-
"Entertainment industry lobby groups often describe file-sharers as
thieves who refuse to pay for any type of digital content. But not
everyone agrees with this view. Swedish telecom giant Ericsson sees copyright abuse as the underlying cause of the piracy problem.
In a brilliant article, Rene Summer, Director of Government and
Industry Relations at Ericsson, explains how copyright holders
themselves actually breed pirates by clinging to outdated business methods.
The most vocal rightsholder groups would ideally turn the Internet
into a virtual police state, and at the other end of the spectrum there
are groups that want to abolish copyright entirely.'"
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/07/01/1843221/Copyright-Common-Sense-From-Telecom-Ericsson
-
Altho' I don't agree with Ericsson. The best is to use corporate greed and ineptitude to hang themselves with. Much faster than actually trying to teach them to be a good citizen and stop bribing/corrupting democratic system.
It is much easier to escalate their legal cost while destroying their product viability than waiting for big labels to wake up one morning and understand digital era.
(Case and point: how fast the big labels are dropping like flies while none of them actually able to develop digital store.)
It is much easier to tell everybody on the net not to listen to those fuckers, use their new found smartphone freedom to tune into new music and multimedia. MUCH MUCH easier...
hipper too.
------------
file sharing is not a symptom or a problem. It's the very essence of internet. data transmission between nodes. (what type of data being transmitted is accidental.)
-
“This is a pan-European issue, and as such, it must be addressed
uniformly across the continent. To date, efforts to revise legislation
have focused on protecting existing practices and content-distribution
models, which has unfortunately reinforced the underlying problem and
hence its symptoms.“Instead, targeted policy reforms that stimulate the growth of a
well-functioning supply of legal digital content available on-demand for
multiple screens are needed if actors at all stages of the value chain
are to develop products that successfully meet the evolving needs of
consumers.”Indeed, Ericsson is calling for an end to extensive lobbying for
harsher and more restrictive copyright legislation. Instead, the
entertainment industry should take it upon themselves to meet the
demands of consumers. No more DRM, no more artificial delays, and global
availability in all formats possible. In other words, offer products
that can compete with piracy instead of attempting to make piracy go
away through repressive legislation.http://torrentfreak.com/file-sharing-symptom-not-problem-110629/
...good luck with that one. Zarkosy administration is owned by Universal, hence Hadopi-3 strike out jingle.
-
Can a Monkey Get a Copyright & Issue a Takedown?
"Last week, the Daily Mail published a story about some monkeys in Indonesia who happened upon a camera and took some photos of themselves.
The photos are quite cute. However, Techdirt noticed that the photos
had copyright notices on them, and started a discussion over who actually held the copyright in question,
noting that, if anyone did, the monkeys had the best claim, and
certainly not the photographer. Yet, the news agency who claimed
copyright issued a takedown to Techdirt!
When presented with the point that it's unlikely the news agency could
hold a legitimate copyright, the agency told Techdirt it didn't matter.
Techdirt claims that using the photos for such a discussion is a clear
case of fair use, an argument which has so far been ignored."
-
UN Bigwig: The Web Should Have Been Patented and Licensed
"Cory Doctorow over at BoingBoing has unearthed an amazing video
where the head of WIPO, the UN agency responsible for 'promoting'
intellectual property, suggests that Tim Berners-Lee should have patented HTML and licensed it to all users. Amazingly this is done on camera and in front of the head of CERN and the Internet Society, who look on in disbelief."
- His opinion completely overlooks the fact that it's my intellectual
property right to choose whatever licensing I want for my product, and
if I *choose* to release it to the public domain OR under any other
terms, that is my right.
- Yes, you may elect to contribute to
the betterment of mankind. But in doing so you make yourself a bad
person in the eyes of the WIPO.
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/10/09/0639255/un-bigwig-the-web-should-have-been-patented-and-licensed
-
Obama Administration To Use ACTA Signing Statement To Defend Why It Can Ignore The Constitution In Signing ACTA
Whether or not that's accurate, what I wanted to focus on was a
separate tidbit of info suggesting that, while the Obama administration
is very much aware of the very serious Constitutional questions raised by the signing, it's going to issue a "signing statement" that defends its right to ignore the Constitution here.
In the US, there is no plan to constitutionally ratify the agreement.
Indeed, this will likely be the main focus of the US signing statement.
The document will be an argument to Congress that the executive can pass
this agreement alone – legally binding the US to a trade agreement
without no congressional authorization – because, according to the
Executive, ACTA is fully consistent with current US law.
Thus, the administration argues that there doesn't need to be a Senate
review because no laws will be changed. This is, of course, wrong,
since ACTA (1) does not align itself fully with US laws and (2)
massively constrains Congress's ability to change certain intellectual
property laws in the future. Furthermore, this basic argument is
ridiculous. The President is only allowed to sign executive agreements
that cover items solely under the President's mandate. Intellectual
property is not. It's clearly given to Congress under the Constitution.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110929/13395816138/obama-administration-to-use-acta-signing-statement-to-defend-why-it-can-ignore-constitution-signing-acta.shtml
total clown show.
