• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

SOPA and Protect IP

Do Not Sell My Personal Information
Screw SOPA. I want my interwebs free of censorship.
 
By that logic you would in theory support this bill, because you do not believe in the protections of the First Amendment. I, in contrast, firmly believe in the freedom of information. If I or someone else needs/wants to learn how to make a bomb, they should have the ability to obtain said information freely. And quite honestly I have had interest in these kinds of things since I was a child and everything was disseminated over BBS's and Fidonet in the form of ASCII text files. (as have many people who've read the very well circulated old-school Anarchist Cookbook).

The same could be said for information regarding sawing off the barrel of a shotgun, making drugs, picking locks, hacking, or learning how to bump-fire a semi-automatic assault rifle. The government's overreach could censor all of these topics, just as easily as "bomb making."

Anyway, to users concerned, a good application to download (if this passes) is TOR, and learn to use services like OpenDNS.

If this law is indeed implemented, I may consider relocating outside the United States.. :(

I'm not for crippling the versatility of the people's internet. At all. I believe that the platform we're all using now is the one we're used to and adjusting that would hinder the great potential the internet has. I think the government is afraid of that very potential and this is their attempt to put a collar on it before they can't catch it at all. I'm also for freedom of information, but I'd be lying if I told you that I'm not for monitoring websites that teach you how to inflict harm on others, be it by making drugs or weapons. You're far too left if you think people should be able to craft weapons and drugs and tell others how to without being flagged in some way.
 
This bill scares the shit out of me. It will allow companies to censor websites/remove them. They can potentially block many many websites that we regularly use.

The house votes on this bill today! I never thought United States of America would start censoring shit like this!!

Like a lot of what washington does , the intent is there but how it will be applied is what scares everyone

as someone who works in IT in the entertainment industry , I understand its intent

Piracy that infringes on IP is rampant outside the US and costs the industry a great deal

the policing is already there the MPAA hires security firms to monitor pirate web sites. the issue is they have no real means to stop this other than to reach out and ask them to stop

how to really police this infringement is where the debate begins
 
I'm not for crippling the versatility of the people's internet. At all. I believe that the platform we're all using now is the one we're used to and adjusting that would hinder the great potential the internet has. I think the government is afraid of that very potential and this is their attempt to put a collar on it before they can't catch it at all. I'm also for freedom of information, but I'd be lying if I told you that I'm not for monitoring websites that teach you how to inflict harm on others, be it by making drugs or weapons. You're far too left if you think people should be able to craft weapons and drugs and tell others how to without being flagged in some way.

Left or or right treading on free speech at all is a slippery slope, once you start how do you stop?
 
Fuck bomb making websites. Let's talk how this directly affects us, since I am sure most of us do not go to bomb making websites on the reg (at least I hope not).

This bill will shut down live game streams. Legit companies like justin.tv will have to be more active in removing live game streams, where as sites like ilemi.me or atdhenet.tv will most likely be shut down for good since that is their main product.

But the big thing is, FREE PORN. All these sites will most likely be shut down. They distribute and stream copyrighted pornographic material. Better get your hand ready to sign that checkbook for legit porn sites if you want to get your hand ready to... well you get the point.
 
What Is SOPA And Why Does It Matter?

Julianne Pepitone

POSTED: 2:34 pm EST January 17, 2012
UPDATED: 10:40 am EST January 18, 2012

Email Print


NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- The tech industry is abuzz about SOPA and PIPA, a pair of anti-piracy bills. Here's why they're controversial, and how they would change the digital landscape if they became law.

What is SOPA?

SOPA is an acronym for the Stop Online Piracy Act. It's a proposed bill that aims to crack down on copyright infringement by restricting access to sites that host or facilitate the trading of pirated content.

SOPA's main targets are "rogue" overseas sites like torrent hub The Pirate Bay, which are a trove for illegal downloads. Go to the The Pirate Bay, type in any current hit movie or TV show like "Glee," and you'll see links to download full seasons and recent episodes for free.

