Shop OBEX P1 Docs P2 Docs Learn Events
SOPA (again) and how it would affect Parallax — Parallax Forums

SOPA (again) and how it would affect Parallax

Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi)Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi) Posts: 23,514
edited 2012-01-15 17:16 in General Discussion
Here's a link to an essay on Tom's Hardware about SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) and how it would affect their website:

Everything they talk about there applies equally to Parallax and to this forum. If you haven't called your congressperson yet in opposition to SOPA, please do it ASAP! Here's a link you can use to get your representative's contact info:

This is not a political issue; it's a matter of survival for the websites, like this one, that we depend upon.

-Phil
«1

Comments

  • VIRANDVIRAND Posts: 656
    edited 2011-12-30 00:34
    Another application for my Binary Champernowne Constant work. All data content therein is predetermined and predictively synthesized and not copied but completely original.
  • LoopyBytelooseLoopyByteloose Posts: 12,537
    edited 2011-12-30 02:40
    If it is not a political issue, why should I contact my Congressman? These days everything that is economics is politics and everything that is politics is economics.

    Sorry, but I am a bit world weary about compelling causes.
  • Oldbitcollector (Jeff)Oldbitcollector (Jeff) Posts: 8,091
    edited 2011-12-30 07:33
    When (not if) a bill like SOPA does finally pass, I forsee the fracturing of some of the Internet into smaller private networks.

    Wish I had some serious money to invest in Google. They are ready for this.

    OBC
  • ElectricAyeElectricAye Posts: 4,561
    edited 2011-12-30 10:33
    ... Here's a link you can use to get your representative's contact info:

    .....

    Thanks for that link, Phil. I used it to convey my non-poltical views about this non-poltical SOPA thing to my non-political congressman. I always feel that, even if my emails don't count for anything, at least I know I tried.

    Generally speaking I sense that there's something of a power grab going on "out there" with the internet. As another example, Facebooger and Google want to run all our internet traffic through their own little cattle chutes so they can monitor and profit over every thing we do. And other companies are scrambling to figure out how to set up some cattle chutes of their own. This entire "frictionless sharing" movement seems completely idiotic to me and it worries me that so many of my fellow human beings seem to think this is not a threat or is, even worse, a positive thing.

    http://www.businessweek.com/technology/why-facebooks-frictionless-sharing-is-the-future-10032011.html

    I think the funniest and perhaps most ironic thing about all of this sharing business is that your actual friends probably don't give that much of a damn about what you do. Companies are working hard to figure out how to keep your friends interested in you (or at least provide you with the perception that your friends actually care) so that you will keep sharing more and more information about yourself, which the companies will sell and/or manipulate for marketing, political targeting, opinion manufacturing, etc.

    http://www.technologyreview.com/article/39321/?p1=MstRcnt

    Why this social sharing thing has become an obsession totally baffles me. Maybe it's because Twitter and Facebooger are now acting as psychological substitutes for what prayer used to be for our species, back when the only "thing" we thought might be listening or watching us was The Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus or (insert personal caring cosmic entity here).
  • potatoheadpotatohead Posts: 10,261
    edited 2011-12-30 11:06
    Why contact legislators?

    (sidebar)

    Everything is political. Why? Because those that get that determine how it all goes for those that don't. Speak or be spoken for. That's the short answer on why. Tech will not win out on this one. They have already played that game, and we know that absolutely nothing survives the "scratch that itch" plus "many eyeballs" reality out there. Now that is known, they are using it to make the case for expansive powers without due process. All check, no balance, just because they want to. Their case is seeing success BECAUSE of technology. They are framing this as a last ditch effort, no alternatives. Either we speak out about how wrong that is and call them on the merits of their case, or this will go down as stated and we won't like the product of that. Count on it.

    In this case, voting was delayed due to people contacting legislators. They got a bad read. Here's the thing. The entities who will profit from this expansion of power; namely, the ability to censor the net without due process, won't quit asking. The amounts of money in play are simply too great. Others can cite the reasons.

    Dollars are being spent, or invested if you will, to make more dollars at our expense. The only real check on that is our speech, which is fairly diluted today, due to the dollars.

    This stuff doesn't take much time. A few percent at most. If we do it, we get some balance. If we don't, we won't, and it's all really that simple. Sadly, that now needs to be a recurring investment. Tell your friends. The precedent is clear. They just keep pressing, and when people waver, they get some advance and we lose. Go and look. It's all right there, and I could easily cite pages and pages of stuff we have to live with because they paid the dollars to make their case at our expense. This isn't changing in the US anytime soon.

    I personally DO spend about 5 percent of my free time on these matters. They are important.

