The end of Internet as we know it? SOPA/PROTECT-IP. - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: firewalker
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2012, 01:12:01 am
content: S.O.P.A.:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_ActPROTECT-IP:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROTECT_IP_ActProbably will be voted in U.S. soon. So the evil/stupid empire needs to force every one else in the game.E.g.QuoteAlexander.

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2012, 01:23:38 am
content: Wonder how many Spaniards hate their own government that turning into Uncle Sam's poodle dog ?

author: 8086
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2012, 01:25:37 am
content: Apparently Google, Twitter, Facebook, et al. are considering a total blackout with only a message when you visit with information about SOPA and who to contact. In all honesty, I hope they go ahead.

author: Psi
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2012, 01:50:34 am
content: [my personal views]It doesn't really matter how many laws governments pass, most people now believe copying stuff is acceptable and will keep doing it.The more the riaa/mpaa industry pushes the more likely it will be cut out of the profits when the whole entertainment system crumbles away and a new system develops that doesn't include them.In some ways a totally ridiculous system is good in that it will bring about change sooner.I can see three possible outcomes in the future with regard to media/piracy.1) The more the government/mpaa/riaa try to clamp down the most outrage there will be when they start actively try to enforce it on a large scale.Eventually it will reach the point where people have had enough and it will force a law change to something more reasonable.2) Companies offering legal download services will increase, get cheaper and eventually turn into an "all your can eat" type pricing structure. Something like $100 a year for all the media you want. Most people will be more than happy with that.The movie/record labels will suddenly find they are making more money than ever before off these kind of systems and everyone will be happy again.3) A large company (like Google) will start up their own record/movie label so they have complete control over distribution. They will offer really good prices on media and, like above, 'all you can eat' or even advertising based free media will develop. At first they will have only a few tvshows/music artists then as existing contracts expire others will join until it either scares the current movie/tv labels into providing a proper system or it cuts them out of the market.-) Whatever happens, at some point the current system of different released dates for media around the world will end. The only way a new media system can survive is to be on-demand for everyone who wants it wherever they are in the world.[/my personal views]

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 08, 2012, 02:30:51 am
content: It's time for peole to start forming their own private networks away from governments isp's media companies and all that crap. Technology is already here anyway.

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2012, 02:59:26 am
content: Quote from: HAL-42b on January 08, 2012, 02:30:51 amIf we had a supply of low cost 1W 2.4GHz (and 5GHz) amplifiers, a long range wireless mesh network can be made using 802.11. The problem is that I don't know of such a source for those. But there are low cost 1W 900MHz amplifiers, so maybe I should team up with Tiffany Yep to create a wireless mesh standard for 900MHz? Or just zap lasers from building to building, which would be capable of very high bandwidth. And maybe run high frequency carriers on the power lines, although it would be hit or miss whether two neighboring buildings would be on the same transformer and phase.And in any case, boycott the RIAA and MPAA while raising awareness of the problems.

author: RCMR
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2012, 03:34:47 am
content: These were my takes on the whole situation:2012, the year of the cyber-rebel?andSOPA, suicide for the RIAA and its members?

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 08, 2012, 04:28:21 am
content: Quote from: RCMR on January 08, 2012, 03:34:47 amNice write-up. From my vantage point, which is in the middle between the west and the east I can see that the western world is not as unlikely to be a center of civil upheaval as you say. Maybe not Australia and New Zealand but US and Europe are close to the limits where civil population and the governments can hardly tolerate each other any more. Both are out of money and running out of options.What I see is the danger of a major armed conflict once again looming over the world. A communication network which can not be controlled by governments may help alleviate this danger. Also we need to start moving away from oil and stop population growth and pronto.btw. in my country population growth is a major issue and at the same time it is "the ultimate vote looser" for the politicians.