Content creators have battled against piracy for years -- remember Napster? -- but it's hard for U.S. companies to take action against foreign sites. The Pirate Bay's servers are physically located in Sweden. So SOPA's goal is to cut off pirate sites' oxygen by requiring U.S. search engines, advertising networks and other providers to withhold their services.

That means sites like Google wouldn't show flagged sites in their search results, and payment processors like eBay's PayPal couldn't transmit funds to them.

Both sides say they agree that protecting content is a worthy goal. But opponents say that the way SOPA is written effectively promotes censorship and is rife with the potential for unintended consequences.

Silicon Valley woke up and took notice of the implications when SOPA was introduced in the House of Representatives in October. But its very similar counterpart, PIPA, flew under the radar and was approved by a Senate committee in May. PIPA is now pending before the full Senate and scheduled for a vote on January 24, though some senators are pushing for a delay.

Isn't copyright infringement already illegal?

Yes. The 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act lays out enforcement measures.
Let's say a YouTube user uploads a copyrighted song. Under the current law, that song's copyright holders could send a "takedown notice" to YouTube. YouTube is protected against liability as long as it removes the content within a reasonable timeframe.

When it gets a DMCA warning, YouTube has to notify the user who uploaded the content. That user has the right to file a counter-motion demonstrating that the content doesn't infringe on any copyrights. If the two sides keep disagreeing, the issue can go to court.

The problem with DMCA, critics say, is that it's useless against overseas sites.

SOPA tackles that by moving up the chain. If you can't force overseas sites to take down copyrighted work, you can at least stop U.S. companies from providing their services to those sites. You can also make it harder for U.S. Internet users to find and access the sites.

But SOPA goes further than DMCA and potentially puts site operators -- even those based in the U.S. -- on the hook for content that their users upload. The proposed bill's text says that a site could be deemed a SOPA scofflaw if it "facilitates" copyright infringement.

That very broad language has tech companies spooked.

Sites like YouTube, which publishes millions of user-uploaded videos each week, are worried that they would be forced to more closely police that content to avoid running afoul of the new rules.

"YouTube would just go dark immediately," Google public policy director Bob Boorstin said at a conference last month. "It couldn't function."

Tech companies also object to SOPA's "shoot first, ask questions later" approach.

The bill requires every payment or advertising network operator to set up a process through which outside parties can notify the company that one of its customers is an "Internet site is dedicated to theft of U.S. property." Once a network gets a notification, it is required to cut off services to the target site within five days.

Filing false notifications is a crime, but the process would put the burden of proof -- and the legal cost of fighting a false allegation -- on the accused.

As the anti-SOPA trade group NetCoalition put it in their analysis of the bill: "The legislation systematically favors a copyright owner's intellectual property rights and strips the owners of accused websites of their rights."

Who supports SOPA, and who's against it?

The controversial pair of bills, SOPA and PIPA, have sparked an all-out war between Hollywood and Silicon Valley. In general, media companies have united in favor of them, while tech's big names are throwing their might into opposing them.

SOPA's supporters -- which include CNNMoney parent company Time Warner, plus groups such as the Motion Picture Association of America -- say that online piracy leads to U.S. job losses because it deprives content creators of income.

The bill's supporters dismiss accusations of censorship, saying that the legislation is meant to revamp a broken system that doesn't adequately prevent criminal behavior.

But SOPA's critics say the bill's backers don't understand the Internet's architecture, and therefore don't appreciate the implications of the legislation they're considering.

In November, tech behemoths including Google and Facebook lodged a formal complaint letter to lawmakers, saying: "We support the bills' stated goals. Unfortunately, the bills as drafted would expose law-abiding U.S. Internet and technology companies to new uncertain liabilities [and] mandates that would require monitoring of web sites."

Where does the bill stand now?