    (end sidebar)

    You might be wondering, "why now?"

    The current composition of Congress is favorable to this kind of thing. There will be a big press early next year to revisit this matter, and it will be done under the radar, not seeing much, if any media attention. Big media stands to seriously benefit from this. The general public doesn't get this stuff any more than they did the last few ugly laws passed without serious debate. This one is no different.

    They will do it as things ramp up for the election. It is a prime time, with this being the early dry run, with some chance of success. Now that they've seen the opposition, they will re-frame this stuff and present it again. Both speakers, House and Senate have expressed a desire to settle this quickly before the election gets into full swing.

    Why is that?

    Because it's the kind of thing that looks bad AFTER it's done, which is why it will be pressed hard and quietly early on, most likely attached to some must do legislation.

    My best guess target is the two month extension on pay roll tax ending in Feb sometime. That bill will need to pass, and so will anything attached to it. It is vital we speak on this now, and when it comes to attention again. It will. This is exactly why key entities are continuing to press the issue. They know it was a first pass, and they know both houses are gearing up to move this one through. Not just put it on the table, but pass it. Congress is not well aligned with ordinary people right now.

    Again, there is nothing worse. I hate this garbage. But, I hate the passing of it and dealing with it as law worse. So there you go, my personal motivations for you to consider.
  • Cluso99Cluso99 Posts: 18,069
    edited 2011-12-30 11:19
    Google and the other big players would just host in another country. But for the little USA players it will be history!

    I am in Oz and if it distracts from local politics here, our politicians will follow suit.

    Just my 2c. (oooh, is that statement anyones trademark??)
  • potatoheadpotatohead Posts: 10,261
    edited 2011-12-30 11:23
    I think it's worse than that. US will be asserting regulatory powers globally. I fully expect balkanization of the net along basic political lines, with the US losing it's trusted position for failure to live up to it's founding values when shepherding the net.
  • Peter KG6LSEPeter KG6LSE Posts: 1,383
    edited 2011-12-30 11:24
    I did my damage today .......... 24 Phone calls later to all the Body’s I can contact Is as good as I can do..



    Peter...
  • ElectricAyeElectricAye Posts: 4,561
    edited 2011-12-30 11:28
    Cluso99 wrote: »
    ...

    Just my 2c. (oooh, is that statement anyones trademark??)

    It probably belongs to Disney. If I were you, I wouldn't even think of sailing into US waters now. The claim can be made that you violated copyright from your sailing vessel, therefore it will be confiscated as an accessory to your crime. Shame on you.
  • Kevin WoodKevin Wood Posts: 1,266
    edited 2011-12-30 13:10
    > with the US losing it's trusted position for failure to live up to it's founding values

    Don't worry... we're doing that just fine without SOPA...
  • doggiedocdoggiedoc Posts: 2,245
    edited 2011-12-31 05:17
    I have chimed in with a message to my congressman:
    Dear Congressman Mulvaney,

    I am writing you to express my concerns over “Stop Online Piracy Act” (SOPA) legislation. While I certainly oppose piracy, the information that I am reading online about SOPA such as http://www.tomshardware.com/news/toms-hardware-sopa-Stop-Online-Piracy-Act-PROTECT-IP-Senate,14393.html has me worried that such legislation will overbearing and directly affect sites that I depend on and use daily.

    I am interested to know your position on this particular matter.

    Thank you,
    Paul A. Willoughby, DVM
    Tega Cay Animal Hospital

    Now to find my Senators email....

    Doc
  • doggiedocdoggiedoc Posts: 2,245
    edited 2011-12-31 05:19
  • Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi)Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi) Posts: 23,514
    edited 2011-12-31 09:14
    Thanks for that link, Paul!

    When contacting your senators, be sure to refer to the senate version of the legislation, which is the "Protect IP Act." There will be differences between the two versions, since they were written more or less independently, and I do not know which of the two is the more onerous. Although internet attention seems to be focused on SOPA, it certainly doesn't hurt to cover all the bases.

    -Phil
  • lanternfishlanternfish Posts: 366
    edited 2011-12-31 13:46
    We already have similar legislation here in NZ. And it doesn't appear to have made any difference to the root problem, downloading of copyright music and video.
  • frank freedmanfrank freedman Posts: 1,983
    edited 2012-01-01 22:02
    We already have similar legislation here in NZ. And it doesn't appear to have made any difference to the root problem, downloading of copyright music and video.

    And why would it? For every way someone would find to protect something, a hell of a lot more are out trying to unprotect it. Most of these types of law are not about anti-piracy, but more about giving some politician/party advantage over another. It they were serious about anti-piracy, they would simply use the existing law more effectively against individuals and entities within their legal jurisdiction and use sanctions and other methods to control those who are outside their lawful reach.

