There’s a disturbing bill making the rounds on Capitol Hill right now called the Stop Online Piracy Act, or SOPA. It’s purportedly designed to thwart music and movie piracy by empowering copyright holders to isolate and shut down websites or online services found with infringing content. SOPA is the House version of the bill, introduced by Representative Lamar Smith (R-Tex.), and there’s another in the Senate called the Protect IP Act, introduced by Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.). Hearings on SOPA began Wednesday, and the chances it’ll pass are excellent, because it’s backed by powerful business lobbies and has bipartisan majority support in both the House and Senate. If it does pass, the only thing that could shut it down would be a veto by President Obama.
In short, SOPA, if passed, would allow the U.S. government to blacklist any website found to have infringing material, inhibiting access to said sites using DNS filtering techniques similar to those employed by China and Iran. What’s “infringing material”? Anything deemed in violation of copyright, say a few posts by users in a web forum or on a social network—even links sent in email. What’s more, a website or Internet communication medium’s owners would be held liable for any infringing content, and the government would be empowered to cut off revenue to those sites’ owners and force search engines to block them, too.
The people who invented the internet have published an open letter saying FOR FUCK'S SAKE, CONGRESS, WHAT ARE YOU THINKING? DON'T PASS EITHER OF THESE BILLS.
...
The current bills -- SOPA explicitly and PIPA implicitly -- also threaten engineers who build Internet systems or offer services that are not readily and automatically compliant with censorship actions by the U.S. government. When we designed the Internet the first time, our priorities were reliability, robustness and minimizing central points of failure or control. We are alarmed that Congress is so close to mandating censorship-compliance as a design requirement for new Internet innovations. This can only damage the security of the network, and give authoritarian governments more power over what their citizens can read and publish.
The US government has regularly claimed that it supports a free and open Internet, both domestically and abroad. We cannot have a free and open Internet unless its naming and routing systems sit above the political concerns and objectives of any one government or industry. To date, the leading role the US has played in this infrastructure has been fairly uncontroversial because America is seen as a trustworthy arbiter and a neutral bastion of free expression. If the US begins to use its central position in the network for censorship that advances its political and economic agenda, the consequences will be far-reaching and destructive.
Signed,
Vint Cerf, co-designer of TCP/IP, one of the "fathers of the Internet", signing as private citizen
Paul Vixie, author of BIND, the most widely-used DNS server software, and President of the Internet Systems Consortium
Of the two signatures I left attached, the first is from Vint Cerf. I highlighted it because he FUCKING INVENTED THE INTERNET. For serious. Vint Cerf oversaw the team that invented and built ARPAnet. ARPAnet grew into the Internet. If Vint Cerf says "This is terrible for the Internet", well, who are you going to trust, Vint Cerf, or the RIAA?
And when the signature note points out that Paul Vixie invented BIND, the most commonly used DNS program, this is relevant because DNS is the first system SOPA and PIPA demand censorship powers over.
So, on one side, we have the Usual Suspects: the RIAA, the MPAA, and the megabrands. On the other, we have all the young new Internet companies that let us share data, and the people who invented the fucking internet. A call to your representative to point out which side is more trustworthy would not go amiss. At latest report, Congress seems to be confused, and these bills have been moving forward with only a few small stumbles, ever nearer to passing.
The House Judiciary Committee confirmed Tuesday that it will delay continuing debate on the Stop Online Piracy Act until after Congress returns from its winter recess.
Committee spokeswoman Kim Smith said in an e-mailed statement that the hearing is expected to be scheduled for “early next year.”
After two days of heated debate last week, the committee adjourned its markup session on the measure without a vote. The debate over SOPA has been framed as a fight between old media and new media. Organizations such as the Motion Picture Association of America have been backing the bill, while Internet firms such as Reddit have been mobilizing their users against it.
SOPA, or something like it, is going to pass. There's simply too much money behind it.
Not that it will stop piracy. Right now you can download your very own Pirate Bay and set up a tracker wherever you want. The networking can go decentralized, too, and it would make the Internet as a whole healthier as it does.
motorfirebox said:
SOPA, or something like it, is going to pass. There's simply too much money behind it.
Not that it will stop piracy. Right now you can download your very own Pirate Bay and set up a tracker wherever you want. The networking can go decentralized, too, and it would make the Internet as a whole healthier as it does.
I may be misunderstanding, but it sounds like this bill will not do what it supposedly intends to do (stop piracy) but will create a situation where websites can be shut down without any sort of due process.