SOPA was once expected to sail quickly through committee approval in the House. But after a massive pushback from tech companies and their supporters, it's being extensively reworked. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor has said SOPA won't come up for a committee vote as-is.

That means the bill could change a lot from day to day -- and one major tenet of the original legislation has already been removed. As originally written, SOPA would have required Internet service providers (ISPs) to block access to sites that law enforcement officials deemed pirate sites.

But the White House said its analysis of the original legislation's technical provisions "suggests that they pose a real risk to cybersecurity," and that it wouldn't support legislation that mandates manipulating the Internet's technical architecture.

The White House's statement came shortly after one of SOPA's lead sponsors, Texas Republican Lamar Smith, agreed to remove SOPA's domain-blocking provisions.

Smith's office says it's still planning to work through amendments to the bill, but his representatives declined to estimate how long that will take. They plan to resume revision of the bill in February.

A markeup process once expected to take days is now likely to last for months. As the outcry around SOPA grows louder, the bill's momentum in Congress appears to be fading.

What are the alternatives?

One option, of course, is that Congress does nothing and leaves the current laws in place.

Alternative legislation has also been proposed. A bipartisan group of House members has begun drafting the Online Protection and Enforcement of Digital Trade Act (OPEN), a compromise bill.

Among other differences, OPEN offers more protection than SOPA would to sites accused of hosting pirated content. It also beefs up the enforcement process. It would allow digital rights holders to bring cases before the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC), an independent agency that handles trademark infringement and other trade disputes.

OPEN's backers have posted the draft legislation online and invited the Web community to comment on and revise the proposal.

SOPA supporters counter that the ITC doesn't have the resources for digital enforcement, and that giving it those resources would be too expensive.

Read more: http://www.wgal.com/technology/30232977/detail.html#ixzz1jpWJYFh1
 
By that logic you would in theory support this bill, because you do not believe in the protections of the First Amendment. I, in contrast, firmly believe in the freedom of information. If I or someone else needs/wants to learn how to make a bomb, they should have the ability to obtain said information freely. And quite honestly I have had interest in these kinds of things since I was a child and everything was disseminated over BBS's and Fidonet in the form of ASCII text files. (as have many people who've read the very well circulated old-school Anarchist Cookbook).

The same could be said for information regarding sawing off the barrel of a shotgun, making drugs, picking locks, hacking, or learning how to bump-fire a semi-automatic assault rifle. The government's overreach could censor all of these topics, just as easily as "bomb making."

Anyway, to users concerned, a good application to download (if this passes) is TOR, and learn to use services like OpenDNS.

If this law is indeed implemented, I may consider relocating outside the United States.. :(

Here's the problem and you know it Gour. OpenDNS is based in San Francisco, so it wouldn't do you any good. Same thing goes for Google's Public DNS servers. They're all based in America, so moving out the country doesn't help you when every DNS has blocked that website.
 
This is a really stupid bill. This will hurt our economy more.

It'll suck without Facebook, Twitter, Yahoo, Youtube, etc.
 
Fuck bomb making websites. Let's talk how this directly affects us, since I am sure most of us do not go to bomb making websites on the reg (at least I hope not).

This bill will shut down live game streams. Legit companies like justin.tv will have to be more active in removing live game streams, where as sites like ilemi.me or atdhenet.tv will most likely be shut down for good since that is their main product.

But the big thing is, FREE PORN. All these sites will most likely be shut down. They distribute and stream copyrighted pornographic material. Better get your hand ready to sign that checkbook for legit porn sites if you want to get your hand ready to... well you get the point.

its more that, its any site that LINKS to a site that posts copy written material can be shut down (without a trial remind you). so pretty much anything that has to do with music or video is gone (youtube, porn, etc), and any site that links to that is gone (search engines), and any other random site that has something this includes fark, wiki, and reddit to name a few. Also included would be RCFs as we clearly have copy written stuff posted on here by users.
 

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-13: "Backup Bash Brothers"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:11: "Clipping Bucks."
Top