-
As The Cable reported last month, the Obama administration is required by existing U.S. law to cut off funding for any international organization that grants the Palestinians full membership. . Membership in UNESCO also grants the Palestinians membership in the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO). The United States is not a member of UNIDO, but will be forced to stop contributing to WIPO.
http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/11/01/senators_predict_massive_us_withdrawal_from_international_organizations
WIPO is pretty big deal, the usual stick any administration beating people over music/movie/copyright stuff.
-
The disconnection laws that the entertainment industry has bought for
itself in the UK, New Zealand and France provide for removing whole
households from the Internet on the strength of their copyright
accusations. If the net were just cable TV, this might make sense, but
for families all over the world, the net is work, socialization, health,
education, access to tools and ideas, freedom of speech, assembly and
the press, as well as the conduit to political and civic engagement.
There just isn’t such a thing as ‘‘copyright policy’’ anymore. Every
modern copyright policy becomes Internet policy – policy that touches on
every aspect of how we use the net.
And as we make the transition from a world where everything we do
includes an online component to a world where everything we do requires
an online component, it’s becoming the case that there’s no such thing
as ‘‘Internet policy’’ – there’s just policy. -
A Brief History of Failed Digital Rights Management Schemes
this article at opensource.com on the "graveyard" of digital rights management schemes — the death of each of which has left customers out in the cold. An excerpt: "There
are more than a few reasons digital rights management (DRM) has been
largely unsuccessful. But the easiest way to explain to a consumer why
DRM doesn't work is to put it in terms he understands: 'What happens to
the music you paid for if that company changes its mind?' It was one
thing when it was a theoretical question. Now it's a historical one ..."
-
There is a new BIOS standard evolving which is called UEFI.
Microsoft is trying to get the hardware manufacturers to include a
"secure boot" feature whereby a computer can only run the OS first
installed and never be switched to a different OS.I predict that if Windows 8 machines ship with UEFI's secure boot
enabled that the history of secure boot will look like a sped up version
of the history of DRM as described by Ruth Suehle. As the cracking and
counter measure battle over secure boot unfolds Microsoft will leave
many Windows 8 users stranded with unusable Windows 8 operating systems
that they have already paid for. At the same time second hand cracked
machines will sell for more than second hand uncracked machines. Second
hand machines that have been subjected to Microsoft's counter measures
will be worthless.Any bets on which country first produces "UEFI Maria"?
http://opensource.com/life/11/11/drm-graveyard-brief-history-digital-rights-management-music
Wait until Microsoft finds out people actually ditching Windows for android or Ubuntu for next home computer.
-
German Copyright Group To Collect From Creative Commons Event
"In Leipzig, Germany, an 8 hour music/dance party event was organized to play nothing but creative commons music
the entire time. A German copyright group called GEMA told the
organizers that to be certain that no rights were infringed, it would
need a list of all artists including their full names, place of
residency and date of birth. After the event GEMA sent an invoice for
200 euros. They claim that behind pseudonyms some of their artists may
be hidden and produce things that they would not earn anything from.
According to German law, you are required to prove that an artist is not
with GEMA. So even though GEMA probably does not have rights to any of
the music, they are not required to prove that they do."
-
Congressional SOPA hearings: no opponents of the bill allowed
By Cory Doctorow at 7:01 am Tuesday, Nov 15
As the House of Representatives opens hearings on SOPA,
the worst piece of Internet legislation in American history, it has
rejected all submissions and testimony from public interest groups and
others who oppose the bill.
Irony Alert: The House is holding hearings on sweeping Internet
censorship legislation this week -- and it's censoring the opposition!
The bill is backed by Hollywood, Big Pharma, and the Chamber of
Commerce, and all of them are going to get to testify at the hearing.
But the bill's opponents -- tech companies, free speech and human rights
activists, and hundreds of thousands of Internet users -- won't have a
voice. -
Oh man this infographic on SOPA http://mashable.com/2011/11/16/sopa-infographic/ makes it sound even more horrible. I'm glad I am not American
-
I can't decide what this latest move is about.
a) the kids are protesting, proposed some outrageous law. Then pretend there is a discussion. All to distract their pesky political reform demand. Good kabuki.
b) The usual corrupt actors. mafi@@ (It's berman office. one of the slickest weasel in the business) But why now? why not last week... or next month?
or c) continuation of DHS attempt. (homegrown ...whatever, internet control.) This one is the most dangerous possibility IMO. The kind that lead to public outrage... purge, tattoed, and put 'em in gas chamber sort.
I for one am watching the sub plot, drama, and how the actors move. (the regulation itself will be proposed again and again in various different format under all sort of different guises. copyright is just one good excuse at the moment. next will be protecting
the children, or the elderly, helping the poor...or whatever else. It's the nature of corruption. Internet is too dangerous, too many truth floating about. )
But think about it: there are only 3 labels left in the cartel
1. Universal, which is 100% owned by Vivendi, france
2. Sony, japan
3. WMG, now owned by a russian oligarch
an organization like mafiaa is completely controlled by big corps. And they are demanding control over entire country speech and information flow, with major repercussion to world infrastructure. Wouldn't it be easier to just remove these few fuckers instead? It doesn't make sense right? ( But of course how many people know the state of major entertainment industry monopoly?) How much money is this so called music and film industry producing each year in proportion to entire internet economy? (again very small minority demanding control over everybody. How many people knows these fuckers are shrinking, not making money and very tiny online??)
