we have a bit of life time left with our good internet. so lets get more names than ever to sign this petition and help spread the word. dont let the government control you by stripping your internet freedom(facebook, youtube, google, amazon, paypal, downloading) away without you voicing your opinion. Remember: this is a government for the people and by the people. We grant it powers and we can take them away. We are the bosses. SIGN THESE BELOW!
So yeah, sign a petition, write an email, do whatever!
[23:09] <Gabo> hey guys, i have a question
[23:09] <Gabo> is it possible to transfer games from one account toanother on steam?
[23:09] <felix45> fire away lotion master
[23:10] <felix45> ROFL
[23:10] <Gabo> =_=
[23:10] <felix45> sorry I cant let that go [23:10] <felix45> oh and I dont think so gabo
[23:10] <Gabo> the worst part is that i do like lotions <_<
I've signed petitions several times in the last two years, and sent emails to my congress people (using one of the automatic letter thingies.) One of the old dudes sent me back an automated messaging trying to convince me it's a good idea and it's only gonna be used for good. >_>
Whenever things like this come up, it can be very tricky to figure out what the real facts are. Bills are open to different interpretations, and people can take away what they want to hear from them, which means that relying on second-hand information can be misleading. Everyone has their own interests to look after, which makes it very hard to take people seriously who are either strongly for or against SOPA. I tried reading through the actual text of SOPA, but it's nearly impossible to wade through the legalese and get anything meaningful from it.
I've heard plenty of people criticizing SOPA with a myriad of claims about what it does to free speech, the internet, etc., and from what I've heard it sounds like passing SOPA would be a terrible decision. But I also see documents like this one from the Judiciary Committee out there, and can't decipher how much of what it states is true or false.
Can anyone explain to me where some of the points in the above link are wrong or misleading, or what understanding you have of the implications of SOPA that differ from what that article states? In the end, I doubt SOPA will pass simply because of the massive public backlash it would receive, but I think it's worth understanding just what the bill would do (as opposed to the vastly differing consequences offered by proponents and opponents of the bill). I put the text of the link below too, in case any of you are too lazy to click a link, heaven forbid.
Text of link
Myth #1: SOPA allows the government to censor the Internet by prohibiting access to websites on the Internet. Fact: SOPA does not censor legal activity on the Internet. It targets activity that is already illegal. The bill helps stop illegal foreign websites from stealing and selling America’s technology and inventions, and keeping the profits for themselves. The theft of America’s intellectual property costs the U.S. economy more than $100 billion annually and results in the loss of thousands of American jobs. This bill targets foreign websites that are primarily engaged in illegal and infringing activity. It’s not censorship to enforce the law and stop criminal activity online.
Myth #2: SOPA limits free speech on the Internet. Fact: SOPA is a constitutional bill that protects free speech and America’s intellectual property. The First Amendment is not an excuse for illegal activity. And simply because illegal activity occurs online does not mean that it is protected speech. Like online piracy, child pornography is also offered online. It is also illegal. Just as there is no First Amendment right to offer or access obscenity online, there is no protected interest in offering illegal counterfeit and pirated products and services. This bill does not threaten the Internet as a tool of communication and commerce. But it does threaten the profits generated by foreign criminals who target the U.S. market and willfully steal intellectual property by trafficking in counterfeit or pirated goods.
Myth #3: SOPA will allow anyone to file a complaint against any website (even lawful websites) and have access to that site blocked. Fact: The bill authorizes the Justice Department to seek a court order requiring companies to sever ties with foreign illegal websites. The Justice Department must go to a federal judge and lay out the case against a foreign site. Search engines will simply be required to remove the direct link to an illegal site. Third party intermediaries, such as credit-card companies and online ad providers, are only required to stop working with the illegal site. They cannot be held liable for the illegal or infringing actions taken by the rogue site. These are responsible and reasonable actions that are only required after significant due process and federal judicial oversight.
