Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Kai

Stop Online Piracy Act

Recommended Posts

Kai   

If you are an American, there is an extremely serious act going into vote TOMORROW. It touts that it will stop "online piracy" but merely gives the government control of our internet and our freedoms and could possibly extend to my freedom to use this website.

If any of you could, Please write your elected officials about this....

Visit: http://www.americancensorship.org ...here you can write an anonymous email to congress as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Henry   

I heard about this a while back and I even started a topic about it here on FM: http://furmorphed.com/index.php?/topic/1223-the-end-of-online-gaming-streams-and-more/

No one really believed it would pass, but look at it now! We cannot let this happen. This would end the careers of some of the best internet stars of our day.That Guy With The Glasses, Angry Video Game Nerd, much of College Humor, and LPs are just some of the casualties. For those of you not in th US, you may not think this applies to you and that you will not be affected, but you are wrong.

http://thatguywiththeglasses.com/videolinks/thatguywiththeglasses/nostalgia-critic/33243-top-11-reasons-he-wont-review-digimon

Don't let the title fool you. Watch the video and you will see why other countries will be affected by this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kai   

This particular version is the House Version and is actually a separate bill than the one you posted previously (hence why i determined it a new topic worthy)

The discussion in the House Judiciary Committee has been extended till tomorrow. Currently the bill has been amended to the point that it shouldn't affect the general internet infrastructure at this time. However, ANY government regulation is the 1st step to government control of the free internet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Two-winged Cat   
Guest Two-winged Cat

Just to bring a little dose of reality to this particular topic, it's very unlikely this is going to get passed with the number of people who are against it. The likes of Google and Wikipedia will probably be able to stop it all on their own. And if it did get passed... which it won't... see the following:

ANY government regulation is the 1st step to government control of the free internet.

First, the Internet is not, and never has been, "free" in any sense. It has always been run by Internet Service Providers to their own rules for their own benefit. Most ISPs were originally nationalised, and some still are, so the governments have the world have always run the Internet. More restrictions changes nothing. And you have a very easy way out of being "controlled": terminate your contract with your Internet Service Provider, anyone can do that at any time with few or no negative consequences.

And second, regulation and control are two very different things; see also any good dictionary. It's a favourite tactic of wacky, out-there wingnuts to blur that particular line.

could possibly extend to my freedom to use this website.

FurMorphed does not host any copyrighted material without its author being the one who posted it here, so none of this will affect FurMorphed or the use thereof in any way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kai   

"As the most participatory form of mass speech yet developed, the Internet deserves the highest protection from government intrusion." ~Stewart Dalzell

When I mean "free," I am talking about the freedom of the internet as a global communication medium. It's like using a telephone; even though each area has localized telephone lines, the communication is intended to be free communication with unlimited amount of users. I can talk to somebody from Brazil usually without worry about what the content is about and without worrying that the person I am calling might be blocked from me to call (even in this, government has intervened and "listened in" on private conversations). When government intervenes and restricts this flow, they are essentially limiting this "freedom of speech" in some small form. When one regulation is imposed, it sets a precedent for another and another and another to follow. So that eventually, regulation becomes control, where its users have no freedom. Look at China, they can't even use Google without the government on their backs.

As far as this website is concerned, if the government deems this website as doing a poor job of preventing piracy (whether it is a problem or not...which currently it isn't)....then I could be blocked from viewing it. As long as there are real people using this website, piracy will always have the potential to exist. I'm not saying that they will absolutely do it, but there is potential to happen under any extremely loose interpretation of the bill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Two-winged Cat   
Guest Two-winged Cat

Let's put this into some kind of perspective here. The Internet was never "free". See my previous post. Let's also remember that there can be no freedom without taking responsibility for those freedoms - well, there shouldn't be, anyway. Regulations do not set precedents. They are atomic units. And drawing a parallel between your country and China - unless you live somewhere like, say, China - is kinda flawed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kai   

Despite what I may say, I will never get the point across. So my end of the discussion ends here. I don't wish for this to blow up into anything that I will be potentially angry at in the future. I have said what I came here to say, and I am done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Two-winged Cat   
Guest Two-winged Cat

I concur. I've made my logical argument and it doesn't seem to be having any effect, so I too am done. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Neybulot   

Just so it's noted, according to SOPA, any site that has or links to copyrighted material would be taken down in the United States specifically.

