dslreports logo
 story category
Congress Introduces Another Awful Anti-Piracy Law
Because the DMCA and Protect IP Weren't Obnoxious Enough
Congress this week introduced the Stop Online Piracy Act (pdf), a companion bill to the Protect IP Act. Like its entertainment-industry pushed sibling, the Stop Online Piracy Act involves slowly eroding safe harbor protections, while giving the government broader authority to purge infringing sites from the Internet. According to analysis by the EFF, the bill is the "worst piece of IP legislation we’ve seen in the last decade," and is designed primarily to erode normal legal process. The bill also gives ISPs another forceful shove in the direction of having to be copyright cops on the beat. From the bill:
quote:
A service provider shall take technically feasible and reasonable measures designed to prevent access by its subscribers located within the United States to the foreign infringing site (or portion thereof) that is subject to the order, including measures designed to prevent the domain name of the foreign infringing site (or portion thereof) from resolving to that domain name’s Internet Protocol address. Such actions shall be taken as expeditiously as possible, but in any case within 5 days after being served with a copy of the order, or within such time as the court may order.
Techdirt calls the bill "an abomination and an insult to the Constitution," noting that the bill essentially creates a giant blacklist owned and operated by the entertainment industry with the U.S. government and ISPs as their personal police agency. Any attempt to get around these filters results in increased liability for ISPs. From Techdirt:
quote:
The bill effectively takes what the entertainment industry wanted the Supreme Court to say in Grokster (which it did not say) and puts it into US law. In other words, any foreign site declared by the Attorney General to be "inducing" infringement, with a very broad definition of inducing, can now be censored by the US. With no adversarial hearing. Hello, Great Firewall of America.
All in all, another day in heavily-lobbied Washington DC.
view:
topics flat nest 

kingdome74
Let's Go Orange
Premium Member
join:2002-03-27
Syracuse, NY

kingdome74

Premium Member

Yet Another...

...bill designed to restrict our access to the free flow of information. As we take one more step toward the Communist Chinese model of internet my question is - who is going to stop it?

dks7
join:2004-05-31
Omak, WA

1 recommendation

dks7

Member

Re: Yet Another...

A few bullets in the right direction aimed at the movers and shakers will.

Bill Neilson
Premium Member
join:2009-07-08
Alexandria, VA

Bill Neilson to kingdome74

Premium Member

to kingdome74
said by kingdome74:

...bill designed to restrict our access to the free flow of information. As we take one more step toward the Communist Chinese model of internet my question is - who is going to stop it?

One more step towards Communist China?

Do you understand what Communism is? Or are you over-exaggerating to make a political point all the while never saying this years earlier when laws like this existed or were started during another party in the White House?

kingdome74
Let's Go Orange
Premium Member
join:2002-03-27
Syracuse, NY

kingdome74

Premium Member

Re: Yet Another...

I'm not sure where you are getting any of this bullshit but I didn't mention a party or American politics in general. Drop the gloves, dude, no one rang a bell. Are you even aware there's a (getting smaller) difference between Communist China's internet and ours? I made general comment about our overall loss and about to lose a lot more freedom on the internet. Me thinks you need to tone down your kneejerkmeter a tad

Bill Neilson
Premium Member
join:2009-07-08
Alexandria, VA

Bill Neilson

Premium Member

Re: Yet Another...

said by kingdome74:

Are you even aware there's a (getting smaller) difference between Communist China's internet and ours?

Like what? And when I ask you for this...I want actual examples...not these copy/paste general assertions from blogs that you deem cool.

Psst...I lived in China for work...I know exactly what I am talking about.

Your "OMG, WE ARE IN CHINA!" idiotic statements are based off several things done here and that is it.

We are little to nothing like China
WernerSchutz
join:2009-08-04
Sugar Land, TX

1 edit

WernerSchutz to Bill Neilson

Member

to Bill Neilson
I DO.

I was born in a Communist state and grew up in a Communist state. All the spying, restriction of information, lies, Gestapo style "Homeland Security" shit, "security" was there and now is here, slowly growing.

The fear of government that takes shape here, the corruption, the poverty it brings to the normal citizen, the growth of the army to be used against citizens in a police state, the prisons one was sent for protesting or for telling the truth, the violence against human rights.

So kingdome74 is absolutely right.

annonymiss
@comcast.net

annonymiss to Bill Neilson

Anon

to Bill Neilson
said by Bill Neilson:

said by kingdome74:

...bill designed to restrict our access to the free flow of information. As we take one more step toward the Communist Chinese model of internet my question is - who is going to stop it?