Myth #4: SOPA will destroy social networking sites like Facebook and YouTube. It will even make it illegal for parents to post videos of their children singing songs by their favorite recording artists. Fact: SOPA defines rogue sites as foreign websites that are primarily dedicated to the illegal sale and distribution of counterfeit or pirated goods or foreign websites that market themselves as such. Websites like Facebook and YouTube that host user content are not “primarily dedicated to” illegal activity and they do not market themselves as websites “primarily dedicated to” illegal activity. Legitimate and lawful websites, including blogs and social networking sites, have nothing to worry about. But if a user posts illegal content on a website, current law (1998 DMCA) allows rights holders to notify the website to remove the illegal or infringing content.
Myth #5: SOPA will break the Internet. Fact: When one-quarter of Internet traffic is infringing, something is already in need of repair. Laws exist to protect our property rights in the real world – those same protections apply to the Internet.
Myth #6: SOPA imposes burdensome regulations on the Internet, which will hurt the free flow of information and stall innovation. Fact: It is not regulation to enforce the law on the Internet. The Stop Online Piracy Act stops criminals from using the online global marketplace to profit from the sale and distribution of counterfeit American goods. The bill does not regulate those engaged in lawful activity on the Internet. But it does help to cut off the flow of revenue to foreign criminals who hide behind the anonymity of the Internet to rob America’s innovators and job creators of their hard-earned profits. Piracy and counterfeiting discourage innovation because they steal profits and revenues that rightfully belong to America’s innovators. This bill protects financial incentives by ensuring that profits from America’s innovations go to American innovators. That encourages creativity and innovation, which leads to economic growth and job creation.
Myth #7: SOPA must be bad if Internet giants like Google oppose it. Fact: Unfortunately, some critics of this bill have generated enormous profits from illegal websites that sell stolen intellectual property. Google has directed consumers to these illegal sites by featuring them prominently on their search function. This includes sites with counterfeit drugs that could endanger the lives of consumers. In August, Google paid $500 million dollars to settle a criminal case into the search engine giant’s active promotion of rogue foreign pharmacies that sold counterfeit and illegal drugs to U.S. patients. Google’s conduct demonstrates there is a need for the government to step up enforcement of intellectual property rights online and provide increased protections to American consumers. American intellectual property industries provide 19 million high-paying jobs to the U.S. economy and account for more than 60 percent of U.S. exports. But the theft of America’s intellectual property costs the U.S. economy more than $100 billion annually. Companies that care about American consumers and our economy should support legislation that protects American jobs and innovations. It is clear that Google has a vested interest in opposing this legislation. That’s because they profit from doing business with online criminals who sell counterfeit goods.
Myth #8: SOPA allows Attorney General Eric Holder to “police” the Internet. Fact: This bill does not give unilateral authority to the Justice Department to shut down foreign rogue websites. Under the bill, the Justice Department must go to a federal court and lay out the case against a foreign infringing site. If a judge agrees that the site is an illegal and infringing rogue website, then a court order can be issued requiring companies to sever ties with the illegal foreign site. o Third party intermediaries, such as credit-card companies and online ad providers, are only required to stop working with the illegal site. They cannot be held liable for the illegal or infringing actions taken by the rogue site. o Search engines are merely obligated to not return results that lead directly to illegal foreign rogue websites. o These are responsible and reasonable actions that are only required after significant due process and federal judicial oversight. It’s ironic that opponents of the Stop Online Piracy Act express concern over DOJ’s role in the enforcement of intellectual property law, but have no problem giving President Obama the authority to pardon foreign rogue websites for mere ‘policy reasons.’ Sponsors of the OPEN Act seem fine with President Obama being able to use this authority at his political will, but are unwilling to trust the judiciary and federal courts who have handled intellectual property enforcement for decades. Comments that the entire Justice Department cannot be trusted because of Attorney General Eric Holder demean the hard work of thousands of career prosecutors and attorneys-in-the-field who have no political, personal or professional affiliation with the Obama administration. Under that same logic, if you don’t trust DOJ to handle intellectual property cases, why would you allow them to handle more pressing issues like terrorism and national security? We have problems with Attorney General Eric Holder, to be sure. But the Justice Department as a law enforcement entity is not defined by the Attorney General – it includes tens of thousands of federal investigators, FBI agents, prosecutors and law enforcement officials who serve our country with professionalism and distinction. Their service should not be me marred simply because of the Attorney General.