In case anyone thinks SOPA is dead for now as well, it's actually been stealthily moved to the 21st, so the thing is still kicking for now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kanibal   

He is massively too happy about all this. Still that video is spreading like wildfire and I'm pleased it's raising awareness and all however...

Someone by the handle of 'Cynical Brit' which is a name I love had this to say about that video.

Because people keep sending me this video I feel the need to tell people why I don't think it's a particularly good speech on the matter. Now the guy in question has done his research and brings up valid points. Yes, without question, there is hypocrisy in the industry when it comes to piracy, however this is not news nor is it the ace in the hole we've been looking for to bring these companies to their knees. Big corporations are hypocritical you say? Surely not! Hypocrisy isn't a "gotcha" for them, it's a state of being, it is the very air they breath. While acting rather smugly, the maker of the video has completely missed what's really important, informing people WHY this bill is bad. Catching companies out is not the way to stop this bill, education for the masses is. Yes, we get it, these companies profited from piracy. This is not a revelation, this has been known for a long time. This isn't going to convince a politician any more than convincing a pig that rolls in muck everyday that this particular brand of muck is disgusting. This kind of shady nonsense happens ALL THE TIME in American politics (it's not exclusive to America but America does have the largest lobbyist culture and the most money in it's politics of any country in the world). What matters is not what these companies have done in the past but what they will do if this bill passes. The consequences of this bill are dire. This is not about playing "spot the conspiracy", it's about the future of the internet and freedom of information. Regardless of the rather obnoxious nature in which this fellow expresses his opinion, which may very well put off many and makes the cause look far more wingnut than it needs to be, the real point is that it muddles the message. The message should be loud and clear, SOPA is bad because of A B and C. D E and F will happen if SOPA passes which prevents G H and I. It does not need to be any more complicated than that and the more complex the issue gets, the less people will actually care about it.

Stay on message, focus on what this bill actually does, not what the companies supporting it have done. These companies are incapable of embarrassment and discrediting them by saying "oh, but they did naughty things too!" is not a strong argument. SOPA is bad because it has the potential to cripple future innovation, strangle existing channels of freedom of expression, severely damage the competitive marketplace and gives sweeping powers to people who absolutely cannot be trusted with them, to censor and destroy for the benefit of their shareholders.

As many smart people have said. K.I.S.S. - Keep It Simple Stupid.

And this was his own explanation of SOPA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Voidpaw   
Guest Voidpaw

SOPA pisses me the hell off for many various reasons. All I'm gonna do anyways is change my I.P. with Ghost-IP (I think it's called) to an I.P. from the U.K. so SOPA wouldn't affect me anyway.

Silly politicians! The Internet is for intelligent people!

-E

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SOPA pisses me the hell off for many various reasons. All I'm gonna do anyways is change my I.P. with Ghost-IP (I think it's called) to an I.P. from the U.K. so SOPA wouldn't affect me anyway.

Silly politicians! The Internet is for intelligent people!

-E

IP Spoofing software is made illegal by it as well, 25 year minimum jail time estimated based on other laws, also it would still destroy hundreds of sites when their servers and such are DNS blocked, Seized, and wiped. So regardless, it will effect everyone, even those outside the USA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kanibal   

SOPA says nothing about IP spoofing, thats not the purpose of the bill although I'm sure it is covered by plenty of other acts in other places. A jail term that long is ridiculous so unless you would care to substantiate your claims with actual facts please stop posting. This should be a serious debate about the bill.