One more step towards Communist China?

Do you understand what Communism is? Or are you over-exaggerating to make a political point all the while never saying this years earlier when laws like this existed or were started during another party in the White House?

Communism comes from the Latin word communis, which means "shared" or "belong to all".

Who "owns" GM again? What company isn't "taxed" to the point that if you don't pay those "taxes" the government comes after your business and "takes" most of it? How is any of that not headed toward "communist china?" Psst, there is capitalizm in China, it's the political system that's supposedly "communist". P Pssssst. Don't pay your property taxes anywhere in america and see how fast the USSA takes "your" property that you paid for.

""Pure communism" is a term sometimes used to refer to the stage in history after socialism, although just as many communists use simply the term "communism" to refer to that stage."

Socialism? You mean like a Central (US Federal) government that takes your work (wages) away from you and says "here, we know what's best for you, let US do your healthcare, or your retirement, or, or, or etc etc..".

"The classless, stateless society that is meant to characterise this communism is one where decisions on what to produce and what policies to pursue are made in the best interests of the whole of society—a sort of 'of, by, and for the working class', rather than a rich class controlling the wealth and everyone else working for them on a wage basis. "

Yeaaaah, we treat all people the same right? If you work your but off in the USA and make a lot of money you pay the same percentage as someone that never works, and lives off "the people" right? Right?

And it's not like the USG just dumped a bunch of money down the holes on wortless "green" energy that costs upwards of 10times what other energy costs. Heck no. No "for the people" going on in this government.

Sorry, we are almost headed more toward Communism then China ever was.

US citizens better wake up, or we WILL end up with a controlling class called the "united states federal government" that will make most major decissions for you from birth to death, JUST LIKE THE CHINESE supposedly do.

pppssst, try and put up something on "your property" that's against building codes and tell me "your government" doesn't control most of what you do today.

Oh, btw, the USG is doing judgeless wiretaps and data taps on the general public. How's THAT not like CHINA again?

astroboi
@rr.com

astroboi

Anon

Face it folks......

The innovative and exciting internet we grew up with is done. Now that just about everybody is on-line, the days of "you can be anybody you want on the internet" has morphed into "you can't hide anywhere on the internet anymore and that's the way it should be!". Give it a few years and all you will be able to do on the net is shop, read government approved news and pay to watch previously free tv shows. I'd be surprised if even porn wasn't slowly eliminated. No more whistle-blowing, no controversial websites, no anti-government blogs. As our minders slowly strangle dissent, first by revoking driving licenses, then later credit cards the angry rabble will be a powerless serf-like class with few rights, little hope and the best part, the government won't even have to put them in jail. Being powerless they will "do their time" in public housing. Somebody please convince me I'm wrong!
Wilsdom
join:2009-08-06

Wilsdom

Member

Re: Face it folks......

There are a few generations that will notice the loss. I think the government is underestimating the disruption that will occur when they either engage in mass suicide or rioting.
MyDogHsFleas
Premium Member
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX

MyDogHsFleas

Premium Member

Re: Face it folks......

Wow so this bill will cause news sites and porn sites (both legal BTW, and both respecters of IP), to be eliminated, and cause mass suicides and riots? Not to mention drivers licenses and credit cards being revoked? A bit over the top don't you think?

If "the Internet we grew up with is gone" means "you can't download and share pirated IP at will from wherever and to wherever you want", well, then, yes. Oh, and by the way, the vast majority of the growth has been via legal content and apps hosted by legal companies, not by some amorphous "freedom".

The Internet is not a magic fairyland where rules that apply to the rest of society don't hold.

Look, if you want to argue about the rules, fine. But don't just blanket assert that the Internet is or should be free from them.

Metatron2008
You're it
Premium Member
join:2008-09-02
united state

Metatron2008

Premium Member

Re: Face it folks......

It's just like whenever a black guy gets pulled over, has a bunch of guns, and says 'it's rodney king all over again!'. Freedom for a lot of people apparantly also means freedom to commit crimes.
Rekrul
join:2007-04-21
Milford, CT

Rekrul

Member

Re: Face it folks......

said by Metatron2008:

It's just like whenever a black guy gets pulled over, has a bunch of guns, and says 'it's rodney king all over again!'. Freedom for a lot of people apparantly also means freedom to commit crimes.

Why should anyone respect the "rights" of multi-billion dollar corporations when they don't respect the rights of the average person?

