on US soil. These other governments need to also put their people first, something the NZ government utterly failed and are no better than the US one. It was disgusting what they allowed to happen, no backbone at all. I just hope my own government would tell the US where to go if they tried it on an Australian citizen.

The US government, (all governments for that matter) must also go by what their people want after all those are the people they serve, the people who put them in a job. The thing is no matter how large a military is, at the end of the day the people outnumber, they have the true power the governemtn is just there the serve, but when they stop they should be made to see the truth. I am not enticing rebellion I am stating that these people who think they are so important need to see the reality of why they are there in the first place and get back to the job they are supposed to. I think the US government and any other government thinking of putting this law or one like it in should put in a mandatory vote for it's population to see whether this law should be passed or not, it's a democracy isn't it? Or is it becoming a dictatorship in the US?

 

[Atlantisbase]

[highlight]US Threatened To Blacklist Spain For Not Implementing Site Blocking Law[/highlight]

OK; WTF!

This is just getting absured. I almost felt sick at this part:

A banner advertisement was shown in New York's Times Square offering advice on "what to do during an internet blackout". It suggested reading books, listening to music or watching a movie.

WHHHAAAAT! That was so...so....something that I can't believe it. It was worse than propaganda. :x I really want to tell who ever wrote that to go blow themselves.

And the Anons have probably just made things worse, although it seems like you can't get results these days without going over the top. And I can't say I entierly agree with some of what they did, but I'm not sure anything less would have any form of impact. I'm just afraid that the backlash will be just as extreme.

I think the US government and any other government thinking of putting this law or one like it in should put in a mandatory vote for it's population to see whether this law should be passed or not, it's a democracy isn't it? Or is it becoming a dictatorship in the US?

Our gonvernment and media have really gone off the rails; and the worst part is, we can't seem to vote the loonies out because no one with fresh ideas is ever "allowed" to run. Maj, I'm not sure what our government is anymore, we don't seem to have much choice of who we can vote for, and then once they get to Washington all they seem to do is squabble and vote along party lines. We can't seem to say anything these days for fear of it being called politically incorrect, hate speech, a racial slur, etc, etc, etc. We're supposed to be a representative democracy, the folks in Washington are supposed to represent the people's - our - interests; they seem to have forgotten that.

I don't know why we are having any say in the workings of the government of another country, nor why we are muscling them into doing what we want. We have more than enough c**p to deal with here. We need to stop shoveling money at the rest of the world, which is not to say that we should become isolationist, that would be bad.

Pretty soon things are going to look like 1984. This is one of the reasons I'm against e-Readers - they're just too Orwellian for me.

 

[Hellkite]

As a military man

“I, AB, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.â€

They seem to always forget about the domestic part

But I digress

To point is that this is the 1% Demanding action ... Politicians catering to the to the all mighty Dollar IE the super Pac s and special interest groups , Instead of taking heed of the wishes of there constituents.

 

[CABAL]

[highlight]US Threatened To Blacklist Spain For Not Implementing Site Blocking Law[/highlight]

That's just disgusting.

 

[CrazyFrog1903]

The most recent news said these were postponed in congress indefinitely.

 

[EAS_Intrepid]

Hey, Terra, you know what this reminds me of? "STOP"-Signs for blacklisted internet sites and "Zensursula"...


For the non-Germans: In 2009 the government wanted to establish an infrastructure to block access to blacklisted websites. Instead of the site you would see a large "STOP"-Sign. Especially the Secretary for Family and stuff like that - Ursula von der Leyen (She's of the "Why doesn't somebody think of the children!?"-type) - was very engaged in making this possible.
They wanted to block access to sites containing child pornography.
Now you cannot be against fighting child pornography, right? That's why you have to agree to internet blockages.
But I don't agree with blocking sites.

Even child care organizations specifically stated, that this would not help in fighting sexual abuse of children. Desprite a major uproar of the internet community, child care and abuse victim organizations as well as IT-lawyers and the parliamentary opposition Secretary von der Leyen held a speech at the Parliament using fake statistics, numbers and facts.
They wanted this law and infrastructure badly - so badly, they even went about to lie to the Parliament and the public.

Servers can be found, the people operating these severs can be found as well and we have a judicial system and a working police force to get a hold of and prosecute these people abusing children and spreading it over the internet.
I want them in jail and in therapy, not blocked by a STOP-sign :x

***

It is good that the SOPA and PIPA bills have been postponed. Failed would be better but as the famous philosopher Jagger once said "You can't always get what you want".
Threats against Spain for not implementing a national law are just outrageous. That interference with the national affairs of another state is far beyond the usual.


