Hitler reacts to SOPA

[Gz Rider]

...

[mole2]

Originally Posted by Gz Rider

That was my exact understanding with which I have written all my posts on this thread. Where have I shown a lack of understanding?

Copyright=the right to use a given peice such as writing, music, movies, technical data, that a person has created.

SOPA=A bill to help prevent the theft of copyrighted material by punishing websites that fail to enforce copyright rules.

Right?

Wrong. A pirate site is already covered in the Digital act. SOPA is unneeded for that.

Again, you don't seem to understand. Copyright protects the intelectual property and gives recourse to an offender in the courts.

SOPA will punish not the person who infringes, but the web site where the links are and the hosts. They did nothing wrong. It's the person who violated the copyright who should and does get punished in court. The innocent operator, in this case Dupo, who is getting punished with SOPA.

by the way, the mere fact that I put music to my video WITHOUT getting financial compensation for it is not a violation of copyright. None the less if you complain under SOPA then GZ250BIKE goes down and Dupo did nothing wrong. He has to sue to get the site back up costing him.

I'm done with this because you have some twisted idea that SOPA is meant to help copyright holders which the copyright law already does. It does nothing but give the gov't control over inet content. If you're for that then have at it. The inet as you know it will disappear.

[Gz Rider]

...

[Meme]

I have to agree with mole2. This was a run around attempt to give the government and the ultra rich more power. It was worded in a way to protect those with power and take from those without it. It puts the burden of proof on the accused, and they aren't even accused of doing something wrong, only of hosting what someone else did wrong. The looser in this whole scenario would be the American people and ultimately the entire world of internet users.

Plain and simple, if you think SOPA is good for the country, I think you are not paying enough attention.

[mole2]

Originally Posted by Gz Rider

If you don't want to discuss this, I certainly can't make you but my undertsanding of copyright and SOPA is not wrong as anyone reading this thread can see. I think you understand it as well.

I'm going to give this one more shot. SOPA/PIPA does NOT apply to domestic sites but rather it is for international sites. The copyright laws and the Digital Millinium Act (another bad law) are what applies to domestic sites. SOPA grants the US gov't the ability to have the domains of international sites removed from domestic name servers without any proof - just on the accusation - of copyright infringement. This grants the US gov't the same ability to filter international content that China uses to hinder information from reaching it's people. An example would be if someone in the UK were to post a link to a derogatory news artiicle about Obama on a UK site the US gov't can block the host of that site. If you're in favor of that then have at it.

[Gz Rider]

...

[Gz Rider]

...

[blaine]

Came across this today and thought I'd share it:

A Copyright Quickie: Canada Is About To Pass Sopa’s Evil Little Brother. Politely.


I’m a Canadian.

We’re a quiet bunch; prone to enjoying hockey, drinking stronger beer than our friends south of the border, and lovers of fries smothered in cheese curds and gravy.

We also, apparently, have an inferiority complex when it comes to being evil dirt bags, because we’ve decided to pass our very own version of SOPA up here.

Only better*

Meet Bill-C11. Formerly Bill C-32. (I think they thought if they made the number lower people would care less about it?)

Or as we call it up here; Her Royal Majesty V, Zzzzzzz

We like our politics dry up here.

But, as innocuous as it sounds, C-11 does a whole lot that SOPA did with a few extra twists you might not find in the Wikipedia write-up.

Like your PVR? You can’t keep it under C-11.

Like ripping CDs to your iPod? Say bye-bye.

Hey, do you want to be able to unlock your $500 smartphone and take it to a provider less dedicated to violating your wallet? That won’t be allowed either.

Did you get accused of internet piracy but no evidence has been presented and a trial date hasn’t even been set? Under C-11 your ISP will now be forced to terminate your internet access.

And people say that governments can’t be bought.

We’re not going to get Google or Wikipedia to go dark up here. We don’t have as robust a tech industry to act as a public counterbalance to entertainment industry interests. We have a Prime Minister (that’s French for Dear Leader under the current regime) who doesn’t give a suckling goat what the people think about his policies.

But we do have a lot more recourse in our political system to make politicians pay than our Yankee brethren do. (Yes I know I just insulted everyone south of the Mason Dixon line. I’m sorry. You trying caring about foreign geographical terminology when every person you’ve ever met from a particular country still thinks it’s the height of hilarity to ask if you live in an igloo.) We have things like votes of no confidence that can really bugger up a sitting House member’s day.
:roll: :cool:

[Gz Rider]

...

[greatmaul]

Part of the thing with sopa, and I agree that piracy hurts creative people, is that the bill can be used to shut down free speech. If someone on some website complains about a product or a corporation, then they can use this bill to easily have that entire website shut down. The end result of this is that websites will not allow posts which say anything negative about corporations, because they will not want to risk being shut down.

"The idea that we're going to preemptively have the government start censoring the Internet on behalf of giant corporations' economic interests, strikes me as exactly the wrong thing to do," former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said in opposition to the bills, according to a Washington Post article.
from http://www.trumanindex.com/sopa-infr...9#.TyW0hcWJc_w