Why can I be sent to jail longer for using a camcorder in a movie theater than I can for actually assaulting someone?

Why can Disney freely take story ideas from the public domain, without ever allowing anything they've created to become public domain?

Why are software companies allowed to circumvent the first-sale doctrine by claiming that you're only leasing software, despite the fact that they blatantly sell you a copy of the program?

Why are software companies the only industry that is allowed to offer a product with absolutely no consumer protection whatsoever?

Why are game companies allowed to retro-actively remove features from a game console AFTER you've bought it?

Why is the movie industry allowed to effectively block the import of a completely legal product (movies) through the use of region codes?

Why is it that when the average person gets caught sharing 24 songs, they can be fined millions of dollars, but when the recording industry gets caught ripping off a musical artist for millions, absolutely nothing happens to them?

Why are there never any penalties for corporations filing false DMCA takedown notices?

Why is it that the same politicians who are pushing for these restrictive new laws are regularly caught infringing copyright themselves?

Maybe if there were actually some balance in the law, and the entertainment industry didn't try to kill off every major advance in technology (VCRs, MP3 players, P2P file sharing, etc) to come along, people wouldn't be so openly supportive of piracy.

Metatron2008
You're it
Premium Member
join:2008-09-02
united state

Metatron2008

Premium Member

Re: Face it folks......

So two wrongs make a right? Why not try and think of the fact that corporations and executives would get golden parachutes while your antics would make some average joe get fired who would have a family to feed?
Rekrul
join:2007-04-21
Milford, CT

Rekrul

Member

Re: Face it folks......

said by Metatron2008:

So two wrongs make a right?

Sometimes, yes. It's called civil disobedience.
said by Metatron2008:

Why not try and think of the fact that corporations and executives would get golden parachutes while your antics would make some average joe get fired who would have a family to feed?

So we have to keep supporting corrupt organizations because they employ a lot of average Joes?

How exactly are people supposed to change things then? And don't say that they do it through the government because that's a joke. Virtually all the politicians are bought and paid for by the corporations.

annonymiss
@comcast.net

annonymiss

Anon

Re: Face it folks......

You realize "civil disobedience" is code for "stupid sucker going to jail because he can't come up with a better way to change things" right?

It's simple. Don't buy stuff from companies that support things like this.

Eventually someone will say "hey, there's money to be made here from those people boycotting the big guys, think I'll do what they like".
MyDogHsFleas
Premium Member
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX

MyDogHsFleas

Premium Member

Re: Face it folks......

said by annonymiss :

You realize "civil disobedience" is code for "stupid sucker going to jail because he can't come up with a better way to change things" right?

It's simple. Don't buy stuff from companies that support things like this.

Eventually someone will say "hey, there's money to be made here from those people boycotting the big guys, think I'll do what they like".

well 2 comments:

a) if a boycott was going to happen it would have happened by now. No one cares about copyright being an infringement on freedom. This is a settled issue except with the fringe.

b) Apple has already done what you suggest. Since the audio/video distribution industry didn't step up Apple did it for them. So now we have the 99 cent downloads which is what the mass public wants.

c) ok 3 comments: I disagree totally with your characterization of civil disobedience. It's a massively important tool to effect change. Look at what it did for segregation in the US, for independence in India, etc. However, the important thing about civil disobedience is that it requires actual people to put their actual butts in the line of fire to be effective. Anonymously stealing over the Internet is very far from any kind of "civil disobedience" and those that think they are doing a noble deed by pirating are dead wrong.
Trencher
join:2007-02-12
Etobicoke, ON

Trencher to MyDogHsFleas

Member

to MyDogHsFleas
I think you're missing the point. The MPAA and RIAA should not have the power to tell the general public what or what they can't go to. Is it illegal to download movies/music off the internet? Sure but do you really think that its just going to stop at some infringing websites?

This basically opens up the floodgates to anything they deem inappropriate... after pirate sites it could move to porn and then to websites that hold a view that not everyone may agree with and so on. Once you open Pandora's box its impossible to go back.
MyDogHsFleas
Premium Member
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX

MyDogHsFleas

Premium Member

Re: Face it folks......

said by Trencher:

I think you're missing the point. The MPAA and RIAA should not have the power to tell the general public what or what they can't go to.

That's not what this is about. It's about shutting down infringing sites. Just like the government can shut down stores selling counterfeit trademarked goods.

Is it illegal to download movies/music off the internet? Sure but do you really think that its just going to stop at some infringing websites?