"Retaliatory options".... Launching nukes in 5...4...3...

 

[Terra_Inc]

Oh yes, the Zensursula... That was pretty embarrassing. I never liked her with that whole Holier-Than-Thou attitude, and the Internet blocking thing just reinforced my opinion.
And you just know that once they can block criminal sites, they won't stop there.

 

[Majestic]

Apparently the Bills have been postponed.

[highlight]Sopa and Pipa bills postponed in US Congress[/highlight]

The US Congress has halted debate on two contested anti-online piracy bills.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid delayed a vote on the Protect IP Act (Pipa) scheduled for Tuesday.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith then said his panel would not consider the Stop Online Piracy Act (Sopa) until a compromise was reached.

The decisions follow protests by online encyclopaedia Wikipedia, and thousands of other websites, which went "dark" in protest for 24 hours earlier this week.

"In light of recent events, I have decided to postpone Tuesday's vote on the PROTECT IP Act," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat, said in a statement on Friday.

Mr Smith, a Texas Republican in the House of Representatives, said in a statement: "I have heard from the critics and I take seriously their concerns regarding proposed legislation to address the problem of online piracy.

"It is clear that we need to revisit the approach on how best to address the problem of foreign thieves that steal and sell American inventions and products."

'Censoring the web'
Of about 40 co-sponsors for the Pipa bill, a handful withdrew their support on Wednesday, as thousands of websites participated in a co-ordinated online protest.

Floods of emails and phone calls to congressmen followed the online protests, prompting some lawmakers to withdraw their support for the measures.

More than seven million people signed a petition on Google saying that passage of the legislation would result in censoring the web and impose a regulatory burden on businesses.

Both bills focus on responding to online piracy, specifically illegal copies of films and other media.

The bills would also outlaw sites from containing information about how to access blocked sites.

The Motion Picture Association of America, a key supporter of the legislation, has campaigned strongly against the violation of copyright laws.

But on Thursday evening their website was targeted by a hacking group known as Anonymous.

Celebrity backing
Anonymous also claimed credit for blocking access to the US Department of Justice and FBI websites, by launching a so-called "denial-of-service" attach that bombards their websites with traffic.

The move was being seen as a retaliation after the Department of Justice shut down a major file-sharing website, Megaupload.

The firm's co-founders have been charged with violating existing anti-piracy laws.

Four Megaupload employees were arrested in Auckland, New Zealand, at the request of US authorities.

Police seized cash, valuable cars and a short-barrelled shotgun from the residence of the website's German founder, Kim Dotcom, formerly known as Kim Schmitz.

Their Hong Kong-based site had around 150 million users and 50 million daily hits.

It has received celebrity endorsements from artists such as Alicia Keys and Kanye West, making it one of the internet's most high profile file-sharing platforms.

Also found this:

[highlight]Viewpoints: Anti-piracy efforts divide web users[/highlight]

The past week has seen parts of the web in tumult. On Wednesday Wikipedia, WordPress and thousands of other sites took their content offline.

Webmasters offered warnings of the potential damage posed by the Stop Online Piracy Act (Sopa) and the Protect Intellectual Property Act (Pipa) - two bills being considered by members of the US Congress.

On Thursday the Department of Justice announced that it had shut down Megaupload, one of the internet's biggest file-sharing sites, and had charged several of its employees with copyright infringement.

On Friday "hacktivists" who align themselves under the name Anonymous mounted attacks against websites belonging to the US authorities, music companies and other advocates of a piracy crackdown.

The US Congress subsequently halted debate on the two bills for the time being.

The BBC asked a range of stakeholders to analyse the events and discuss what will happen next.

Geoff Taylor, BPI


The attacks by hackers on the FBI, Department of Justice and creative industry and the recent protest by tech companies against new anti-piracy laws have exposed the dirty underbelly of the internet piracy economy.

Anonymous accuse governments and the creative community of being "tyrants" for trying to prevent them stealing other people's work. This illustrates the extremism of much of the anti-copyright movement.

Not only is it morally wrong to justify taking someone else's work for nothing, it ignores the simple truth that anything of value, including entertainment, takes time and money to create. One would hope that such naive views would carry little public influence. But they have some very powerful allies.

Under the guise of fighting for their vision of an "open internet", some Silicon Valley behemoths have launched a high-profile campaign to oppose new US laws to tackle major pirate websites. As publicity stunts for this campaign, Wikipedia closed for a day and Google "censored" its doodle, asking their users to oppose the legislation.

