Internet Censorship?

Penwrite · Post by **Penwrite** » Sat Nov 19, 2011 2:14 pm

Dissension wrote:That varies by location. Some nations' copyright laws are more lax than others.

I've taken media law classes, so you'd think I'd be able to make a big contribution to this discussion, but meh. x3

Don't worry Diss, you make a nice enough contribution with your awesome green text.

GunRacer · Post by **GunRacer** » Sat Nov 19, 2011 3:36 pm

Thanks for bringing this thing up, ChewyChewy. Scary stuff, especially since the whole "affirmative defense" language seems to indicate that you'd be guilty until proven innocent, with your website shut down until you can prove an allegation false. And (at least the way I'm reading the bills), it looks like the gov't and your accusers can't be sued for any loss of business, revenue, etc. that would result from such a shutdown.

That means that ONE complaint, no matter how bogus, could effectively kill a site of any size.

On the plus side, though, a quick scan of some different sites showed that while this issue may be political, it's not really partisan. Seems like pretty much everyone except the music industry is opposed. So there is hope yet, although the lengthy bipartisan list of House and Senate cosponsors is disturbing.

Interesting times we live in.

If anyone's interested in links to the actual text of these two bills, I could post links.

yehoshua · Post by **yehoshua** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 1:37 pm

Chances still exist that nothing happens and we get left alone. Let's just hope that those are big ones.

TensaZangetsu · Post by **TensaZangetsu** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 1:39 pm

yehoshua wrote:Chances still exist that nothing happens and we get left alone. Let's just hope that those are big ones.

I'm pretty sure well be fine.
(hopefully...)

Seth · Post by **Seth** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 8:39 pm

GunRacer wrote:Thanks for bringing this thing up, ChewyChewy. Scary stuff, especially since the whole "affirmative defense" language seems to indicate that you'd be guilty until proven innocent, with your website shut down until you can prove an allegation false. And (at least the way I'm reading the bills), it looks like the gov't and your accusers can't be sued for any loss of business, revenue, etc. that would result from such a shutdown.

That means that ONE complaint, no matter how bogus, could effectively kill a site of any size.

On the plus side, though, a quick scan of some different sites showed that while this issue may be political, it's not really partisan. Seems like pretty much everyone except the music industry is opposed. So there is hope yet, although the lengthy bipartisan list of House and Senate cosponsors is disturbing.

Interesting times we live in.

If anyone's interested in links to the actual text of these two bills, I could post links.

I'll try to slog through them if you'd be kind enough to post them here

GunRacer · Post by **GunRacer** » Tue Nov 22, 2011 11:36 am

Sorry it took so long to post this stuff. In between a roadtrip, college applications, being sick, etc. it's been hard to find time. Now, on to the links.

House Bill: judiciary.house.gov/hearings/pdf/112 HR 3261.pdf

Senate Bill: leahy.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/BillText-PROTECTIPAct.pdf

Odds of passage, at least in the House, aren't good, and I imagine the Senate will shortly flip against it as well. Plus, we always have a presidential veto to fall back on as a last resort.

Hope you enjoy the reading, at least as much as a person can enjoy reading legislation.

Penwrite · Post by **Penwrite** » Tue Nov 22, 2011 11:43 am

GunRacer wrote:Sorry it took so long to post this stuff. In between a roadtrip, college applications, being sick, etc. it's been hard to find time. Now, on to the links.

House Bill: judiciary.house.gov/hearings/pdf/112 HR 3261.pdf

Senate Bill: leahy.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/BillText-PROTECTIPAct.pdf

Odds of passage, at least in the House, aren't good, and I imagine the Senate will shortly flip against it as well. Plus, we always have a presidential veto to fall back on as a last resort.

Hope you enjoy the reading, at least as much as a person can enjoy reading legislation.

It feels...weird, to me, to be counting on Obama for something.

Politics are weird.

