dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
10
share rss forum feed

jerseyjoe123

join:2008-04-28
Picton, ON

2 edits
reply to FFH5

Re: Google anti-SOPA/PIPA actions will disappear soon

It wouldn't be only their search results that would take a hit by SOPA/PIPA. Youtube, which Google owns, would be effectively wiped out.


FFH5
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5
said by jerseyjoe123:

It wouldn't be only their search results that would take a hit by SOPA/PIPA. Youtube, which Google owns, would be effectively wiped out.

YouTube has nothing to worry about. Google made peace with the content providers awhile ago over YouTube submissions that break copyright. They implemented an automated system of removing infringing content that captures the vast majority of infringing submissions.

And SOPA/PIPA, despite the slippery slope arguments by opponents, is NOT designed to block US sites. It is squarely aimed at foreign sites and governments that tolerate/encourage the stealing of US content. The alarmists always want EVERY law gutted that could potentially be abused somehow. But that is true of every law ever passed. So for them we should have no laws, because all laws can be abused. That is an anarchist's position.
--
The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, I'm from the government and I'm here to help.
»www.politico.com/2012-election/



rit56

join:2000-12-01
New York, NY

1 recommendation

What a crock.

jerseyjoe123

join:2008-04-28
Picton, ON
reply to FFH5
This sums it up pretty well:

»www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LEb_D2SD3k


Rob
In Deo speramus.
Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Comcast

1 recommendation

reply to FFH5
said by FFH5:

And SOPA/PIPA, despite the slippery slope arguments by opponents, is NOT designed to block US sites. It is squarely aimed at foreign sites and governments that tolerate/encourage the stealing of US content. The alarmists always want EVERY law gutted that could potentially be abused somehow. But that is true of every law ever passed. So for them we should have no laws, because all laws can be abused. That is an anarchist's position.

It is not our government's place to police the Internet, or police foreign governments.

Have you read your signature lately?
--
CheckSite.us | YourIP.us | Reverseip.us


coldmoon
Premium
join:2002-02-04
Broadway, NC
Reviews:
·Windstream

2 recommendations

reply to FFH5
quote:
...And SOPA/PIPA, despite the slippery slope arguments by opponents, is NOT designed to block US sites. It is squarely aimed at foreign sites and governments that tolerate/encourage the stealing of US content. The alarmists always want EVERY law gutted that could potentially be abused somehow. But that is true of every law ever passed. So for them we should have no laws, because all laws can be abused. That is an anarchist's position.
Your logic and blind faith are unsupportable. The entertainment industry and big content will abuse the system just as they have the DMCA. Such things like submitting take downs on content they DO NOT OWN, interfering with a legitimate business' advertising because they don't like the company that made the ad, ICE seizing a totally legal site USED BY THE INDUSTRY'S OWN MARKETING DEPARTMENTS and holding the domain hostage for over a year without recourse or explanation, Suing people for clearly fair use scenarios even when they were found NOT TO BE THE ACTUAL RIGHTS HOLDER, etc, etc, etc

And all this WITHOUT SOPA/PIPA being passed. No, the industry does not deserve any new tools until they learn the proper and ethical use of the tools they currently have and also learn how to innovate and deliver the content people want to consume in the formats they want.

We are at a crossroads and if the legacy industry fails to adapt, they will simply cease to exist in time and all this will be moot regardless...
--
Returnil - 21st Century body armor for your PC


Alex J

@apexcovantage.com
reply to FFH5

The alarmists always want EVERY law gutted that could potentially be abused somehow. But that is true of every law ever passed. So for them we should have no laws, because all laws can be abused. That is an anarchist's position.

You continue to clearly illustrate that you are the biggest and worst troll this website has.


ArrayList
netbus developer
Premium
join:2005-03-19
Brighton, MA
reply to Rob
isn't hypocrisy fun?


FFH5
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5
reply to Rob
said by Rob:

Have you read your signature lately?

Not everything can be based on 1 statement.

I like small government. But I am also patriotic and want a military that can defend our country - even if it costs more than I like. I hate thieves(and copyright infringers) and want them prosecuted - even if it isn't always cost effective. I'd like healthcare to be cheaper, but not at the expense of the gov't calling all the shots on whether I get to live or die in a cost effective manner. I want illegal immigrants found and deported and I want those who knowingly hire them jailed, even though it would be government that has to perform that function at a cost. Etc, etc, etc. In other words, attempts to pigeonhole a group you don't like should not resort to the poor tactics of picking 1 item of something they support and then using that as some std of purity to measure every one of their goals. The world is not black and white, it is gray.
--
The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, I'm from the government and I'm here to help.
»www.politico.com/2012-election/



pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

2 recommendations

reply to FFH5
All the laws in the world won't change a thing. The Internet has been a complete game-changer to the way the content industry does business. To a certain extent, the music industry has adapted, even though Apple now holds them by the balls, but the movie industry hasn't.

