The problem is that this is just another means for those in control to keep their control over us.
It is NOT about online piracy. That is simply a ruse. It is about control.
Did you not watch the video that I posted earlier? If so, go back and watch it! If you still dont get it then, then you really deserve living in the dictatorship that is coming. The recent laws are the foreplay to fascism.
Please defeat SOPA
Like Government controlled healthcare.Skipjack wrote:The problem is that this is just another means for those in control to keep their control over us.
It is NOT about online piracy. That is simply a ruse. It is about control.
Did you not watch the video that I posted earlier? If so, go back and watch it! If you still dont get it then, then you really deserve living in the dictatorship that is coming. The recent laws are the foreplay to fascism.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —
— Lord Melbourne —
GTI, I'm not sure you're comprehending what's being written and that might be causing confusion. Studios do charge whatever they like, continually causing the rise of price on ticket sales. The result of rising prices is that there are fewer movie go'ers, but this drop in movie go'ers is being blamed on piracy by the studios at a time when piracy is significantly dropping. Movie go'ers don't stop going to movies because piracy is dropping, that doesn't make any sense. You'd expect piracy to increase when people stop going to movies....not the other way around.GIThruster wrote:They can charge whatever they like. I don't know what gets blamed on online piracy, but its obvious such theft is a very serious matter. Mostly because people think their theft of music and movies is justified, by whatever bullshit story they have.
To put it more succinctly, Studios are putting Theaters out of business because people won't watch a poorly made movie. They won't pay and they won't pirate, the films are just THAT BAD.
GTI, if SOPA is purely about IP protection, aside from the ridiculous requirements put on search engines and such, how come the majority of major tech corporations are against it? What IP theft are they committing against the RIAA and MPAA daily that would make them so worried about the wording in this law?
Recently a domain was yanked under a similar premise. The domain was the main domain of a small business. This small business has now gone bankrupt due to loss of revenue from their site. In the end, they were cleared of any wrong doing, but it simply was too late. This is the type of stuff SOPA will cause.
Recently a domain was yanked under a similar premise. The domain was the main domain of a small business. This small business has now gone bankrupt due to loss of revenue from their site. In the end, they were cleared of any wrong doing, but it simply was too late. This is the type of stuff SOPA will cause.
http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/112829
84,000 mistakes already, how many more "mistakes" do we need when major studios have the governments ear? SOPA states you have 5 days to comply and 5 days to appeal.....
DHS Admits They Accidentally Took 84,000 Sites Offline
Though They Don't Explain Why, Or Why They Ignore Due Process
by Karl Bode Monday 21-Feb-2011 tags: legal · business · consumers
Techdirt directs our attention to the fact that the Department Of Homeland Security has finally admitted to accidentally taking 84,000 websites offline after previously refusing to talk about the error whatsoever. The rather-large governmental goof occurred recently when the DHS ICE department shuttered the domain of free DNS provider mooo.com as part of the DHS's controversial (and probably not legal) domain seizure efforts aimed at copyright infringement and child pornography. The error came on the heels of the DHS seizing the domain of a completely legal Spanish company's domain. The acknowledgement simply states the mistake happened, but not why:
"During the course of a joint DHS and DOJ law enforcement operation targeting 10 Web sites providing explicit child pornographic content, a higher level domain name and linked sites were inadvertently seized for a period of time. Those sites were restored as soon as possible to normal functionality."
As Techdirt notes, if you're looking for the DHS to acknowledge the potential violations of the First Amendment or the total and complete lack of due process propping up these domain seizures, you may be waiting for some time.
-
GIThruster
- Posts: 4686
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm
Well Scott that's interesting, but completely irrelevant. It doesn't matter what the studios say. It doesn't matter where the actual drop is. BTW, the stats I looked at said this year they are predicting the FIRST EVER drop in theater ticket sales, of about 1%. I think people are putting words in the mouths of the studios that don't belong, but this is not what is at issue. The fact of the matter is, the studios cannot charge more than people are willing to pay, and make money. Theater tickets are completely controlled by the market, and whining about it just shows the person whining doesn't understand how capitalism works.
