Convo with my dad about SOPA...
 

Him: Have you heard of this thing called SOPA?

Me: Uh, yeah...

Him: I think it's complete bullshit...

Me: Um, alright... why?

Him: Sites like Pirate Bay, tubes, and social networking are going to be fucked. That's fucked up. This is going to kill the internet as we know it. This is only going to benefit the huge companies like Microsoft.

Me: Interesting, dad...


Overwhelming theme among anti-SOPA people are piracy advocation. Since when does having a "free and open internet" include being able to steal whatever the fuck they want? They think they have a claim to your IP. They propagandize their agenda by saying it will be the death of the internet. Nope, just the death of piracy. If that's all they use the internet for... fuck 'em. Let's wipe these mother fuckers offline, and kill their revenue sources. :thumbsup

Every SOPA thread on sites like Engadget has these idiots coming out of the woodwork like cockroaches. They're rallying for the right to steal. They think their argument has merit. Their mantra seems to be "it's on the internet, it's free!"

Piracy needs to be stopped, SOPA isn't the answer. That's why it's dead.

But of course, they already paid for their internet connection so everything in it should be free.

I think that's their theory anyway.

:upsidedow

Yeah, the parasites and thieves profiting from stealing are having a real freak out. SOPA is not dead...just being neutered by companies that depend on theft to make profit.

If anyone thinks the fight against piracy is over, think again. Yes, SOPA was brought up by a Texan whackjob...but too many others support many of the concepts within it. Only people who are unable to create anything are against the stopping of piracy. The parasites of the world.

SOPA or no SOPA, a dual tiered internet is inevitable. The superfast, streaming HD web will be piracy free. The big ISPs will collude with Hollywood & TV/tablet/phone makers to ensure its family friendly & cannot stream stolen content.

the internet for the rest of us, without the deep pockets to pay $100+/month for top tier internet, will get crappy speed, viruses, & pirates run amok. Basically todays web.

so i dont care too much what happens with SOPA because the tech industry is going to create hardware solutions to the piracy problem, at least for the rich.

That doesn't make much sense to me. If you create a tier just for the rich, who have the money to pay for the movies, songs, and software they want and wouldn't wasted their time or take chances downloading pirated content, how does this affect piracy? This is just separating those that pay anyway, from those that pirate.

its related to net neutrality & the ability of ISPs to discriminate against certain traffic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_di...As_Anti-Piracy

even if SOPA fails, the ISPs & hollywood will find a hardware solution, which piracy will be marginalized to slower bandwidth. Maybe thats not a big deal today. Once HD content is prevalent on tablets/phones/TVs, the consumer will expect a certain level of quality, & pirated content will live on only on dated hardware.

another way to think about it...is the versatility of your PC vs your smartphone/HDTV. Your phone & TV have limited controls, & an interface provided by the hardware supplier that limits what you can do (short of being a hacker)

They will make tech so that nobody can copy anything with their TV or their phone. Your music collection is slowly converting from something you download & carry, to something in a cloud. You will lose control of how you manage media.

Piracy will survive, but it will be marginalized to older technology & wont be satisfactory to HD consumers.

in 2010, verizon & google cut a deal to engineer this dual tier. it was big news back then...

Do you guys remember the days before you all bitched about piracy? Everyone was stealing back then too.

This pro-piracy attitude is what's wrong, not the other way around. You may not create content, but as an affiliate you stand to benefit from a system that's more locked-down. When surfers can't find pirated content, they will buy... and that's something you should be all about.

i hope 90's comes back in terms of sales.,

I have been told by my girlfriends father that the internet will no longer exist...

as we know it

Yeah, that's the pirate propaganda again. Same shit my dad said. Same shit one of my close friends said. Everyone's pissed off all their free shit is gonna get taken away.

And they want to tell everyone their freedoms are being taken away. These people don't know what the fuck freedoms are.

you sound bitter. let go of the hate.

I didn't understand what he was saying... I think it means that the internet will be governed like the government...

http://www.ghosttraveller.com/aurora_wayne_garth.jpg

No seriously, let's choke off some pirates.

would you support sopa if the penalty for making a bogus complaint was the revocation of all your copyrights

such a clause could protect the pirate bay since they could never prove the complaint was bogus.


it would only punish the copyright holder who abuse the law to take down legit sites.

Give me a fucking break. One excuse after another, endless arguments, all about the same fucking thing ... Using the property of others without paying or permission. Simple as that.

.

moron i am talking about totally innocent sites that were WRONFULLY accused period.

so explain yourself how is talking about a penalty that could apply when a copyright holder wrongfully accuses a site this IS authorized (by licience or fair use) be "trying to use the property of others without permission"

I'm not following what you're saying. I'm not talking about making bogus complaints, and I'm not talking about protecting Pirate Bay.