Here is a comment I left elsewhere on Digital Piracy.
I honestly think piracy is the best solution if you want to hurt the entertainment industry. If we can get the majority to agree that making an exact replica of digital media, which costs nothing to anyone other than electricity, bandwidth, and time, is not wrong, then the problem is solved. That is of course assuming that the majority have power. If SOPA and PIPA still go (or if not these bills, some type of similar bill) through it should be obvious the majority DONT hold power in the US, and honestly if that is the case then it is time for a change in government. Making an exact copy of something for free so that all can enjoy, that sounds like a perfect future. It accomplishes what communism tries to do on paper. It does what libraries do, but much better, with convenience, and on a much larger scale. Why force scarcity on something that is infinite? That is ridiculous. Why force inequality? Wouldn't a perfect world have everything readily available for everyone? If this is possible, why stop it? Sure the creator(s) of a product should be given due for their work, but what difference is it to the creator(s) if someone who CANT pay for their product get it for free if it is no cost to the creator(s)? This is something I will never come to understand, and it is something I never wish to understand. That is greed at its worst, that is poison, and that is what is wrong with the entertainment industry. Copyright laws were intended for LIMITED products which could NOT be infinitely copied at no cost to anyone. The way copyright laws work in the digital world should NOT be the same as in the physical, because they are in NO WAY similar. The way this situation is handled needs to be COMPLETELY rethought. And I am absolutely sure that congress is the LEAST QUALIFIED to do the job properly! Very few of the old farts elected know anything at all about the internet and piracy. This issue should be discussed on a WORLD FORUM, not in a US committee meeting. It deserves more time, thought, and effort than any group of US senators could ever give it. If there was ever a time for ethics philosophers to show their worth, I think now would be that time. This is an entirely new and unique issue that falls right into the lap of philosophy of ethics. It could use new ideas and perspectives as to how to solve the issue, and clarity as to exactly what is right or wrong in regards to digital piracy.
[23:09] <Gabo> hey guys, i have a question
[23:09] <Gabo> is it possible to transfer games from one account toanother on steam?
[23:09] <felix45> fire away lotion master
[23:10] <felix45> ROFL
[23:10] <Gabo> =_=
[23:10] <felix45> sorry I cant let that go [23:10] <felix45> oh and I dont think so gabo
[23:10] <Gabo> the worst part is that i do like lotions <_<
The Myths/Facts that you linked talk about the intended purpose of the bill, but the bill's vague wording (as you can see in the video), gives some interesting loopholes.
Glenstorm: .... I like 7-up better Sprite is bubbles and taste while 7-up is better bubbles and better taste and then u have the cherry 7up
Thanks nerdboy, that's exactly what I wanted. It seems to me that most of these things wouldn't happen in practice, like Youtube being sued or shut down because a user posted a link to an illegal site or a comment infringing on copyright, etc., but there's no reason to even leave that door open to be abused.
Walker wrote:Can anyone explain to me where some of the points in the above link are wrong or misleading, or what understanding you have of the implications of SOPA that differ from what that article states?
It is clear that Google has a vested interest in opposing this legislation. That’s because they profit from doing business with online criminals who sell counterfeit goods.
Yes, sure, and those Wikipedia people must be crooks too, since they also oppose SOPA.
When one-quarter of Internet traffic is infringing, something is already in need of repair.
Yes, and the music industry is not to blame for not making any effort to bring the cost reductions of modern technology to the masses, so the problem must come from the technology that so mindlessly allows data to flow so freely and instantly around the world. It's ok if lobbies are doing their best to continue making money with few added value -- nothing to repair here. It will even save some jobs!
The bill does not regulate those engaged in lawful activity on the Internet.
Oh, great! Then we can allow a censorship system to be built -- it's ok, the government will ensure that it only targets illegal activity. Just like in China!
Ah, I can't wait until the new law is applied and has eliminated online piracy. Because I am confident that it will be way more effective than similar laws in other countries, and that tech-savvy people will never found any way to work around it.
