SOPA is crap. Anti-SOPA is awesome.

STOP SOPA!

Has no one heard of this bill?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhwuXNv8fJM

While the issue of the Stop Online Piracy Act has certainly been around for a while, today the anti-SOPA movement has become much more vocal in their protests, especially with significant internet powers like Google and the Wikimedia Foundation.

I won't go into my opinions in the first post, but I thought I'd start up a thread as I feel it is a worthy topic of discussion. Please try to keep other political issues out of this conversation.

Jack Lopez

SOPA would probably put a dent into the sale of KO puzzles into the US...

Destroying the US's power grid system would also put a dent in the sale of KO puzzles in the US.

The best/easiest to understand explanation of why **PA is a bad idea that I've seen.

http://www.ted.com/talks/defend_our_fre ... _idea.html


And this one's just funny: The Day the LOLCats Died
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1p-TV4ja ... r_embedded

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/p ... _new_study

In summary - study in Switzerland determines that piracy DOES NOT affect sales of entertainment products. Remember when CD sales went back up after Napster was shut down? Me either... Times have changes, the industry has not.

sopa is like ko's they are anoyying

I'm odd I guess but I support SOPA, or atleast its goal. That Ted video to me was really flawed, talking about how these super corporations don't want us to produce. No, they don't want us to profit using content they spent millions to make.

It is actually a lot like puzzles and the ko issue.

Equating that back to puzzles:
So no more selling shape mods on EBay?

And just so you understand where I'm coming from, I should say that I work in the movie industry.
A small portion of those millions goes to my bank account.
I'm not worried that piracy is going to put me out of a job.
That doesn't mean I think that piracy shouldn't be minimized, but this is the cannon aimed at the mosquito.

I for one am glad of the information blackout today. (I just wish it extended to Google translate.)

After having a major go at my students on Wednesday for their slothfulness, I told them to get their bums in gear and start writing. They've a major paper due on Friday and typical of HK students plan to do it at midnight on Thursday.

In my classes Wiki is banned as a source-using it as a jumping off point is ok, but as a source-can you say failure! Well, I don't pay attention to the news and such so when I started getting frantic emails yesterday, I had to go look at wiki didn't I? Yippee! Not usable. But dang it all if the Chinese wiki wasn't open. Oh well, I can't have it all can I?

Now, whether we agree with this bill or not, can we please keep it out of the other threads over the next few days whilst this is still a 'hot topic'? (I don't want to have to do a lot of editing)

My view on piracy:
1.) I can pirate my media, and the big companies get nothing.
2.) I'll just do without, and the big companies still get nothing. I'd rather not have the music than to pay for a file on my computer.

I don't know why media companies think they're entitled to the 'millions of dollars they "lose" to piracy'. Who said I'd buy the music from them if I decided to be a good person and not pirate it?
That said, I'd be completely willing to pay moderately high prices for a physical CD, but even in today's virtual world I have qualms about paying for something I can not see or touch.

^^^This.

I will never illegally acquire a Wii game. Why? Because the Wii does not like reading discs without the proper [insert in-depth explanation on the security of the Wii]. Likewise, the discs are formatted not to be read properly in the computer. If I want a Wii game, I either have to do extensive complicated hacking or buy one from the store. I can try an emulator but then it would take more insane work to get the motion tracker working properly, or the game experience just isn't right.

This is how Nintendo makes money off of the Wii. By the time you get to the point of getting the game illegally, you've already broken a mountain of other laws that Nintendo can bust you for.

You can't have anyone singing the "Happy Birthday to You" song online, though, unless you get licensed to do so. PBS got in trouble for doing this on Eyes on the Prize, a documentary about the US Civil Rights Movement. The film was only put back up on the air 19 years later when it settled. Filmmakers have to work around showing the full lyrics to that song.

Happy Birthday to You...
Happy Birthday to You...
Happy Birthday dear "S.O.P.A."...
Happy Birthday to You!



