Rambo Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 Is that sarcasm? Pretty sure he didn't veto it, he just threatened to, and only because it didn't give the executive branch enough power. Yeah it was sarcasm, sorry. lol A week ago I was trying to find out more information about the NDAA and found that many people EXPECTED him to veto it. That's all I was saying. Look it up on Wikipedi...Oh wait! haha. good one. I like what OCR has done with the site to raise awareness. I've been in this thread before and I'm slightly familiar with the concerns, but I doubt I'd have ever watched a video like the one posted on the homepage without the encouragement of the site. And I'm looking into it further still as a result. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Level 99 Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 Is that sarcasm? Pretty sure he didn't veto it, he just threatened to, and only because it didn't give the executive branch enough power.Anyway, so far today I've: * Called both my district representatives (one of them picked up and hung up immediately, the other said they don't support it) * Emailed both senators Interestingly, one of the reps said BOTH bills had been pulled. Source? I got a response from one of them saying it needs more research ages ago, the other one never got back to me. I'm fairly certain nearly all offices are deflecting calls today, though it is a shame that one hung up on you immediately. You should call back again and again until they talk to you Did you even say anything or was it just up->click? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mirby Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 I'm posting that front page video on various gaming forums I go to (one of which regularly sends people to E3). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toadofsky Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 Considering I live in Kentucky, it'd be a waste of time to try calling Mitch McConnell... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NegimaSonic Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Considering I live in Kentucky, it'd be a waste of time to try calling Mitch McConnell... Tennessee says what's up? http://mashable.com/2011/06/10/tennessee-law-online-images/ I nearly forgot that existed. Oh and apparently we have a ban on sharing passwords as well. I know these were meant well just like SOPA/PIPA, etc. But those passed just fine. Way to represent the south in the digital age... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toadofsky Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 And here I thought my state couldn't be any dumber, you just made it a "slight" bit better. I hate Paducah, the day I move away from here, will probably be just one of my happiest days of my life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arcana Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 People are starting to backpedal on this issue. http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/01/pipa-support-collapses-with-13-new-opponents-in-senate.ars Now, I don't know much about the "OPEN" act (which a Senator from Oregon proposed) but apparently it might not be too much better than PIPA. It's rather annoying that so much time is tied up in these kinds of things. Is piracy REALLY that big of a deal? Maybe it's because I actually have money now, but I find that it's nowadays much easier to just buy stuff rather than to try to pirate it. With iTunes, Steam, online distribution, Netflix, Hulu, or advertisement-supported streaming, buying is easier than ever. Sure, there are going to be people who pirate, but really, they're probably doing so because the material is hard to get, or they're not going to buy stuff anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mirby Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 OPEN and ACTA are apparently two other bills with similarly undesirable results. Right now, though, the problem is SOPA and PIPA. Also, I likened trying to stop piracy to cooling down the sun earlier. One would destroy the world, the other would destroy the world wide web. Neither is good, and neither can be truly stopped without serious repercussions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NegimaSonic Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 And here I thought my state couldn't be any dumber, you just made it a "slight" bit better.I hate Paducah, the day I move away from here, will probably be just one of my happiest days of my life. yeah. It's sad but what can you do. Glad it's mostly not enforced, or at least doesn't appear to be. At least the public library system around here is great (free internet and whatnot). People are starting to backpedal on this issue.http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/01/pipa-support-collapses-with-13-new-opponents-in-senate.ars Now, I don't know much about the "OPEN" act (which a Senator from Oregon proposed) but apparently it might not be too much better than PIPA. It's rather annoying that so much time is tied up in these kinds of things. Is piracy REALLY that big of a deal? Maybe it's because I actually have money now, but I find that it's nowadays much easier to just buy stuff rather than to try to pirate it. With iTunes, Steam, online distribution, Netflix, Hulu, or advertisement-supported streaming, buying is easier than ever. Sure, there are going to be people who pirate, but really, they're probably doing so because the material is hard to get, or they're not going to buy stuff anyway. I think they're going to pass something sooner or later, it's just more about how much can we get them to take out of these bills to get them to tolerable. I don't have much of an opinion on piracy, I have my own personal limitations. In general, if it is obtainable here, I'll get it, or not get it. If it is something that is refused to be sold here for whatever reason or near impossible to get (like some anime for instance), then I might not pay as much attention to the rights of that company... though is youtube-ing something really piracy..perhaps but I'm not counting that myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt E. Waldman Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Jeremy Soule posted this on one of my facebook posts earlier today: "Sopa is annoying for companies like google because Google and other Big