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 08, 2012, 04:48:55 am
content: if you haven't seen this yet:

author: PeteInTexas
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2012, 05:53:41 am
content: Quote from: firewalker on January 08, 2012, 01:12:01 amWhat was voted in the U.S. recently? I'm pretty sure S.O.P.A is still in committee. GoDaddy just paid a dear price for its support of it at the end of 2011. Both congressional chambers have been in "recess" since before Christmas. What are you talking about?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 08, 2012, 08:49:22 am
content: Quote from: HAL-42b on January 08, 2012, 04:28:21 amI'm curious, in what way is it a major issue?Do people in China like the One Child Policy and see it as good thing or a bad thing in general?Such schemes are of course generally good for the planet's future and the future prosperity of our children and their children, but not so great financially for the country that actually does it. Many predictions are that China will suffer big time in a few generations when India who are breeding like rabbits will take over and dominate.Sorry, don't wish the hijack the thread :->Dave.

author: Sionyn
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2012, 11:12:56 am
content: In a leaked letter sent to Spain’s outgoing President, the US ambassador to the country warned that as punishment for not passing a SOPA-style file-sharing site blocking law, Spain risked being put on a United States trade blacklist . Inclusion would have left Spain open to a range of “retaliatory options” but already the US was working with the incoming government to reach its goals.http://torrentfreak.com/us-threatened-to-blacklist-spain-for-not-implementing-site-blocking-law-120105/

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 08, 2012, 12:18:34 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on January 08, 2012, 08:49:22 amMajor issue in the sense that the unemplyment is grossly down played by the government, yet the country has no industry to speak of besides maybe agriculture, no electronics industry, no aerospace industry, and definitely not even close to china in terms of low cost. In these circumstances the govt. still finds the guts to preach "three kids in every familiy" these were the very words of the PM. We are 70M at the moment and multiplying fast. As can be expected, the signs of overpopulation are alredy there - unemployment, inadequate helth and education system, high crime, a bloated and inefficient government which is also corrupt etc etc.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 08, 2012, 01:01:37 pm
content: Oops, I mistook your flag for China!, sorryDave.

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 08, 2012, 01:07:37 pm
content: Opps... damn low res

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2012, 01:29:16 pm
content: These are still pending in congress, it hasn't been voted into law. I am firmly against it, if valid in your country join opposition groups against similar bills before they are voted into law.http://americancensorship.org/Quote from: firewalker on January 08, 2012, 01:12:01 am

author: firewalker
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2012, 01:41:03 pm
content: My bad. Changed the original text to "Probably will be voted".Alexander.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2012, 01:53:26 pm
content: No worries, folks need to know about this and speak outbeforeit becomes law, so your post is important and timely. Its harder to repeal a law than prevent it from existing.Quote from: firewalker on January 08, 2012, 01:41:03 pm

author: PeteInTexas
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2012, 07:22:24 pm
content: Quote from: saturation on January 08, 2012, 01:53:26 pmGot my chance to "vote with my wallet" couple of weeks ago by joining many who moved their domains away from GoDaddy, just about the only high profile internet centric company to publicly support SOPA. They have since capitulated and thats great. The pressure needs to keep up though.The stakes are high. It is possible that Dave will lose his blog with SOPA.

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2012, 07:33:46 pm
content: Quote from: PeteInTexas on January 08, 2012, 07:22:24 pmHuh ?Mine elaborate further ?

author: PeteInTexas
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2012, 07:41:47 pm
content: Quote from: BravoV on January 08, 2012, 07:33:46 pmOne of the "reliefs" a quote rights holder unquote can ask for under the proposed law is domain seizure whereby by a court orders DNS servers to "shutdown" a domain. The url instead will resolve to some page stating that the domain has been seized due to alleged copyright infringement. One of the reasons GoDaddy supported SOPA is they stand to gain from these seizures. Ars Technica is following this pretty well. See there for their various write up on it.I will leave it up to your imagination on how Dave may be accused of copyright infringement. The bar is pretty low which is another thing that is wrong with SOPA.

author: firewalker
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2012, 07:53:44 pm
content: Quote from: BravoV on January 08, 2012, 07:33:46 pmLet's say I am:Asking for a datasheet that happens to be copyrighted.Cracking open a U.S. made "black magic box" (like some infrared camera products) with "controlled" technology and post pictures.Asking help for an Ukrainian made tactical nuclear weapon trigger I am designing.Posting a yt video with a song.Giving help to a Iranian user with an obscure project.mpla mpla mplaAlexander.

