Active Users:212 Time:07/05/2024 04:31:34 PM
If the US government wants to summarily block sites within the US, it already can and will. Joel Send a noteboard - 18/01/2012 06:15:53 PM
Even Congress concedes that. I DO think the onus should be on sites to control what goes through their pipes, but also agree there should be a limit to that onus, one that stops well short of effectively disconnecting them if they happen to miss something. The appropriate response would be a process by which offending content would be removed, subject to independent oversight. Part of the problem here is that we already have a law very close to that (the main difference is the lack of independent oversight,) its inadequacy to the task motivated the pending legislation and the same people who are most critical of the pending legislation are highly critical of that inadequate laws "censorship."

It is hard to take critics of the pending legislation seriously when they argue the existing law that does not do enough actually does too much.

As with so much of government, the bottom line remains: Tell them what they SHOULD do instead of what they should NOT do.

Congress hasn't really conceded anything. Nothing has been changed, so far- SOPA was "delayed," which means "we were hoping to pass this without fuss, but now that people are actually paying attention, we're hoping you'll all forget about this pretty soon."

Exactly. A new law is coming, so get used to it. What you must decide now is what you want it to be. "Nothing" is not an option.

It's all well and good to say that "sites should be responsible for what is on their pages," but what SOPA means is that if I posted a picture of Batman wearing a funny hat, RAFO could be summarily blocked due to a copyright complaint.

So tell them to alter that provision and there is a really good chance they will. Tell them to just drop the whole matter and there is NO chance they will.

And finally, with regard to your "doesn't do enough, does too much" comment: The point is that "pirates" and "hackers" (these shadowy figures that are being pointed to as a kind of monolithic Axis of Evil) wouldn't be slowed by SOPA in the slightest- there are pretty basic ways to access sites anyway. That's the "doesn't do enough" part.

The "does too much" part is that it sets in place infrastructure to monitor, control, and censor every aspect of the Internet. That was the point of my Denmark story- that even though it starts out saying "oh, we just want to stop this one thing," it becomes a tool that can be used for much more.

The POINT is that rather than evil Big Media cruelly trying to imprison innocent decent people who have done nothing except violate multiple EXISTING laws hundreds of times a month and thumb their nose at resulting fines, the proposed law would send those people to prison, which would significantly curtail their piracy. It certainly sounds like the bill as written casts too wide a net, and criminalizes too much that it should not, so raise those objections and suggest alternative conditions for those criminal penalties. But do not pretend they are never warranted, or expect Congress to share that view, 'cos it ain't gonna happen.

As far as "we cannot allow evil Big Brother this kind of power to abuse!" once again, they already have it, so I suppose we are all doomed. :P
Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.

Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!

LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Reply to message
English Wikipedia Anti-SOPA Blackout - 17/01/2012 08:31:46 AM 2050 Views
Yeah, man, because currently copyright holders have no recourse, am I right? - 17/01/2012 11:47:35 AM 877 Views
"altering the infrastructure of the Internet so as to render RAFO virtually inaccessible"? - 17/01/2012 08:12:27 PM 988 Views
I'll go ahead and ask before I get my panties in a bunch: do you understand these bills? - 17/01/2012 09:09:22 PM 1065 Views
I admit I have not looked into it much - 17/01/2012 11:42:30 PM 934 Views
And yet you're still arguing the matter. - 18/01/2012 02:34:04 AM 1041 Views
I love you. *NM* - 18/01/2012 03:41:03 AM 605 Views
heh, thanks. I usually find myself pushing minority opinions. Nice to be "appreciated" for once. *NM* - 18/01/2012 04:01:10 AM 585 Views
Can i second the adulation? - 18/01/2012 04:07:17 AM 772 Views
I too (three?) appreciate the common sense and reasonable explanations. *NM* - 18/01/2012 04:12:59 AM 595 Views
Thanks guys. - 18/01/2012 04:39:00 AM 929 Views
Right, because the argument is not just over THIS bill but, apparently, over ANY bill. - 18/01/2012 11:09:13 AM 933 Views
Alternatives to SOPA/PIPA have been proposed for months now. Please stop arguing this. - 18/01/2012 05:42:10 PM 891 Views
That is really all I ask. - 18/01/2012 06:26:37 PM 927 Views
"sensitive federal content"? Provide a source justifying this claim and it's relevance, please. - 18/01/2012 05:59:47 PM 946 Views
I would not have thought a source necessary. - 18/01/2012 06:24:44 PM 950 Views
Okay, I'm with Aemon now. - 18/01/2012 07:36:21 PM 966 Views
OK. - 18/01/2012 10:16:16 PM 987 Views
Surreal. It's like you're a spam-bot or something. *NM* - 19/01/2012 01:23:35 AM 721 Views
That was constructive. - 19/01/2012 03:29:53 PM 863 Views
Very nicely summarised. *NM* - 18/01/2012 02:06:02 AM 526 Views
should be interesting - 17/01/2012 12:41:47 PM 812 Views
Could be; depends on a lot of factors. - 17/01/2012 07:38:55 PM 874 Views
See, that's one of the biggest problems that people aren't understanding. - 17/01/2012 09:31:38 PM 890 Views
So tell them that. - 17/01/2012 11:54:19 PM 1029 Views
Could've done without the snide rejoinder, but, good. - 17/01/2012 02:20:08 PM 815 Views
I love the black banner, like some kind of internet Holocaust. - 17/01/2012 08:03:27 PM 954 Views
Are you aware that SOPA/PIPA has nothing to do with hackers and everything to do with copyright? - 18/01/2012 02:08:56 AM 796 Views
There seems to be some overlap. - 18/01/2012 01:08:22 PM 917 Views
Re: There seems to be some overlap. - 18/01/2012 08:13:15 PM 791 Views
Er, what Ghav said. - 18/01/2012 02:30:37 AM 818 Views
Sorry, protecting Pirate Bay and offshore gambling are not compelling counterarguments. - 18/01/2012 11:38:08 AM 865 Views
Okay, another analogy: - 18/01/2012 02:04:12 PM 843 Views
The devil is always in the details, and it seems clear the details need great revision. - 18/01/2012 03:31:20 PM 852 Views
Re: The devil is always in the details, and it seems clear the details need great revision. - 18/01/2012 04:27:30 PM 896 Views
If the US government wants to summarily block sites within the US, it already can and will. - 18/01/2012 06:15:53 PM 837 Views
NO - you are still wrong on this point - 19/01/2012 02:38:14 AM 842 Views
Power, or authority? - 19/01/2012 03:41:24 PM 915 Views
A technical examination of SOPA and PROTECT IP - 18/01/2012 08:32:44 AM 823 Views
"As a disclaimer, I am not a lawyer, I'm a sysadmin." - 18/01/2012 12:47:16 PM 1083 Views
wow, you are totally correct! - 18/01/2012 03:45:54 PM 856 Views
That is a separate issue. - 18/01/2012 04:01:24 PM 855 Views
Thank you for posting that. - 18/01/2012 03:09:07 PM 878 Views
Wikipedia has already convinced me - 18/01/2012 03:26:01 PM 703 Views
Trying to stop this legislation without proposing an alternative is trying to stop ANY legislation. - 18/01/2012 03:44:18 PM 930 Views
It isn't their job to propose legislation - 18/01/2012 04:12:53 PM 850 Views
No, but they have as much RIGHT to do so as anyone else. - 18/01/2012 05:31:55 PM 828 Views
Strike three. - 18/01/2012 05:37:55 PM 877 Views
That is fine; that is what people SHOULD be doing. - 18/01/2012 06:03:59 PM 702 Views
Things being better now than they would be under SOPA seems like a legitimate argument to me - 18/01/2012 09:04:18 PM 965 Views
Against SOPA, sure; against ANY new law, no. - 18/01/2012 10:46:48 PM 807 Views
Re: Against SOPA, sure; against ANY new law, no. - 19/01/2012 12:15:48 AM 885 Views
That is a poor approach to drafting legislation, at best. - 19/01/2012 04:37:22 PM 929 Views
About "proposing new legislation" - 18/01/2012 04:45:08 PM 963 Views
So true - 18/01/2012 05:08:45 PM 896 Views
Not to go off on a tangent about combatting piracy... - 18/01/2012 05:38:12 PM 803 Views
Entirely agree *NM* - 18/01/2012 06:13:13 PM 578 Views
That was an excellent post. *NM* - 19/01/2012 11:18:19 PM 558 Views
Re: About "proposing new legislation" - 18/01/2012 05:59:55 PM 1039 Views
For those who want a short, one page explanation... - 18/01/2012 05:41:49 PM 822 Views
Yeah, so I use Russian wikipedia for a day. Or German wikipedia, or French, or Italian... *NM* - 18/01/2012 06:23:36 PM 643 Views
We get it: You are a polyglot. - 18/01/2012 06:27:48 PM 831 Views
Or just hit stop right before the script runs. *NM* - 18/01/2012 06:52:40 PM 613 Views
Or just disable Java. *NM* - 19/01/2012 01:58:03 AM 492 Views
That's not as much fun though. *NM* - 19/01/2012 02:13:44 AM 609 Views
Exactly, this way its kind of a game. *NM* - 19/01/2012 02:20:37 AM 432 Views
Or Answers.com, or even the actual sources that are often copy/pasted into Wikipedia... - 19/01/2012 01:07:38 AM 951 Views
They all did it on twitter - 19/01/2012 01:26:19 AM 884 Views
I was asleep much of the day - 19/01/2012 02:40:11 AM 949 Views
Oh, no; now Congress will be inundated with complaints from lazy college students! - 19/01/2012 04:40:12 PM 977 Views
13 previously unopposed senators now do not support SOPA. - 19/01/2012 11:36:15 PM 930 Views
How does that "rebutt" what was a facetious post in the first place? - 20/01/2012 09:24:27 PM 1035 Views
a joke can, indeed, be rebutted... - 21/01/2012 09:07:32 PM 915 Views
Oh, draggie, I ALWAYS see what you do there. - 21/01/2012 10:01:58 PM 874 Views

Reply to Message