Save The Internet!

[Daddy2mylilgirl]

Big businesses have screwed the little guy just as much (if not more) than piracy. Piracy still hurts but how many little guys are even left in the industries?

How many music stores have closed since iTunes has come out? How many people have been put out of work cause of CGI? How many book stores have closed cause of ebooks?

The only reason for this bill is cause piracy is cutting into the big businesses' profits. Profits that have gone up since they cut out the little guys. They don't care about the little guys, only their bottom lines.

People want to support the little guy/small businesses/struggling artist. They don't want to support big heartless corporations.

There is no right answer. Piracy is wrong. But what these big businesses do are wrong too.

 

[JMohegan]

If you're (general "you") running a website that enables people to steal intellectual property, your site should be shut down and you should face legal penalties. Based on facts and evidence, of course, not on random accusations.

I just called my computer-generation, computer science major, nephew to discuss this. He says that the list of websites enabling people to steal intellectual property includes ANY website that allows content posted by users.

Including... photo processing sites, such as Shutterfly; photo sharing sites, such as Photobucket; video sharing sites, such as youtube; blogging sites; forums; etc.

He says that current law attempts to mitigate theft by requiring such sites to remove content in response to complaints by the property owner.

I don't know about you, but I don't like the idea of the government having a say in what knowledge I can or can't have access to.

They already do. See internet pornography laws, for example.

Intellectual Property laws and internet enforcement are needed. It is a discussion that should happen.

But not like this. Not bull-rushed through Congress and the Senate backed by only Big Businessmen who want to decide for everyone else.

This is where I really hope those "checks & balances" come into play. We're a step closer to becoming the corporate world of the Aliens movies.

I don't know a lot about the Internet, but I do know quite a bit about the political process.

The way to block this bill is to convince lawmakers that a whole lot of people oppose it, and that those people are motivated enough to take their objections to the polls.

People who care about this issue should be flocking to the presidential candidates' rallies - for every candidate - asking questions about their positions on SOPA. That's how you make the news in an election year.

Try to get Obama to believe that this is a rallying point that could get young people off their asses to the polls in November. He could veto the bill, after all.

Remember... the reason Medicare soaks up so much political attention & money is that old people care, and old people vote.

 

[JMohegan]

In addition to the usual humor value, this is actually a very informative segment...

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-co...racy-act---danny-goldberg---jonathan-zittrain

 

[Kojote]

Big businesses have screwed the little guy just as much (if not more) than piracy. Piracy still hurts but how many little guys are even left in the industries?

How many music stores have closed since iTunes has come out? How many people have been put out of work cause of CGI? How many book stores have closed cause of ebooks?

How many horses lost their jobs since there are cars?
C'mon...
I don't like the gig ones getting bigger and bigger. But that's no logical argument to condemn technical advance.

If I want to support the litlle guys I actually go out and uy things from them instead of the big players.
That's what pays their bills. Not any new laws or what...

 

[YourCaptor]

So if I spend 2 years, without pay, 7 days a week, 10-12 hours a day, writing a novel, (not to mention the years before that I spent learning and honing the craft), then go through all the effort of finding an agent, publisher, etc, I should just give it away and...what? Make nothing?

So the work of artists is worth nothing?

Good Cod, most barely get by as it is.

Sorry YC, that's about the most ignorant statement I've heard in awhile. How can anyone agree with that?

Don’t get me wrong, labor should be compensated, but intellectual property is bullshit.

K, if you were compensated, would you not be thrilled by a billion people reading copies of your book?

And there are other business models that could work. The typical one used these days, ad revenue.

What if you put one ad in your book and got paid one cent per viewing?

 

[BiBunny]

Also, it's not as if there are no measures in place to deal with this at all. DMCA take-down notices, for example. Despite the fact that these things are abused, too, they at least give the website owner in question a chance to defend him/herself.

Should SOPA pass, the abuses of competitors targeting competitors will only increase because the burden of proof will lie on the accused instead of on the accuser. Websites can be yanked without any sort of proof, and if someone cares to pursue it enough, even if the site is reinstated, it can be blocked from showing up in Google and other search engines as well. When you make your money doing this kind of thing, it's sort of a big deal.

In this country, we're supposed to be innocent until proven guilty, not vice-versa. I don't like the idea of competitors acting as judge, jury, and executioner.

 

[DVS]

Don’t get me wrong, labor should be compensated, but intellectual property is bullshit.