author: RCMR
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2012, 08:39:16 pm
content: Yes, the big problem with SOPA and many of the other initiatives being driven by the RIAA/MPAA is that they allow people to act only on the allegation of guilt -- not the proof.The basic tenet of justice is the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty -- under much of this new and proposed copyright law reform and anti-terror legislation, that right is removed and "the powers that be" need only accuse you of a crime for you to be presumed guilty -- unless *you* can prove otherwise.We've just gone through something similar with the "three strikes" law (Sec 82A of our Copyright Act) in which the copyright owners wanted to be gifted the power to have people's internet connections withdrawn (for a lengthy period) if they were *accused* of downloading material without permission three times.Fortunately we got that tossed out -- but it was a hard-won battle that involved internet black-outs by content producers and mass protests. However, the threshold of proof is still very, very low in the legislation that was finally passed into law.The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

author: McMonster
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2012, 12:27:35 am
content: Quote from: firewalker on January 08, 2012, 07:53:44 pmNo need to look that far. Anyone remember Dave's flux capacitor t-shirt story?

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2012, 03:30:33 am
content: Quote from: RCMR on January 08, 2012, 08:39:16 pmDamn , this is so ridiculously stupid and it will be really messy if this turned into law.So can I easily claim thatwww.whitehouse.govis mine ?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 09, 2012, 03:54:07 am
content: Quote from: RCMR on January 08, 2012, 08:39:16 pmAnd often to prove otherwise, you might have to actually go to court and win a ruling. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.And if it's some trivial copyright "technicality" thing, like for example me using a datasheet (which is of course copyright) in a video, and in theory in some alternative dictatorial universe I'm not allowed to actually use it unless I get their express written permission, technically the owner would be able to take me down just for the implication of that breach.The little guy wouldn't stand a chance.Dave.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 09, 2012, 03:55:51 am
content: Quote from: McMonster on January 09, 2012, 12:27:35 amSame thing happened with my FSM T-ShirtDave.

author: PeteInTexas
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2012, 04:25:33 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on January 09, 2012, 03:54:07 amThe sponsor of SOPA is Representative Lamar Smith, a Republican from the 21st district of Texas. I am sorry to say I live in his district. I have never voted for him. Unfortunately, A LOT of wealthier people keep sending him back to protect their interest.

author: RCMR
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2012, 04:58:41 am
content: And... have you noticed...The mainstream media have provided virtually *NO* coverage of this issue.Why?Because their bread and butter is copyrighted intellectual property so they'd love SOPA to make it into law. In fact, many of the USA's major broadcasters and publishers are actuallysponsors of the bill.Sponsors of the bill who also have news/publishing interests include:News Corporation (also own Fox News)CBSComcast/NBC Universal (owners of NBC and MSNBC)Time Warner (owns CNN)Disney Publishing Worldwide, Inc. (own ABC News)Association of American Publishers (AAP)ESPNIndependent Film & Television Alliance (IFTA)ViacomMacmillanMcGraw-Hill EducationNational Cable & Telecommunications AssociationPenguin Group (USA), Inc.Random HouseSo much for the independence of the news media huh?And, since the vast majority of "the great unwashed" get their news from papers or TV, chances are that they'll never even know what's happening until it's too late and the bill has been signed into law.Those of us who understand what's going on have an obligation to wake up the public to this travesty -- before the first thing they notice is that an increasing number of their favourite websites have disappeared from the face of the Internet.

author: firewalker
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2012, 08:17:16 am
content: Yeah... Was was that about? They copyrighted a religion symbol?Alexander.Quote from: EEVblog on January 09, 2012, 03:55:51 am

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2012, 12:53:39 pm
content: This is a problem with any big organization; you are at the mercy of any small group supporting or attacking your interest, and their influence is magnified by the money they have.That's why the Internet is 'liberating' in that it gives voice to anyone, so long as google, now the dominant search engine, remains open and doesn't censor or favor particular websites and suppress others.Thus, its important to support the opposition groups, a key one ishttps://www.eff.org/In general, supports an open Internet or net neutrality, SOPA is just one issue.Everyone should join the EFF, its the single biggest organization that coordinates with others and actually takes the issues to court, at least in the USA.SOPA is about intellectual property and giving more teeth to DMCA, which everyone already dislikes.But open internet is even broader, it prevents your ISP from filtering lawful content, so it prevents them from cutting off say a competitors web hosts, in favor of their own, more than just intellectual property. There are very few backbone providers, Tier 1 as its called, so if Tier 1 folks decide who sees what, you have censorhip that would make even google weep, they are the true keepers of the keys.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_backbone#Modern_backboneVerizon is particularly scarey. It not only is a major backbone for the entire Internet in the USA, but also an ISP. It has the capacity to cut off all other backbones from its network and other ISPs and create its own private Internet in hardware, not just what Facebook attempts to do, which is trivial compared to Verizon's capacity. Thus, if you go to fcc.gov you'll see a lot of lawsuits by Verizon against the FCC, as the FCC tries to keep Verizon open.Quote from: RCMR on January 09, 2012, 04:58:41 am