Seriously, folks, who came up the the "Happy Birthday" song? It's mind-numbingly redundant.

[rant]S.O.P.A. is just one more blow to a long bucket-list of attempts to ban free speech. It's the first amendment for a reason, people. I really don't get it. And a lot of religious people support this bill because they believe in censorship. I'm religious but I don't support censorship, and the reason for that is if they can legally ban one form of speech, let's say obscenity for instance, then they will ban religious speech next, and before you know it they start banning everything that anyone finds the least bit offensive, and the United States becomes more and more communist whilst retaining less and less of the democratic principals on which it was founded.[/rant]

Yes I'm nitpicking
It doesn't ban free speech.
The reason so many (including myself) are up in arms is that we believe SOPA will effectively keep websites from hosting user generated content because it would be too expensive to allow it.
We'd still be able to speak freely, but there just wouldn't be anyplace on the internet to do so.

I think most people would (or should) agree with the principles of SOPA, specifically that theft, or assisting in theft of intellectual property is wrong and should be stopped, the key issue as with all laws comes down to practical implementation...

I don't agree that entire sites should be blocked based on a few pages or individual advertisements linked to piracy, however I do believe a more targeted system is required to block those specific pages and advertisements, if only this could be done in a fair and cost-effective manner. Ultimately, as in any legal case, however, each individual instance would require 1) one or more individuals to report the case, 2) additional individuals to defend the case, and 3) some neutral party to make a fair judgement. I simply do not see how this system could be implemented cost-effectively, and yet I don't see any other way to implement these principles fairly. And this is the key challenge: to find a system that is both fair and cost-effective.

Perhaps the next Google will be a start-up that finds an automatic solution to this problem - some kind of automated or wiki-type system that can specifically identify and block illegal content on the internet. The great thing about such big challenges is that they bring huge opportunities for those who can find a solution!

But I agree that current proposals constitute an excessive, draconian restriction on free speech that is not acceptable in our society: the cons far outweigh the pros, and another solution must be found!


EXACTLY!

Indeed.
Ah, there's the rub.
Unfortunately the SOPA system does not care what you think is fair.
Absolutely. You only have to look at something like the Patriot Act in the US or the anti-terror laws in the UK. If you give people these sort of powers, they will be abused. It has happened time and time again, and would happen with SOPA. Things always start out for the "right" reasons, but absolute power corrupts absolutely.

I've one problem with music and film industry:

- I already paid royalties to the artist for a cassette, a single, an LP, a video
- so why do I still have to pay those royalties for the CD (the remastered CD, and then high-end CD), for the DVD (and then the Blue Ray and then the 3-D Blue ray) and all that comes next??

I want a discount (having sponsored the original artist and publisher already)!!

I overheard a conversation today between two people that were convinced Wikipedia shut down for a day to protest about "something to do with people's pensions in America".

As I was discussing with a teacher today: SOPA likely won't pass, but what he hopes comes from it is more specific copyright laws that make it more clear what actually violates copyright and what a fitting punishment is for doing so.

Jack

I see three main problems with SOPA/PIPA:
1. It fails at its stated goal, as technologically savvy people will be able to easily bypass it and will make the tools to assist the non-savvy.
2. It makes the already one-sided legal relationship between big business and customers more unbalanced in big business's favor.
3. It does nothing to improve the standing of small producers in protecting their IP.

On a related note: ~95% of my Digital Music Collection is FLAC ripped from CD. The remaining ~5% are mp3s I downloaded from the net(Though I plan on replacing about 2/3 of my mp3s with FLAC ripped from CD as I have noticed the CDs in question have dropped to a reasonable price for new copies). I daresay that in excess of 50% is music I would have never heard of if I stuck to "official channels". I have bought dozens of CDs featuring music I first heard as an illegal mp3 or in a Fan-Made Music video(either downloaded or viewed on YouTube), sometimes ordering a CD online before I even finish listening to a downloaded album the first time. Looking at my Music folder, I count 9 musical acts, including some of my all-time favorite bands and singers, that have gotten my money because of piracy. Added bonus: I have never been burned on a CD-purchase and have more money to support the artists I actually like.

