January 17, 201214 yr Who's pushing this? I'd like names & affiliations. It was introduced by Lamar Smith (R-Texas). Other than that the other 30 sponsors are 50/50 D or R from what I've read. I'm not clear on names.
January 17, 201214 yr I can see Google following along the lines of wikipedia. Probably an edited home page. I don't think Zuckerberg will take Facebook offline, intentionally, no matter what the circumstances are. If the internet community does not want this passed (which is what I assume) then expect the social media websites to be bombarded with posts related to this topic.
January 17, 201214 yr The chairman of Twitter announced that his company wouldn't take part in the blackout, not because of any political reason, but simply because he felt that shutting down a global business over a domestic political issue didn't make any sense for the company.
January 17, 201214 yr Author The chairman of Twitter announced that his company wouldn't take part in the blackout, not because of any political reason, but simply because he felt that shutting down a global business over a domestic political issue didn't make any sense for the company. That makes sense. Plus, without social media it might be harder to spread news and awareness about this thing. I imagine that tomorrow facebook and twitter will see quite a few posts on the topic as people begin to realize why Wikipedia isn't working.
January 17, 201214 yr That makes sense. Plus, without social media it might be harder to spread news and awareness about this thing. I imagine that tomorrow facebook and twitter will see quite a few posts on the topic as people begin to realize why Wikipedia isn't working. Yeah, and even Wikipedia's blackout isn't global. From what I understand it's just their English-language site.
January 17, 201214 yr Who's pushing this? I'd like names & affiliations. List of sponsors and co-sponsors: SOPA Sponsors
January 17, 201214 yr Has there been an alternative offered to protect the owners of the material being downloaded? It's not perfect, but the Digital Millenium Copyright Act was a pretty good start and it's already on the books. It allows user-generated sites to police themselves at the request of copyright holders. Copyright holders alert a site (YouTube, Facebook, reddit) that copyrighted material is circulated on their site and the company then gives the user notice and then takes it down. But this bill uses a Patriot Missile to swat a mosquito. It allows entire sites to be shut down. These are online communities almost completely devoid of management-generated content. YouTube, reddit, etc. simply couldn't exist if they could be shut down every time their users posted copyrighted material. I understand the goals. But the execution is very poor for no other reason than I don't think it's going to work. Pirates can simply start a new site very quickly while the law will just be a massive hassle for otherwise usable sites like Google and Facebook. Imagine the resources it's going to take for sites to constantly be policing online communities while pirates just move their operation from place to place with limited consequences. This just isn't a good step to take.
January 17, 201214 yr Yeah, and even Wikipedia's blackout isn't global. From what I understand it's just their English-language site.It is.
January 17, 201214 yr I'm very surprised YouTube and by virtue of ownership Google aren't participating in the blackout. If SOPA passes then YouTube might as well just shut down...
January 17, 201214 yr Author It's not perfect, but the Digital Millenium Copyright Act was a pretty good start and it's already on the books. It allows user-generated sites to police themselves at the request of copyright holders. Copyright holders alert a site (YouTube, Facebook, reddit) that copyrighted material is circulated on their site and the company then gives the user notice and then takes it down. But this bill uses a Patriot Missile to swat a mosquito. It allows entire sites to be shut down. These are online communities almost completely devoid of management-generated content. YouTube, reddit, etc. simply couldn't exist if they could be shut down every time their users posted copyrighted material. I understand the goals. But the execution is very poor for no other reason than I don't think it's going to work. Pirates can simply start a new site very quickly while the law will just be a massive hassle for otherwise usable sites like Google and Facebook. Imagine the resources it's going to take for sites to constantly be policing online communities while pirates just move their operation from place to place with limited consequences. This just isn't a good step to take. Exactly. I think one of the main problems is that this bill attacks “facilitators” of copyright infringement, which is essentially any website that contains a link to or discussion about websites that have copyrighted content. Even BGP could fall under this umbrella as the majority of the content is user-generated and someone could easily and unknowingly link to an offending site, post a copyrighted image, etc. Another big problem is that the bill was crafted by entertainment lawyers and thus the technical details of the internet are either very vague or outright incorrect. The tech sites I’ve seen have had a field day lampooning some of the inaccuracies, but are also utterly terrified of the implications. The legislators in favor of the bill have also demonstrated that they are terribly ignorant about the technology and have struggled to answer very basic questions about it (all the while refusing to allow experts to testify or even slow the bill down for debate until the online uproar). Considering the technological illiteracy of the Supreme Court – which has been documented in recent cases were the Supremes struggled to grasp things as simple as a text message – and you have a situation that is ripe for disaster. At the end of the day, these bills would give the Justice Department unprecedented latitude in seizing, shutting down, or blocking access to internet sites and would also give copyright holders similarly broad latitude in suing internet sites, all without ever punishing the actual copyright violators. Copyright in the digital age is a thorny issue and one that the entertainment industry has struggled to adapt to. But, this is a massive boon to the entertainment industry – as one would expect since they authored the bill. It demonstrates the chokehold lobbying has on our government as we watch a bipartisan group of legislators jump through hoops to defend a bill they clearly don’t understand.
January 17, 201214 yr Author It looks like Google will feature a message on their homepage tomorrow regarding their opposition to the bills.
January 17, 201214 yr It looks like Google will feature a message on their homepage tomorrow regarding their opposition to the bills. That was fairly predictable. I assume youtube will have the same thing.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.