The actual point though is, it's the whining that is used to rationalize stealing from the IP holders, as an excuse to steal. People wouldn't do this--whine, or steal--if they thought they'd get caught, or if they were not the morally bankrupt people they are. Fact is though, most are morally bankrupt and don't steal ONLY because of fear of being caught. That's why we read these stupid posts about Gramma being sued for theft and we're suppose to sympathize with the thieves. Sorry. I don't sympathize with people who steal movies, or music, or computer programs or anything else, and I can tell you it's obvious from almost all the posts in this thread that people are all fired up and making up ridiculous nonsense statements about the law, and the situation and the supposed threat of Big Brother taking over our lives, all as a sham to support their thievery.
Stop stealing folks, and you won't have a need to fabricate these shitty arguments.
The actual point though is, it's the whining that is used to rationalize stealing from the IP holders, as an excuse to steal. People wouldn't do this--whine, or steal--if they thought they'd get caught, or if they were not the morally bankrupt people they are. Fact is though, most are morally bankrupt and don't steal ONLY because of fear of being caught. That's why we read these stupid posts about Gramma being sued for theft and we're suppose to sympathize with the thieves. Sorry. I don't sympathize with people who steal movies, or music, or computer programs or anything else, and I can tell you it's obvious from almost all the posts in this thread that people are all fired up and making up ridiculous nonsense statements about the law, and the situation and the supposed threat of Big Brother taking over our lives, all as a sham to support their thievery.
Stop stealing folks, and you won't have a need to fabricate these shitty arguments.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis
This argument makes no sense. What's thievery is giving a company the ability to shut down any other company's site on the mere accusation that they they missed copyrighted material.GIThruster wrote:So you want to go on record that you support making it easy for people to steal what is not theirs, because they're stealing from "rich people"?
Tell us, do you download movies and music that you know you're supposed to pay for, and yet don't, because you know you're only stealing from "rich people"?
And tell us, how is it people keep pointing us to these links about the bills and yet we're not seeing what the bills actually say?
Looks to me like thieves supporting thievery.
I'm not against a law to help stop rampant piracy, but are our priorities really such that we value media giant profits over free speech? I'm sure there's a way we can crack down on piracy without something as draconian as SOPA.
-
GIThruster
- Posts: 4686
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm
As I said, I can't support the bill because I don't see this as an instance that justifies sidestepping due process. However, just to say it again, since the last 15 times didn't seem to sink in--the bill DOES NOT give a company the ability to shut down any other company's site on the mere accusation that they they are violating copyright. It gives the Department of Justice the ability to block web sites and DoJ would certainly have to give an account of why they took that action on every occasion.
The only problem I can see with the bill is that the appeal to DoJ can be ex parte or one party alone, with no opportunity for defense by the accused. This remedy is an exception to the due process normally expected, and is contingent upon things like an injured ability. A better bill would not be ex parte and would allow very large punative damages for violations.
The only problem I can see with the bill is that the appeal to DoJ can be ex parte or one party alone, with no opportunity for defense by the accused. This remedy is an exception to the due process normally expected, and is contingent upon things like an injured ability. A better bill would not be ex parte and would allow very large punative damages for violations.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis
Okay.GIThruster wrote:As I said, I can't support the bill because I don't see this as an instance that justifies sidestepping due process. However, just to say it again, since the last 15 times didn't seem to sink in--the bill DOES NOT give a company the ability to shut down any other company's site on the mere accusation that they they are violating copyright. It gives the Department of Justice the ability to block web sites and DoJ would certainly have to give an account of why they took that action on every occasion.
The only problem I can see with the bill is that the appeal to DoJ can be ex parte or one party alone, with no opportunity for defense by the accused. This remedy is an exception to the due process normally expected, and is contingent upon things like an injured ability. A better bill would not be ex parte and would allow very large punative damages for violations.
