Blacked Out

poadeleted21

poadeleted21

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Aug 18, 2011
Messages
12,332
Just noticed wikipedia is blacked out due to the SOPA/PIPA fiasco.

It's like internet IQ kryptonite!
 
Last edited:
Google only went so far as to block out their logo. They should have executed a SOPA block on the entire web.
 
Jim Logajan said:
Google only went so far as to block out their logo. They should have executed a SOPA block on the entire web.
Click to expand...

Google has lots-o-paying customers and contracts to hold up. Not aware of any that Wikipedia does.
 
Jim Logajan said:
Google only went so far as to block out their logo. They should have executed a SOPA block on the entire web.
Click to expand...

They should execute a SOPA block on the sites of the SOPA supporters.

Isn't that what SOPA wants - for google to block objectionable sites.
 
Last edited:
Pirated software and sale of counterfeit items is a big deal and shutting down sources of that stealing is a bad thing? :dunno:

No one is gonna care if someone posts a video clip of a copyrighted movie and posts it on You Tube. It's when companies in China start mass produce ipads. Some regulation is needed.
 
As a web designer I can assure you that SOPA would be a bad, bad thing for The united states.

Here is how I have heard it:

1. The government hears that you have a picture on your website that you did not take.

2. The government blocks your domain name on all ISP's (you can still enter the site's IP address to access it) they do this without a court hearing or any kind of legal proceeding.

Now that may be going to the deep end of blocking a site because of one picture that is not yours, but you now get the picture.

Also this bill has absolutely nothing to do with China producing fake iPads? A teacher this morning walked in and said he liked the SOPA bill because it stops websites from getting hacked, I almost barfed right on the spot.

Will somebody on the board who truly understands this bill write up a short summary? I can not really trust what I am reading in the news. And I do not truly understand this bill.
 
loudbagel said:
As a web designer I can assure you that SOPA would be a bad, bad thing for The united states.

Here is how I have heard it:

1. The government hears that you have a picture on your website that you did not take.

2. The government blocks your domain name on all ISP's (you can still enter the site's IP address to access it) they do this without a court hearing or any kind of legal proceeding.

Now that may be going to the deep end of blocking a site because of one picture that is not yours, but you now get the picture.

Also this bill has absolutely nothing to do with China producing fake iPads? A teacher this morning walked in and said he liked the SOPA bill because it stops websites from getting hacked, I almost barfed right on the spot.

Will somebody on the board who truly understands this bill write up a short summary? I can not really trust what I am reading in the news. And I do not truly understand this bill.
Click to expand...

If you " truly don't understand the bill" how do you know for certainty the government will shut your web site for posting a picture you didn't take?

The bill takes aim at pirated music, and the sale of pirated goods.
 
Geico266 said:
If you " truly don't understand the bill" how do you know for certainty the government will shut your web site for posting a picture you didn't take?

The bill takes aim at pirated music, and the sale of pirated goods.
Click to expand...

Given the Government's track record of hitting what it aims at and not inflicting collateral damage, I hope everyone understands when people have concerns.
 
Geico266 said:
If you " truly don't understand the bill" how do you know for certainty the government will shut your web site for posting a picture you didn't take?

The bill takes aim at pirated music, and the sale of pirated goods.
Click to expand...

Is that right? They can pass all the laws they want they're never going to stop that or even slow it down. It would take a technically ignorant politician blinded by campaign contributions to think otherwise. What they should have been doing with all that lobbying money is figuring out a new business model to operate in a new climate instead of trying to buy legislation that hurts consumers (AKA Their customers).

I think the author of reddit said it best.

Reddit Founder Alexis Ohanian on CNBC: "Why is it that when Republicans and Democrats need to solve the budget and the deficit, there's deadlock, but when Hollywood lobbyists pay them $94 million dollars to write legislation, people from both sides of the aisle line up to co-sponsor it?"
Click to expand...