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 14, 2012, 08:57:11 am
content: Sounds like they congress got the message and backed down:http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/01/under-voter-pressure-members-of-congress-backpedal-on-sopa.arsDave.

author: firewalker
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 14, 2012, 09:16:33 am
content: Great!Alexander.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 14, 2012, 12:23:57 pm
content: Great! Now we need to keep the Internet open, aka, net neutral. A reflection of how governments treat freedom is already showing when entire countries censor content. Each member of eevblog with their respective countries have different rules, so good luck.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Internet_Censorship_World_Map.svgGreen = no censorship. Surprisingly, Oz gov't, in yellow, monitors content!Quote from: EEVblog on January 14, 2012, 08:57:11 am

author: PeteInTexas
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 15, 2012, 05:10:08 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on January 14, 2012, 08:57:11 amAnd now Obama makes a stand on the side of internet freedom!http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/01/obama-administration-joins-the-ranks-of-sopa-skeptics.arsThis is great news. Don't anyone get complacent though. If you listen closely, politician and supporters dialing backe their support employ language to the effect of "cannot support SOPAas it is currently written". Translation: we can still be persuaded.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 15, 2012, 08:01:27 am
content: Quote from: PeteInTexas on January 15, 2012, 05:10:08 amOr translated even further... "we just put out the fire so we can slip it in the back door later down the track with sneakier wording".Just like the greatest swindle in history, the US banking bail out, when it got knocked back the first time through.Dave.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 15, 2012, 08:08:59 am
content: Quote from: saturation on January 14, 2012, 12:23:57 pmSurely every country monitors content in some way?Australia is basically censorship free as far as users are concerned. They don't actually block anything, you just aren't allowed to host "Refused Classification" content on Australian servers. So it's only an issue for content producers who host in Australia. But who uses Australian servers anyway?, too expensive.Regardless of laws and countries, I believe many ISP's take it upon themselves to filter really stuff they find out about, like child porn.Dave.

author: firewalker
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 15, 2012, 09:48:35 am
content: Hellas (Greece) doesn't.You may doing something illegal and no one will hit your door. Until someone starts complaining at least. Then the district attorney will issue an order for further investigation.It is very difficult for the providers to reveal your real name though. As I can recall from memory only 2 times for pirate content providers gave account infos for the admins of such sites. They were charging users (advanced membership e.t.c.) for hundreds of thousands euros without paying any taxes. Those cases was more like an economic crime.Exception is child pornography and suicide threats (in FaceBook e.t.c.) of teenagers. The provider will revel account infos without the order of the district attorney.Alexander.Quote from: EEVblog on January 15, 2012, 08:08:59 am

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 15, 2012, 11:18:06 am
content: Quote from: firewalker on January 15, 2012, 09:48:35 amI'm pretty sure that's how it works here too.Nothing stopping you from uploading this "refused classification" content onto an Oz server and getting away with it indefinitely. It would be next to impossible for the government or anyone else to automatically detect such stuff. So it would have to rely on someone complaining.Dave.

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 15, 2012, 11:20:08 am
content: This map green color:No evidenceof censorshipWho can read it as: No censorship.I have never understand that no evidence about something means that there is not something.And maybedirect censorship is most low problem what internet include.Real problem is "somewhere" there....Also think opposite censorship. "inverted censorship"There are lot of false flag's and other types of disinformation.Think some new US law and internet authentication systems and then security - oh, what security.What ever you do in internet it is just like write all to post card.Even if you use crypted services (example your netbank) with normal public keys. There is just one very stupid hole.Who guarantees the guarantor?CA system is broken and it leaks. System is just as weak as weakest point.And who have full access to internet infrastructure in nations borderlines. In all developed or developing country just this nation goverment some peoples. If "they" ask some data and they tell that do not tell even that we have visited. They get data and no one never know it.Most of internet users think that internet is just random free network. It can not think more wrong. And what ever is some wiki*peep* map color.