It sounds like we're on different pages.

Yes, I think sites should be penalized for submitting bogus complaints. No, I don't think their copyrights should become public domain when that happens. That doesn't accomplish anything but devaluing people's work. Do you think that would benefit you somehow?

putting the content in the public domain benefits everyone.

it benefits the site who was wrongfully accused because they can now sell/give away that content to recover their loses.

It benefits the public who was denied access to that legit site that should not have been blacklisted.

And it only punishes the copyright holder who chooses to abuse the law with the bogus complaint.

It doesn't devalue anyone else's content at all, because good copyright holders still get to keep their copyright.


the key point is that this kind of penalty doesn't protect the pirate bay because rogue sites will never be able to prove "that they were wrongfully accused".


BTW

how can you not see that blacklisting an INNOCENT company devalues that INNOCENT companies work too.

Okay, now I'm really not following. If you pirate Company A's content, and you get a bogus request from Company B to take it down... does not make Company A's content yours.

That makes no sense.

How hard is it to say that you'd support those filing false claims getting fucked if it meant your wonderful SOPA bill passed? Or do the protections you want only work one way?

http://targetlaw.com/consequences-of...kedown-request

I know it kills your argument when the facts are on the other side but there already are penalties for filing fraudulent claims. There's a name for your condition:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

so
A. I am actually guilty and therefore can't ever make a claim i am innocent
B. Company A didn't make a bogus complaint
C. the content doesn't get transfered to me, it goes into the public domain only if the accused site is innocent (not A) and Company A makes a bogus complaint (Not B).


Either nothing will happen to company B (because Company A backs them up) or Company B will lose their copyright (because Company A actually was ok with what was misrepresented as "piracy") and Company B screwed them over too.

Company A never loses shit.

A penalty so weak that it doesn't even act as a Deterrence at all, isn't really a penalty.

The average monetary damages from counter suits to dmca is less then 47% of the declared damages caused to the wrongfully accused after legal fees are deducted.

How would you feel if the maximum penalty for someone pirating your shit was 47% of the money you could prove you lost.

BTW do you want to give a single example ever of a person getting convicted for fraud for filing a bogus DMCA notice.

You have to convince the government to file changes for that penalty to be valid, and that an uphill battle.

It not a real penalty if it isn't enforced.

You talk about me then post this horse shit.

You are clearly out of touch with pretty much everything if that is your argument.

False claims! False claims! False claims! False claims! False claims! False claims!

OMFG... what are we going to to about false claims?!?!?1?!

OH noez!!!!

I've sent over 75,000 DMCA notices out. I've had 2....TWO...counter claims. (0.0027%). One was a pirate who thought by countering he could continue to get away with his crimes. His site is no longer in business by the way. The other was for a mainstream client who had a title go into the public domain and failed to notify me. In that case we spoke with the person countering and worked out an amicable deal. (He had uploaded it before it went into the public domain).

There are penalties for false claims just like there are penalties for filing a false police report making false accusations or writing bad checks. Doesn't mean the law is broken.

if that true then why do you object to a penalty that puts all your shit into the public domain

The second case was settled, so the wrongfully accused wouldn't demand the penalty of putting all the copyright holders shit into the public domain.

So here's Gideon Gallery's philosophy on how the law should work...

A car thief steals a car from Person A, but Person B who doesn't own the car points out that it's stolen. What Gideon would like to have happen in his fantasy... Person B's car is awarded to the thief.

That sounds absolutely fantastic for the thief! But we're not talking about protecting thieves. We're talking about how to wipe them off the face of this earth, and how to make their existence as miserable as possible. We're talking about protecting the property of content creators... not trying to figure out ways to reward thieves for doing something nefarious and underhanded. :2 cents:

Either way, the thief does not own the car. The thief has no claim to anyone's car. And the thief should be reprimanded.

SOPA will pass, too bad we are fucked :)

And there you have it. However, logic doesn't belong in a world where people think they deserve everything for free and get it without consequences.

What in the hell are you smoking good sir.

So if someone working at Sony mistakingly (or purposely) fires at the wrong site then all of Sonys work will become public domain? WTF?

Horse shit you say???

What the hell are you talking about?

The first link he posted clearly addressed your issue with false claims.

As for the second link, well... it's quite apparant that you're having difficulty finding consonance among your cognitions :)

.

Ever notice how the divide between people who support SOPA versus the people who don't support SOPA always hinges upon whether those people create content, or just merely consume it? People who don't create it... don't want any rules forbidding it's distribution.

Funny how people who don't create content can't be objective whatsoever.

It's really not, just people uninformed care about this.

The real argument and the real reason SOPA was formed is to have total control over all domains. If this goes through they will be able to take your domain without any proof or for a mistake.

Think about that.