I'll give them all the $100 flight fees they want, that's just money. This would be a big ole broad hand over of power to people who don't need it, can't be trusted with it, who are puppets for big corporations who can't stand to see the world change around them because they can't figure out how to operate in it, or are refusing to.
 
Last edited:
Bob Noel said:
Given the Government's track record of hitting what it aims at and not inflicting collateral damage, I hope everyone understands when people have concerns.
Click to expand...
Considering the government's track record on immigration and drugs, They have all these laws, spend all this money, and they don't even put a dent in the problem. I wonder where they are going to get the resources to pursue the billions of people on the internet? How much is this going to cost the taxpayers. Maybe I'm way off the mark here. I have not done a lot of research on this law, but it seems to me that it is just another example of the legislature passing a law without giving a whole lot of thought about how they are going to enforce it. Isn't there already laws that are supposed to protect against copyright infringement? Why aren't they working? Do we really need another law to address the problem?
 
Maxmosbey said:
Considering the government's track record on immigration and drugs, They have all these laws, spend all this money, and they don't even put a dent in the problem. I wonder where they are going to get the resources to pursue the billions of people on the internet? How much is this going to cost the taxpayers. Maybe I'm way off the mark here. I have not done a lot of research on this law, but it seems to me that it is just another example of the legislature passing a law without giving a whole lot of thought about how they are going to enforce it. Isn't there already laws that are supposed to protect against copyright infringement? Why aren't they working? Do we really need another law to address the problem?
Click to expand...

The problem the MPAA et. al. have isn't that there aren't laws in place to go after "billions" of people on the internet. It's that they don't want to do it.
Lets say I make a video on youtube of me flying, I set the background music to Pink Floyd's Learning to Fly. Whatever record label owns the rights to that song would have their lawyer send a DMCA based ceist and desist and youtube would then take the video down, fair use or not. It's just not worth it to anybody except the entity that only has to send a simple form letter sent on some law firms digital letterhead.

That's the way it is today and even this has been BROADLY abused, because WMG, MPAA or whoever is likely to have more money and lawyers than me and willing to give YouTube a bigger headache than they want. So youtube just takes down the video.

Now what this law would like to see happen is that MPAA or whoever whines that YouTube is facilitating the distribution of pirated material to whoever tells your web browser where YouTube is today and make it where you can't get to youtube anymore.

The even nastier part is, some have speculated for good reasons that companies like Monster Cable, don't care much for the used market for their products since it's likely easier to get a used cable off eBay than it is to order new ones. So since they're POed that they can't sell new ones due to a rich used market, they'll claim that eBay is facilitating the sell of knock off cables (which they likely are and would remove the listings if pointed out to them by an offended party) to just shut eBay out altogether, they've gone so far as to call eBay and Craigslist "rogue" sites.

The bigger sites could likely fight it, but upload that same video here instead of youtube and bye bye POA. Basically any site that allows unvetted user created content would be pretty much a sitting duck depending on what mood the MPAA and their cronies are in that day.
 
Last edited:
Geico266 said:
Pirated software and sale of counterfeit items is a big deal and shutting down sources of that stealing is a bad thing? :dunno:

Isn't that a civil issue? why is the government involved?

No one is gonna care if someone posts a video clip of a copyrighted movie and posts it on You Tube. It's when companies in China start mass produce ipads. Some regulation is needed.
Click to expand...

International piracy is a big problem, but why do we allow these imports ? don't we have a customs agency? Simply stop all imports from any country that allows this to happen, until they cure their problems.
 
Geico266 said:
Pirated software and sale of counterfeit items is a big deal and shutting down sources of that stealing is a bad thing? :dunno:

No one is gonna care if someone posts a video clip of a copyrighted movie and posts it on You Tube. It's when companies in China start mass produce ipads. Some regulation is needed.
Click to expand...