Post by **Sleet** » Tue Nov 22, 2011 12:55 pm

He's confirmed he'll veto it. This is good.

GunRacer · Post by **GunRacer** » Tue Nov 22, 2011 3:18 pm

Excellent! I suppose THAT metaphorical bullet's been dodged now. Still, it will be interesting to see how the votes come down... that'll be serious ammunition in '12, I bet.

Penwrite · Post by **Penwrite** » Sun Nov 27, 2011 11:55 am

So...been a while since any fresh news on that bill. Anyone heard anything new?

ChewyChewy · Post by **ChewyChewy** » Sun Nov 27, 2011 3:55 pm

Penwrite wrote:So...been a while since any fresh news on that bill. Anyone heard anything new?

It's set for markup on December 15th, and someone withdrew support for it, saying there was a lot that needed to be looked into before they passed it.

Still not dead, unfortunately, but at least that's something.

Kyderra · Post by **Kyderra** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 12:06 pm

This conversation was going on already in the chat treath, but i think more people should aware of this.
This topic is not to discuses if people think it's bad or good, but to make everyone aware of what it can potentially do to the internet.

This week, a bill that would create America’s first Internet censorship system is going to a full committee for a vote, and is likely to pass. This week, millions of us will protest censorship, censoring our own posts and asking you to call Congress. We need your help - please make a call right now.

Video Explanation:
http://fightforthefuture.org/pipa/

==============

I really would like for everyone to sign the partition here: http://americancensorship.org/
Even as a person from the Netherlands i'm very worry'd about this.

If there is anything that would be first to go, it would be DevaintArt. (half of DA's content is fan art)

On a most extreme types of examples:
you like reading Housepets comic right?
Say the bill gets passed.
One company thinks a episode of the comic is to much like the Lion King, The website has now been removed.
There is no way you can fight against it even tough you know it din't have anything to do with the lion king,
sadly, they don't care.

I'm all for fighting piracy, but this will not stop piracy one bit.
Please check it out.

IceKitsune · Post by **IceKitsune** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 2:56 pm

Actually the first to go would be All Torrent Sites then stuff like Mega Upload and Rapidshare. Then Fanfiction.net, DA, FA, 4chan, and the like would be the next to go. Not that the process would take days but more like hours maybe a day if we are lucky and they are slow. And yes they could if they wanted to, shut down Housepets if they found something on the site that was infringing even if it was likely fair use in the comic itself.

Post by **Sleet** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 3:14 pm

This could take down 4chan and fanfiction.net? Cool!

(Kidding, you guys.)

Tiggy · Post by **Tiggy** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 3:22 pm

CAn you actually imagine what would happen if they took down youtube, etc?

They would never take down youtube, ever.

FlintTheSquirrel · Post by **FlintTheSquirrel** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 3:28 pm

I still dun think it will have as high of an impact as people say, the video states the worst possible outcome, but I dun think they will hit it to hard due to public being against it. I know it will have some impact, but will not shut down sites to my knowledge.
I'll just be a bystandard and wait and see.

KJOokami · Post by **KJOokami** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 3:42 pm

The way I see it is this: piracy is a problem, there's no doubt about that. However, giving the government this kind of control over such a vast array of internet-related content is a much, much worse thing. In addition, it really does very little to stop piracy, as the major industries already have the means and authority to take down particular people and sites that are specifically made for pirating (c) material; all this bill does is allow them to shut down entire sites for the greedy few who feel no need to buy anything legitimately (**Note, this doesn't apply to people who pirate things to see if they're worth spending money on, and then actually -buy- said material.) and support the people who make and produce it.

Dylan · Post by **Dylan** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 3:57 pm

Tiggy wrote:CAn you actually imagine what would happen if they took down youtube, etc?

They would never take down youtube, ever.

I think they are more into the pirating issues (not that they can stop it), and they know not to mess with what American citizens use on a daily basis...But yes, if they did it would be mass riots. Also to truly stop piracy, they would have to shut down all websites and only use websites they created or by issuing websites...and that wouldn't make people happy.

