site Search:


 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery






how-to block ads


 
Search Topic:
Uniqs:
542
Share Topic
Post a:
Post a:
AuthorAll Replies


Linklist
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5

4 edits

The Summary of what the bill says

»www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xp···=summary
Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act - Amends the federal criminal code to authorize the Attorney General (AG) to commence an action for injunctive relief against a domain name used by an Internet site that is "dedicated to infringing activities," even where such a domain name is not located in the United States. Defines an Internet site that "dedicated to infringing activities" as a site that is: (1) subject to civil forfeiture; (2) designed primarily to offer goods or services in violation of federal copyright law; or (3) selling counterfeit goods. Requires the AG to maintain a public listing of domain names that the Department of Justice (DOJ) determines are dedicated to infringing activities but for which the AG has not filed an action. Allows parties to petition the AG to remove such a domain name from the list and obtain judicial review of the final determination in a civil action.
The full bill can be read here:
»www.govtrack.us/congress/billtex···111-3804

And what is copyright infringement?:
»www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/us···00-.html

Since the vote was unanimous, all 19 members of the committee listed here voted for it:
»www.govtrack.us/congress/committ···?id=SSJU

Groups supporting bill:
Property Rights Alliance
Motion Picture Association of America
Coalition Against Domain Name Abuse
US Chamber of Commerce
Screen Actors Guild
Viacom
International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees, Moving Picture Technicians, Artists and Allied Crafts of the United States

Groups opposing legislation:
Center for Democracy & Technology
Electronic Frontier Foundation
Distributed Computing Industry Association

Where the lobbying money came from to the US Senators, shows both for & against:
For bill: $5,348,392 Against bill: $167,750
»maplight.org/us-congress/bill/11···ibutions

gorehound

join:2009-06-19
Portland, ME

I am an artist and I do not support censorship.This bill is bullshit and I intend to do something about it.

1.boycott mafiaa
2.buy only used products
3.never buy theater tickets
4.never support any artists or labels involved with mafiaa
5.already wrote to my senators
6.not voting democrat or republican again

maybe bills like these will get us all moving in the right direction.away from a 2 party bs system many of us hate



Linklist
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5

said by gorehound:

I am an artist and I do not support censorship.
Seems some of your fellow artists don't agree:

Supporters of bill:

Screen Actors Guild

International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees, Moving Picture Technicians, Artists and Allied Crafts of the United States

Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

His statement was without question not all inclusive to every artist and thus did not need your 2 cents.



Linklist
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5

2 edits

reply to Linklist

A more extensive list of this bill's supporters:
»www.slyck.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=52810
1-800-PetMeds
Activision
Acushnet Golf
Association of American Publishers
Cable and Satellite Broadcasting Association of Asia (CASBAA)
Chanel
Church Music Publishers' Association
Copyright Alliance
Disney
EMI
Entertainment Software Association
Fashion Business Inc.
Fortune Brands
Guru Denim, Inc.
Imaging Supplies Coalition
Johnson and Johnson
LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton
Major League Baseball
Merck
Motion Picture Association of America
NagraStar
Nagravision
National Music Publisher's Association
NBC Universal
Nervous Tattoo Inc., dba Ed Hardy
Newscorp
Nike
Oakley
OpSec Security
Premier League
Recording Industry Association of America
Sony Music Entertainment
Sports Rights Owners Coalition
STOP Streaming Group
Tiffany and Co.
Time Warner
True Religion Apparel, Inc.
Ultimate Fighting Championship
Underwriters Laboratory
Universal Music Group
U.S. Chamber of Commerce
Viacom
Warner Music Group
Xerox

PDXPLT

join:2003-12-04
Banks, OR

1 edit

reply to Linklist

Karl distorts the facts again

quote:
The bill would create a website blacklist and give the (entertainment industry lawyer stocked) Department of Justice the ability to censor or shut down certain websites deemed "dedicated to infringing activities" without Judicial review.
That's not true, if the contents of the bill are accurately described above:
quote:
Amends the federal criminal code to authorize the Attorney General (AG) to commence an action for injunctive relief ...
'Injunctive relief' must be granted by a court. So much for the 'no judicial review' falsehood.

It's no surprise to me that Franken would support this. He used to be an entertainer. He got paid for the copyrightable content he would create.