K, if you were compensated, would you not be thrilled by a billion people reading copies of your book?

And there are other business models that could work. The typical one used these days, ad revenue.

What if you put one ad in your book and got paid one cent per viewing?

Why do you say intellectual property is bullshit? Are you a socialist?

 

[Keroin]

Don’t get me wrong, labor should be compensated, but intellectual property is bullshit.

K, if you were compensated, would you not be thrilled by a billion people reading copies of your book?

And there are other business models that could work. The typical one used these days, ad revenue.

What if you put one ad in your book and got paid one cent per viewing?

I want to write stories...not billboards. Art has intrinsic value, at least as much value as a couch or a toaster or any solid, tangible item.

If I was "fairly" compensated, yes, I would be thrilled to have a billion people reading my book. But be realistic, a "bestseller" by NY Times standards is only 5000 books sold in a week. So, if you were to stay on the bestseller list for a year, your sales would be aprox 250,000 books (a far cry from a billion). And how many books make it to that list , never mind staying on that list for a year? (Ha!) And how do those books even get noticed in the first place? (Marketing and $$ provided by traditional publishers).

Yes, the industry is changing, and needs to change, but no writer out there is going to be able to survive on a penny per read. Your model is unfeasible.

I have no idea why you consider intellectual property bullshit. The things artists create don't magically appear out of the "happy imagination cloud" with the wave of a hand. They take time, effort, money and skill, and they deserve the same protection from theft as any other good or service that people purchase.

 

[Sangsuesub]

So what do you guys think about Creative Commons licensing? You can attach a license to your work that says anyone can copy or modify your work as long as it isn't for commercial gain, or you could say they can for commercial gain, or no one can touch your work at all (there are a lot of different licenses for CC, I'm just throwing a few out here), and if the license is violated your lawsuit has a pretty damn good chance of being successful.

I don't think you can really stop everyone/anyone from piracy, and the rights to intellectual property seem (in my opinion, not saying this is how it is/should be) useless as soon as a work hits the internet. I've always thought that once you release something you've created out into the wild it's no longer really yours. And it's kind of cool that people can and do take things that other people have created and turn it into something else. Creativity! Woo! But that doesn't really take an artist's livelihood into consideration, I haven't really formed a solid opinion on that yet. It's not exactly fair of me to say that artists shouldn't expect to be paid and that adversity breeds creativity, right?

 

[JMohegan]

Why do you say intellectual property is bullshit? Are you a socialist?

Because he'd rather proclaim IP to be bullshit than himself the thief that he is.

 

[Sir_Winston54]

And here's some background info that helps us all understand that these idiots have no freakin' clue what they're proposing to do...

Comcast kills DNS rerouting to protect DNSSEC, while it continues to push for SOPA's DNS blocking

While Comcast's lawyers and lobbyists work on pushing the DNS-blocking Stop Online Piracy Act through Congress, the company's technical experts say that DNS rerouting (blocking) is now incompatible with its secure DNS system. In separate blog posts today, Comcast announced that it has fully implemented Domain Name System Security Extensions (DNSSEC), and that it will be killing its own DNS rerouting service because it is incompatible with DNSSEC — Chris Griffiths, Comcast DNS Engineering Manager, says that "DNS redirect services... are technically incompatible with DNSSEC and / or create conditions that can be indistinguishable from malicious modifications of DNS traffic." In other words, Comcast has just made itself unable to comply with key provisions of the very law it is actively championing.

It's a very peculiar twist in the SOPA story so far: it's clear now that even the most ardent supporters of SOPA don't have a consistent message on the bill's most controversial elements. We'll have to wait and see whether Comcast's legal or technical team wins out, but the argument for DNS-blocking just got a little murkier.​

 

[intothewoods]

Intellectual property is property -- that's well-established and won't be changing.

JM is right. This isn't a David v. Goliath fight. I personally think that in a lot of cases the players with money should rely heavily on technology and some market savviness to stay one step ahead of thieves, and then rely on legal measures for the rest. It just makes good business sense, but not all companies take this approach.

In any event, the law as proposed is clunky and overbroad.

 

[Stella_Omega]

The essence of the problem is still this:

Literotica could be shut down if anyone quoted too much of an article from elsewhere, or posted the lyrics of a song, or borrowed a jpg to illustrate a point.

And you all know how often that happens here. Needless to say, anyone who wanted to RID THE WORLD OF THE EVIL PORN would be more than happy to use some visitor's post as a reason to shut lit down. These laws would make that a very easy thing to do.