I still do not subscribe to the notion that each incidence of piracy is equal a lost sale. There is no proof whatsoever that people who pirate content would have otherwise purchased it legitimately if piracy were not an option.

I do hold to the fact that like the DMCA, all SOPA/PIPA will do is make life miserable for legitimate users of copyrighted content. The same content industry that gave us the DMCA still clings to the idea that you need to buy a separate copy of the same content if you want to use it in different places, and still believes that you are a criminal should you decide to break the DRM restrictions on legitimately purchased content so that you can use it in non-infringing ways (sorry RIAA, but ripping a track off a CD you bought so you can listen to it in the car without ruining the original disk is NOT piracy).

The push for yet another law just reminds of the push for more gun control laws. In both situations, none of the present laws are effective, the ones in place don't seem to be enforced, and the only people who are impacted are legitimate users who simply wish to exercise their rights.

Enough is enough.
--
"Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service.


Rob
In Deo speramus.
Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to FFH5
said by FFH5:

The world is not black and white, it is gray.

The RIAA/MPAA doesn't see it that way. To them, the world is black and white.
--
CheckSite.us | YourIP.us | Reverseip.us


FFH5
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5
reply to pnh102
said by pnh102:

All the laws in the world won't change a thing. The Internet has been a complete game-changer to the way the content industry does business. To a certain extent, the music industry has adapted, even though Apple now holds them by the balls, but the movie industry hasn't.

I still do not subscribe to the notion that each incidence of piracy is equal a lost sale. There is no proof whatsoever that people who pirate content would have otherwise purchased it legitimately if piracy were not an option.

I do hold to the fact that like the DMCA, all SOPA/PIPA will do is make life miserable for legitimate users of copyrighted content. The same content industry that gave us the DMCA still clings to the idea that you need to buy a separate copy of the same content if you want to use it in different places, and still believes that you are a criminal should you decide to break the DRM restrictions on legitimately purchased content so that you can use it in non-infringing ways (sorry RIAA, but ripping a track off a CD you bought so you can listen to it in the car without ruining the original disk is NOT piracy).

The push for yet another law just reminds of the push for more gun control laws. In both situations, none of the present laws are effective, the ones in place don't seem to be enforced, and the only people who are impacted are legitimate users who simply wish to exercise their rights.

Enough is enough.

I haven't defended all the copyright law features. No one has. Not even the RIAA or MPAA. But opponents like to take the position that if copyright law isn't perfect, then there should be no copyright at all. Many of those opponents do subscribe to the entitlement theory that "IF they can steal it; they should be allowed to". The solution isn't all or nothing. The copyright laws need changing, especially for length of time and use by 1 person over many devices. So lobby for those changes. But enforcing copyright restrictions IS NEEDED, especially from those overseas who feel that stealing from the RICH USA is justified.
--
The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, I'm from the government and I'm here to help.
»www.politico.com/2012-election/



N3OGH
Yo Soy Col. "Bat" Guano
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
kudos:2

1 recommendation

reply to pnh102
You & Coldmoon pretty much sum it up.

Use the tools you have now in an effective & responsible way, then we MIGHT consider giving you more.

Make it so that legitimate purchasers can use their content as they see fit.

Making the parallel to gun control is a good argument. The government doesn't enforce the laws that are on the books, but they want to make it harder for legitimate folks to exercise their rights...
--
Petty people are disproportionally corrupted by petty power
Expand your moderator at work

WernerSchutz

join:2009-08-04
Sugar Land, TX

1 edit
reply to FFH5

Re: Google anti-SOPA/PIPA actions will disappear soon

.


Jackie

@bmo.com
reply to FFH5
said by FFH5:

I haven't defended all the copyright law features. No one has. Not even the RIAA or MPAA. But opponents like to take the position that if copyright law isn't perfect, then there should be no copyright at all.

There really shouldn't be any copyright law at all. Or at least, nothing other than restrictions regarding commercial use. "Copyright" is an artificial entity creating value by restricting thought, nothing more. (Intellectual property is nothing more than data, information, and ultimately thought.) By trying to tell people what they can copy or not, view or not, and if they could manage it, think about or not, they're ultimately attempting to control how we think.
Companies need to realize this anachronistic business model of artificially limiting a free resource to increase value is never going to work in the digital age. They are fighting a losing battle. What they need to do is provide tangible value, something that doesn't need artificial legal restrictions to back up its demand. This is inevitable - they will adapt or die out. "Piracy" is growing, not shrinking. People are learning that information is as free as the bandwidth it takes to acquire it. The cat is out of the bag, and no amount of government wrangling is ever getting it back in.