Why are these 3 corporation trying to control the entire structure of world internet? (.com, .org domain name)
I doubt anybody with half a brain won't start wondering and getting really annoyed.
The level of corruption is mind boggling.
-------Supporters
The Stop Online Piracy Act was introduced by Representative Lamar Smith [R-TX] and was initially co-sponsored by Howard Berman [D-CA], Marsha Blackburn [R-TN], Mary Bono Mack [R-CA], Steve Chabot [R-OH], John Conyers [D-MI], Ted Deutch [D-FL], Elton Gallegly [R-CA], Bob Goodlatte [R-VA], Timothy Griffin [R-AR], Dennis A. Ross [R-FL], Adam Schiff [D-CA] and Lee Terry [R-NE]. As of November 15, 2011, there were 24 sponsors.[38]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act
Read his position. It'll make you shiver. cheap political conspiracy novel sort of stunt.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Berman
-
In the 21st century, consumers spent less money on recorded music than they had in 1990s, in all formats.[7] Total revenues for CDs, vinyl, cassettes and digital downloads
in the world dropped 25% from $38.6 billion in 1999 to $27.5 billion in
2008 according to IFPI. Same revenues in the U.S. dropped from a high
of $14.6 billion in 1999 to $10.4 billion in 2008. The Economist and The New York Times report that the downward trend is expected to continue for the foreseeable future[8][9] —Forrester Research predicts that by 2013, revenues in USA may reach as low as $9.2 billion.[8] This dramatic decline in revenue has caused large-scale layoffs inside the industry, driven retailers (such as Tower Records) out of business and forced record companies, record producers, studios, recording engineers and musicians to seek new business models.[10]The "Big 5" major record companies became the "Big 4" in 2004 when
Sony acquired BMG, and the "Big 3" when EMI was acquired by Universal in
2011.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Music_industry
It's PUNY. It's only $10B USD per year. Not worth a sneeze.
-
United States
- Many media industries today are essentially oligopolies.
- Six movie studios receive 90% of American film revenues.[citation needed]
- The television industry is mostly an oligopoly of seven companies: The Walt Disney Company, CBS Corporation, Viacom, Comcast, Hearst Corporation, Time Warner, and News Corporation.[28] See Concentration of media ownership.
- Four wireless providers (AT&T, Verizon Wireless, T-Mobile, Sprint Nextel) control 89% of the cellular telephone service market.[29]
This is not to be confused with cellular telephone manufacturing, an
integral portion of the cellular telephone market as a whole.
Movie is very much the same. Universal, Sony, WMG. ..fox, disney, paramount.
- Many media industries today are essentially oligopolies.
-
Media cross-ownership in the United States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_cross-ownership_in_the_United_StatesUnited States
Main article: Media cross-ownership in the United StatesIn the United States,
movie production is known to be dominated by major studios since the
early 20th Century; before that, there was a period in which Edison's Trust monopolized the industry. The music and television industries recently witnessed cases of media consolidation, with Sony Music Entertainment's parent company merging their music division with Bertelsmann AG's BMG to form Sony BMG and TimeWarner's The WB and CBS Corp.'s UPN merging to form The CW. In the case of Sony BMG, there existed a "Big Five" (now "Big Four") of major record companies, while The CW's creation was an attempt to consolidate ratings and stand up to the "Big Four" of American network (terrestrial) television
(this despite the fact that the CW was, in fact, partially owned by one
of the Big Four in CBS). In television, the vast majority of broadcast
and basic cable networks, over a hundred in all, are controlled by nine
corporations: News Corporation (the Fox family of channels), The Walt Disney Company (which includes the ABC, ESPN and Disney brands), CBS Corporation, Viacom, Comcast (which includes the NBC brands), Time Warner, Discovery Communications, E. W. Scripps Company, Cablevision, or some combination thereof (examples including the aforementioned The CW as well as A&E Networks, which is a consortium of Comcast and Disney).There may also be some large-scale owners in an industry that are not the causes of monopoly or oligopoly. Clear Channel Communications, especially since the Telecommunications Act of 1996, acquired many radio stations
across the United States, and came to own more than 1,200 stations.
However, the radio broadcasting industry in the United States and
elsewhere can be regarded as oligopolistic regardless of the existence
of such a player. Because radio stations are local in reach, each
licensed a specific part of spectrum by the FCC
in a specific local area, any local market is served by a limited
number of stations. In most countries, this system of licensing makes
many markets local oligopolies. The similar market structure exists for television broadcasting, cable systems and newspaper
industries, all of which are characterized by the existence of
large-scale owners. Concentration of ownership is often found in these
industries.In the United States, data on ownership and market share of media companies is not held in the public domain. Academics, for example at MIT Media Lab and NYU, have struggled to find data that show reliably the concentration of media ownership.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentration_of_media_ownership
-
Internet censorship bills appear to be fast-tracked for action
Because forcing austerity on the nation isn't enough to keep Congress
occupied and off the streets, they're also plotting against the internet
with SOPA, the Stop Online Piracy Act in the House, and PROTECT IP in the Senate (BANANAS alert
if you click that link). In a generally deadlocked body, this one seems
to be on the fast track, potentially coming up for a vote in the Senate
as soon as Dec. 5.ArsTechnica provides the background.