 

[BiBunny]

Intellectual property is property -- that's well-established and won't be changing.

JM is right. This isn't a David v. Goliath fight. I personally think that in a lot of cases the players with money should rely heavily on technology and some market savviness to stay one step ahead of thieves, and then rely on legal measures for the rest. It just makes good business sense, but not all companies take this approach.

In any event, the law as proposed is clunky and overbroad.

I know. But in my case, I happen to be a David who's on the side of one of the Goliaths, and there are a huge number of other people just like me.

Literotica could be shut down if anyone quoted too much of an article from elsewhere, or posted the lyrics of a song, or borrowed a jpg to illustrate a point.

And you all know how often that happens here. Needless to say, anyone who wanted to RID THE WORLD OF THE EVIL PORN would be more than happy to use some visitor's post as a reason to shut lit down. These laws would make that a very easy thing to do.

Yep.

I suspect had this been posted by someone who's not a pornmonger, the reaction would've been a good bit different. Mea culpa.

 

[intothewoods]

I know. But in my case, I happen to be a David who's on the side of one of the Goliaths, and there are a huge number of other people just like me.



Yep.

Yes, of course. I just meant more broadly speaking there are big players on both sides.

I suspect had this been posted by someone who's not a pornmonger, the reaction would've been a good bit different. Mea culpa.

Does anyone here disapprove of what you do?? That would be kinda bonkers.

 

[Keroin]

Does anyone here disapprove of what you do?? That would be kinda bonkers.

Not me.

My issue was that whenever talk turns to stopping piracy on the Internet the cry goes up about stifling creative freedom. Now, granted, having read more about this proposed bill, I agree that it is not in the best interest of anyone and would not do what it is purportedly designed for.

Again, not that I can do anything about it, living across the line, as I do.

My reaction was a bit knee jerk. It's just getting annoying living in a culture where IP theft has become - among the younger gen, at least - socially acceptable. I can't count the number of folks I've heard discuss illegally downloading movies as casually as they would talk about taking out a book from the library.

 

[BiBunny]

Yes, of course. I just meant more broadly speaking there are big players on both sides.

Does anyone here disapprove of what you do?? That would be kinda bonkers.

Oh, yes, there are definitely big players on both sides.

And, hypocritically enough, I have met with some disapproval here. Or maybe I'm just paranoid.

Not me.

My issue was that whenever talk turns to stopping piracy on the Internet the cry goes up about stifling creative freedom. Now, granted, having read more about this proposed bill, I agree that it is not in the best interest of anyone and would not do what it is purportedly designed for.

Again, not that I can do anything about it, living across the line, as I do.

My reaction was a bit knee jerk. It's just getting annoying living in a culture where IP theft has become - among the younger gen, at least - socially acceptable. I can't count the number of folks I've heard discuss illegally downloading movies as casually as they would talk about taking out a book from the library.

Your objections are understandable, given that you're a writer. But even you said that you thought the thing was too broad and general in scope, so IMO, that means there's something fundamentally wrong with a bill that makes even the people it is conceivably supposed to protect go "Ehhh...maybe not such a good idea, folks."

I agree piracy is a problem, but I think there are much better solutions that should be aimed at the protection of individual writers' and artists' rights, rather than the protection of the corporations' bottom lines.



For the record, I'm almost completely out of the phone end of the deal now--only turn them on when I need extra money--and am now almost completely devoted to SEO and writing projects for other people in the industry AND in running my own (extremely small) phone business with my friend chaoticDeviance who posts on here, too, occasionally. I've got ladies working for me now, and that means I'm responsible for more than just myself, which makes me hyper-vigilant, I suppose, of anything that might interfere with that.

Also, I have had people steal my shit and pass it off as theirs before (hence the familiarity with DMCA takedowns). I have never done the same and will never. So I see it from both sides as well because, while it's not the most noble writing profession on earth, a tiny part of me still sees myself as a "writer." Thus, I am not completely unsympathetic.

 

[Sir_Winston54]

And more amusement on the SOPA front:

The Author of SOPA Is a Copyright Violator

US Congressman and poor-toupee-color-chooser Lamar Smith is the guy who authored the Stop Online Piracy Act. SOPA, as I'm sure you know, is the shady bill that will introduce way harsher penalties for companies and individuals caught violating copyright laws online (including making the unauthorized streaming of copyrighted content a crime which you could actually go to jail for). If the bill passes, it will destroy the internet and, ultimately, turn the world into Mad Max (for more info, go here).