I had an entertainment industry insider recently sum up the industry to me in a few short sentences: first you have a bunch of creative types, that create stuff in order to be paid for doing so. That's one sde of the industry. They then hire the other side: an army of barracuda lawyers whose job is to negotiate deals, wring out every possible penny of revenue that can be obtained for that creative content, and to protect the value of said content as much as possible. Yea they have front groups like the RIAA/MPAA that take the public heat for being the 'evil empire', but make no mistake the objective for all involved is to make as much money from as many sources as possible. How else to pay for all that bling.

Yea it doesn't sit well with the internet population that thinks this should all be free, but what else is new.

EDIT: WIRED has a much more accurate and better-written article: »www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/1···liceman/


BF69
Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN

reply to Linklist

Re: The Summary of what the bill says

said by Linklist:

A more extensive list of this bill's supporters:
»www.slyck.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=52810
1-800-PetMeds
Activision
Acushnet Golf
Association of American Publishers
Cable and Satellite Broadcasting Association of Asia (CASBAA)
Chanel
Church Music Publishers' Association
Copyright Alliance
Disney
EMI
Entertainment Software Association
Fashion Business Inc.
Fortune Brands
Guru Denim, Inc.
Imaging Supplies Coalition
Johnson and Johnson
LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton
Major League Baseball
Merck
Motion Picture Association of America
NagraStar
Nagravision
National Music Publisher's Association
NBC Universal
Nervous Tattoo Inc., dba Ed Hardy
Newscorp
Nike
Oakley
OpSec Security
Premier League
Recording Industry Association of America
Sony Music Entertainment
Sports Rights Owners Coalition
STOP Streaming Group
Tiffany and Co.
Time Warner
True Religion Apparel, Inc.
Ultimate Fighting Championship
Underwriters Laboratory
Universal Music Group
U.S. Chamber of Commerce
Viacom
Warner Music Group
Xerox
What's ironic is that if the governemnt tried to ban certain music, video games, movies or books many of this group would oppose such laws on freedom of speech.

Desdinova
Premium
join:2003-01-26
Gaithersburg, MD

reply to Linklist
"1-800-PetMeds
Activision
Acushnet Golf
Association of American Publishers
Cable and Satellite Broadcasting Association of Asia (CASBAA)
Chanel..."

And eugenics was supported by the American Medical association, Theodore Roosevelt, the National Academy of Sciences, and the National Research Council. The Supreme Court upheld the rights of states to involuntarily sterilize "undesirables" and by 1963, over 60,000 people had been sterilized, many for no other reason than homosexuality, feeble-mindedness or just social undesireablity.

"Eugenic breeders believed American society was not ready to implement an organized lethal solution. But many mental institutions and doctors practiced improvised medical lethality and passive euthanasia on their own. One institution in Lincoln, Illinois fed its incoming patients milk from tubercular cows believing a eugenically strong individual would be immune. Thirty to forty percent annual death rates resulted at Lincoln. Some doctors practiced passive eugenicide one newborn infant at a time. Others doctors at mental institutions engaged in lethal neglect.

Nonetheless, with eugenicide marginalized, the main solution for eugenicists was the rapid expansion of forced segregation and sterilization, as well as more marriage restrictions. California led the nation, performing nearly all sterilization procedures with little or no due process. In its first twenty-five years of eugenic legislation, California sterilized 9,782 individuals, mostly women. Many were classified as "bad girls," diagnosed as "passionate," "oversexed" or "sexually wayward." At Sonoma, some women were sterilized because of what was deemed an abnormally large clitoris or labia."

--quoted from »hnn.us/articles/1796.html

So just because a group of people attached to a cause support and like that cause, doesn't exclude the cause from being horrifically wrong and shortsighted.



KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK

reply to Linklist
When money is involved ethics and principles go right out the window. I find it ironic that many of Hollywood support such a measure out of greed. Seems it really is true, those who do not study the past are doomed to repeat it.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini


Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ

reply to Linklist
SAG supporting a bill like this, now there is a shocker. their premier members just could not live with only one bentley this year.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports



Kylemaul
Lovin' My Firefox
Premium
join:2001-03-30
North Port, FL
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

reply to BF69

said by BF69:

What's ironic is that if the government tried to ban certain music, video games, movies or books many of this group would oppose such laws on freedom of speech.

Hmmm.
A) This is the government trying to ban something.
B) 'many of this group' part is negated by their participation. As far as I'm concerned, they just turned in their own (and those they represent's) 'freedom of speech' cards.

Friday, 24-May 12:24:23 Terms of Use & Privacy | feedback | contact | Hosting by nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo
over 13.5 years online © 1999-2013 dslreports.com.
Most commented news this week
Hot Topics