    I would be willing that there are things which could be done against China such that their government would become suddenly much more cooperative regarding pirates, but sadly some of our business leaders (i.e. GE, apple and others) and politicians (who's left to borrow from for pet projects/social experimentation) have no such interest in pressuring one of the biggest co-conspirators in global piracy. Until we in the US, and other countries grow a pair and become less dependent on countries like China, the piracy outside of US law will continue unchecked, and until people here trading in copyrighted and other IP material realize that doing so is the equivalent of walking out of the store without paying, it won't stop here either.......

    Frank
  • lanternfishlanternfish Posts: 366
    edited 2012-01-02 00:31
    @ frank freedman: Good points. And too many politicians are rarely tech literate enough to understand the full implications of what they are voting for (or against) let alone what the issues are. And they was clearly evident in NZ with the parliamentary 'debates' where so many of those on both sides of the debate showed their ignorance with poorly constructed references to the internet/web when they just meant 'computer' and vice versa.
  • PJAllenPJAllen Banned Posts: 5,065
    edited 2012-01-02 06:27
  • ElectricAyeElectricAye Posts: 4,561
    edited 2012-01-02 09:37
    PJ Allen wrote: »


    Instead of expensive sitting-duck satellite stuff, why not start with something down to earth and less centralized? Perhaps laser systems can't leap over oceans, but I would think it would be harder for centralized authorities to shut them all down simultaneously.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RONJA

    http://forums.parallax.com/showthread.php?113361-High-Speed-optical-transmissions-thru-air&p=812537&viewfull=1#post812537
  • sam_sam_samsam_sam_sam Posts: 2,286
    edited 2012-01-03 17:48
    Thanks for that link, Paul!

    When contacting your senators, be sure to refer to the senate version of the legislation, which is the "Protect IP Act." There will be differences between the two versions, since they were written more or less independently, and I do not know which of the two is the more onerous. Although internet attention seems to be focused on SOPA, it certainly doesn't hurt to cover all the bases.

    -Phil


    I wrote my senators about how I feel about this topic while Online Piracy is a real problem
    I DO NOT think that the way this bill is written that it will help very much in the long run
    I think it will do more harm
  • nightwingnightwing Posts: 56
    edited 2012-01-03 19:41
    I have a saying. Locks only keep honest people out.

    This does nothing to stop the problem.

    Oh saw this....

    http://kotaku.com/5872766/the-video-game-industrys-lobbyists-support-sopa-but-they-understand-why-you-might-not
  • TorTor Posts: 2,010
    edited 2012-01-04 05:18
    nightwing wrote: »
    I have a saying. Locks only keep honest people out.
    Locks also keep drunk people out.. as I had to learn way back when I was a teenager and had to throw a drunk guy out of the house - he had just wandered in. We didn't lock doors back then. After the second time we learned to start locking the doors. Sigh.

    -Tor
  • doggiedocdoggiedoc Posts: 2,245
    edited 2012-01-06 09:48
    Response from my congressman.

    Dear Dr. Willoughby,

    Thank you for contacting me with your concerns about the Stop Online Piracy Act. I appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts with me.

    As you may know, H.R. 3261 the Stop Online Piracy Act was recently introduced by Rep. Lamar Smith, where it was referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. Companion legislation in the Senate, S. 968, the Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act of 2011 (PROTECT-IP) was introduced by Senator Patrick Leahy and is currently pending in the Senate. Both bills would give the federal government expanded authority to pursue websites which are accused of providing pirated or counterfeit content.

    Individuals have expressed concerns that these bills may lead to excessive government regulation of internet speech. For this reason, concerns have been raised about the impact this may have on user uploaded websites such as YouTube and Facebook. These are legitimate concerns, and I look forward to reviewing the Judiciary Committee's report on this issue. Please know, should this legislation arrive on the House floor, I will keep your concerns about it in mind.

    Thank you again for contacting me about this important issue, and please do not hesitate to let me know if I may be of additional assistance in the future. It is a privilege to serve you.
  • Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi)Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi) Posts: 23,514
    edited 2012-01-06 10:20
    "I'll keep that in mind," is how I always respond to a suggestion that I plan to ignore.

    -Phil
  • doggiedocdoggiedoc Posts: 2,245
    edited 2012-01-06 11:40
    "I'll keep that in mind," is how I always respond to a suggestion that I plan to ignore.

