SOPA, change the implementation

[shadron]

So as someone who mostly supports the idea of SOPA (that there should be regulation to stop the varieties of theft and fraud on the internet), I am asking what would you do to improve the implementation of SOPA.

For those who are unaware:

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

"The originally proposed bill would allow the U.S. Department of Justice, as well as copyright holders, to seek court orders against websites accused of enabling or facilitating copyright infringement. "

that is not the current proposal as I am sure it has been amended and is committee right now.

Here are the arguments against:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act#Arguments_against

One might start with this TED talk:



His suggestion is that instead of SOPA and PIPA, that the media companies do what they did for Napster - sue 'em. It worked, but it doesn't make everyone carrying out the spirit of the Audio Home Recording Act guilty, and destroying the access that we have today.

 

[Upchurch]

So let me ask you this: If SOPA and PIPA and all these harsh laws were to become accepted and implemented, would this at least mean that scam sites such as www.usafis.org could be completely eradicated?

Because if they can't even guarantee that, then this law is in fact nothing but useless crap that does nothing except destroy the little freedom of speech we have.

Scam sites would only be blocked by this law if they displayed copyrighted material without permission. In other words, they would be less susceptible than JREF would be.

Thanks for the try at least people.

So if the bill is scrapped and a new one generated:
-should it include the ability to sanction the transfer of copyrighted material without permission?

Therein lies the problem. What behavior are you trying to sanction? What does "transfer" mean?

If a JREF forum user posts a link to a torent site that allows people to download copyrighted movies, should the JREF be held accountable? If not, how you differentiate between other forums that might alot a section of their board to collecting links to torrents for downloading those same movies? Or is that not a problem either?

 

[Axiom_Blade]

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=freetard

That's so leotarded.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Go ahead then, define "music industry"

Wikipedia has a pretty good summary: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Music_industry

Nowhere is it even implied that consumers of music, like you or I, are themselves considered part of the industry. What you've claimed is, again, unadulterated nonsense.

 

[Jekyll's Guest]

If being the key word here. What are the odds that some guy who has thousands and thousands of movies on this disks has even watched your movie, though? This is the same argument that the MPAA and RIAA make. People download it because they can; that doesn't mean that they would've bought it, if they couldn't.

Exactly. This "studios lose billions to piracy!" thing is utter crap. Just because someone will watch a flick for free, doesn't mean they would pay $15 for it it they couldn't. Maybe they'd just skip it, it's not like it's oxygen, it's a movie, totally optional.

I've seen a lot of movies through Redbox, and about half of them I feel like I've wasted a dollar.

 

[Dancing David]

So let me ask you this: If SOPA and PIPA and all these harsh laws were to become accepted and implemented, would this at least mean that scam sites such as www.usafis.org could be completely eradicated?

Because if they can't even guarantee that, then this law is in fact nothing but useless crap that does nothing except destroy the little freedom of speech we have.

Now that is like asking if traffic laws stop high speed chases?


So should there be :some, no, any limits on digital transfers of unauthorized copyrighted materials?

 

[Dancing David]

Uh, and that would be needed why exactly? After all, there are already plenty of laws regarding copyright and what sanctions are possible if someone violates those laws.

There is absolutely no need for any new bill or law. use the existing ones first, and if for some strange reason they are not sufficient, then (and _only_ then) think about new ones.

Fair enough, so what sanctions against groups like Megaupload?

 

[Christian Klippel]

Fair enough, so what sanctions against groups like Megaupload?

If the copyright holder can reliably, without any doubt, show that a certain files or files there contain their protected material, then Megaupload should be notified, and in turn forced remove that/those file(s). If they fail to do so within a reasonable amount of time, then monetary sanctions (after it went to court, of course) are in order, as with every other proven copyright infringement. Also, after a court ruled so, Megaupload should be forced to hand out user-account information and/or the IP address data of the user who uploaded it, plus access time when that upload happened.

Simple as that, since Megaupload is not the one who uploaded the file(s) in the first place. They simple provide a service which may or may not be used for crimes by others.

However, in no way should they, or anyone else operating such a (or similar) service be forced to hand out that information just because of the say-so of any alleged copyright holder. There must be proof first that the claimant is indeed the copyright holder to force them to delete that/those file(s). Any further action, like handing out user-account data, should be required only after a court has ruled so.

This is about privacy and security of users as well. Giving any company the power to demand such data just by say-so opens up a huge privacy risk. Imagine some oppressive regime requesting such data under the disguise of copyright infringement, just because they found that some user uploaded a regime-critical pamphlet or similar.

Corporate greed and wishes have to stand back and respect citizens rights first. They already invaded those rights far too deep. It's time that this stops and gets reversed.

What they actually want would translate, for example, to holding car manufacturers responsible for the faults of the actual drivers causing accidents, plus the drivers themselves, and then some.

Greetings,

Chris

ETA: Oh, and keep in mind that all the sanctions/etc. that i proposed here are already possible under current law. It's not the users or the providers fault that they don't use them. Yes, going that way requires some effort, and in some cases some money. But then, that's what they are there for: to protect the rights of their artists/etc. That's what they get paid for, and no little sums for that matter.

 

[pipelineaudio]

Wikipedia has a pretty good summary: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Music_industry

Nowhere is it even implied that consumers of music, like you or I, are themselves considered part of the industry. What you've claimed is, again, unadulterated nonsense.