On the same note spoofing your IP would do no good as this bill its to do with DNS filtering and it matters not a bit what country you are in out pretend to be in. If the name servers are down and the website its gone pretending to be somewhere else will not help you.

People have already backed out of this topic and if it turns into scare mongering I will close it. I can see it started as a complete scare but lets move it away from that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kai   

....and i duly apologize for it. I was scared and did it out of stupid human emotion. I don't even know what came over me that entire week. I should have been more thoughtful in my initial posting and should have considered not posting it at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kanibal   

Well thank you for your apology but if we can turn it into a debate I would be interested in taking part. Though we will find it difficult to locate anyone who supports the act.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

SEC. 101. DEFINITIONS.


  • In this title:


      • (1) DOMAIN NAME- The term `domain name' has the meaning given that term in section 45 of the Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. 1127) and includes any subdomain designation using such domain name as part of an electronic address on the Internet to identify a unique online location.



          • (2) DOMAIN NAME SYSTEM SERVER- The term `domain name system server' means a server or other mechanism used to provide the Internet protocol address associated with a domain name.



              • (3) DOMESTIC DOMAIN NAME- The term `domestic domain name' means a domain name that is registered or assigned by a domain name registrar, domain name registry, or other domain name registration authority, that is located within a judicial district of the United States.



                  • (4) DOMESTIC INTERNET PROTOCOL ADDRESS- The term `domestic Internet Protocol address' means an Internet Protocol address for which the corresponding Internet Protocol allocation entity is located within a judicial district of the United States.



                      • (5) DOMESTIC INTERNET SITE- The term `domestic Internet site' means an Internet site for which the corresponding domain name or, if there is no domain name, the corresponding Internet Protocol address, is a domestic domain name or domestic Internet Protocol address.



                          • (6) FOREIGN DOMAIN NAME- The term `foreign domain name' means a domain name that is not a domestic domain name.



                              • (7) FOREIGN INTERNET PROTOCOL ADDRESS- The term `foreign Internet Protocol address' means an Internet Protocol address that is not a domestic Internet protocol address.



                                  • (8) FOREIGN INTERNET SITE- The term `foreign Internet site' means an Internet site that is not a domestic Internet site.



                                      • (9) INCLUDING- The term `including' means including, but not limited to.



                                          • (10) INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ENFORCEMENT COORDINATOR- The term `Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator' means the Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator appointed under section 301 of the Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual Property Act of 2008 (15 U.S.C. 8111).



                                              • (11) INTERNET- The term `Internet' has the meaning given that term in section 5362(5) of title 31, United States Code.



                                                  • (12) INTERNET ADVERTISING SERVICE- The term `Internet advertising service' means a service that for compensation sells, purchases, brokers, serves, inserts, verifies, clears, or otherwise facilitates the placement of an advertisement, including a paid or sponsored search result, link, or placement, that is rendered in viewable form for any period of time on an Internet site.



                                                      • (13) INTERNET PROTOCOL- The term `Internet Protocol' means a protocol used for communicating data across a packet-switched internetwork using the Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol, and includes any predecessor or successor protocol to such protocol.



                                                          • (14) INTERNET PROTOCOL ADDRESS- The term `Internet Protocol address' means a numerical label that is assigned to each device that participates in a computer network that uses the Internet Protocol for communication.



                                                              • (15) INTERNET PROTOCOL ALLOCATION ENTITY- The term `Internet Protocol allocation entity' means, with respect to a particular Internet Protocol address, the entity, local internet registry, or regional internet registry to which the smallest applicable block of Internet Protocol addresses containing that address is allocated or assigned by a local internet registry, regional internet registry, or other Internet Protocol address allocation authority, according to the applicable publicly available database of allocations and assignments, if any.



                                                                  • (16) INTERNET SEARCH ENGINE- The term `Internet search engine' means a service made available via the Internet that searches, crawls, categorizes, or indexes information or Web sites available elsewhere on the Internet and on the basis of a user query or selection that consists of terms, concepts, categories, questions, or other data returns to the user a means, such as a hyperlinked list of Uniform Resource Locators, of locating, viewing, or downloading such information or data available on the Internet relating to such query or selection.