    -Phil
    I drew the same conclusion.
  • Ken GraceyKen Gracey Posts: 7,401
    edited 2012-01-06 12:00
    "I'll keep that in mind," is how I always respond to a suggestion that I plan to ignore.

    -Phil

    You shouldn't have told me, Phil! I just did a search of all of my deleted items and came up with about a dozen from you that included this phrase!

    Ken Gracey
  • Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi)Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi) Posts: 23,514
    edited 2012-01-06 12:34
    Ouch! So busted! -P.
  • potatoheadpotatohead Posts: 10,261
    edited 2012-01-07 11:39
    This one isn't going away folks.

    It is as I suspected earlier. SOPA targeted for early votes: http://www.searchenginejournal.com/tech-giants-support-open-act/38534/

    Reid: “This is a bipartisan piece of legislation which is extremely important. I repeat, it is bipartisan. I hope we can have a productive couple of days, pass this bill, and move on to other matters.”

    ASNE issues letter against: http://asne.org/Article_View/ArticleId/2107/ASNE-Issues-Letter-Opposing-Onerous-Federal-Anti-Piracy-Bill.aspx

    ASNE: "
    ASNE's letter makes it clear that the organization strongly opposes content piracy and supports the committee's efforts to eradicate it. But SOPA in its present form "allows individual copyright owners to effect the most onerous restriction on speech -- the prior restraint -- with little evidence and virtually no due process, utilizing vague and overbroad definitions in the process," says the letter, signed by ASNE President Ken Paulson.
    "Navigating the balance between copyright and free speech demands precision, and in seeking to protect the interests of copyright holders, the First Amendment requires Congress to adopt the least restrictive intrusion on speech available," ASNE tells the committee. "SOPA fails this test.""

    The list of supporters isn't trivial: http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-s968/money

    You will find a list of dollars and people on that page. Senator Reid, who is driving this to a quick vote saw: $665,420 fall his way for moving it forward. (read, passage)

    One other thing not reported right now is the heavy hitters backing the legislation have convinced small scale creators that they stand to gain significantly from the legislation, forming a pool of very aggressive advocates who also happen to have excellent communications skills. Their motive is dollars, but a secondary one is just getting the power for themselves, frequently mentioning they would employ this legislation in aggressive ways to combat ALL uses of their works to drive revenue, with fair uses not even under discussion.

    There is some significant overlap between technical people against and for, complicating things somewhat as well.

    Right now, I would peg this for passage. No joke.

    The US is pressing on Spain to also implement a similar law: http://torrentfreak.com/us-threatened-to-blacklist-spain-for-not-implementing-site-blocking-law-120105/

    When we see that, know the majority view is passage, and that it's been framed as an economic necessity, given hard times. That's standard shock doctrine type policy, which generally isn't very good for ordinary people.

    Ironically, smaller scale creators may not benefit much at all, as the bar for competitive works and liabilities surrounding those will be much higher under SOPA, which will generally have a chilling effect on small scale works overall, encouraging more middle man publishing where the liabilities can be paid for, and less direct trade between creator and audience / consumer.

    http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111219/04322417127/reuters-media-columnist-explains-that-sopapipa-are-cure-worse-than-disease.shtml

    Doesn't look good kids.
  • Dave HeinDave Hein Posts: 6,347
    edited 2012-01-07 12:51
    I've done some research on SOPA, and I agree with some of the reasons for the bill, but I understand the concerns about is as well. However, discussing political issues such as this is forbidden on this forum, and it should be moved to some other forum.
    Political or religious beliefs:
    The Parallax Discussion Forums is not the venue to discuss religious/non-religious agendas, nor is it a place for political rants or arguments. As stated above: the forums were created to promote and allow ongoing discussions about, but not limited to, products designed and developed by Parallax Inc. If you wish to discuss the existence of things divine or the most recent upheaval in the legislature of man, find another forum.
  • Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi)Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi) Posts: 23,514
    edited 2012-01-07 13:14
    Dave Hein wrote:
    However, discussing political issues such as this is forbidden on this forum, and it should be moved to some other forum.
    Dave, I respectfully disagree. If you read the Tom's Hardware essay linked to in my first post, you would understand that this is something that touches on the very essence and existence of forums like this one. I stated from the outset that it's not a political matter and, in the sense of left versus right, it is not. It is, however, a brewing legal issue that has the potential to impact the internet and this very forum in a negative way. As such, I can't think of a better place than here, in the very venue that it threatens, to discuss SOPA and advocate either for amending it or voting it down.

    -Phil
  • ctwardellctwardell Posts: 1,716
    edited 2012-01-07 13:40
    I agree with Phil that SOPA is a subject of importance to the forum.

    C.W.
Sign In or Register to comment.