Then they are wrong

EVERY single fan is an extremely strong part of the entire decision process of the "music industry"*

Which I would still like to see you define, in a few sentences if possible

 

[Jekyll's Guest]

EVERY single fan is an extremely strong part of the entire decision process of the "music industry"*

I'm blinking and rubbing my eyes, but that sentence is still on the page.

 

[The Dark Lord]

Then they are wrong

EVERY single fan is an extremely strong part of the entire decision process of the "music industry"*

Which I would still like to see you define, in a few sentences if possible

I guess I am apart of the automobile industry because I own a car.

Music industry - Individuals and businesses involved in the production and sale of music.

 

[pipelineaudio]

Music industry - Individuals and businesses involved in the production and sale of music.

So, the Janitor at the local live music bar, is he in or out of the music industry?

Does that Janitor have the power to pass SOPA? Did he lobby for it?

What about, say the two biggest names in "the music industry" NAMM and AES, did they lobby for SOPA?

 

[The Dark Lord]

So, the Janitor at the local live music bar, is he in or out of the music industry?

Depends whether you think he is involved in the production and sale of music. Personally, I don't care.

Does that Janitor have the power to pass SOPA? Did he lobby for it?

I am sure you know that nobody means "every single person in the music industry" when they say "music industry" so I am not sure why you are playing these stupid games.

What about, say the two biggest names in "the music industry" NAMM and AES, did they lobby for SOPA?

Don't even know who they are nor do I care.

 

[pipelineaudio]

I am sure you know that nobody means "every single person in the music industry" when they say "music industry" so I am not sure why you are playing these stupid games.

If you care to read the thread I entered when it was claimed that music studios were among those behind SOPA

so I am not sure why you are playing these stupid obfuscation games

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Then they are wrong

Perhaps you can inform me of where in the 10 year history of that article it began to diverge from your particular reality.

EVERY single fan is an extremely strong part of the entire decision process of the "music industry"*

This is, again, unadulterated nonsense. Your repetition of it only makes me question your... rationality.

Which I would still like to see you define, in a few sentences if possible

I've provided you much more than a few sentences. It's true that those aren't my words, but they're an accurate representation of my idea of what constitutes the music industry. I tend to avoid reinventing the wheel, so to speak.

Also, I can't help but notice that you've provided absolutely nothing in support of your bizarre, personal definition of the phrase. Is there a reason for that?

So, the Janitor at the local live music bar, is he in or out of the music industry?

Out.

Does that Janitor have the power to pass SOPA? Did he lobby for it?

Irrelevant given my answer above.

What about, say the two biggest names in "the music industry" NAMM and AES, did they lobby for SOPA?

Hmm... So, for the statement, "The music industry lobbied for SOPA and/or PIPA," to be valid in your mind, every single individual and organization even remotely connected to the music industry must have personally or officially contacted their representative and pushed for the legislation? Really?

If you care to read the thread I entered when it was claimed that music studios were among those behind SOPA

so I am not sure why you are playing these stupid obfuscation games

NAMM and AES¹ aren't music studios, so your bringing them into the discussion appears to be some game of your own...


--
¹ Also, AES falls into the audio industry, not music industry.

 

[pipelineaudio]

NAMM and AES¹ aren't music studios, so your bringing them into the discussion appears to be some game of your own...


--
¹ Also, AES falls into the audio industry, not music industry.

Again you are conflating.

Obviously only an idiot would suggest that music studios could possibly be behind this, but unfortunately, one did so I had to say something

AES and NAMM were brought up as part of the "music industry" undeniably a huge part of it, setting standards, and deciding in a large way what styles and sounds would be around that year

And sorry, the janitor at the club is as much a part of "the music industry" as the imaginary cigar smoking fatman

Using your truther logic to claim "the music industry" is some giant nameless, faceless untouchable entity just makes you sound like a paranoid loon

 

[This is The End]

I haven't checked every SOPA thread to see if this has been posted yet (probably, it's almost a month old).

Everything you need to know about SOPA (as long as you can read fast (or pause) subtitles):

 

[Dancing David]

Therein lies the problem. What behavior are you trying to sanction? What does "transfer" mean?

If a JREF forum user posts a link to a torent site that allows people to download copyrighted movies, should the JREF be held accountable? If not, how you differentiate between other forums that might alot a section of their board to collecting links to torrents for downloading those same movies? Or is that not a problem either?

I was actually thinking that was where the discussion would occur , as to where the guideline would be.

My personal take would be that if a user posted a link to an illegal site, then just a request to remove that link would be adequate.

 

[Dancing David]

If the copyright holder can reliably, without any doubt, show that a certain files or files there contain their protected material, then Megaupload should be notified, and in turn forced remove that/those file(s). If they fail to do so within a reasonable amount of time, then monetary sanctions (after it went to court, of course) are in order, as with every other proven copyright infringement. Also, after a court ruled so, Megaupload should be forced to hand out user-account information and/or the IP address data of the user who uploaded it, plus access time when that upload happened.

makes sense.

 

[Joe Random]

I'm blinking and rubbing my eyes, but that sentence is still on the page.

By the logic of the sentence you quoted I'm a major player in the porn industry. Cool!