                                                                      • (17) INTERNET SITE- The term `Internet site' means the collection of digital assets, including links, indexes, or pointers to digital assets, accessible through the Internet that are addressed relative to a common domain name or, if there is no domain name, a common Internet Protocol address.



                                                                          • (18) LANHAM ACT- The term `Lanham Act' means the Act entitled `An Act to provide for the registration and protection of trademarks used in commerce, to carry out the provisions of certain international conventions, and for other purposes', approved July 5, 1946 (commonly referred to as the `Trademark Act of 1946' or the `Lanham Act').



                                                                              • (19) NONAUTHORITATIVE DOMAIN NAME SERVER- The term `nonauthoritative domain name server' means a server that does not contain complete copies of domains but uses a cache file that is comprised of previous domain name server lookups, for which the server has received an authoritative response in the past.



                                                                                  • (20) OWNER; OPERATOR- The terms `owner' or `operator', when used in connection with an Internet site, includes, respectively, any owner of a majority interest in, or any person with authority to operate, such Internet site.



                                                                                      • (21) PAYMENT NETWORK PROVIDER-




                                                                                            • (A) IN GENERAL- The term `payment network provider' means an entity that directly or indirectly provides the proprietary services, infrastructure, and software to effect or facilitate a debit, credit, or other payment transaction.





                                                                                                  • (B) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION- For purposes of this paragraph, a depository institution (as such term is defined under section 3 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act) or credit union that initiates a payment transaction shall not be construed to be a payment network provider based solely on the offering or provision of such service.




                                                                                                      • (22) SERVICE PROVIDER- The term `service provider' means a service provider as defined in section 512(k)(1) of title 17, United States Code, that operates a nonauthoritative domain name system server.



                                                                                                          • (23) U.S.-DIRECTED SITE- The term `U.S.-directed site' means an Internet site or portion thereof that is used to conduct business directed to residents of the United States, or that otherwise demonstrates the existence of minimum contacts sufficient for the exercise of personal jurisdiction over the owner or operator of the Internet site consistent with the Constitution of the United States, based on relevant evidence that may include whether--




                                                                                                                • (A) the Internet site is used to provide goods or services to users located in the United States;





                                                                                                                      • (B) there is evidence that the Internet site or portion thereof is intended to offer or provide--






                                                                                                                              • (i) such goods and services,







                                                                                                                                      • (ii) access to such goods and services, or







                                                                                                                                              • (iii) delivery of such goods and services,






                                                                                                                                                    • to users located in the United States;





                                                                                                                                                          • © the Internet site or portion thereof does not contain reasonable measures to prevent such goods and services from being obtained in or delivered to the United States; and





                                                                                                                                                                • (D) any prices for goods and services are indicated or billed in the currency of the United States.




                                                                                                                                                                  • ...


Definitions of the Bill


...


(a) For Offenses Committed by Individuals- Section 1831(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended, in the matter after paragraph (5)--


    • (1) by striking `15 years' and inserting `20 years'; and



        • (2) by striking `not more than $500,000' and inserting `not less than $1,000,000 and not more than $5,000,000'.


          (b) For Offenses Committed by Organizations- Section 1831(b) of such title is amended by striking `$10,000,000' and inserting `not more than the greater of $10,000,000 or 3 times the value of the stolen trade secret to the organization (including expenses for research and design or other costs of reproducing the trade secret that the organization has thereby avoided)'.


          ...

This denotes the penalties for violations in the section I was referring to.



...
SEC. 102. ACTION BY ATTORNEY GENERAL TO PROTECT U.S. CUSTOMERS AND PREVENT U.S. SUPPORT OF FOREIGN INFRINGING SITES.