Yea just like the goverment agency TSA they only stop terrorism and do not inconvenience everone else.
Or do you think the new goverment agnecy will get it right this time:mad2:
 
To hell with why, the issue is allowing the government to take enforcement action with out due process of law. Blocking the web sites after a court process where those involved have a chance to argue their side wouldnt bug me, but that isn't the case here.
 
Geico266 said:
Pirated software and sale of counterfeit items is a big deal and shutting down sources of that stealing is a bad thing? :dunno:

No one is gonna care if someone posts a video clip of a copyrighted movie and posts it on You Tube. It's when companies in China start mass produce ipads. Some regulation is needed.
Click to expand...

They already do care and they shut the videos down on a case by case basis.. Everyday.

This fine piece of work of legislation has almost ZERO to do with knockoff products.

The big music/mpaa is tired of having to nit pick and actually prosecute/bug offenders. They want to shut down the venues they use even if 99.9999999999999999% of the site is legitimate. So, they want this broad sweeping legislation so they can just say "Damn it, we're tired of dealing with YouTube's users, just shut YouTube down ALREADY!!!!"

Here's what they want to do make it easier to do without due process.

http://www.channelsurfing.net/
 
Last edited:
Skylane81E said:
To hell with why, the issue is allowing the government to take enforcement action with out due process of law. Blocking the web sites after a court process where those involved have a chance to argue their side wouldnt bug me, but that isn't the case here.
Click to expand...

That is the big issue, just like any administrative law. We say you are guilty, here is your fine, and you have no recourse. think IRS, FAA,TSA, and host of others.
 
Tom-D said:
International piracy is a big problem, but why do we allow these imports ? don't we have a customs agency? Simply stop all imports from any country that allows this to happen, until they cure their problems.
Click to expand...
It is called smuggling,:rolleyes: How good are they at stopping the drug flow. think software will be any different? Stopping it at the source hasn't been effective.:mad2: It is supply & demand driven. Raw unfettered Capitalism.:idea: Great Idea stopping ALL imports .:yikes: So we get no coffee till the cocaine problem disappears? :nono: No easy answers. Dave
 
I worked in the international/intermodal shipping industry for 5 years, 2003-2008, no way in hell they can even dent it, you can ship whatever you want wherever you want. There's too much junk coming in to look in every box.
 
Just going to add my usual comment...

You're getting all the government you keep voting for and paying for.
 
Jim Logajan said:
Google only went so far as to block out their logo. They should have executed a SOPA block on the entire web.
Click to expand...
Between 2100 PST and 0430 PST, Google was blacked out to me. Each time I tried to access any Google feature I was redirected to a page about SOPA.
 
Does this really have anything to do with copyright infringement, or is this about the fact that thanks to the internet big recording companies and movie studios no longer have a monopoly on content creation and distribution? My guess is that this isn't an attack on people using content that the RIAA and MPAA companies own copyrights to, but an attack on the content they don't.
 
Geico266 said:
If you " truly don't understand the bill" how do you know for certainty the government will shut your web site for posting a picture you didn't take?

The bill takes aim at pirated music, and the sale of pirated goods.
Click to expand...

With a nuclear weapon. The potential for collateral damage is what all the various EFF/ACLU/etc are up in arms about.
 
My understanding of it is that PoA could be shutdown, without due process, simply for someone posting a link to another site that had an image of a Jeppesen approach plate.

Does that sound like legislation we want? No thanks. I commend those that did the blackout.
 
jesse said:
My understanding of it is that PoA could be shutdown, without due process, simply for someone posting a link to another site that had an image of a Jeppesen approach plate.

Does that sound like legislation we want? No thanks. I commend those that did the blackout.
Click to expand...

Sure you know this but... Right now what would happen is a Jeppesen lawyer would have to be mad enough about it to send out a copy of his standard cease and desist letter and make some vague reference to the DMCA and mention some big numbers of the trouble you could be in. the recipient of said letter would probably not think it was worth it to fight and just remove the link in question even though it probably wasn't illegal to being with.

That's the way it works now and it's universally abused, I don't know why anyone would think handing over more power would be any different.