These large corporations argue that blocking access to some mass piracy sites amounts to Chinese-style censorship of free speech and will "break the internet" - ignoring that other types of illegal sites are routinely blocked, and people will always be free to express their points of view through the millions of perfectly legal websites that don't infringe copyright.

But is the tech community's opposition to tackling piracy motivated by principle - or by profit?

Many consumers see digital theft as a kind of victimless crime - musicians and film stars have loads of money, right?

In fact, most musicians earn less than the national average income and everyone who works in the creative sector, from roadies to mastering engineers, is negatively affected by piracy. But the money that downloaders save by taking music, films and books for nothing is flowing silently into the pockets of large tech corporations.

Online hosting services pay users to upload the most popular files and charge freeloaders for faster downloads.

Search giants earn billions from online advertising, with searches for illegal free music and films a major driver of traffic.

Broadband providers charge users for all the extra bandwidth they consume downloading stuff for free.

The internet advertising industry earns commission from the ads on pirate sites, and brands reach a huge audience cheaply.

This is the hidden internet piracy economy.

Most of the internet companies that benefit from this routinely claim that they don't support piracy. They may well be sincere. Yet they consistently oppose every new measure to tackle it, and offer up no effective alternatives of their own.

Long term, this cannot be the way forward.

Apple's former chief executive, the late Steve Jobs, understood that the creative and technology industries should be partners, and that consumers benefit from better quality services as a result. Spotify and others have taken up the mantle and there are new examples to welcome, with Google and some ISPs launching their own digital music services.

But if we want a digital economy that works, the big players on the internet need to kick their addiction to the money flowing from piracy. Like Steve Jobs, they need to show that they value other people's creativity as well as their own.

Geoff Taylor is chief executive of the BPI - the trade body that represents the British recording industry.

Ernesto, Torrentfreak.com


Aside from increasing liability for many legitimate tech companies, the problem with the pending Sopa and Pipa bills is that they might achieve next to nothing in stopping piracy.

It may become easier to take out what the entertainment industry calls "rogue sites" dedicated to copyright infringement, but the recent past has shown that for every service that gets shut down, a dozen new ones appear.

Ten years ago the major threat was said to come from Napster, a few years later it was Limewire, and today it is Megaupload.

All these services are now offline but there are no signs that file-sharing is declining, on the contrary.

Instead of aggressively attempting to legislate piracy away and alienating consumers, a much better approach is to take a good look at why many people share copyrighted material.

To a great extent piracy can be interpreted as a marketing signal. Consumers see a mismatch between the offerings of the big media companies and their demands.

When the MP3-player (and iPod) first came along there was no way for people in some countries to legally buy songs to put on them.

The demand was huge but big media wasn't serving it. We still see a mismatch today, and it's one of the main motivations for people to pirate.

Piracy will always remain, but if the entertainment industries are smart enough they'll eventually deliver services that make unauthorised downloading obsolete for most people.

In Europe, for example, many people don't want to wait years before their favourite US shows air on TV, so they use file-sharing sites instead.

This is more about availability than the fact that these shows are free. The same is true for movies and music.

What the public wants is better services and increased availability at a fair price.

Ernesto is the Netherlands-based co-editor of the blog Torrentfreak.com. He asked to withhold his full identity and photograph.

I think this guy hit it on the nail pretty darn well.

Neelie Kroes, European Commission

I've said that we have to safeguard the benefits of an open internet and that Sopa is not the model for Europe. What we need instead is laws that are effective, proportionate and preserve the open internet we cherish.

Or, as I put it on Twitter, speeding is illegal but you don't stop it by putting speed bumps on the motorway.

In the digital age, our current copyright system is not succeeding in its objectives. I agree we should fight against piracy. But it's becoming increasingly hard to legally enforce copyright, and enforcement is only one side of the coin.

On top of that virtually all artists are earning under £800 a month from copyright. That's pretty devastating, for the artists themselves and for Europe as a whole.

There are lots of potential ideas out there for new systems of recognition and reward - but too often they are killed stone dead by rigid, pre-digital legislation.

Meanwhile legislation can discriminate against innovative forms of distribution - for example, e-books don't benefit from the same VAT reduced rates as "physical" books.

Overall, I have been clear that we need to go back to basics and put artists back at the centre of copyright law.