Funny thing. I somehow didn't notice this thread was 9 pages long and thought I was responding to a recent post of yours.
Which was more specious: The definition of IP with respect to the public Domain prior to 1978, or the current definition of IP, with respect to the public Domain?GIThruster wrote:You're making a specious argument, saying artists don't get profits from online sales, then referencing the state of affairs in that regard 12 years ago and then talking about CD and online sale in the last 5 years. Besides, it'a ll red herring--theft is theft is theft. How is it otherwise decent people can't remember this? Are you all thieves? You're supporting the notion of STEALING by saying you're only stealing from large corps.ScottL wrote:. . .you do realize that the artist gets 0% of online sales of their work right? In a few rare cases, the artists were smart enough to contract for a portion, but the majority before ~2000 had no such clause.Furthermore, in the last 5 years CD sales have been plummetting while online sales have been sky-rocketing.
IT STEALING!!!
Until you get that, you don't qualify for adult conversation of the subject.
Why can you not see that giving the distribution and IP owners ever more power over public discourse will so stifle the new creativity cultural richness and risk so much more damage that it can't be worth it? You seem willing to accept each and every more encompassing definition of creative works away from the public domain that your cry of STEALING is itself specious, because it seems that the broader the definition of IP and the more encompassing definition is preferred despite the great damage it does to cultural richness of a rich public domain of IP, and of how strongly the creative work has been woven into the fabric of public discourse and creativity.
You've had plenty of opportunity to see the light; Now I suspect you're just stubborn at best, trolling at worst. I'm done reading this discussion.
And here is more about how all this fits together. Take information from the previous links posted here and this one and then the picture becomes more and more solid.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/201201 ... pipa.shtml
It is all about the traditional news media retaining control over information and how it is presented to the public. Social media like twitter, youtube and facebook are a thorn in their side. They cant control it and whenever someone catches them doing something, the rest of the world gets to see it. With the SOPA in place, they can just produce some phony IP thingy and have the entire webservice blocked, not just the video taken down.
I live in a country where there is still a government run TV station (in the hands of the socialists) that still has a huge influence over what people think and how they vote. They had a monopoly until recently and they fought very hard to keep it in place, despite it being condemned as a human rights violation by the European court.
Anyway, I can totally see what is going on here. For me with my background it is totally clear what is happening there. The SOPA and PIPA have to be stoped, or it the US moves one step closer to a two pseudo- party dictatorship, with the rest of the world being dragged down with it.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/201201 ... pipa.shtml
It is all about the traditional news media retaining control over information and how it is presented to the public. Social media like twitter, youtube and facebook are a thorn in their side. They cant control it and whenever someone catches them doing something, the rest of the world gets to see it. With the SOPA in place, they can just produce some phony IP thingy and have the entire webservice blocked, not just the video taken down.
I live in a country where there is still a government run TV station (in the hands of the socialists) that still has a huge influence over what people think and how they vote. They had a monopoly until recently and they fought very hard to keep it in place, despite it being condemned as a human rights violation by the European court.
Anyway, I can totally see what is going on here. For me with my background it is totally clear what is happening there. The SOPA and PIPA have to be stoped, or it the US moves one step closer to a two pseudo- party dictatorship, with the rest of the world being dragged down with it.
The impressive "unprecedented powers" that are given are the fact that if you have a big enough wallet, you can buy the court orders to shutdown small business or media outlets without due process. That's the point many of us have been making from the start. SOPA under the guise of stopping piracy would allow access to a "1 hour photo" style court order. This not only creates a corrupted market, but can also be used to stifle "protected" free speech via unsubstantiated claim.
And some day when the government needs the money for something other than your healthcare....Skipjack wrote:Completely different starting situation there and completely different direction too. I dont think that this can be compared. So lets leave it out of this discussion, please.Like Government controlled healthcare.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.