Kyderra · Post by **Kyderra** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 5:04 pm

This wont stop piracy one bit tough, just creative content.

Even I can make a firefox / Crome extension that will take a listing of IP's and convert them into names.
If it that worn work, you really think people wont just make a website that lists all the pirate websites' IP's ?
When I can no longer type in " piratebay" in google or a URL, they think it will go away?
the only thing that will happen is that your first search result will be < Piratebay IP: >

Even if it wont have a high impact , I rather not take the chance that it will because some big company wants it.

Post by **Sleet** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 7:37 pm

A vast majority of anti-piracy measures only hurt law-abiding citizens; pirates just get around it.

Post by **Dissension** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 7:46 pm

I don't feel I've been harmed by any copyright-protection laws, so I'm curious what you mean. = P

GunRacer · Post by **GunRacer** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 8:37 pm

The scariest part of all this, though, isn't the legislation (in my opinion). Because even as bad as the bill is, it's limited and easy to circumvent if necessary.

BUT.

The infrastructure that this legislation requires could be used for any sort of censorship in the future. And, theoretically, once the system is implemented the FCC-- which just loves[/] to defy Congress and take more power for itself-- could decide it should be the enforcer of "morality", "decency", "fairness", "hate speech", or some other similarly nebulous concern. Of course, such a serious concern would simply demand that the FCC take serious steps to remedy the problem. Oh look! There's a censorship system already in place! While securing a system for that purpose would be a non-starter, doing something under-the-radar with existing infrastructure? Possible, if not probable. Call me paranoid.

And Sleet: Yeah. All these ridiculous laws that are written seem to assume that criminals will obey the law. But if criminals obeyed the law... there wouldn't be any criminals! Punish the people who do bad things, but for the love of Pete don't pre-emptively penalize everyone.

Dissension: while I can't speak for Sleet, I can say that I have personally been, or shortly will be, affected by similar laws that penalize everyone for the bad actions of a few-- sometimes even just the idea that someone might do something bad. Even though I haven't done a dang thing wrong, I get punished. And criminals *gasp* violate the law to do what they want regardless.

But let me stop before I hyperventilate.
GunRacer

Post by **Sleet** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 8:50 pm

Dissension wrote:I don't feel I've been harmed by any copyright-protection laws, so I'm curious what you mean. = P

There's one very obvious, though very small, example: ever watched a DVD and you had to sit through like 15 seconds of an FBI warning? You know who doesn't have to? The person who pirated a version of that movie with the warning cut out.

Post by **Dissension** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 9:34 pm

Hardly what I'd call harmful, Sleet. x3

Ebly · Post by **Ebly** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 10:01 pm

Ever lost an entire library of music/movies/whatever because of a computer problem, and have been unable to reacquire them due to DRM without being forced to break the law anyway?

Yeah pirates don't have to worry about that either.

Ever had to waste time jumping through hundreds of security hoops only to be locked out of your purchased product if you make a small mistake?

Again, pirates are laughing at ya

Post by **Dissension** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 10:09 pm

No, I've never experienced either. Since this is starting to get pro-illegal activity, we might want to go a different route.

Post by **Sleet** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 11:32 pm

No one is encouraging illegal activity in this thread. We are expressing why certain measures used to stop illegal activity are not wise because they make being legal more inconvenient, thereby making it more appealing for people to break the law.

Post by **Dissension** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 11:37 pm

"You don't have to deal with this if you obtain the [whatever] illegally. It's also free!"

Post by **Sleet** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 11:49 pm

So do you endorse punishing law-abiding citizens and letting lawbreakers off without having to worry about it?

I'm sure you don't, but I'm just saying, opposing these laws is not encouraging piracy.

Post by **Dissension** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 11:55 pm

There has to be some method to protect copyright-holders.