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 15, 2012, 12:00:49 pm
content: Quote from: rf-loop on January 15, 2012, 11:20:08 amIt does not mean, but it's the closest we can get to proving the absence of something. Look up absence of evidence vs. evidence of absence. The only thing you can do is look harder for evidence, until you're fairly sure that your investigation was so thorough that you should have found something if there was anything.

author: firewalker
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 15, 2012, 12:23:48 pm
content: http://blog.reddit.com/2012/01/stopped-they-must-be-on-this-all.html

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 15, 2012, 01:34:44 pm
content: In the end, there will always be enemies of the open Internet, so any reader would be encouraged to join some opposition group rather than leave the opposite camp free to do what they will. Be if the EFF [ which works only in the USA] or other groups.I concur with Dave, censorship should occur at the individual user level, you don't want your family to see it, block it. If you host items your country deems illegal: child porn, warez, etc., and are not caught now, in the US there is almost no statue of limitations for crimes, even if its been taken down or the defendant 'reformed', if its discovered years later punishment will still be required.Quote from: firewalker on January 15, 2012, 12:23:48 pmQuote from: EEVblog on January 15, 2012, 08:08:59 am

author: RCMR
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 15, 2012, 08:44:35 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on January 15, 2012, 08:01:27 amYes, a commonly used strategy in the political world...Government: "We are going to kill all your children"Public: "gasp -- outrage!"Government: "Okay, we're only going to kill your first-born"Public: "phew -- thanks, we were worried for a moment"Typically, governments announce "plans" to introduce horrifically unacceptable laws and then recant, offering instead a much watered-down (but still draconian) alternative. The great unwashed public, more often than not, accept the watered-down version -- which in reality, was exactly what the politicians intended on legislating anyway.If they'd simply tried to pass the lesser law first, the public would have been just as outraged but because they make it look like the lesser law is really a huge backdown and concession -- it gets accepted by the vast majority of people.I've seen this happen over and over again -- even here in NZ -- and a gullible public fall for it *every* time.

author: don.r
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 17, 2012, 01:26:04 am
content: SOPA has been shelved but PIPA is still alive...http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2012/01/16/so-is-sopa-dead-not-exactly/apparently Wikipedia is going down on Wednesday...

author: Teknotronix
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 17, 2012, 02:00:22 am
content: All this SOPA/PIPA stuff seems like a bit of a smoke screenhttp://blog.curry.com/stories/2012/01/16/sopaIsARedHerring.html

author: DrGeoff
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 17, 2012, 02:50:30 am
content: Quote from: rf-loop on January 15, 2012, 11:20:08 amIt's pretty widely known that PKI has always been broken. In reality though it is being used often as a series of closed systems, rather than a widespread public infrastructure.

author: Teknotronix
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 17, 2012, 02:59:03 am
content: Quote from: DrGeoff on January 17, 2012, 02:50:30 amThe thing with banks is that they are not so concerned with the privacy/confidentiality of your information. They are more concerned with implementing robust authentication mechanisms that ensure the value and integrity of the transactions. Encryption is only one small part of this problem because nobody can ever guarantee the how secure any endpoint is that might be sending/receiving.

author: slateraptor
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 17, 2012, 04:51:26 am
content: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/English_Wikipedia_anti-SOPA_blackoutWiki sure knows how to get the general public's attention.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 17, 2012, 11:25:05 am
content: Yes. So join any group that is in opposition. You don't have to contribute money, just your support via membership at minimum, counts.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 17, 2012, 07:34:18 pm
content: Some important groups opposed to net censorship:UK:http://www.openrightsgroup.org/Oz:http://www.efa.org.au/

author: ndictu
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 17, 2012, 09:42:32 pm
content: For people who want really in-depth overview of SOPA/PIPA and it's consequences with proper citations:http://blog.reddit.com/2012/01/technical-examination-of-sopa-and.html

