Boycott SOPA, PIPA & ACTA

[anywebsite]

But the US Constitution doesn't apply to you ... and the Bill of rights doesn't, either.

 

Exactly, it's only targeted towards 'foreigners' cheeky enough to make a website. I don't think the US constitution says much about what they can do to foreigners living outside the USA.

[fruitisbad]

boohooo, Hollywood.

 

people usually support things with artistic merit. new business models will evolve. why the states want to protect this is crazy. its total protectionism and goes against free markets.

 

for music it means we will get rid of manufactured pop bands. musicians will make it on merit. distribute your music for free get more fans, make money through touring and merchandise. it should he for the love, not the money.

 

quality films can be funded through art councils, and showings at independent cinemas like the showroom. people will pay for things they are passionate about, just not for toss.

 

as for Hollywood, they have been forced to things

like 3d to make people go to the cinema.

 

what do we gain by allowing these industries to stagnate?

 

they are using their accrued wealth to protect them through buying of politicians rather than innovating. crony capitalism.

[Karis]

Many files on Megaupload were perfectly legal.

 

There's so much wrong with this statement...

 

That's like saying: well, a major crime lord does some legal acts per day (he buys a newspaper on the way to extort more businesses).

 

The key word here is some. It should be all or nothing that's within the law.

 

So many people are protesting SOPA without any thought to the IP that's being illegally distributed.

 

I imagine millions would feel very different if someone came around to their house and e-distributed their private recipes that had been in the family for generations (for example).

 

It would be war then.

[XXTickerXX]

There's so much wrong with this statement...

 

That's like saying: well, a major crime lord does some legal acts per day (he buys a newspaper on the way to extort more businesses).

 

The key word here is some. It should be all or nothing that's within the law.

 

So many people are protesting SOPA without any thought to the IP that's being illegally distributed.

 

I imagine millions would feel very different if someone came around to their house and e-distributed their private recipes that had been in the family for generations (for example).

 

It would be war then.

 

It`s obvious you don`t understand the bill.It`s not about piracy.It`s about the huge scope the government will have to shut down any website without due process.IF I put a link up for the pirate bay on here in one post on one sub forum then all SF gets shutdown,not just the page.SF would be guilty without a trial.

[Karis]

It`s obvious you don`t understand the bill.It`s not about piracy.It`s about the huge scope the government will have to shut down any website without due process.IF I put a link up for the pirate bay on here in one post on one sub forum then all SF gets shutdown,not just the page.SF would be guilty without a trial.

 

That's such a typical response (that you disagree and therefore I clearly don't understand the bill). I'm not even sure what your post has to do with mine.

 

When you have a vested 'legal' interest in protecting your IP from online theft, or some actual positive steps to create a better, more robust system, then come back to me and we'll discuss. If you're merely interested in eliciting more outrage about the bill, then we have very little to discuss.

[XXTickerXX]

That's such a typical response (that you disagree and therefore I clearly don't understand the bill). I'm not even sure what your post has to do with mine.

 

When you have a vested 'legal' interest in protecting your IP from online theft, or some actual positive steps to create a better, more robust system, then come back to me and we'll discuss. If you're merely interested in eliciting more outrage about the bill, then we have very little to discuss.

 

Calm down!!

 

I was merely responding to where you said this:

 

"So many people are protesting SOPA without any thought to the IP that's being illegally distributed."

 

Nobody is debating IP rights being protected.I just didn`t believe you had a full understanding of how this particular bill actually works.It`s draconian.If you think its fair for a website to get shutdown without due process that`s fine.

I wasn`t trying to argue with you.

So many people are supporting SOPA without knowing what it will do to free speech.

[anywebsite]

There's so much wrong with this statement...

 

That's like saying: well, a major crime lord does some legal acts per day (he buys a newspaper on the way to extort more businesses).

 

The key word here is some. It should be all or nothing that's within the law.

 

So many people are protesting SOPA without any thought to the IP that's being illegally distributed.

 

I imagine millions would feel very different if someone came around to their house and e-distributed their private recipes that had been in the family for generations (for example).

 

It would be war then.

 

Many uses of hammers are legal, however some people use them to murder people, should we ban them?

 

It was just a tool. A file uploading & sharing service for files too big to email, or that you wanted to share with the public without paying large bandwidth fees for. It was used by many copyright owners to share their own work. They weren't uploading files & they took down anything they got a copyright complaint about. These aren't major crime lords any more than YouTube are, they're just based in the wrong country. Dropbox wont be raided, despite providing a similar type of service, because they're American.

[Waldo]

Many uses of hammers are legal, however some people use them to murder people, should we ban them?

 

It was just a tool. A file uploading & sharing service for files too big to email, or that you wanted to share with the public without paying large bandwidth fees for. It was used by many copyright owners to share their own work. They weren't uploading files & they took down anything they got a copyright complaint about. These aren't major crime lords any more than YouTube are, they're just based in the wrong country. Dropbox wont be raided, despite providing a similar type of service, because they're American.

 

I think you'd need to compare typical usage of these services. With some, the % of material they host that is illegal, will be very small, with other services, that % will be a lot bigger.

 

I personally have a lot more sympathy for hosting services where the % is smaller, and esp. if they take active steps to remove illegal material (rather than drag their heels when they recieve take-down notices, because they're more concened over their advertisment income, than protecting the rights of IP owners).

[altus]

Your statement would be valid if the issue affecting creative artists was they insisted on releasing everything on cassette tape and betamax and thus people didn't buy it anymore. The actual issue is that technology has made it very easy to steal their stuff. If my business was in the same situation then i would expect the powers that be to legislate to stop my stuff being stolen.

 

But the 'creative' companies haven't been adapting to new technologies and have a history of trying to stop them rather than taking advantage of the new opportunities they present - Thirty Years Before SOPA, MPAA Feared the VCR.

[L00b]

How about a law that fined and gave an automatic lifetime internet access ban (if broken punishable with a substanial jail term) to anyone uploading copyrighted material to a website? That would target individuals committing copyright theft and protect the integrity of the net.

Are you aware that you own the copyright which arises (automatically) in each and everyone of your posts on here? As do I in my posts. Etc.

 

Next, are you aware that quoting a post without the permission of the post's author technically infringes the author's copyright vesting in that quote?

 

Now, let's bring in this 'law' of yours. Somehow, I don't think there are enough prison places left available in the UK for the number of infringers on SF alone. Never mind other UK forums (and/or UK posters).

 

Now, let's extrapolate to the entire t'Internet (since everything on the Internet attracts copyright - irrespective of content type, and some content even attracts several distinct types of copyright)...see the problem?

 

It's a problem of definition. What is "copyrighted material"? (hint: everything is, on t'Interweb) What is "copyright theft"? (hint: there's no such thing, it's called infringement. And, in the UK still -and thankfully-there is nothing criminal about it). Etc, etc. All of which, incidentally, existing legislation (UK/US/Intl/etc.) already answers. Amply so.

 

What you are seeing, is exactly what quisquose and some other enlightened posters have been telling you since page 1: a lobby with highly-vested interests attempting to ram through ill-conceived (and 99% redundant) legislation to reduce their legal overheads (which, of themselves, dwarf their own R&D efforts to "get with the times" by several orders of magnitude, and have done so for a non-trivial amount of years now).

 

No "new" legislation is needed at all.

 

You don't have to take my word for it, andy. But (just so you have context) I am qualified IP practionner and have been exercising in this field (solely in this field) for well over a decade, in many different countries (UK, EU, US and further afield).