We need to ensure internet access is as widespread as possible. And we need to deal with piracy from both angles. Piracy won't be minimised until the amount of legally available content is increased.

Neelie Kroes is the vice president of the European Commission and is responsible for issues relating to the Digital Agenda

Prof William Dutton, University of Oxford


The worldwide diffusion of the internet is one of the most promising technological developments of the 21st Century. Over two billion people already use the internet and that number is set to grow as more people in the rapidly developing nations come online. There are already more Chinese users than there are Americans on the planet.

It is a core infrastructure for economic development in developed and rapidly developing nations alike, and is enabling networked individuals to hold governments and other institutions accountable in ways that are as powerful as the press in earlier eras.

However, the vitality of the internet, web and related technologies is being placed at risk by an ideologically blinkered stand-off between two single-issue groups - one seeking to protect copyright versus another protecting freedom of expression.

The internet and web grew out of a culture of sharing and free expression within academic communities, and more than 40 years on from the invention of the internet, many users remain supportive of online freedom of expression. Given the high levels of support for this underlying culture it should not be surprising that threats to freedom of expression have created major counter-reactions.

Legislative routes to protecting copyright would have a chilling effect on the internet, as they would usher in greater surveillance and governmental sanctioning of the blocking of content as well as the disconnection of users. That is why Wikipedia, Google and other responsible stakeholders in the internet have protested Sopa and Pipa.

At the very moment that protests over these legislative actions appeared to be gaining ground among US elected officials, the Department of Justice raised the stakes by taking the domain names of the Megaupload file-sharing site offline and charging its founders with violating piracy laws.

As a result the internet "hacktivist" group, Anonymous, launched its denial of service attacks. The actions of nearly every stakeholder in this conflict have been seriously uncompromising.

In the short run, it is time to talk and to stop these flame wars. Each side has failed to be open to discussion, but that is exactly what is needed. In the long term, the creative industries must focus on new business models that are sustainable in the digital era. Government can help support the research and development to enable these innovations.

More generally, all stakeholders need to understand that freedom of expression and copyright cannot be pursued as single issues. Both are part of a larger ecology of policies that have major interactions.

It is tempting to say that freedom of expression trumps all other values and interests, but the evidence is right before us that freedom of expression is being eroded by copyright, liability, privacy and data protection, public safety and other concerns. Single-issue political posturing could undermine the internet's future.

William Dutton is professor of internet studies at the Oxford Internet Institute

This guy missed the point entirely all he was looking at was the reaction to the proposal to the bill and the closure to Megaupload not the main issue.

Neil Roiter, Corero Network Security

Ideologically based attacks are now a fact of life. Organisations have to prepare for them and be ready to respond.

The distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks launched by Anonymous in the wake of the Megaupload takedown are not a surprise: these attacks are becoming the rule, rather than the exception.

Ideologically motivated groups, or "hacktivists", launch these DDoS attacks, in particular, at any time and for whatever rationale. We've just witnessed ideologically motivated attackers in the Middle East take down the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange and El Al Airlines sites.

Expect to see more of these types of attack. Some will be nuisances, while others will cause substantial damage by disrupting commerce, the flow of information and/or access to critical online services.

DDoS attacks are well within the means of any number of groups or individuals.

In this instance, we are seeing groups like Anonymous, which took credit for the attacks in the wake of the Megaupload takedown and arrests, enlist participants through the simple act of clicking on a link.

The fact is anyone can rent an army of compromised computers, also known as botnets, for some £60 and launch an attack that floods an organisation with false messages and brings a website to a halt. And the sophistication of attack methods is only increasing and becoming more difficult to detect. Organisations need to be vigilant.

Organisations such as the ones that have been targeted in these attacks should never be taken off-guard. Government agencies are by definition on the front line.

For example, industry groups such as the Recording Industry Association of America, the Motion Picture Association of America and the entertainment companies that have led the charge to suppress digital copyright infringement for years are in the crosshairs and likely calling fire down onto their foxholes.

Organisations and agencies can do a lot more than simply weather the storm. They must have corporate security policies, processes and technologies in place to detect, respond and mitigate.

These technologies include working with their ISPs to increase bandwidth to absorb DDoS flooding attacks; subscribing to services that can reroute some types of attack traffic or "scrub" traffic clean; and deploying on-premises appliances that are effective against all types of denial-of-service attacks.

Hacktivist attacks are a real and, we can expect, enduring threat for the foreseeable future. Every organisation is a potential target based on their actions, their corporate philosophy or simply who they are. They must protect themselves accordingly.