(a) Definition- For purposes of this section, a foreign Internet site or portion thereof is a `foreign infringing site' if--


    • (1) the Internet site or portion thereof is a U.S.-directed site and is used by users in the United States;



        • (2) the owner or operator of such Internet site is committing or facilitating the commission of criminal violations punishable under section 2318, 2319, 2319A, 2319B, or 2320, or chapter 90, of title 18, United States Code; and



            • (3) the Internet site would, by reason of acts described in paragraph (1), be subject to seizure in the United States in an action brought by the Attorney General if such site were a domestic Internet site.


              • (b) Action by the Attorney General-


                  • (1) IN PERSONAM- The Attorney General may commence an in personam action against--




                        • (A) a registrant of a domain name used by a foreign infringing site; or





                              • (B) an owner or operator of a foreign infringing site.




                                  • (2) IN REM- If through due diligence the Attorney General is unable to find a person described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1), or no such person found has an address within a judicial district of the United States, the Attorney General may commence an in rem action against a foreign infringing site or the foreign domain name used by such site.



                                      • (3) NOTICE- Upon commencing an action under this subsection, the Attorney General shall send a notice of the alleged violation and intent to proceed under this section--




                                            • (A) to the registrant of the domain name of the Internet site--






                                                    • (i) at the postal and electronic mail addresses appearing in the applicable publicly accessible database of registrations, if any, and to the extent such addresses are reasonably available; and







                                                            • (ii) via the postal and electronic mail addresses of the registrar, registry, or other domain name registration authority that registered or assigned the domain name of the Internet site, to the extent such addresses are reasonably available; or






                                                                  • (B) to the owner or operator of the Internet site--






                                                                          • (i) at the primary postal and electronic mail addresses for such owner or operator that is provided on the Internet site, if any, and to the extent such addresses are reasonably available; or







                                                                                  • (ii) if there is no domain name of the Internet site, via the postal and electronic mail addresses of the Internet Protocol allocation entity appearing in the applicable publicly accessible database of allocations and assignments, if any, and to the extent such addresses are reasonably available; or






                                                                                        • © in any other such form as the court may provide, including as may be required by rule 4(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.




                                                                                            • (4) SERVICE OF PROCESS- For purposes of this section, the actions described in this subsection shall constitute service of process.



                                                                                                • (5) RELIEF- On application of the Attorney General following the commencement of an action under this section, the court may issue a temporary restraining order, a preliminary injunction, or an injunction, in accordance with rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, against a registrant of a domain name used by the foreign infringing site or an owner or operator of the foreign infringing site or, in an action brought in rem under paragraph (2), against the foreign infringing site or a portion of such site, or the domain name used by such site, to cease and desist from undertaking any further activity as a foreign infringing site.


                                                                                                  • © Actions Based on Court Orders-


                                                                                                      • (1) SERVICE- A process server on behalf of the Attorney General, with prior approval of the court, may serve a copy of a court order issued pursuant to this section on similarly situated entities within each class described in paragraph (2). Proof of service shall be filed with the court.



                                                                                                          • (2) REASONABLE MEASURES- After being served with a copy of an order pursuant to this subsection, the following shall apply:




                                                                                                                • (A) SERVICE PROVIDERS-






                                                                                                                        • (i) IN GENERAL- A service provider shall take technically feasible and reasonable measures designed to prevent access by its subscribers located within the United States to the foreign infringing site (or portion thereof) that is subject to the order, including measures designed to prevent the domain name of the foreign infringing site (or portion thereof) from resolving to that domain name's Internet Protocol address. Such actions shall be taken as expeditiously as possible, but in any case within 5 days after being served with a copy of the order, or within such time as the court may order.







                                                                                                                                • (ii) LIMITATIONS- A service provider shall not be required--








                                                                                                                                          • (I) other than as directed under this subparagraph, to modify its network, software, systems, or facilities;









                                                                                                                                                    • (II) to take any measures with respect to domain name resolutions not performed by its own domain name server; or




                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    (III) to continue to prevent access to a domain name to which access has been effectively disabled by other means.