Imagine a world in which any intellectual property holder
can, without ever appearing before a judge or setting foot in a
courtroom, shut down any website's online advertising programs and block
access to credit card payments. The credit card processors and the
advertising networks would be required to take quick action against the
named website; only the filing of a “counter notification” by the
website could get service restored.It's the world envisioned by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) in today's
introduction of the Stop Online Piracy Act in the US House of
Representatives. This isn't some off-the-wall piece of legislation with
no chance of passing, either; it's the House equivalent to the Senate's PROTECT IP Act, which would officially bring Internet censorship to the US as a matter of law.Calling its plan a “market-based system to protect US customers and
prevent US funding of sites dedicated to theft of US property,” the new
bill gives broad powers to private actors. Any holder of intellectual
property rights could simply send a letter to ad network operators like
Google and to payment processors like MasterCard, Visa, and PayPal,
demanding these companies cut off access to any site the IP holder names
as an infringer.
-
I feel we may have hit the watershed moment in Europe with all the national laws infringing more and more personal freedoms to let the copyright industry maintain their monopolies.The EuropeanCourt of Justice have basically told the copyright holders to fuck off when they wanted deep packet inspection to find out if people are downloading illegal content and prevent them from doing so. How this will affect DEACT and HADOPI is unknown- but at least there is a line now...
-
Big Pharma and the recording and movie industries are on the verge of
passing a bill that could very well destroy the social web, including
Daily Kos.This is no hyperbole. Watch the video above. It is literally an
existentialist threat for Daily Kos and any other site with
user-generated content, from Facebook, to Reddit, to tumblr, Sound Cloud
or YouTube.This is the holy grail of the entertainment industry—to destroy the
internet, and thus, destroy the biggest danger to their business.While the entertainment industry already has outsized tools to fight
piracy, they don't want to deal with the hassle of having to send
takedown notices to individual infringing sites. It's hard work, going
after YouTubes of dancing babies
and stuff! And, of course, they don't have jurisdiction over many
foreign-based sites. So, if they can't stomp out all piracy, plan B is
to destroy the internet.Democratic Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy is inexplicably leading the charge in the Senate with the Protect IP Act. Republican Texas Rep. Lamar Smith
is leading the companion bill in the House with the Stop Online Piracy
Act. This bill would've been rushed through with no debate through both
chambers had it not been for the singular efforts of Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden, a true hero of grassroots media and the social web.Wyden has put a hold on the bill in the Senate, and has promised a
full filibuster. Currently, there appear to be 60 votes to overcome that
filibuster, but the delaying tactics would tie up the Senate for a full
week. And if it doesn't pass this year, supporters have to start from
scratch all over again next year—this time under the full glare of a
spotlight.Wyden is now being joined with Sens. Maria Cantwell of Washington, Jerry Moran of Kansas (he's a senator that exists) and Rand Paul of Kentucky (even a stopped clock ...).
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/11/28/1040530/-Congress-is-close-to-destroying-the-internet-(no-hyperbole)?via=blog_1
-
The political class don't like the internets. (57+ / 0-)
They have pretty intense disdain for political blogging - and they aren't so fond of the grass roots in general.
Add to that that a dollar from you is nothing to them when they can
get millions from a sector like the Entertainment industry and you
aren't going to find a lot of the major political fundraisers worrying
about the death of the internet.Ironically, I would be really concerned if I was in Hollyweird or in
the music industry because getting exposure for media is so much harder
now. The internet is really important to them regardless of what
revenues they claim they "lose" to it. They are too foolish to see that
what they gain probably far outweighs any "paper losses" they've
conjured up in some back accounting office. -
U.S. Anti-Piracy Police Kept Secret From The Public
Last month the MPAA and RIAA made a deal with all the major Internet
providers in the United States to systematically hunt down file-sharers.
The new “Copyright Alerts” system will directly affect millions of
Internet users, but thus far the participating parties have refused to
disclose which monitoring company will act as anti-piracy detectives.
It’s time for the big reveal.