Of course, something else the RIAA probably does not like is that piracy makes it easy for Americans to gain exposure to non-American music*. Naturally, the more Americans have to non-American music, the more money is being spent on importing non-American music instead of buying American music.

*Seriously, other than Oldies Stations playing British Rock and the occasional Classical Station, does non-American music have any significant exposure on radio in the US?

Here are a few suggestions to Media Companies that are stuck in the 20th Century:
Want fewer people turning to unofficial channels to find new music? How about making it possible for potential customers to sample your music before they buy.
Want fewer people turning to piracy because they cannot justify the price of legal copies? Re-evaluate your pricing scheme and try to provide a level of convenience and quality that makes piracy less appealing.
General suggestion: Work with the power of the Internet instead of trying to fight it.

What I find interesting is that all of the conventional news sources (radio and television) barely made mention of the issue. When they did mention it, they quoted the people behind SOPA and why the protest is a bad idea. Of course conventional news sources (and their parent companies) will benefit from SOPA.

Then you look at internet news sources and it's the exact opposite.

-d

It's funny how SOPA backwards is APOS, you know... "a piece of..." never mind , but it does describe how I feel about it

The matter of Piracy and Ethics has already been discussed, so please don't rehash that here.

I haven't looked at it in detail but it seems this is the latest in a series of attempts by the large industries (who make their money on IP) to protect themselves from piracy. Like previous efforts, it is heavy handed and therefore the underlying logic and ethics of IP protection are lost in the wake of the response.

This makes me sad, because I consider IP protection important and I think we have a generation of young minds who, at least in the realm of online content, don't really appreciate it. My thoughts on this can be found in the link above.

Overblown responses like this (SOPA, PIPA) don't educate on the real ethics involved which are of course complicated by the fact that the industries trying to enforce these protections are often guilty of ethical violations themselves. This doesn't change the underlying wrongness of piracy, but gives easy cover for those stealing from "the man".

Dave

Thanks Dave. I don't think we should have any political or religious discussions on this forum at all. The issues are too complicated.

I think there are some topics that don't even belong in "Off Topic" and this is one of them.

Very well said Dave. My thoughts exactly.
I love when people can say what I'm trying to say, only much more eloquent and concise.

-d

You just said so yourself. The Internet is the best thing to ever happen in favor of free speech since the 1st Amendment. Prohibiting all user generated content from being uploaded to the Internet, whether said content is actually infringing or not, would effectively ban the use of free speech online.

Basically, if this bill were to pass, any website hosting user-generated or web-cached content could easily be shut down at will. Someone does a Google search for infringing content and finds a copy of it imbedded in Google's cache? BAM! The worlds largest search engine, Google.com, is shut down. Someone uploads a Mickey Mouse image to their Facebook page? BAM! The entire domain name facebook.com, along with millions of user profiles, is shut down. A blogger posts links to infringing matererials on Blogspot. BAM! The entire domain name blogspot.com, along with millions of non-infringing blogs, is shut down. Someone uploads an Eminem video to YouTube without permission? BAM! The entire domain name youtube.com, along with millions of harmless non-infringing videos, is removed from the Internet. Someone edits a Wikipedia article with plagiarized source material? BAM! en.wikipedia.org is no longer accessible to millions. Someone finds cached images of defunct websites (likely shut down or bankrupted due to SOPA) on archive.org? BAM! The worlds largest repository of defunt websites is killed instantly.

You get the idea. The potential for abuse regarding this ludicrous bill far exceeds any plausible benefits. Censorship is a bad idea. Please don't kill free speech. There are other far less threatening ways to deal with piracy/copyright.

People in this thread are much more agitated than we need to be. We're all arguing the same point, from what I've read in these responses: SOPA is a poorly written bill, but the fundamental intent is good (slow down piracy).