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    (iii) CONSTRUCTION- Nothing in this subparagraph shall affect the limitation on the liability of a service provider under section 512 of title 17, United States Code.

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    (iv) TEXT OF NOTICE- The Attorney General shall prescribe the text of any notice displayed to users or customers of a service provider taking actions pursuant to this subparagraph. Such text shall state that an action is being taken pursuant to a court order obtained by the Attorney General.

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    (B) INTERNET SEARCH ENGINES- A provider of an Internet search engine shall take technically feasible and reasonable measures, as expeditiously as possible, but in any case within 5 days after being served with a copy of the order, or within such time as the court may order, designed to prevent the foreign infringing site that is subject to the order, or a portion of such site specified in the order, from being served as a direct hypertext link.

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    © PAYMENT NETWORK PROVIDERS-

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    (i) PREVENTING AFFILIATION- A payment network provider shall take technically feasible and reasonable measures, as expeditiously as possible, but in any case within 5 days after being served with a copy of the order, or within such time as the court may order, designed to prevent, prohibit, or suspend its service from completing payment transactions involving customers located within the United States or subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and the payment account--

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    (I) which is used by the foreign infringing site, or portion thereof, that is subject to the order; and

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    (II) through which the payment network provider would complete such payment transactions.

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    (ii) NO DUTY TO MONITOR- A payment network provider shall be considered to be in compliance with clause (i) if it takes action described in that clause with respect to accounts it has as of the date on which a copy of the order is served, or as of the date on which the order is amended under subsection (e).

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    (D) INTERNET ADVERTISING SERVICES-

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    (i) REQUIRED ACTIONS- An Internet advertising service that contracts to provide advertising to or for the foreign infringing site, or portion thereof, that is subject to the order, or that knowingly serves advertising to or for such site or such portion thereof, shall take technically feasible and reasonable measures, as expeditiously as possible, but in any case within 5 days after being served with a copy of the order, or within such time as the court may order, designed to--

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    (I) prevent its service from providing advertisements to or relating to the foreign infringing site that is subject to the order or a portion of such site specified in the order;

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    (II) cease making available advertisements for the foreign infringing site or such portion thereof, or paid or sponsored search results, links, or other placements that provide access to such foreign infringing site or such portion thereof; and

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    (III) cease providing or receiving any compensation for advertising or related services to, from, or in connection with such foreign infringing site or such portion thereof.

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    (ii) NO DUTY TO MONITOR- An internet advertising service shall be considered to be in compliance with clause (i) if it takes action described in that clause with respect to accounts it has as of the date on which a copy of the order is served, or as of the date on which the order is amended under subsection (e).

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    (3) COMMUNICATION WITH USERS- Except as provided under paragraph (2)(A)(iv), an entity taking an action described in this subsection shall determine the means to communicate such action to the entity's users or customers.

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    (4) ENFORCEMENT OF ORDERS-

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    (A) IN GENERAL- To ensure compliance with orders issued pursuant to this section, the Attorney General may bring an action for injunctive relief--

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    (i) against any entity served under paragraph (1) that knowingly and willfully fails to comply with the requirements of this subsection to compel such entity to comply with such requirements; or

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    (ii) against any entity that knowingly and willfully provides or offers to provide a product or service designed or marketed for the circumvention or bypassing of measures described in paragraph (2) and taken in response to a court order issued pursuant to this subsection, to enjoin such entity from interfering with the order by continuing to provide or offer to provide such product or service.

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    (B) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION- The authority granted the Attorney General under subparagraph (A)(i) shall be the sole legal remedy to enforce the obligations under this section of any entity described in paragraph (2).

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    © DEFENSE- A defendant in an action under subparagraph (A)(i) may establish an affirmative defense by showing that the defendant does not have the technical means to comply with this subsection without incurring an unreasonable economic burden, or that the order is not authorized by this subsection. Such showing shall not be presumed to be a complete defense but shall serve as a defense only for those measures for which a technical limitation on compliance is demonstrated or for such portions of the order as are demonstrated to be unauthorized by this subsection.