Starting in a few months, the copyright police will start to track down ‘pirates’ as part of an agreement with all major U.S. Internet providers.All parties agreed to warn copyright infringers that their behavior
is unacceptable. After six warnings the ISP may then take a variety of
repressive measures, which include slowing down the offender’s
connection.The new system is a formalized version of the existing takedown
system already operated by copyright holders, and was announced under
the name ‘Copyright Alerts‘.https://torrentfreak.com/u-s-anti-piracy-police-kept-secret-from-the-public-110811/
-
The Record Industry’s War On Innovation, And What You Need To Know About It
http://www.antiquiet.com/features/editorials/2011/07/the-record-industrys-war-on-innovation/The slaughtering of MP3.com was a merciless act of biblical,
scorched-earth retribution that sent a very clear message to Silicon
Valley. MP3.com founder Michael Robertson called it a “campaign of
terror,” and it went far beyond a lawsuit.After less than a year of operation, five major record companies sued
MP3.com, alleging willful copyright infringement. Four settled for
large cash reparations, but Universal Music Group was after far more,
and forced the case to court. When a federal judge in New York ruled in
favor of UMG, finding MP3.com liable for $118 million in damages, Universal took a crippling $53.4 million in a settlement, but that was just the beginning. Universal then bought
the service they had paralyzed, at a deep discount of course, of $5 per
share ($23 below the IPO share price). Then, in 2002, the
Universal-owned MP3.com brought a malpractice suit
against its own lawyers, for being so irresponsibly incompetent as to
argue that such a service was legal, which had directly led to
significant monetary losses from the lawsuits brought against the
company.In other words, MP3.com was killed, resurrected by its killer just to
be exploited, and then killed again just for daring to have ever fought
back. For over a decade after MP3.com was buried by Universal, no
remotely responsible startup would dare develop technology that might
disrupt the music industry’s status quo. Paul Graham of investment camp Y
Combinator compared the labels to a “rogue state with nuclear weapons,” a psychopath not to be crossed.
-
Rupert Murdoch Personally Lobbies Congress For SOPA And PROTECT IP
from the wouldn't-he-just-love-that? dept
Well, well. Apparently dealing with the fallout from the News of the World reporters hacking into phones in the UK isn't keeping Rupert Murdoch busy enough. He showed up in DC last week to make a personal plea to Congress to support SOPA and PIPA and censor the internet. It's been clear for quite some time that Rupert Murdoch doesn't get the internet. His history is littered with massive and expensive internet failures.
So it's no surprise that he's lobbying hard for a law like SOPA and
PIPA, which will restrict up and coming online competitors and help
clear out some of the field so that maybe he and his son James can
finally get their wish
to turn the internet into something that looks a lot more like TV: with
the big media conglomerates delivering the content, and everyone else
just consuming (and paying for) it.http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/n9ks6/rupert_murdoch_personally_lobbies_congress_for/
-
In newspapers across the country today, a who's who of massively successful entrepreneurs are asking Congress not to pass SOPA or PROTECT IP. On the list of people signing:
- Marc Andreessen, co-founder of Netscape, Opsware, and Andreessen Horowitz
- Mitchell Baker, co-founder of Mozilla Firefox
- Sergey Brin, co-founder of Google
- Jack Dorsey, co-founder of Twitter and Square
- Caterina Fake, co-founder of Flickr and Hunch
- David Filo, co-founder of Yahoo
- Reid Hoffman, co-founder of LinkedIn
- Arianna Huffington, co-founder of the Huffington Post
- Chad Hurley, co-founder of YouTube
- Brewster Kahle, founder of the Internet Archive
- Elon Musk, co-founder of Paypal, Tesla and SpaceX
- Craig Newmark, founder of Craigslist
- Pierre Omidyar, founder of eBay
- Biz Stone, co-founder of Obvious and Twitter
- Jimmy Wales, founder of Wikipedia and Wikimedia
- Marc Andreessen, co-founder of Netscape, Opsware, and Andreessen Horowitz
-
Wikipedia Explains, In Great Detail, How Even An Updated SOPA Hurts The Web & Wikipedia
I’ve been asked for a legal opinion. And I will tell you, in my view,
the new version of SOPA remains a serious threat to freedom of
expression on the Internet.
The new version continues to undermine the DMCA and federal
jurisprudence that have promoted the Internet as well as cooperation
between copyright holders and service providers. In doing so, SOPA
creates a regime where the first step is federal litigation to block an
entire site wholesale: it is a far cry from a less costly legal notice
under the DMCA protocol to selectively take down specified infringing
material. The crime is the link, not the copyright violation. The
cost is litigation, not a simple notice.The expenses of such litigation could well force non-profit or
low-budget sites, such as those in our free knowledge movement, to
simply give up on contesting orders to remove their links. (Secs.
102(c)(3); 103(c)(2)) The international sites under attack may not have
the resources to challenge extra-territorial judicial proceedings in
the United States, even if the charges are false.Although rendering it discretionary (Secs.102(c)(2)(A-E);
103(c)(2)(A-B)), the new bill would still allow for serious security
risks to our communications and national infrastructure. The bill no
longer mandates DNS blocking but still allows it as an option. As
Sherwin Siy, deputy legal director of Public Knowledge, explained:
“The amendment continues to encourage DNS blocking and filtering,
which should be concerning for Internet security experts . . . .”http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111214/04212117082/wikipedia-explains-great-detail-how-even-updated-sopa-hurts-web-wikipedia.shtml
-
Tiffiniy sez, "How bad is SOPA internet censorship? It's so bad,
political cartoonist David Rees came out of retirement to make fun of
it. getyourcensoron.com."
http://boingboing.net/2011/12/15/get-your-war-on-vs-sopa.html
-
First, both bills would still result in the censoring of non-infringing
speech. That is because they allow for the blocking of entire websites –
even though the site may contain a great deal of perfectly legal
speech. The Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed, “broad prophylactic
rules in the area of free expression are suspect . . . Precision of
regulation must be the touchstone in an area so closely touching our
most precious freedoms.” As Professor Laurence Tribe puts it, “The First
Amendment requires that the government proceed with a scalpel – by
prosecuting those who break the law – rather than with the sledgehammer
approach of SOPA, which would silence speech across the board.” And if
you think the government will at least be precise in choosing which
sites to target (not that the Constitutional analysis turns on the
government’s good intentions), recall the disgraceful treatment of some
of the sites targeted by the government as part of “Operation In Our
Sites.”