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 17, 2012, 11:00:01 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on January 15, 2012, 11:18:06 amThere is an important distinction here here between morality and ineffectiveness. Our current communications minister has a definite mission to place internet communications under government control. The fact he is a buffoon and crackpot, does not detract from the evil within the intent. While current efforts are laughable and ineffective, "national internet filter", and "restricted NBN points of concentration", this remains an area of real concern.The rights of content providers and the rights of consumers are equally important and both need to be preserved. What we do not need across the globe is any imbalance of interest or influence. The distribution medium is not the place where issues of content or copyright should be played out. We need to resist any efforts to restrict communications no matter how clueless and ineffective these efforts are.

author: PeteInTexas
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 19, 2012, 04:37:58 am
content: Just watched the news. And guess who I just saw being interviewed in support of SOPA? Chairman and CEO of the Motion Picture Association of America, Chris Dodd. That's right! You use to know him as US Senator Chris Dodd just last year. He represented the "well to-dos" of Connecticut (bankers, financial types) and now hes whoring for the big money movie studios.I can't wait to see which recently retired US Senator will be whoring for the cause of internet freedom.

author: Armin_Balija
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 19, 2012, 05:06:40 am
content: I called my senators (Debbie Stabanow and Carl Levin) my representative (Candice S. Miller) of Michigan and Senate leader Harry Reid urging them to vote NO on S.968 SOPA and PIPA. I got a few letters sent back today regarding my calls and letters. I figure I'd keep calling until they get sick of me.

author: PeteInTexas
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 19, 2012, 05:18:07 am
content: Quote from: Armin_Balija on January 19, 2012, 05:06:40 amMy rep is Lamar Smith, SOPA midwife and mother. I don't think he's changing his mind much.

author: Armin_Balija
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 19, 2012, 05:33:57 am
content: Quote from: PeteInTexas on January 19, 2012, 05:18:07 amYikes. Hopefully people will rally and vote for the other guy next time. I'd personally like to see every senator and representative AND Obama be disbarred from the political process permanently if they vote YES for the bill and sign it.

author: ndictu
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 19, 2012, 10:57:22 am
content: Some good representatives you have there...

author: 8086
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 20, 2012, 10:52:15 pm
content: Bye bye SOPA/PIPA (probably)http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/01/internet-wins-sopa-and-pipa-both-shelved.ars

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 20, 2012, 11:59:08 pm
content: Quote from: Armin_Balija on January 19, 2012, 05:06:40 amOh no, that's when you start upping the pace and become really effective!Dave.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2012, 12:52:02 am
content: Making big news in the US current are worldwide raids on the file hoster megaupload.com initiated by the US. It includes arrests in NZ, I recall.FWIW, at least, it means that the US gov't has the ability to prosecute copyright and IP theft without a new law.Details of raid and arrests can be found on google.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 21, 2012, 08:22:16 am
content: I was thinking of starting a new topic when I heard the news. To be honest I don't see why all the fuss, If you really sit down and admit it to yourself you will come to realize that there is a tremendous amount of copyright material being ripped off. Look at all the warez download sites, and don't tell me you have never used one. And the owners charge for access to material that is not there's !!!! I mean cmon guys face it, it was good while it latest and many people went beyond being reasonable and helpful, they made a living off other peoples work and that is not fair !As for megauploads, yes I can tell you that they did have copyrighted material I mean cmon what else are these services used for. For such a massive service to exist where did the material come from. I'll give you another example of rip off and making money. seewww.westernclips.net(be warn before you click this IS a porn site). This guy runs a free porn site, you can download very high quality long video that he hosts on file hosting websites, these websites pay him for people downloading his stolen content because if you want to download a sensible amount of stuff you need a paid subscription to the service as they only allow one connection at a time and on DSL systems you usually have a shared IP address so you can only use it by paying, so megaluploads (and others) make money on the content from you paying subscriptions to get copyright material someone else put up there and they give him a cut, he even embeds his own website name on the videos, yes he has a statement on his site about copyright and to let him know if you think something is copyrighted and he'll look into it but really - who will do that when they are downloading free content or content for 7 bucks a month. And the file sharing sites promote this idea of you using them to make money on "your" content. Now I know we don't really consider porn to be copyright but legally it is and it still costs money to make like films and programs do.I have a collegue at work that rarely buys films, he downloads them. I am sorry but while I'm not paranoid over copyright I think the mark has been overstepped and we have seen an utter abuse of any loopholes in the law or benevolence on the part of the law or copyright holders.The only sad thing in all this would be the loss of old television material on YouTube, I know legally it is copyright but I have found out about old britist TV programs on youtube and after bought the DVD or am contemplating it. The quality is also so poor and the fact that programs are broken into small chunks makes you want to buy the DVD having appreciated it's existence.