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    (D) DEFINITION- For purposes of this paragraph, a product or service designed or marketed for the circumvention or bypassing of measures described in paragraph (2) and taken in response to a court order issued pursuant to this subsection includes a product or service that is designed or marketed to enable a domain name described in such an order--

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    (i) to resolve to that domain name's Internet protocol address notwithstanding the measures taken by a service provider under paragraph (2) to prevent such resolution; or

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    (ii) to resolve to a different domain name or Internet Protocol address that the provider of the product or service knows, reasonably should know, or reasonably believes is used by an Internet site offering substantially similar infringing activities as those with which the infringing foreign site, or portion thereof, subject to a court order under this section was associated.

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    (5) IMMUNITY-

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    (A) IMMUNITY FROM SUIT- Other than in an action pursuant to paragraph (4), no cause of action shall lie in any Federal or State court or administrative agency against any entity served with a copy of a court order issued under this subsection, or against any director, officer, employee, or agent thereof, for any act reasonably designed to comply with this subsection or reasonably arising from such order.

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    (B) IMMUNITY FROM LIABILITY- Other than in an action pursuant to paragraph (4)--

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

                                                                                                                                                    [*]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kai   

Yes, but sadly the US and several others already signed it. If there was enough momentum left over from stopping PIPA/SOPA......who knows?

Interestingly enough, the UK wasn't part of this at all...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Technically unrelated: Megaupload has been taken down, the operators have been arrested (at least Kim Dotcom has) and Fileserve has locked down its links so only the uploaders can access them. None of that is actually connected to SOPA/PIPA directly, but the similar timeframes and the implications of the takedown have been noted by many.

Hip hop bigshots are pretty angry, since file-sharing sites are essentially the label-less way for a new artist to make money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kai   

I really hate that it shut down. It was a great site for a great many people....(It was the best site to download *cough*legal*cough* things)

As long as the other filesharing sites founders don't do anything illegal in the future, we may continue to see a healthy lifespan of these sites.

But as soon as a few more start doing some more illegal things...the big ol' ACTA will brandish its nasty head and shut em all down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually while I am strongly against SOPA PIPA and ACTA I don't view the shutdown of megaupload as a bad thing. Yes it means that people have been cut off from there "legal" data (They should have made backups anyways) but this just proves that SOPA PIPA and ACTA are not necessary and that the government has enough power to deal with piracy as it is. (more power than they need in most cases I think)

And we all know megaupload was not squeaky clean, I remember reading an article or watching a video shortly after it happened pointing out that at times megaupload was openly encouraging piracy. And let’s not forget that Kim Dotcom was in a non extradition country and the only reason he was caught is because he went to New Zealand to meet friends for his birthday if I remember correctly.

So rather than complain about our loss we need to put this on a pedestal and say “Look at this, you really think you need more power to deal with piracy?â€

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest cyaocide   
Guest cyaocide

ima play devils advocite for a second here but...

shutting down megaupload may have helped but that was about all the goverment could do to help fight piracy at the present, simply because it was in the country...

realistically shutting it down may have helped but the problem is very much still out there. so Im not really sure how well the idea that "the goverment allready has enough power" really works... there are still alot of diffrent download sites and just as many ways to torrent things as before.

granted I agree SOPA PIPA and ACTA are probbably too far, but I also dont think things as they stand are very good either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Allenfox   
Guest Allenfox

Well I orginally was going to post a 3 page depressing story about these bills. Yet it was FAR to depressing for anyone that even has a shred of humanity left in them.

I kind of gave up my hope in humanity a long time ago probally why I see myself as a normal fox.

Neverless basically these bills are yet more comunist policies slowly and stealthfully being creeped into America.

Giving goverment power to shut down acess to any site they want and even have an excuse to make it legal at times.

Most should know that the term copyrighted can be twisted insanely far. To think you could even get in trouble for singing a copyrighted song in public these days.