Second, the bills allow the government to obtain blocking orders without
an adversary proceeding, which means that the right of U.S. citizens to
receive information from abroad would be denied, without any real test
of the merits of the infringement claim. To be clear, this process is
unconstitutional even though the originators of the speech are outside
of the United States (though, in some cases, the originators could be
U.S. residents, e.g., folks posting comments on a foreign site’s
forums), because the First Amendment protects our right to receive
information as well as send it. Tribe points to a chilling parallel in a
Supreme Court case which held that the Post Office could not keep a
list of U.S. citizens receiving “communist political propaganda” (which,
of course, intimidated those citizens from doing so) even though the
“propagandists” were located abroad.Why SOPA is unconstitutional
-
House Judiciary committee adjourns in temporary victory for opponents of SOPA
No one saw this one coming, but it's a very welcome surprise:The House Judiciary Committee is considering whether to send
the Stop Online Piracy Act to the House floor abruptly adjourned Friday
with no new vote date set — a surprise given that the bill looked
certain to pass out of committee today.The committee’s chairman and chief sponsor of the legislation, Rep.
Lamar Smith (R-Texas), agreed to further explore a controversial
provision that lets the Attorney General order changes to core internet
infrastructure in order to stop copyright infringement.Smith said the hearing would resume at the “earliest practical day that Congress is in session.” That could be weeks.
The abrupt halt to Friday’s proceeding, which followed a
marathon-long, 11-hour hearing Thursday, was based on a motion from Rep.
Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah). He urged Smith to postpone the session until
technical experts could be brought in to testify whether altering the
internet’s domain-naming system to fight websites deemed “dedicated” to
infringing activity would create security risks.Yesterday Smith had said hearing from the technical experts wasn't
necessary, "despite a signed letter signed by many of the internet’s
core engineers saying that the bill’s approach was technically flawed."
So this is a temporary victory for the geeks, and for everyone who cares
about real internet security and a flourishing, vibrant web.Congress isn't slated to get back to work until the end of January,
so it will be weeks before the hearing reconvenes and those experts are
brought in, giving opponents weeks to organize and educate
legislators—both in the House and Senate—of just how dangerous this bill
is. That's critical, because the Senate is ready to bring its bad
version of this bill to the floor.
-
-
List of SOPA cosponsors who have received donations from big media, compiled by the Sunlight Foundation: http://reporting.sunlightfoundation.com/2011/legacy-media-bankrolling-campaigns-of-SOPA-consponsors/ [sunlightfoundation.com]
Many groups have lobbied for the PROTECT IP Act, including several that
employ lobbyists who have worked for the members of Congress who have
signed on to the legislation. Among them:
Comcast Corporation, which spent nearly $4 milion during the third quarter of this year lobbying against the PROTECT IP Act and other bills. Comcast lobbyist Joseph Trahern is a former aide to cosponsor Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., and lobbyist Phil Tahtakran is a former legislative director to SOPA cosponsor Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif.
National Cable and Telecommunications Association spent $90,000 on lobbying
for this bill and others. NCTA hired lobby firm Fierce, Isakowitz &
Blalock. Firm lobbyist Aleix Jarvis, who worked on the NCTA account, is
a former legislative director for cosponsor Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.
Cox Enterprises Inc. spent $790,000 lobbying for this bill and others.
Disney Worldwide Services, Inc. spent $600,000 lobbying for this bill and others during the third quarter.
http://politics.slashdot.org/story/11/12/18/1836249/sopa-creator-in-tvfilmmusic-industrys-pocket
-
The usual suspects. (I am surprised Universal/viacom aren't in there somewhere)
At least EMI is dead. One less fucker in the list.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/12/21/1047637/-BOYCOTT-these-SOPA-supporters!?via=siderecent
Sony Electronics Inc. (try 1-800-222-7669)
Sony Music Entertainment - (212) 833-8000
Sony Pictures Entertainment - 310-244-4000
The Walt Disney Company - 818-560-1000
Time Warner Inc. - 212.484.8000
Warner Music Group - (212) 275-2000
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/nl9e0/here_are_27_prosopa_major_tech_companies_who_has/
WMG is one inch away from its death throw... ..uhhh, this is so much fun. die die die ...
-
Adam Savage on SOPA: "We're better than that"
James sez, "MythBuster Adam Savage joins the growing chorus of opposition to the Stop Online Piracy Act and Protect IP Act."