Thistle said:
this will pass because many people in Congress simply don't give a shit how this will effect internet users.
No, the problem is they don't understand it. They're lead to believe the internet is nothing but porn and stealing music/movies.
I think not caring and not understanding are two sides of the same coin. If they used the internet, or if they really cared about their constituents' lives, they would both understand the issue and care more about it.
motorfirebox said:
SOPA, or something like it, is going to pass. There's simply too much money behind it.
Not that it will stop piracy. Right now you can download your very own Pirate Bay and set up a tracker wherever you want. The networking can go decentralized, too, and it would make the Internet as a whole healthier as it does.
I may be misunderstanding, but it sounds like this bill will not do what it supposedly intends to do (stop piracy) but will create a situation where websites can be shut down without any sort of due process.
Sorta. It will, or can, have a significant, negative effect on piracy in its current form. The thing is, there is a fairly extensive community that is dedicated to piracy. They've invested a lot of time, expertise, personal pride, and even money in making piracy happen. The reason high-quality versions of music, movies, and especially games are available to pirate is that these guys make them available, and thereby make it possible for others to follow suit (eg once one guy cracks some DRM, other people can learn from it to crack other stuff).
This won't slow them down, any more than any other form of DRM has slowed them down. What it will slow down is the audience--the good will still be available, but the minimum expertise threshold to take advantage of them will be raised. For a while. Until the scene make it easy to connect to pirate networks, at which point piracy will be back more resilient than ever.
I think SOPA might possibly reduce piracy levels, for a time, to what they were in 2001 or so--right around the time they shut down Napster. But I doubt it will even be that effective. People today are a lot more tech literate than they were back then, so it takes them significantly less time to adapt to new ways of doing things.
(Sorry if that got a little mansplainy, I just think this stuff is cool as hell.)
^That was just regular explainy, not mansplainy Thanks for the additional info. I don't know a ton about piracy but from what experts have been saying, SOPA has the potential to effect all sorts of internet usage because of its scope. Stopping piracy doesn't seem important enough to cripple the rest of the internet.
I've signed the petitions, and I spent a bit of free time last weekend emailing companies that I have supported in the past to let them know I will no longer support them if this law passes.
motorfirebox said:
SOPA, or something like it, is going to pass. There's simply too much money behind it.
Not that it will stop piracy. Right now you can download your very own Pirate Bay and set up a tracker wherever you want. The networking can go decentralized, too, and it would make the Internet as a whole healthier as it does.
I may be misunderstanding, but it sounds like this bill will not do what it supposedly intends to do (stop piracy) but will create a situation where websites can be shut down without any sort of due process.
Sorta. It will, or can, have a significant, negative effect on piracy in its current form. The thing is, there is a fairly extensive community that is dedicated to piracy. They've invested a lot of time, expertise, personal pride, and even money in making piracy happen. The reason high-quality versions of music, movies, and especially games are available to pirate is that these guys make them available, and thereby make it possible for others to follow suit (eg once one guy cracks some DRM, other people can learn from it to crack other stuff).
This won't slow them down, any more than any other form of DRM has slowed them down. What it will slow down is the audience--the good will still be available, but the minimum expertise threshold to take advantage of them will be raised. For a while. Until the scene make it easy to connect to pirate networks, at which point piracy will be back more resilient than ever.
I think SOPA might possibly reduce piracy levels, for a time, to what they were in 2001 or so--right around the time they shut down Napster. But I doubt it will even be that effective. People today are a lot more tech literate than they were back then, so it takes them significantly less time to adapt to new ways of doing things.
(Sorry if that got a little mansplainy, I just think this stuff is cool as hell.)
Your explanation had me thinking about Harvey dent's breakdown of his massive mob arrests in TDK. So this bill could possibly slow down the little fish, but not effect the big fish, right.
This bill does sound like a waste of time to me. I also agree with thistle, members of congress likely don't know/care about the possible fallout from the bill. Is there any possibility of them alienating themselves from future campaign contributers by supporting this bill?
Mansplain: only applies if you're being condescending or assuming superior knowledge due to your maleness and your audience's femaleness. In other words, you post was really informative, and not at all sexist
Move your domains away from GoDaddy and show them how you feel about a free Internet.
Boycott the Bastards!
There are so many good reasons to boycott GoDaddy. Insanely sexist advertising, the CEO's hunting of endangered animals, and now this. I really would love to see them go under.
MissyMalice
USA
May 2010
NOV 17, 2011 08:49 AM