This basically opens up the floodgates to anything they deem inappropriate... after pirate sites it could move to porn and then to websites that hold a view that not everyone may agree with and so on. Once you open Pandora's box its impossible to go back.

The slippery slope argument can be used against just about anything. It's a debating trick designed to remove focus from the issue at hand, by changing the focus to something that no one would agree with.

Would you agree with someone who said: "We're going to let gay people get married? What's next? Letting people marry their dog? Letting adults marry 12-year-olds? Once you open those floodgates, you can't go back."

Your argument is as full of holes as that one.

Stopping sites from purveying copyrighted material without a license is nothing like censorship of political or porn sites, both of which are legal.
Trencher
join:2007-02-12
Etobicoke, ON

Trencher

Member

Re: Face it folks......

Really? You're going to compare blocking websites to gay marriage? That's about the stupidest thing you could of wrote. There's a difference between something that should of been allowed from day one (Gay marriage) to allowing the government to censor the internet.

When the police are closing down a store that sells pirated/stolen goods that's within the confines of that cities/countries laws but the internet is not owned or operated by the USA and its free domain and open to all. If the government wants to shut down local torrent sites that are infringing on copyrights then fine... but to block those that are outside of their own jurisdiction is ludicrous. I can't see how anyone would be on the "FOR" side of internet censorship unless you work for the RIAA or MPAA.

Lets put it this way, its fine for someone to create a Neo Nazi website that blames Jews and blacks for all the troubles in the world but try going to thepiratebay.org and you get a "page can't be displayed" does that make any type of sense to you? Which one do you think is more harmful and does more damage?
MyDogHsFleas
Premium Member
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX

MyDogHsFleas

Premium Member

Re: Face it folks......

I am not comparing blocking websites to gay marriage. I was illustrating the fallacy of slippery slope arguments. Try actually reading my posts.
MyDogHsFleas

MyDogHsFleas to Trencher

Premium Member

to Trencher
Your next lame debating technique is ad hominem attack. "If that's your position you must be a (insert derogatory attribute)". Not even worthy of a response.

Which is worse, Pirate Bay or a neo-Nazi site? Wow, just wow. You went to the Nazi comparison that soon?

To be clear, although I hate to respond to such a stupid attack, I'll point out the obvious. The neo-Nazi site is protected by the Constitution as free speech. Pirate Bay is actively engaged in fostering illegal activity, the downloading of pirated goods. One is legal, the other is not.

You do seem to be advocating that free speech should be illegal because it's "more harmful" than pirating. Is that really where you stand?

Finally the only semi reasonable argument in your post. "the USA has no jurisdiction over foreign websites". Correct me if I am wrong, but this bill is about blocking them. Like we block import of illegal goods at the border. Also it's my understanding that we work with other countries to jointly manage the shutdown of illegal sites.

Finally I'll repeat the main point. There seems to be the idea that the Internet is a magical fairy land where normal rules of law don't apply. If you disabuse yourself of this notion it will help you understand what's really going on.

Metatron2008
You're it
Premium Member
join:2008-09-02
united state

Metatron2008

Premium Member

Re: Face it folks......

The illlegal stuff you download goes thru isps and servers LOCATED IN THE US. Try being responsible for your behavior, because you are certainly doing illegal activity in the US, not in a magical fairy tale land.
Trencher
join:2007-02-12
Etobicoke, ON

Trencher

Member

Re: Face it folks......

Actually I'm doing a legal gray area in Canada. File sharing here is only illegal if your uploading but to download is perfectly fine (until the MAFIAA has their way lobbying/forcing our government to change its stance).

I'm glad I live in a country that (most of the time) doesn't support big buisness over that of its citizens.
MyDogHsFleas
Premium Member
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX

MyDogHsFleas

Premium Member

Re: Face it folks......

Interesting, did not know about the situation in Canada.

The Wikipedia article basically says it is not legal but catching and prosecuting violators is not a priority.

»en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ ··· n_Canada

Also found this article about how Canada is looked down on internationally:

»www.thestar.com/iphone/n ··· ngements

annonymiss
@comcast.net

annonymiss to Trencher

Anon

to Trencher

Canada, where the men are (mostly) men eh? and steal US stuff.

Canada is the lapdog of the US.

What's worth "stealing" from Canada again?

The "Canadian movie industry" is pretty much paid for by US production companies.

Microsoft, while CLOSE to Canada, is still in the good old USA.

Yeah, a canadian stealing US copyright stuff. Should be proud of that.