Honestly, if a friend wrote these into a piece of fiction about
government oversight gone amok, I'd have to tell them that they were too
one-dimensional, too obviously anticonstitutional.The Internet is probably the most important technological advancement
of my lifetime. Its strength lies in its open architecture and its
ability to allow a framework where all voices can be heard. Like the
printing press before it (which states also tried to regulate, for
centuries), it democratizes information, and thus it democratizes power.
If we allow Congress to pass these draconian laws, we'll be joining
nations like China and Iran in filtering what we allow people to see,
do, and say on the Web.And we're better than that.
-
It's a must read, highlighting the insanity of SOPA -- while also being pretty funny:
Supporters aren't willing to talk compromise, claim not clamping down on
speech as well as piracy will "crush" artists and other creators of
content, and appear, with good evidence, to be doing the bidding of
SOPA's financial backers, who no interest in the public good and a
bottomless reservoir of shameless self-interest they believe is more
important than the liberties protected by the First, Fourth and Fifth
Amendments.
On the positive side, that's not even a third of the Bill of Rights, so
accusations that SOPA supporters are willing to crush the Constitution
to line their own pockets are clearly exaggerated by at least seven
Rights.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111220/17004517148/do-we-really-want-to-hand-over-control-internet-to-group-that-sued-dead-grandmother.shtml -
@Squashed Viacom is on there...
-
I noticed after you pointed out... (no surprise there)
---------------
so, as predicted, now they want more mechanism to control information. (regardless of legislative pretext, it always seems to end with same people, same goal, same political gang.)Lieberman wants Taliban blocked on Twitter
Joe Lieberman wants Islamist extremist accounts banned on Twitter.
Aides for Joe Lieberman, chair of the Senate Homeland Security
Committee, said the move was part of a wider attempt to eliminate
violent Islamist extremist propaganda from the internet ... Twitter is
reported to be rejecting the move after pointing out that unlike
al-Qaeda, the Taliban movement is not registered by the State Department
as a foreign terrorist organisation.Lieberman seems not be targeting terrorists who plan attacks using
the service, but rather Taliban propagandists famous for political
hysterics, gloating, and bickering with NATO counterparts. It makes no
sense at all except as censorious weight-pulling for its own sake.
The ranty impulse is to suggest that he's got that Clash of
Civilizations thing going on, or that he doesn't trust you with the
liberty to hear what Helmand Harry has to say. If anything, however
Lieberman seems smaller than that. It's as if he's simply embarrassed to see the enemy free to speak, and banning them from Twitter is his best idea to silence them. -
This was the bill.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violent_Radicalization_and_Homegrown_Terrorism_Prevention_Act_of_2007
This basically was broad sweeping attempt to control the internet. including appointing a group of people to censor. It failed, but they keep trying to pass it in section via various different pretext/legal venue. not surprisingly, done by exact same gang.
-
What happened in Denmark (quoted from someone).
7 years ago we got a child pornography filter on the Internet in
Denmark. Some people said that it was a bad idea, but others said these
people were just paedophiles, or trying to help paedophiles. Some people
said that it was against our constitution, which it was. So the
censorship was implemented in a way so it was formally (but not in
reality) voluntary, which ensured that it was not formally a violation
of our constitution.Some people warned that once the censorship infrastructure was in
place, it would most likely be used to censor other things. But they
were told "Never! This is ONLY to prevent this horrible crime, and will
never be used for other censorship."Fast-forward a few years, and the Danish recording industry did not
like allofmp3.com, so they went to court to get a court order against
the Danish ISPs to start censoring allofmp3 off the Danish Internet. The
judge basically said "ahh, you already have the infrastructure in
place, so there will be no extra cost", and issued the order to censor
allofmp3.com. It was not a violation of our constitution because it was
ordered by a judge.Since then other "pirate" sites have been censored. Most notably The
Pirate Bay, which found out that the court would not even allow them to
speak their case in court, or even submit a written brief.Then our politicians found out that they wanted to protect and expand
income from taxes. In particular the high taxes gambling providers pay.
The official excuse was to limit the horrible disease of ludomania. So
they decided that foreign gambling providers had to pay the taxes in
Denmark too if they were on the Internet and could be seen in Denmark.
If they refused to pay taxes, they should be censored off the Danish
internet. So they passed a law saying that if a foreign gambling
provider refused to pay taxes in Denmark, a court would - on the request
of our government - have to order ISPs to censor its sites off the net,
and payment processors to block all payments to it. If an ISP does not
censor, or a payment processor or bank does not block payment, hefty
fines are issued.Now our politicians worry that some foreign companies selling
medicines on the net are not licensed to sell medicines in Denmark. So
they are preparing new legislation that will censor these sites off the
net, and block payments to them.So our Internet censorship started a few years ago with a very
limited purpose and good intentions. And it was solemnly promised that
nothing else than child pornography would be censored.But once the infrastructure for censorship was in place, the
censorship started spreading to other areas. And the censorship is
getting more and more widespread. -
Specific Organizations Opposing H.R.3261
- Creators’ Freedom Project
- Engine Advocacy
- 4chan
- Boing Boing
- Creative Commons
- Daily Kos
- Disqus
- Grooveshark
- Hype Machine
- Kickstarter
- MetaFilter
- O'Reilly Radar
- Techdirt
- Torrentfreak
- NetCoalition
- Consumer Electronics Association
- Computer and Communications Industry Association
- Public Knowledge
- Electronic Frontier Foundation
-
"Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas), one of the biggest backers of the Stop Online Piracy Act, today said he plans to remove the Domain Name System blocking provision.