Techs don't want to spend an extra .05 percent doing network maintenance required to block the worst offenders like Pirate Bay. Sopa won't touch the average Joe, or do anything terrible to youtube. In fact, the extra personnel Sopa may require means more jobs in the IT industry... And a little less offshore funds going into Google's tax haven accounts--money that is never repatriated or invested into the US economy. And, hell, some people in the music industry might sell some records." Also, http://www.copyhype.com Thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wenmandarin Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Does anybody else here watch independent media? Coverage on SOPA or PIPA has virtually been non-existent on any of the major news channels. Here is some good news regarding SOPA. "Reddit Co-Founder: SOPA Blackout 'Resounding Success' " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackRazgriz Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 I watch The Young Turks. Even though they are on Current TV. They have been an independent news media, covering important subjects like corporatism, etc. and other topics for the lulz. They are a great source to go to, especially in Youtube. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LuketheXjesse Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vesh Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Jeremy Soule posted this on one of my facebook posts earlier today:"Sopa is annoying for companies like google because Google and other Big Techs don't want to spend an extra .05 percent doing network maintenance required to block the worst offenders like Pirate Bay. Sopa won't touch the average Joe, or do anything terrible to youtube. In fact, the extra personnel Sopa may require means more jobs in the IT industry... And a little less offshore funds going into Google's tax haven accounts--money that is never repatriated or invested into the US economy. And, hell, some people in the music industry might sell some records." Don't do the facebookery anymore, so it's not like I can confirm. But, if that's so, I'd be greatly disappointed in the brothers Soule (or just the one). You can barely go three [internet equivalent] steps as of yesterday without reading about how SOPA/PIPA won't do a damn thing to actually stop piracy in the long run. Surprising that anybody could miss it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toadofsky Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Oh, is this rich... http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/01/hollywood-fights-internet-protest-with-tv-ad-billboard.ars Like Hollywood is really going to get people on their side with this kind of typical misinformation... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NegimaSonic Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Oh, is this rich...http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/01/hollywood-fights-internet-protest-with-tv-ad-billboard.ars Like Hollywood is really going to get people on their side with this kind of typical misinformation... hey, TV reaches a lot of people even today, I imagine a lot of people hadn't heard of SOPA before yesterday and of those kind of people, some of them didn't go on the internet yesterday. So if they hear about it on TV first, they'd support it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gario Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Jeremy Soule posted this on one of my facebook posts earlier today:"Sopa is annoying for companies like google because Google and other Big Techs don't want to spend an extra .05 percent doing network maintenance required to block the worst offenders like Pirate Bay. Sopa won't touch the average Joe, or do anything terrible to youtube. In fact, the extra personnel Sopa may require means more jobs in the IT industry... And a little less offshore funds going into Google's tax haven accounts--money that is never repatriated or invested into the US economy. And, hell, some people in the music industry might sell some records." It sounds like Soule is falling into the same trap that many supporters are falling into - anti-SOPA people are not against anti-piracy. They are against the incredible amount of power that is given to copyright holders, which in turn COULD turn it into a freedom of speech and due process issue. I love the man and his music, but I would say that he's simply wrong on the issue. Also, http://www.copyhype.comThoughts? I agree that piracy is bad, which is about the only thing that I agree with them on. Most of the message is basically dolling up the bill to make it not look so bad. Originally posted by CopyHypeMuch of the early criticism over these bills centered around provisions that would allow courts to order service providers to block access to websites. These provisions have since been removed and are not likely to come back. All that talk about “censorship” or “blacklists” or “breaking the internet” (all characterizations I absolutely disagree with) is moot. Admittedly, they DON'T say that the criticism is wrong - they just say that the bill was changed so this isn't true anymore. Funny that they present it as if anti-SOPA people were wrong to begin with, though. This part really bugged me. If a copyright owner wishes to take action against such a site, it must file a lawsuit in court, where the site owner is protected by the same due process safeguards as any civil defendant. The copyright owner may then move for court orders against any advertising or payment provider whose services are being used by the site to profit off piracy. If the court approves these orders, the providers must discontinue their services to that site. This is a blatant lie - the site owner is not protected by the same due processes because the site owner is never entirely informed of the action, and therefore has no ability to defend him/herself. It's not like people aren't reading the bill, here; that's what the bill does, by design. In addition, advertising and payment providers are only required to take “technically feasible and reasonable measures” if served with a court order. Even then, they are only liable for court assessed penalties if they “knowingly and willingly” refuse to comply. And what in God's name does that mean? The ambiguity of that statement is part of the whole problem. It's all too easy to dress