SOPA/PIPA
closed account (DSLq5Di1)
Have you guys have been following the anti-SOPA/PIPA drama? just noticed Wikipedia is folllowing suit with Reddits blackout. http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/English_Wikipedia_anti-SOPA_blackout
I'm glad Wikipedia has jumped on the bandwagon, as Reddit acting alone seemed rather pointless, but.. what will entertain and educate me tomorrow?!
I'm glad Wikipedia has jumped on the bandwagon, as Reddit acting alone seemed rather pointless, but.. what will entertain and educate me tomorrow?!
Encyclopedia Britannica? :P
I personally am in full support of the Wikipedia blackout.
-Albatross
I personally am in full support of the Wikipedia blackout.
-Albatross
closed account (3hM2Nwbp)
We wouldn't have issues like SOPA / PIPA if so many people criminals weren't actually breaking intellectual (and other) copyrights on the net.
I'm in full support of an ISS (Internet Secret Service) that would act to track down and prosecute violators. The revenue generated through the fines would more than pay for such an agency.
I'm in full support of an ISS (Internet Secret Service) that would act to track down and prosecute violators. The revenue generated through the fines would more than pay for such an agency.
Last edited on
closed account (DSLq5Di1)
@Albatross
If by Encyclopedia Britannica you mean Guiness Book of World Records, good idea! :p
@xander337
http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/ngbk3/fixed_sopa_has_not_been_postponed_to_2012_the/
If by Encyclopedia Britannica you mean Guiness Book of World Records, good idea! :p
@xander337
http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/ngbk3/fixed_sopa_has_not_been_postponed_to_2012_the/
| The revenue generated through the fines would more than pay for such an agency. |
Assuming the criminals actually pay them...
It's great that Wikipedia has joined in. As far as reaching a broad audience goes, I think it's up there with Facebook and Youtube, but the only "neutral" one. I'm not sure I'd believe such an action from the other two.
Piracy is a problem, but not one that can be forced out of existence. The market model for "shareable media" has to change. Digital TV is still quite expensive and the availability is limited. The number one [in my country] downloaded media is series, because we simply don't have access to them here. If I hear about a great new series out in the US, I'm forced to sit around and wait, hoping that one of the networks here picks it up. In the meantime, I'm paying for loads and loads of stuff I don't want to see. We see that as normal because we're used to it, but that's actually completely crazy.
The bottom line is: I don't want to wait. If something that I would like is available somewhere, I want to see it, hear it or play it. Often that's not an option, because it's not available in my country, or the prices are ridiculous (a single season often goes up to €60~120... for 24 episodes of 20 minutes, or 12 episodes of 45 minutes. That's nearly €10/hour. The same thing was true for games, except that you have even less of a guarantee on the "enjoyment duration", but now that Steam is around, prices have gone down considerably [even if I still have to pay a mark-up compared to the US/UK...]. Why isn't that medium available for movies and series?
Piracy is a problem, but not one that can be forced out of existence. The market model for "shareable media" has to change. Digital TV is still quite expensive and the availability is limited. The number one [in my country] downloaded media is series, because we simply don't have access to them here. If I hear about a great new series out in the US, I'm forced to sit around and wait, hoping that one of the networks here picks it up. In the meantime, I'm paying for loads and loads of stuff I don't want to see. We see that as normal because we're used to it, but that's actually completely crazy.
The bottom line is: I don't want to wait. If something that I would like is available somewhere, I want to see it, hear it or play it. Often that's not an option, because it's not available in my country, or the prices are ridiculous (a single season often goes up to €60~120... for 24 episodes of 20 minutes, or 12 episodes of 45 minutes. That's nearly €10/hour. The same thing was true for games, except that you have even less of a guarantee on the "enjoyment duration", but now that Steam is around, prices have gone down considerably [even if I still have to pay a mark-up compared to the US/UK...]. Why isn't that medium available for movies and series?
Some argue SOPA is more about limiting freedom of speech than it is about killing piracy, to those people I give this:
http://wikileaks.org/the-spyfiles.html
That said, I really don't want that SOPA act in action.
Abusive surveillance is one thing, abusive control of data flow is another.
http://wikileaks.org/the-spyfiles.html
That said, I really don't want that SOPA act in action.
Abusive surveillance is one thing, abusive control of data flow is another.
All SOPA will do is force pirates to use a different way of distributing files and accessing sites while innocent, less tech-savvy people suffer. It's short sighted. I don't know how to solve piracy or even if it is something that should/can be solved, but SOPA is not the way forwards.
One of the best responses to SOPA I've seen was a proposal to build satellite tracking stations and launch some satellites into space and create a new Internet in space.
http://www.computerweekly.com/news/2240113200/Hacktivists-plan-to-use-satellites-to-by-pass-internet-censorship
One of the best responses to SOPA I've seen was a proposal to build satellite tracking stations and launch some satellites into space and create a new Internet in space.
http://www.computerweekly.com/news/2240113200/Hacktivists-plan-to-use-satellites-to-by-pass-internet-censorship
Last edited on
closed account (1vRz3TCk)
It all sounds like good intensions done in a lazy ass way. Some companies have been caught with their technological pants down and have no viable way of pulling them up again, so lets make loads of things illegal and punish the small people 'cos we are ineffective at dealing with the larger people.
| Piracy is a problem, |
I couldn't disagree more. The internet changed everything. And just about everything it changed was for the better. Archaic laws of intellectual property are what need to change. They need to get with the times. The companies sponsoring these acts are trying to cling to a way of life that by all logic should be long extinct.
Smart companies have adapted the new technology and used it to their advantage.