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 21, 2012, 09:38:02 am
content: Simon, the only thing valuable in the entertainment media industry is the moment itself in which the content is produced - i.e. the live performance itself. This is the only unique thing in the whole entertainment industry, the rest is just gadgetry. I would gladly pay to see live performance any time, however the idea that a performance can be perpetuated ad infinitum artificially in order to generate profit is laughable. It looks stunningly similar to a ponzi scheme which could not be maintained if it wasn't for legal bigotry.Here is my standing, a live Led Zeppelin performance is unique and has some monetary value, then and there. There are a lot of people involved in a live performance but all except the band are merely providing utility service and are therefore not worth a cent more than their hourly fee. A record of a live Led Zeppelin on the other hand is not unique and can not be perpetuated infinitely. One year is plenty of time to allow any entertainment to maintain copyrights and hence recover invested money. After one year any copyrighted media should become public value, free to distribute and copy/modify.Wanna get rich as an artist? - Preform live.Not a good live performer? - Get a day job. We can see that you are crap regardless of autotune.Same goes for the movies. Invested a lot of money in a movie? One year, then GTFO. It makes no difference if they legislate it or not, the natural process of piracy will take care of it pretty well anyway.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 21, 2012, 10:08:25 am
content: if someone is going to charge for an illegal download you might as well pay the content originator. I have to admit that while it is nice to have a free for all culture and all for free perpetuated by the internet and paid for by advertising I am seeing a decline in the quality of what is on the net (too much duff content that acts as an excuse for selling ad space) and an increase in dodgy practices. Of course i have pirated software and the odd pirated film, but i would not pay for it nor would i expect to sell it and if i made money from it I'd be happy to pay for it.a prime example being photoshop, why should i pay a pirater to download it ?Like i said i am pleased to see so much old TV on youtube, I agree that it is time that old films be free to see and if i want a better quality copy i shall buy it.Let me tell you a real life story. Have you ever seen Cleopatra ? That film cost millions, now granted that a lot of money was wasted in making it because they got a few things wrong, but to bring the public that film at the time it cost millions. They even cut the film down to be able to get two screenings in one night as they were having trouble recovering costs, and it was only when it was released on VHS that the full cost was recovered years later.On the whole i prefer to buy a DVD than go see the film in a cinema, who the hell wants to go to the cinema ? to pay a lot of money to sit in a big room full of possibly noisy people with horrible acoustics because some asshole thinks that all we should here is loud bass and that physically hurts my ears (I probably have a perforated ear drum I am told due to having grommets as a kid) I have to sit through 30 minutes of adverts before the film, drive to the damn place, drive back and get back very late. If that is called a live performance of that film then stuff it, I prefer to buy the DVD at a reasonable price and watch it whenever I want in the comfort of my home with the same friends I'd have gone to the cinema with.As for live performances yes I am not too fussed about it, I'm not into that sort of thing but if i was I'd not pay too much for a copy of it, but then the main purpose of the live performance is to make money there and then, although i may pay a couple of quid for a good quality recording of it.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2012, 10:47:36 am
content: Many of the pirate sites have pirate of pirates of pirates of pirates of pirates etc., eventually the material can be found for truly free even for files of gargantuan size. You need to know technology to find them and avoid the malware in there, so it favors the techsavvy. There are also hacks of the filehosters allowing users to get it through cracks of their password schemes or their backdoors.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 21, 2012, 10:53:35 am
content: Quote from: saturation on January 21, 2012, 10:47:36 amyou merely confirm what I say: there is a hoard of people making quite a bit of money on someone elses content. if you spent hours writing a program to sell I am sure you would not appreciate it being spread all over the net and people actually making money from your work. If I was such a person I'd prefer people to have my software for free rather than think they owe a pirater money for it. I mean we even have cases of people charging for freeware software (and i don't mean charging to put it on a CD i mean charging for the privelage of downloading it). how people can just defy the law on the internet elludes me. I think this legislation comes too late as will any other legis;ation that combats illegal acts on the net like child pornography. if the polices forces had acted years ago to deal with the real criminals there might have been more leanient and balanced actions taken then that the heavy handidness we will see now.Why wikipedia shut down for a day also illudes me, they are in a totally different game of providing information put up by people for the benefit of others knowing that was it's purpose. if wikipedia is siding with piraters then that is sad