that up and make it look innocent, but that is an incredibly abuse-able statement. Who defines this, the court, the copyright holders or the payment providers? If one party doesn't agree on what is feasible and/or reasonable what happens then? Finally, these remedies are not permanent. At any time after an order has been entered, a site owner can move to modify or vacate the owner if it disputes the original finding that it was primarily designed for infringement, if it has since changed its site so it no longer infringes, or even if “the interests of justice require” modification. Haaahahahaha... Oh alright, it's not permanent as long as the site owner pays all the legal fees required to fight the charges. Also, a murderer isn't detained indefinitely during a life sentence if proof is provided later that s/he is, in fact, innocent. Seriously, it would be hilarious reading this stuff if it wasn't applying to a bill that's trying to be passed. The internet is filled with misinformation about both bills, much of it inadvertant, some of it deliberate (as with any legislation). A lot of this misinformation could be remedied simply by reading the bills (H.R. 3261 and S.968 ). Not all of it, of course. Legislation can be difficult for even lawyers and Congressmen to understand — and copyright law is an especially difficult subject to grasp. Oh yeah... pretty much the defense of anybody trying to hide something. Really, that link is pretty much garbage, when it comes to supporting SOPA and PIPA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orlouge82 Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 The internet is filled with misinformation about both bills, much of it inadvertant, some of it deliberate (as with any legislation). A lot of this misinformation could be remedied simply by reading the bills (H.R. 3261 and S.968 ). Not all of it, of course. Legislation can be difficult for even lawyers and Congressmen to understand — and copyright law is an especially difficult subject to grasp. Oh yeah... pretty much the defense of anybody trying to hide something. Really, that link is pretty much garbage, when it comes to supporting SOPA and PIPA. Copyright law is pretty much the easiest of all of the IP cousins (patents, trademarks, trade secrets) to understand. It really isn't that hard to understand, either. Of course, the point his saying that was to pretend that he understood how SOPA's opponents could misunderstand the bill. Smarmy asshole. I really hate it when people twist the facts and pretend their version of reality is so plainly obvious that anyone who doesn't see it their way is stupid. Also, don't put lawyers on the same level as Congressmen as far as intellectual capacity. Even Congresspeople and Senators that were originally lawyers undergo a massive lobotomy before they assume office. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mini-Me Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Jeremy Soule posted this on one of my facebook posts earlier today:"Sopa is annoying for companies like google because Google and other Big Techs don't want to spend an extra .05 percent doing network maintenance required to block the worst offenders like Pirate Bay. Sopa won't touch the average Joe, or do anything terrible to youtube. In fact, the extra personnel Sopa may require means more jobs in the IT industry... And a little less offshore funds going into Google's tax haven accounts--money that is never repatriated or invested into the US economy. And, hell, some people in the music industry might sell some records." Also, http://www.copyhype.com Thoughts? Thoughts? Stick to music, Jeremy Soule...not helping to repress people with dangerous and unconstitutional legislation written on behalf of lobbyists. Bills like this are a prime example of why Congress has such low approval ratings; the public is sick and tired of the corruption. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liquid wind Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 It's rather annoying that so much time is tied up in these kinds of things. Is piracy REALLY that big of a deal? Maybe it's because I actually have money now, but I find that it's nowadays much easier to just buy stuff rather than to try to pirate it. With iTunes, Steam, online distribution, Netflix, Hulu, or advertisement-supported streaming, buying is easier than ever. I was the same way, like I'd download old ROMs of out of print games, but nowadays most of those games are available on places like virtual console and PSN, and I've bought a lot of them(I only really play old games on my Wii...). Same goes with music, movies, whatever, a lot of the initial onset of piracy was because the market was slow to adapt to the technology. It is an issue but like any bullshit laws our government puts out, you can follow the money trail and see that it has more to do with who's paying the most than what is actually important to the country. Prescription drug companies, the military industrial complex, alcohol companies, oil companies, and media cartels like the MPAA and RIAA are pretty much collectively raping the people, probably missed a ton of them too... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orlouge82 Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Looks like MegaUpload's gone. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/20/technology/indictment-charges-megaupload-site-with-piracy.html Seems kind of coincidental that this happens the day after the Internet protest... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Strader Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Megaupload is the first casualty of SOPA... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TgLd5UdUTQ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
washudoll Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Megaupload R.I.P. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anorax Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Megaupload R.I.P. What a shame:roll: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollgagh Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 they were one of the better sharing sites that I'd had experience with hardly any waiting times and one hell of a high download limit even for free accounts; you literally had to download gigabytes within an hour to hit it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.