Sorry your country can't produce anything on it's own.
said by Trencher:

Actually I'm doing a legal gray area in Canada. File sharing here is only illegal if your uploading but to download is perfectly fine (until the MAFIAA has their way lobbying/forcing our government to change its stance).

I'm glad I live in a country that (most of the time) doesn't support big buisness over that of its citizens.

tmc8080
join:2004-04-24
Brooklyn, NY

tmc8080

Member

Ummm....

wasn't the so-called "agreement" with ISPs to crack down on piracy enough?

going much further seems to play into the pirate's argument that it's not about fairness anymore, it's about winning the war against pirates & the money (which is a great recipe for losing the war).

TechyDad
Premium Member
join:2001-07-13
USA

TechyDad

Premium Member

Re: Ummm....

I don' think it's even about pirates at all anymore. Oh sure, they'll claim it is and use "pirates" to justify their actions, but it's all about control. The RIAA/MPAA wants to be able to control what people listen to and watch. You can't do that online. I could find an indie musician or just view YouTube videos all day instead of paying them money for their "quality" content. They don't like that. Though it wouldn't (currently) stand up in court, they see this as a lost sale. If they have their way, the only content online will have to be "pre-approved" and sold by them.
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

MaynardKrebs

Premium Member

Re: Ummm....

Time to charge the RIAA/MPAA and ALL their executive & studio heads under RICO statutes.
GeoStar
join:2011-02-10
j2e6f5

GeoStar to TechyDad

Member

to TechyDad
questions

my hillbilly firend from around the block asks:

How quickly will canada goosestep in line with China and the US and other advanced civilizations?

hawhaw

jap
Premium Member
join:2003-08-10
038xx

jap

Premium Member

Re: Ummm....

Did you suggest he do the right thing and move to Canada to help them see the light?
Rekrul
join:2007-04-21
Milford, CT

Rekrul to TechyDad

Member

to TechyDad
said by TechyDad:

I don' think it's even about pirates at all anymore. Oh sure, they'll claim it is and use "pirates" to justify their actions, but it's all about control. The RIAA/MPAA wants to be able to control what people listen to and watch.

Coming soon, the "Getting Rid of Every External Distribution" Act. Or as it will be more commonly known: GREED.

Noah Vail
Oh God please no.
Premium Member
join:2004-12-10
SouthAmerica

4 edits

Noah Vail

Premium Member

Smith intro'd bill after Entertainment contributions lagged

Rep. Lamar Smith (R-San Antonio) has reelection coming up next year and his coffers are not filled - yet.




His largest campaign contributors are from the Entertainment Industry.
Also - Smith is assigned to the House Homeland Security committee and chairs the House Justice committee.
(Both Justice and DHS will gain power and authority w/ this bill)

Introducing the bill excites his Big Entertainment donors; maybe enough to purchase his reelection.

Should it pass into law, Smith can look forward to more clout for the House Justice committee.
As a bonus - he'll also acquire higher standing in his DHS committee role.

It's a win-win-win-WIN! for Smith.

Anyone here from his district?

NV
edits to add detail, readability, just because
axus
join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC

axus

Member

Hopefully the courts will fix it

It seems like the usual censorship of a list prepared by the government. Congress should pass a Constitutional amendment against the freedom of speech if they want these types of laws to stand.

Snakeoil
Ignore Button. The coward's feature.
Premium Member
join:2000-08-05
united state

Snakeoil

Premium Member

They [government]will never learn.

pirates, just like criminals, don't care about laws. Gun ownership laws effect only those that follow the law. Criminals snicker at them, and buy guns from the "black market".
Same applies here, pirates laugh about the laws, find a way around them, and continue to download. Meanwhile the ISPs are getting buried in laws and regulations that force them to play cop.

NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
TP-Link TD-8616
Asus RT-AC66U B1
Netgear FR114P

NormanS

MVM

...just in time to miss me!

I have curtailed my piracy of anime (Japanese animation); not because of threats of legal action, or remorse at unethical activity. I primarily pirated anime because it was hard to come by through legal channels. That is changing, now, and so are my habits. Netflix has a pretty good collection of anime to stream; and I can use that to decide if a show is worth buying on DVD. I don't even need piracy now! Hmmm; and I read somewhere that P2P use is down. Could it be that there are more affordable legal venues now?
Ulmo
join:2005-09-22
Aptos, CA

Ulmo

Member

Censorship?

If this is indeed censorship, then it is against the Constitution of the United States of America.