Noah Vail
Son made my Avatar
Premium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Bright House

1 recommendation

reply to FFH5
said by FFH5:

I hate thieves(and copyright infringers) and want them prosecuted - even if it isn't always cost effective.

Then we can expect you to speak out against these copyright violators and call for their accounting; under the full measure of the law.

If your position has any credibility, that is what you will do.

quote:
This is a screencap of PIPA co-sponsor Roy Blunt's Twitter page from a couple of days ago.
The background image is by photographer Walter Rowland. I spoke to his wife Linny, and she told me:

"Wow, I'm so surprised to see that someone would do this. Especially a senator! It's even more of a violation because I'm actually in the photo so it's as if I'm supporting his beliefs. Yes, that's one of my husband's photos who is actually a semi-professional photographer, and no, they weren't given permission."

Roy has since changed the background on his Twitter in an attempt to cover his tracks.

This is PIPA supporter and Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill's Twitter page as it appears right now.
And this is the background image she stole from Flickr user J. Stephen Conn, who told me this:

"I do not recall giving the senator permission to use this photo on her Twitter account. I have put the photo in the Creative Commons, which means anyone may use it for non-commercial purposes, however, proper attribution of the photo should be given because it is NOT in the public domain."

The above screencap shows the homepage of Florida congressman/SOPA co-sponsor/probable PIPA supporter Dennis Ross' website.
Which features the appropriately titled illustration "Overweight Government Pig" by cartoonist John S. Pritchett. You'll notice that Dennis cropped out the part where it says "© John Pritchett". We contacted John, and he told us:

"To my knowledge, I did not license the usage of my "Overweight Govt. Pig" illustration to Dennis Ross."
Thanks to dave See Profile, whose post brought it to my attention.
That's more attribution than the 'thieving' PIPA supporters bother to give.


NV
--
Adopting other people's animosity is The New Stupid.

Kamus

join:2011-01-27
El Paso, TX
reply to FFH5
*Yawn*

OK, so i'm an "anarchist" because i don't want anyone a third party in my 2 way conversation?

You're not good enough to censor me, the government isn't good enough, the MPAA and RIAA sure as hell aren't.
NOBODY IS.

I GET TO DECIDE WHAT WEBSITES I CAN VISIT.

Is that concept too hard for you to understand?

flbas1

join:2010-02-03
Fort Lauderdale, FL
reply to FFH5
you're drinking too much koolade

YouTube has nothing to worry about. Google made peace with the content providers awhile ago

And SOPA/PIPA, despite the slippery slope arguments by opponents, is NOT designed to block US sites. It is squarely aimed at foreign sites and governments that tolerate/encourage the stealing of US content.

Watch the video on the MPAA website (careful if you have capped internet service - just the homepage is 41MB). creativeamerica.org, then "Be Informed", and then "Follow the Money" video. It directly talks about how Google AdSense is stealing revenue from the MPAA by funding pirates.

And - how about Google.CA, google.CN, and Google.KR. What happens when my google.com filters, and I use those sites. We are going to only fine the canadians, chinese, or whoever?

no sir - MPAA is gunning for Google here.

But - I did see this blog: »www.dailykos.com/story/2012/01/1···ail=hide

She is a content producer, and had your opinion, until she stopped with her koolade.

tcope
Premium
join:2003-05-07
Sandy, UT
kudos:2
reply to FFH5
Truth is, it _can_ block US sites and you have nothing to back up your statement that it's not "designed" this way (as it clearly is). If it won't be used this way why would not contain this exclusion.

But then again, why not simply leave this all up to the gov't? It's not like they will abuse the power. When you have the RIAA and MPAA pumping millions into your pockets the power _will_ be abused.

tcope
Premium
join:2003-05-07
Sandy, UT
kudos:2
reply to FFH5
Exactly! As there is a lot of grey would should always error on the side of rights vs censorship. Laws already exist to prevent copyright violations... wasn't megauploads just shut down. This was done without SOPA. SOPA simply removes due process.

I don't know of anyone against copyright protection... but this is not the problem with SOPA. The issue is that it removes due process.

We live with certain evils... that is just a fact. It's the price we pay to live the way that we do. But we need to all admit this and then look at bills such as SOPA.

tcope
Premium
join:2003-05-07
Sandy, UT
kudos:2
reply to Kamus
said by Kamus:

I GET TO DECIDE WHAT WEBSITES I CAN VISIT.