= = = = =

And this is the background image Lamar was using. I managed to track that picture back to DJ Schulte, the photographer who took it.

And whaddya know? Looks like someone forgot to credit him.

I contacted DJ, to find out if Lamar had asked permission to use the image and he told me that he had no record of Lamar, or anyone from his organization, requesting permission to use it: "I switched my images from traditional copyright protection to be protected under the Creative Commons license a few years ago, which simply states that they can use my images as long as they attribute the image to me and do not use it for commercial purposes.

"I do not see anywhere on the screen capture that you have provided that the image was attributed to the source (me). So my conclusion would be that Lamar Smith's organization did improperly use my image. So according to the SOPA bill, should it pass, maybe I could petition the court to take action against www.texansforlamarsmith.com."

Oh dear. Luckily for DJ, there are people out there like Lamar making new laws to protect the little guy against online copyright theft. Keep fighting that good fight, Lamar!

UPDATES:

Why did Lamar's site go down after this post went up yesterday? We aren't sure, but something smells fishy.​

Pics referred to in the text above, plus a number of SOPA-related links, are in the original article, linked through the headline above.

 

[BiBunny]

And more amusement on the SOPA front:

The Author of SOPA Is a Copyright Violator

US Congressman and poor-toupee-color-chooser Lamar Smith is the guy who authored the Stop Online Piracy Act. SOPA, as I'm sure you know, is the shady bill that will introduce way harsher penalties for companies and individuals caught violating copyright laws online (including making the unauthorized streaming of copyrighted content a crime which you could actually go to jail for). If the bill passes, it will destroy the internet and, ultimately, turn the world into Mad Max (for more info, go here).

= = = = =

And this is the background image Lamar was using. I managed to track that picture back to DJ Schulte, the photographer who took it.

And whaddya know? Looks like someone forgot to credit him.

I contacted DJ, to find out if Lamar had asked permission to use the image and he told me that he had no record of Lamar, or anyone from his organization, requesting permission to use it: "I switched my images from traditional copyright protection to be protected under the Creative Commons license a few years ago, which simply states that they can use my images as long as they attribute the image to me and do not use it for commercial purposes.

"I do not see anywhere on the screen capture that you have provided that the image was attributed to the source (me). So my conclusion would be that Lamar Smith's organization did improperly use my image. So according to the SOPA bill, should it pass, maybe I could petition the court to take action against www.texansforlamarsmith.com."

Oh dear. Luckily for DJ, there are people out there like Lamar making new laws to protect the little guy against online copyright theft. Keep fighting that good fight, Lamar!

UPDATES:

Why did Lamar's site go down after this post went up yesterday? We aren't sure, but something smells fishy.​

Pics referred to in the text above, plus a number of SOPA-related links, are in the original article, linked through the headline above.

*Facepalm*

The level of dumbass in the two links you've posted on this topic are fucking astounding. Not that I'm surprised, mind you, but Jesus tap-dancing Christ.

 

[Sangsuesub]

Oh dear. Luckily for DJ, there are people out there like Lamar making new laws to protect the little guy against online copyright theft. Keep fighting that good fight, Lamar!

God, I love the internet

 

[JMohegan]

It's just getting annoying living in a culture where IP theft has become - among the younger gen, at least - socially acceptable. I can't count the number of folks I've heard discuss illegally downloading movies as casually as they would talk about taking out a book from the library.

That's my impression as well.



For anyone who missed it, the official White House line:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71445.html

 

[Sir_Winston54]

That's my impression as well.



For anyone who missed it, the official White House line:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71445.html

<Sigh> Yeah, Obama needs the $$ from both sides for his reelection bid, and there's no way to reconcile the two sides over *these* bills, so he does the politician thing and comes out with an "official statement" that essentially says nothing except, "This really isn't good, but I'm not going to come out for it or against it because I need your donations to get reelected, so we'll wait until after the election to actually *do* anything one way or the other."

 

[Sir_Winston54]

And yet another SOPA supporter caught with his hand in the cookie jar...

In fighting online piracy, [Utah State Attorney General] Mark Shurtleff accused of plagiarism

Washington • Internet giants are clashing with Hollywood celebrities and major retailers over legislation that would make it easier to shut down sites for online piracy. And Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff has picked sides.

He argued in a Salt Lake Tribune opinion piece last weekend that a tough enforcement bill is needed to protect consumers, entertainers and businesses.