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 21, 2012, 11:28:43 am
content: Quote from: Simon on January 21, 2012, 10:08:25 amContent originator - yes, copyright holder - no. Everything in a piece of entertainment content which is not "artistic input" in the literary sense, is basically commodity services. Once the artists get their share the remaining is commodity. It does not matter who provides the commodity, pirate or apple store, they are not different in the service they provide. Certain amount of bytes, that's all. If I can obtain the same amount of bytes for free I don't need the services of the byte provider.Quotephotoshop is one of the best pieces of computer code ever written, no doubt. Adobe, the producer, is well aware that they can not sell the "old faithful" infinitely, that's why we see new versions now and then. I am happy with my old PS6 and wold have been happier if Adobe didn't cooperate with MS to make it unworkable on new OS'es.QuoteBad product design? The art is there but the cost to make it work is too much. Did they foresee at the time that VHS will come and amortize the investment? Doubtful.QuoteBeing there as it happens - worth money. Watching a recording of what happened - worth the dvd its printed on, or maybe a buck, tops.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2012, 01:18:08 pm
content: Yes, someone in the pipeline could ask for money and someone with less skills would actually resort to paying for it.I agree with you content owners should have copyrights and be allowed to protect it.Alas, SOPA/PIPA is throwing the baby out with the bathwater, so its claim to protect one strangles the other. That's why the megaupload, and prior to that the hotfile suit, is important because protection can be done, without more laws.Wikipedia shut down to draw attention to the issue since they are in the top 10 websites on the net for hits, its content is free.I personally feel the solution is for the content owners to make access to their material easier, highest quality, and more convenient than warez.The problem with users accessing warez is malware and quality, and increasingly bandwidth caps by ISPs.If you fix that, storage, access and indexing becomes the main issue. Each pirate is often tech savvy to maintain their own servers for data and backup, plus creating their own tags for indexing and finding the media. Not everyone is going to or wants to do this, so the goal would be to make it so easy that it isn't worth storing a movie locally nor the time to download from warez sites and engage malware risk and eat their data quota.When the cost to serve legitimate data undercuts the warez hosters, warez is out of business.The problem is the model used by content creators is obsolete, making warez attractive. iTunes current has a working model, but its not applicable to all; I do not think it fair for example. We should not pay per view, but pay to own for the same price, except we no longer have to have physical media in our homes.There are many avenues to cut costs and make new alliances.Hosting is not free, there is finite charge for data, whether its legitimate data or warez. Since large companies can always work in volume, they can always undercut small operators so long as their overhead is properly managed.For example, all ISP now meter data but don't claim to charge per GB, just charge more once you exceed your cap. They can opt to not meter data served by say a media streamer they have a license with. The ISP gets a fee from the media streamer to allow users unmetered access to its media, which is part of the fee a user pays to access the media. This simple model would still meet net neutrality by allowing access to everything, but would not penalize folks who use streaming and consumes their bandwidth cap. This one task now adds one barrier to the warez folks.Quote from: Simon on January 21, 2012, 10:53:35 am

author: PeteInTexas
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 23, 2012, 05:35:53 pm
content: This is interested for the numbers oriented.http://idealab.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/01/sopapipa-blackout-by-the-numbers.php?ref=skyboxes

author: Rufus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 24, 2012, 02:46:53 am
content: Quote from: Simon on January 21, 2012, 10:08:25 amTrue but the file hosting site wants like 5 cents for hosting and bandwidth and the content originator wants 15 bucks. The majority are not given the option to pay the content originator what they are prepared to pay so they pay someone else probably less.If they manage to shut down all the avenues for copyright infringement the vast majority who were infringing (at 5 cents a pop) will just do without and not pay anyone anything. The only winners in this story are the politicians the media industry is buying.