Is that concept too hard for you to understand?

Only difficult to understand what your post has to do with the topic of SOPA. You really need to keep up with what SOPA is. What you mentioned has already been removed.

jerseyjoe123

join:2008-04-28
Picton, ON
reply to tcope
said by tcope:

wasn't megauploads just shut down. This was done without SOPA. SOPA simply removes due process.

I don't know of anyone against copyright protection... but this is not the problem with SOPA. The issue is that it removes due process.

MegaUploads was blocked because the Entertainment industry claimed they had an infringing video on their site that contained a number of high profile artists in it. However, it was MegaUpload who produced the video and had paid the artists to appear in it. The Entertainment industry had no ownership of the video, but still had MegaUpload blocked for a day or two, and disrupted MegaUpload's business, without even validating that any copyright infringement had actually occurred, and without following legal due process.

SOPA just gives them the ability to do the same on a whim to anyone. Luckily, MegaUpload had the media connections, finances, and the clout to push back quickly. Imagine what would have happened if it had been a small video business just starting out? Such an incident would have ruined that business.

tcope
Premium
join:2003-05-07
Sandy, UT
kudos:2
said by jerseyjoe123:

MegaUploads was blocked because the Entertainment industry claimed they had an infringing video on their site that contained a number of high profile artists in it. However, it was MegaUpload who produced the video and had paid the artists to appear in it. The Entertainment industry had no ownership of the video, but still had MegaUpload blocked for a day or two, and disrupted MegaUpload's business, without even validating that any copyright infringement had actually occurred, and without following legal due process.

Not as I read... the Justice Dept indited them for hosting copywrited material to the tune of $500 million of loss revenue. This is not a "video".... this speaks of "multiple" files.


KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
reply to jerseyjoe123
MegaUpload is a legit site.

This takedown and arrest is an example of where this path is leading us.

The USA better be careful or the rest of the world will copy and pirate everything Hollywood makes as a matter of principle.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini


Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA
reply to FFH5
If new laws are needed to combat overseas piracy, then make them targeted and with checks in place to prevent abuse. SOPA and PIPA are vague and have little to no checks. They might be intended to only combat an overseas pirate, but as they are written they could be used to take down legitimate sites based on a mere claim of infringement.

Even if you trust that the current government wouldn't allow these abuses (and, with a username like "ThrowDemsOut", I'm guessing you don't), can you guarantee that the next government won't? What about the one after that?

SOPA and PIPA are way too vague and way too ripe for abuse. We need to toss them out and start from scratch. (Or use the OPEN bill that was formed as an alternative to SOPA/PIPA.)
--
-Jason Levine


FFH5
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5

1 edit
reply to KrK
said by KrK:

MegaUpload is a legit site.

Oh, give me a break. Megauoload is far from legitimate. Having SOME legit files, or even a small percentage of legit files(even 20 or 30 %) doesn't make them legit. And the pretend ignorance by site mgt of what is on their servers is so bogus.

»arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news···load.ars

But the government asserts that Megaupload merely wanted the veneer of legitimacy, while its employees knew full well that the site's main use was to distribute infringing content. Indeed, the government points to numerous internal e-mails and chat logs from employees showing that they were aware of copyrighted material on the site and even shared it with each other. Because of this, the government says that the site does not qualify for a “safe harbor” of the kind that protected YouTube from Viacom's $1 billion lawsuit.

For instance, the “abuse tool” allegedly does not remove the actual file being complained about by a rightsholder. Instead, it only removes a specific Web address linked to that file—but there might be hundreds of such addresses for popular content.

Employees also had access to analytics. One report showed that a specific linking site had “produce[d] 164,214 visits to Megaupload for a download of the copyrighted CD/DVD burning software package Nero Suite 10. The software package had the suggested retail price of $99.” The government's conclusion: Megaupload knew what was happening and did little to stop it.


Wilsdom

join:2009-08-06
What the percentage of internet traffic that is totally legit? Probably only 20 or 30%. SHUT IT DOWN


DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000
reply to Rob
said by Rob:

It is not our government's place to police the Internet, or police foreign governments.

Have you read your signature lately?

LOL, when will this guy quit?

He claims to be a republican yet supports big government nanny police intervention.

So funny!


fifty nine

join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
kudos:2
said by DataRiker:

said by Rob:

It is not our government's place to police the Internet, or police foreign governments.

Have you read your signature lately?

LOL, when will this guy quit?

He claims to be a republican yet supports big government nanny police intervention.

So funny!

Republicans love big Government.

But conservative != Republican