Post by **Sleet** » Mon Dec 19, 2011 12:09 am

Of course! Preferably a method that actually protects them and doesn't encourage people to not pay them for their hard work.

Post by **Dissension** » Mon Dec 19, 2011 12:12 am

If the FBI warning at the beginning of motion pictures and television programs and whatnot is enough to make you perform illegal activity, that says a lot more about you than it does about the laws. I agree it's necessary to protect without being draconian, but there's gotta be a strict and impartial enforcement method or there's no point. The efficacy of any system that doesn't allow copyright holders to pursue those who steal their property is bound to be less than zero.

Post by **Sleet** » Mon Dec 19, 2011 12:45 am

It's not that the measures are too harsh, it's that they don't work. Good copyright law encourages legal consumption and discourages illegal consumption. These kinds of measures discourage legal consumption and have no effect on illegal consumption.

Kyderra · Post by **Kyderra** » Mon Dec 19, 2011 12:53 am

I bought Battle Field III, and i keep having to go trough this Weird beta software, and after that trough a browser, just so I can boot the game.
It takes about 5 / 10 minutes, and my browser always needs to be open.

You know who won't have to do this?
Pirates..

Ebly · Post by **Ebly** » Mon Dec 19, 2011 1:19 am

To stop piracy, the legislation needs to be geared more towards the people who are knowledgeably sharing the copyrighted material, rather than putting a bunch of 'protections' on the material itself and instead of targeting the legitimate businesses that are unwittingly hosting the material (or are unaware to its copyright).

As it is now it's the equivalent of saying, "We want to stop illegal distribution of alcohol to people who are underage so we're going to put really hard locks on the bottles."

As it is proposed over there, I truly have no idea, but based on what I've read so far (and using the same metaphor) it's like shutting down a bottle shop franchise because one of its stores is suspected of selling to someone who might be a minor, regardless of if they were aware they were doing so.

Psykeout · Post by **Psykeout** » Tue Dec 20, 2011 4:36 pm

Can we just highlight it away?

Post by **Sleet** » Tue Dec 20, 2011 5:34 pm

Psykeout wrote:Can we just highlight it away?

*finger wags*

KJOokami · Post by **KJOokami** » Tue Dec 20, 2011 5:50 pm

Ebly wrote:As it is proposed over there, I truly have no idea, but based on what I've read so far (and using the same metaphor) it's like shutting down a bottle shop franchise because one of its stores is suspected of selling to someone who might be a minor, regardless of if they were aware they were doing so.

Actually, it's more like shutting down a bottle shop franchise because one of its stores is suspected of selling to minors, when in reality those minors are breaking into the store, cloning copies of alcoholic beverages, and then stealing those cloned copies. :p

NightFox · Post by **NightFox** » Thu Dec 22, 2011 10:26 pm

Most of you should know what SOPA or PROTECT IP is.
If you do not know what either one of them is, sit tight and watch this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhwuXNv8fJM
That should explain everything, as well as let you know why you don't want it passed. It's long enough to. It's got a couple of swears in it, but if that alone makes you remove it then I shouldn't have even bothered with it.
And before anyone asks, PROTECT IP has nothing to deal with protecting your IP address. Yes, I have had to explain that before.
If you do not live in the US, it will still affect you. Not affecting other countries is a common assumption that is wrong.

Now, on the matter of starting stopping it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJIuYgIvKsc
Has one swear that I noticed. And:
http://www.filmon.com/cbsyousuck/evidence.pdf?1
It's a PDF. Save it. Doubt anyone will take it down, but if they did, you'd want to have it.

ChewyChewy · Post by **ChewyChewy** » Mon Jan 16, 2012 10:35 pm

Just found out that Wednesday there will be a protest against SOPA and PIPA, because Congress is apparently set to pass it even though a majority of Americans are against it, according to americancensorship.org. English wikipedia will be blacked out, for example, on that day.

I know that Congress passing it doesn't mean it will automatically become a law, but this is not welcome news.