If I explain how a successful bank heist was pulled off, am i the one that should be prosecuted if you go do it?
 
denverpilot said:
Just going to add my usual comment...

You're getting all the government you keep voting for and paying for.
Click to expand...

This could easily go SZ, so I'll try to be careful. Often government can do these things without legislation, so we may not have an opportunity to "vote" for or against those who work the system.

As far as paying for it. What happens when you don't pay taxes to the IRS? Most of them are "witheld" (confiscated) anyway.
 
chucky said:
Does this really have anything to do with copyright infringement, or is this about the fact that thanks to the internet big recording companies and movie studios no longer have a monopoly on content creation and distribution? My guess is that this isn't an attack on people using content that the RIAA and MPAA companies own copyrights to, but an attack on the content they don't.
Click to expand...

This is the best Video on the subject I have found.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9h2dF-IsH0I&feature=g-all-f&context=G2861683FAAAAAAAAAAA
 
Geico266 said:
If you " truly don't understand the bill" how do you know for certainty the government will shut your web site for posting a picture you didn't take?

The bill takes aim at pirated music, and the sale of pirated goods.
Click to expand...

Look at http://www.channelsurfing.net if you want to see how this will work out. That site showed television content to users out of market. No stealing, no claim of ownership, just streaming local channels out of market.

That's what SOPA will do. Remove many sites that could serve a great purpose because the US Gov't thinks it breaks the law (many times, without verification).

The Internet should not be controlled. People who break the law should.
 
TMetzinger said:
Highly recommended.

I worked in the music biz in the late 80s and this guy is right on when he talks about how media companies were horrified by the specter of easy copying, and how the home audio recording legislation backfired on them by explicitly permitting non-commercial copying.
Click to expand...

Reminds me of this:

Take the truck, the boat, the helicopter, that we've sent you. Don't wait for the time machine, because we're never going to invent something that returns you to 1965 when copying was hard and you could treat the customer's convenience with contempt.​

http://radar.oreilly.com/2012/01/the-presidents-challenge.html
 
chucky said:
Does this really have anything to do with copyright infringement, or is this about the fact that thanks to the internet big recording companies and movie studios no longer have a monopoly on content creation and distribution? My guess is that this isn't an attack on people using content that the RIAA and MPAA companies own copyrights to, but an attack on the content they don't.
Click to expand...
Ya know what, though? They're not starving because of the Internet...

This year the movie industry made $30 billion (1/3 in the U.S.) from box-office revenue.

But the total movie industry revenue was $87 billion. Where did the other $57 billion come from?

From sources that the studios at one time claimed would put them out of business: Pay-per view TV, cable and satellite channels, video rentals, DVD sales, online subscriptions and digital downloads.​

More here at Barry's:
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2012/0...m-technologies-it-claimed-would-kill-profits/
 
SkyHog said:
The Internet should not be controlled. People who break the law should.
Click to expand...

That is called personally responsibility, the government does not believe in it.

other wise this would be a civil law issue.

If I stole your property, would it be an issue that congress should be involved with ?
 
This is akin to shutting down a highway because someone who lives on it told someone else how to steal a movie.
 
rpadula said:
Ya know what, though? They're not starving because of the Internet...
Click to expand...

Yeah, I know. That's really what makes me think it's not piracy. I think the problem for them is that there is an enormous amount of content that they aren't being created. The real problem is that I could imagine that many people probably spend as much time in a week now watching videos of cats and babies and jackasses wiping out on skateboards as they do watching movies or tv shows. It's not that they aren't making money, but that they think they could be making more.

Tom-D said:
This is the best Video on the subject I have found.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9h2dF-IsH0I&feature=g-all-f&context=G2861683FAAAAAAAAAAA
Click to expand...

This is exactly what I was thinking, except explained much more coherently. Thanks.
 
You know, if you incarcerate everyone you have an excellent captive labor pool.