Currently our church has to very carefully check over song copyrights because just simply singing the song is considered an infringement.

Other arieas of severe twisting include describing a section out of a movie or book.

I mean you simply post on facebook a section of the story of a book or movie and its copyrighted.

Maybe tell about a section of a song that sounded catchy.

The literal definition of copyrighted is simply work that some one has legally patented.

So just a small piece of it can be twisted into claiming it was a vilolation.

Quite literally the insane level of copy protection fears and checking for violations.

Requres ALL of the information that you put onto the internet to be monitored.

For any possible vilations of copy protection. No longer any trust for the individual.

Constantly spying on them and ensuring that they always follow the rules.

Meaning in the end we have the same kind of internet as china.

Just a short matter of time till all of this extra power is abused by hackers and trolls.

That hack into your website or simply post copyrighted content.

Simply for the intention of getting you in hot water.

Since the site is now Liable for the content posted and has to instantly remove any violations of these rules.

Its just madness. Few seem to actually understand exactly how bad these actually are.

They think just simply bad. Yet when you really look into it its not just simply bad. Its more like begginging of end of freedom of speach and the end of freedom of religion on the internet.

This new power quite literally allows shut down of freedom of speach on the internet through a multi step process of deciet and allows more ways to attack religions on claims of religios song and content copyright violations.

To think someone has a site that has information that someone else wants to supress. All one has to do to eliminate that information is trigger off claims of copyright violations.

All kinds of sites could be shut down in attempts to restrict the freedom of speach though twisted legal claims and buerocracy.

Facebook even tried to warn people about these laws they are afraid of being shut down due to being unable to monitor ALL of the content of there users.

Therefore if facebook was shut down that would be just another attack on freedom of speach.

My father has even heard storys about plans to regulate the rate people can send out emails.

As well as new auto industry regulations making cars so expensive that it restricts them to the upper class.

A spark plug desighned to be so hard to replace that it costs 700 dolars for maintence. Its simply obserd.

Therefore knowing all of this going on what to do about it well pray for one.

Yet voting can only really slow this down there is enough cheating going on in elections and campains now its only a matter of time until things get where they are heading.

To think remember all of that funding for Obomas election campain that came from China a few years back as well as other countries?

http://www.thetrumpe...q=5581.3894.0.0

The fact is if you want to find out who a president is working for I would start out with finding out who is sending them money to get in office.

If he truly did get millions from forein comunist countries like I heard on the news a few years back and read on the internet likewise.

Does that not hint us that he is working for them? That in combination to the fact that the birthpermit STILL hasnt been proven to be a U.S resident.

Anyways all of this oboma stuff you may think sounds kind of outlandish and extreme,

Maybe think I am talking about late night radio nonsence.

Yet all of this is NOTHING new at all. Around and during the cold war we had russian spys working in our government and its fairly well known.

They indeed had intentions of not only spying on the inner workings of our government, yet surely also obviosly would have wanted to convert it over to comunism just like their home country.

For all we know we have no idea how many comunist and other groups that have snuck into our government and are trying to bend and twist things to their world view.

Us voters can only go by what information we see on tv, internet and hear on radio. Vast majority of us have never met the person in person or had any kind of good background information. Maybe if lucky hear a few rumors yet its just slim information.

For all we know everything the canidate is saying could be made up and the same person be wanting to do the exact oposite of what is said.

I remember hearing Clinton did this, talk to the republicans as they wanted to hear and talk to the democrats as they wanted to hear.

So because both sides believed he was for their policies he got elected quite easily.

This is at least the story I have heard I have not actually met clinton in person or seen his speaches in person.

Come to think about it the information that passes though the news media is regulated and controlled so that makes it even harder to determine what a canidate is like. Slip ups can be easily edited out and the speach can be chosen to be on tv or not.

Well I finnaly finished typing all of this up at 1:43am.

Sorry if it sounds kind of slopy. I thought hudge was ok considering some of the other giant posts in this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×