"It will take a strong, sustained effort to stop Internet thieves and profiteers," Shurtleff wrote.

Actually, Shurtleff didn’t write that. And other lines in his op-ed didn’t come from him either. They were plagiarized from a news release and columns written by supporters of the Stop Online Piracy Act, or SOPA.​

More at the Salt Lake Tribune article linked in the headline above.

 

[DVS]

I think we'll all agree that piracy should be stopped, but how to do it is the issue. I personally think guns should be better controlled, because it's way too easy for bad guys to get them or untrained people to get access to them. But I don't want my legal right to own a gun to be lessened, just because we can't enforce the laws we already have and stupid people who shouldn't mess with guns don't leave them alone.

But, in many things, it's a slippery slope when you try to make something better and safer. Take the common step ladder as an example. Have you looked at some of the stupid messages they have on them? "This is not a step" printed on the little flimsy shelf? All of the caution messages on how to use it? How about hair driers that tell us not to use them while in the bathtub or all of the safety things on the newest lawn mowers? All of these are there for a reason. Enough people were absent minded enough to get hurt while using these things incorrectly. All consumer warning notices are there as a way to help someone who might otherwise misuse the product.

How about the cleaning products that now have a warning on them that say "not for human consumption" or "any use other than the intended use of this product could result in physical harm or death" on cans that people inhale the vapors of to get high. Gasoline cans that have fancy ventilation tubes on them that takes a college degree to understand how to use them? I broke one just a couple of weeks ago, because I couldn't figure it out. OK, stop laughing!

All of these warnings are there because someone either was having a brain fart the day they used them or they intentionally misused them on purpose. The Internet is the same type of thing. There are some who would love to have more restrictions in place to keep children from getting enticed into bad situations. One mother got off without a scratch when she created a fake personality and harassed a teen girl until she committed suicide. It was said the mother should have known better, but she didn't break any laws, because it was not against any law to create a fake Internet personality.

I'm sure 95% of people who use the Internet use it correctly. But, because it still can be a wild and dangerous place, that 5% who know how to abuse it, take advantage of the lack of laws and restrictions that could be added. While I would love to have the piracy stopped, I don't want restrictions added to keep me from doing something I'd never do in the first place.

There's got to be another way to do it, and some day technology will figure it out. Until then, people who only want it done to please voters or maybe a vocal lobbyist with pockets overflowing with cash shouldn't mess with something they know nothing about.

 

[YourCaptor]

I want to write stories...not billboards. Art has intrinsic value, at least as much value as a couch or a toaster or any solid, tangible item.

If I was "fairly" compensated, yes, I would be thrilled to have a billion people reading my book. But be realistic, a "bestseller" by NY Times standards is only 5000 books sold in a week. So, if you were to stay on the bestseller list for a year, your sales would be aprox 250,000 books (a far cry from a billion). And how many books make it to that list , never mind staying on that list for a year? (Ha!) And how do those books even get noticed in the first place? (Marketing and $$ provided by traditional publishers).

Yes, the industry is changing, and needs to change, but no writer out there is going to be able to survive on a penny per read. Your model is unfeasible.

I have no idea why you consider intellectual property bullshit. The things artists create don't magically appear out of the "happy imagination cloud" with the wave of a hand. They take time, effort, money and skill, and they deserve the same protection from theft as any other good or service that people purchase.

I think intellectual property is “bullshit” because you may as well call it intellectual control. Yes it may be a great idea in a setting of starving artists and honest people, but let’s be real, that is not the world we live in. Intellectual property opens the door to many dirty and damaging practices, for example monopolies on very important things, potentially things such as wheat, corn, even water. The day that becomes reality would be infamous for sure. Other considerations include medicine and research, and if you really want big corporate greed to be the motivational factor behind those, and what the consequences of leaving medicine and progress to money minded people would be. Of course education also factors in on this. Pay per read, pay per view, pay per everything, more expensive schooling for less people, as we already see. One college text book can now cost more than tuition use to for one semester, and that is factoring inflation.

Is it really so farfetched to find a way of compensating those who make contributions to public property?

On piracy, it’s not just young generations and “this is mine” attitude. I could turn the same argument and claim old people are just technophobes and stuck in the past. Remember taping, that was piracy, or lending a book to someone, or even selling used books. The internet just facilitates communication to a revolutionary degree, and we are still trying to find ways of working with it. You can’t stop change, you have to adapt to it.