dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
6
share rss forum feed


BronsCon

join:2003-10-24
Walnut Creek, CA
Reviews:
·Comcast Business..
·SONIC.NET
reply to howardfine

Re: SOPA Protest/Awareness Event

said by howardfine:

Copyright infringement is international, not just in the US. A French company can sue you if you try and copy/sell a French writer's book. Products cannot be sold in other countries due to that country's laws. The French have (or at least had) strict requirements on documentation, for example, that had to be in French or you could not sell your product there. Some countries block web sites already due to their local laws.

I forgot to address this earlier.

Are you telling me you want to be in one of those countries? Keep in mind that we're talking about sites like YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, MySpace (ok, that one makes me want to support SOPA, just a little bit), and pretty much any other site which allows the posting of user content, such as DSLR.

This doesn't just specifically target websites intent on piracy. This targets even the smallest "innocent" infringement; for example, a 10 second clip from a movie, posted to YouTube. Surely that 10 second clip isn't going to stop someone who otherwise would have watched that movie from watching it; quite the opposite, if it's funny or interesting enough, it might encourage someone who would not have seen it to go do so.

But, I digress, some people live in a black and white world; that user didn't create that clip, why should they be allowed to post it?


howardfine

join:2002-08-09
Saint Louis, MO
Reviews:
·AT&T Southwest
said by BronsCon:

This doesn't just specifically target websites intent on piracy. This targets even the smallest "innocent" infringement;

No it doesn't. As I alluded to earlier about "the money", I would bet the Attorney General is not going to act much on anything unless he's alerted to a problem. And he's not going to be alerted to any problem unless someone feels they are losing money and lots of it. MGM won't complain about someone showing a 10-second clip from one of their movies cause it might promote the film but will raise holy hell about someone making the whole film available online. The same thing for Bayer if someone was promoting a knock off of their aspirin.

Speaking of which, a good side affect of this in medicine would be that you are less likely to get a bottle of compressed flour or arsenic if such rogues had no site to list on.


BronsCon

join:2003-10-24
Walnut Creek, CA
Reviews:
·Comcast Business..
·SONIC.NET
First of all, talk to someone on the YouTube team at Google. I know a few of them personally. Yes, MGM will complain about that 10 second clip. They do so dozens of times daily, and the DMCA already requires that those clips be taken down when there is a complaint. SOPA would require that YouTube be taken down if there was a complaint.

Second, to someone with a condition that requires they take a drug to survive, if they can't afford to buy from the US supplier, it's worth risking their life to save their life. Flour would be like no pill at all, they die. Arsenic would be like no pill at all, they die. The right pill, that saves their life. All things being equal, that's a 33% chance of getting the drug they need to survive. Do you really believe that it's ok to take that away from them in the name of protecting a corporation's profits, when we already have laws in place which do that quite effectively?