Let's sit back and ask ourselves the basic question. Who, exactly, is online "piracy" hurting?
It's not the music industry. Sites like Napster, Amazon, iTunes, etc have flourished and gained tons of revenue in mp3 sales. That's not to mention the popularity of portable music devices themselves which wouldn't have sold nearly as well if music wasn't as easy to obtain.
I live in a town of independent music. Just about everyone I know is in a band and trying to get their music out there. They're all struggling artists. You'd think they would be the biggest ones hurt by online piracy, but nobody has a problem with it. In fact they all see it as an advantage - a cheap and easy way to get exposure that wasn't there before.
It's not the software industry. In fact the software industry is probably adapted the most successfully. Apart from software legitimacy being relatively easy to verify through internet connections, online and open source software industries have boomed and don't show any sign of slowing down.
The movie industry has kind of taken a pinch, but only because they're stupid. Ticket sales may be down, but some might argue it's because there haven't been any good movies in the past 15 years. Besides, even in a "slump", blockbuster movies still take in
Sure some companies won't be able to adapt. And not even due to faults of their own, maybe it's just outright impossible for them to survive. But that's how it goes when things change. Some will fold, others will crop up. Some industries will shrink, others will grow. In the end it all balances out.
Now look at it from a personal perspective. Economic issues aside, how many of you personally want these bills to pass? How many of you personally don't like the open and free internet?
Nobody wants that. I doubt even most of the people working for the companies lobbying these bills want this. Maybe a fraction of a percent of people in the world want this.
Last edited on
Sometimes I wonder if it wouldn't be better if this bill passed so that Congressional approval ratings would drop to an all-time low, all the corrupt and nutty members would get voted out, and new donation restrictions would be put in place
The downside to all this is that unless the President vetoed the bill, it would be in effect for a while.
-Albatross
The downside to all this is that unless the President vetoed the bill, it would be in effect for a while.
-Albatross
Last edited on
closed account (1vRz3TCk)
| Archaic laws of intellectual property are what need to change. |
| Let's sit back and ask ourselves the basic question. Who, exactly, is online "piracy" hurting? |
| Now look at it from a personal perspective. Economic issues aside, how many of you personally want these bills to pass? How many of you personally don't like the open and free internet? |
| Why and in what way? |
Because they contradict popular opinion and harm forward progress. The internet is and will continue to be a revolutionary device, but only if we make sure it isn't stifled. Current intellectual propertly laws seem to focus more of stifling the internet than actually protecting intellectual property.
As for what way, that's a good question. One that I don't have a concrete answer to. But the path they're currently on is clearly the wrong one.
| The law abiding citizens? If companies are losing revenue through piracy then they need to put their prices up to cover it. The more it goes on the worse it will get. |
That's where I disagree. If companies are losing revenue, they need to adapt and change their business practices. Businesses that try to cling to the past and fail to adapt to the times are going to fold. This is one part of the internet that isn't new. This has always been the case.
| A bad law is a bad law no matter what its good intentions. |
I fail to see any good intentions in these bad laws. Their motives are clearly transparent, and they do not in any way represent what the people as a whole want. It's just lobbyists trying to fight back against a rapidly changing world.
closed account (1vRz3TCk)
| That's where I disagree. If companies are losing revenue, they need to adapt and change their business practices. Businesses that try to cling to the past and fail to adapt to the times are going to fold. This is one part of the internet that isn't new. This has always been the case. |
| I fail to see any good intentions in these bad laws. |
| Your argument doesn't seem to make sense, if a company is loosing revenue due to theft of their property |
That's the thing. There's theft, and then there's piracy. IMO they are two different things.
Theft, to me, implies that you're actually taking something away from someone else. Like if you steal someone iPod, it sucks because they no longer have an iPod. They're actually losing something.
But if you pirate a song, no such loss exists. You just get a copy of it.
Piracy isnt stealing anything from these companies... it's just preventing them from selling. There's a big difference. It's not like they're manufacturing a product and then losing it. What's really happening is they're manufacturing a product and people aren't buying it.
If they were in fact having physical items stolen from them then I'd agree with you. But there's no actual loss on their end, they could very well compensate for their lower sales with different business practices.
And if they can't -- then they'll fail, go out of business, and make way for the companies that can and will adapt to the new market.
| They are not trying to cling to the past, past and future in technology has nothing to do with your rights to control your property |
I suppose this gets more into the differences between physical and intellectual property. I (and I would figure most people) see them very differently. Past and future technology does in fact have everything to do with how ownership of intellectual property is handled. In fact it is probably the single biggest factor in it.
| The good intension is to help stop theft (unless, that is, you see theft as a good thing). |
Again, I don't really see it as theft.
But do I see it as a good thing? Absolutely. Free and unhindered sharing of ideas and digital media is absolutely incredible. I can't think of a better thing that could ever happen for the individual or society as a whole.
And it's here! We already have it! We just have to stop these has-beens from trying to take it away from us.
Last edited on
closed account (3hM2Nwbp)
| But the path they're currently on is clearly the wrong one. |
I wouldn't say flat out 'wrong', but I'd agree that it isn't the best one. IMO, hard consequences are needed to deter pirates. Right now, there's nothing to stop piracy, except for hoping that the good citizens will have the courtesy to heed the anti-piracy warning labels.
@alba
If they voted out all of the corrupt congress members, we wouldn't have a congress.
| IMO, hard consequences are needed to deter pirates. |
I find such a notion sickening.
Do you really feel that a $10,000+ fine or actual jail time is justified for sharing some music and movies with people? Really?
Is it worth it to spend such much effort on this when there are real crimes that don't have hard consequences?