Around here, if you buy Tilapia fillets at Whole Foods, they most likely came from the inmate-run fish farms in Cañon City, CO.

The inmates get paid $0.60 an 8-hour shift, and up to $5 a day in bonus incentives.

$5000 of any profit an inmate's work makes goes to paying for either their incarceration or restitution. Minimum wage laws do not apply since the product doesn't cross State lines.

The rest of the profit goes to the owners of the huge company that runs multiple business at the prison under the guise of "rehabilitation".

Think they can undercut any non-inmate run business on price? You bet.

Enjoy your fish dinner!

Make that YouTube video of Oprah on a Jet Ski with Jesus and you too can join the fish farming rehab folks in the Federal pokey.
 
denverpilot said:
You know, if you incarcerate everyone you have an excellent captive labor pool.

Around here, if you buy Tilapia fillets at Whole Foods, they most likely came from the inmate-run fish farms in Cañon City, CO.

The inmates get paid $0.60 an 8-hour shift, and up to $5 a day in bonus incentives.

$5000 of any profit an inmate's work makes goes to paying for either their incarceration or restitution. Minimum wage laws do not apply since the product doesn't cross State lines.

The rest of the profit goes to the owners of the huge company that runs multiple business at the prison under the guise of "rehabilitation".

Think they can undercut any non-inmate run business on price? You bet.
Click to expand...

"Shaw-shank redemption"
 
I work in the film industry and my own DVD distribution business has come to an almost complete halt, but I would be daft to blame it on piracy. Piracy takes some money out of our pockets, but the amount really is a small one. Where we have lost it is that everything is moving online and the people in our industry don't want to do the work to figure out how to make profits off of that. Selling DVDs (the lion's share of film profits) is easy, trying to sell digital content isn't. My personal feeling is that if we priced digital content appropriately, then people would pay vs stealing the content. Once a movie is online, there is very little overhead, sell it for a buck a movie, take our money and move on.

I don't believe that this is what SOPA is all about...

None of the SOPA stuff makes sense. Monster Cable listed Craigslist as a site that it wanted removed from the DNS listings. They probably constitute .0001% of the sales on there, but they want everybody to have to buy a new cable from them instead of buying used, so let's shut the whole site down for everybody. That has nothing to do with piracy, and they are willing to affect the freedoms of tens of millions of people to try to make an extra buck themselves.

I think that ultimately, this is an attempt to gain a tool to restrict access to anything that affronts the powers that be in DC. They need a tool to deal with things like Wikileaks, so they try to get that tool under the guise of "stopping theft" that, of course, we will all support, the problem for them is that we are not all as dumb as they believe.
 
misbehaved said:
I work in the film industry and my own DVD distribution business has come to an almost complete halt, but I would be daft to blame it on piracy. Piracy takes some money out of our pockets, but the amount really is a small one. Where we have lost it is that everything is moving online and the people in our industry don't want to do the work to figure out how to make profits off of that. Selling DVDs (the lion's share of film profits) is easy, trying to sell digital content isn't. My personal feeling is that if we priced digital content appropriately, then people would pay vs stealing the content. Once a movie is online, there is very little overhead, sell it for a buck a movie, take our money and move on.

I don't believe that this is what SOPA is all about...

None of the SOPA stuff makes sense. Monster Cable listed Craigslist as a site that it wanted removed from the DNS listings. They probably constitute .0001% of the sales on there, but they want everybody to have to buy a new cable from them instead of buying used, so let's shut the whole site down for everybody. That has nothing to do with piracy, and they are willing to affect the freedoms of tens of millions of people to try to make an extra buck themselves.

I think that ultimately, this is an attempt to gain a tool to restrict access to anything that affronts the powers that be in DC. They need a tool to deal with things like Wikileaks, so they try to get that tool under the guise of "stopping theft" that, of course, we will all support, the problem for them is that we are not all as dumb as they believe.
Click to expand...

1000% agree, but I do think the politicians backing this mess are dumber than we believe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top