'After consultation with industry groups across the country,' Smith
said in a statement released by his office, 'I feel we should remove
(DNS) blocking from the Stop Online Piracy Act so that the [U.S. House
Judiciary] Committee can further examine the issues surrounding this
provision.'"
http://politics.slashdot.org/story/12/01/13/2222203/dns-provision-pulled-from-sopa
FU you chicken shit. when the revolution is over you will be begging in congress parking lot to have your live spared from rampaging angry mob about to whack baseball bat over your head.
-
The public outcry over the Stop Online Piracy Act and Protect IP Act
seems to have gotten so loud that even members of Congress can hear it.
On Thursday we covered the news that Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) was expressing second thoughts about SOPA's DNS provisions. He said he changed his mind after he "heard from a number of Vermonters" on the issue.On Friday, several Republicans started backpedaling as well.
SOPA sponsor Lamar Smith (R-TX) announced that he would be pulling
the DNS-blocking provisions from his own bill. “After consultation with
industry groups across the country, I feel we should remove Domain Name
System blocking from the Stop Online Piracy Act so that the Committee
can further examine the issues surrounding this provision," Smith said
in a Friday statement.bunch of corrupt jerk offs. no wonder there were gas chambers.
-
Wikipedia to join the Wednesday January 18 SOPA/PIPA blackout!
http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/ojh20/wikipedia_to_join_the_wednesday_january_18/
--------------
This is going to get vry ugly, all most popular web sites are going black and urging people to fight sopa/pipa. I wouldn't want to be at the wrong end of this fight once the usually more blaze underground net groups turn militants.
-
Emergency NY Tech Meetup SOPA/PIPA protest Wednesday at Sens. Schumer and Gillibrand's offices
The New York Tech Meetup, a 20,000 member community of people working
in the New York Tech Industry are protesting the pending legislation in
the US Senate called Protect Intellectual Property Act (PIPA) and its
companion legislation in the House of Representatives, called Stop
Online Piracy Act, (SOPA). These proposals pose a great threat to the
open web by making censorship possible by the US government and
corporations without due process. Although we agree piracy of
intellectual property should be stopped, these laws if passed as
currently written would have a chillingly negative effect of free speech
around the world.
We are gathering this Wednesday at 12:30 PM in NYC in front of the
offices of Senators Charles Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand, (who are
sponsors of PIPA). Our effort is aimed to show are collective dismay
through our physical presence in solidarity with all the other online
protests planned for that day by a consortium of sites in support of the
open Internet. You can read about them.
Please join us by signing up here and please tweet, blog, and inform all your various networks.---------------
It's quite amazing that these people are not afraid of NY tech industry but terrified of NY entertainment industry.
-
MPAA issues statement slamming SOPA/PIPA "blackout" protests as "dangerous gimmick"
A so-called “blackout” is yet another gimmick, albeit a dangerous one, designed to punish elected
and administration officials who are working diligently to protect American jobs from foreign
criminals. It is our hope that the White House and the Congress will call on those who intend to
stage this “blackout” to stop the hyperbole and PR stunts and engage in meaningful efforts to
combat piracy.”http://boingboing.net/2012/01/17/mpaa-issues-statement-on-jan.html
F.U. when the revolution comes, you'll be begging on your knees for your life in parking lot. In the meantime, enjoy the crime/bribe/corruption money. Don't think for a moment people doesn't notice. It's a good thing these fuckers are old and can't run very fast. It won't be hard for the angry mob to round them up and whacking their heads off.
-
First, and again, this is a critical battle to wage and win. SOPA is
just the latest, but in many ways, the most absurd campaign in the
endless saga of America’s copyright wars. It will be yet another failed
attempt in a failed war, and I obviously believe it should be opposed.But second, and as you describe, this isn’t my war anymore.
Not because my heart isn’t in it, but because I don’t believe we will
win that war (or better, win the peace and move on) — even if we can win
battles like this one — until the more basic corruption that is our
government gets addressed. That’s the fight I have spent the last 4
years working on. That’s where I’ll be for at least the next 6.http://lessig.tumblr.com/post/13119510676/me-mia-on-the-sopa-soap-opera
Look, this is a legislative racketeering. Make the sheeplees all worked out, more campaign money, distraction from real issue. (they are afraid of OWS) When this is over, repeat again next year.
Basically, until the root corruption cause is removed, they gonna keep playing this game. Manufacturing outrage and make money off of it. This time around, write down the name of participants, map entire network of bribe money, and organizations network/structure.
It's the entire political machination.
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- All Discussions3,267
- General2,523
- Band Promotion217
- Blog Promotion259
- MP3 Blog Tips148
- MP3 Blog Tools120
- Private Messages0