The Great Firewall of America

[velik_m]

http://www.mozilla.org/sopa/

So what's your opinion on this proposed legislation?

I'm kind of torn: on one hand USA handicapping itself like this could be a good boost for Euro economy, on the other hand our soon to be elected right wing government will probably copy this legislation all too happily...

[Winehole23]

Overreaching.

http://boingboing.net/2011/11/16/sop...lds-inter.html

[baseline bum]

Wow, first this country was turning to Mexico... now we're becoming ing China?

[velik_m]

Overreaching.

http://boingboing.net/2011/11/16/sop...lds-inter.html

So we won't use dot-com, dot-net, and dot-org.

[Winehole23]

Still, sucks for Americans. It's possible 100s or 1000s of legit websites could be shut down.

[velik_m]

Still, sucks for Americans. It's possible 100s or 1000s of legit websites could be shut down.

well yes, it sucks for Americans, but just like Europe blowing itself up in ww2 was good for USA economy, this could be good for Euro economy - assuming we don't follow (as we often do)...

[hater]

goverments left or right are scared of the internet effect. Just look at what happened in Middle east and what is happening with OWS

you seriously didn't think the internet was going to be free forever did you?

[hater]

well yes, it sucks for Americans, but just like Europe blowing itself up in ww2 was good for USA economy, this could be good for Euro economy - assuming we don't follow (as we often do)...

you will follow. UK is already in the works. A few more economic dominos falling and protests in France, Italy, etc. and it will happen.

[velik_m]

you will follow. UK is already in the works. A few more economic dominos falling and protests in France, Italy, etc. and it will happen.

Maybe, but Europe has no strong central government and "local" governments are a lot weaker and more exposed - i could probably drive to our pm's house and smack him silly, if i really wanted.

[Winehole23]

Under SOPA, private companies will be able to force payment processors to shut down payments to websites by merely claiming the site “engages in, enables or facilitates” infringement. This broad provision could target websites behind important Internet projects such as Tor, the anonymity network that has been vital for protecting activists from government surveillance in Tunisia and Egypt. While Tor is designed to promote free expression, privacy, and human rights (and has had an amazing impact on the Arab Spring), it can unfortunately also be used to mask one’s IP address when downloading copyrighted content, such as music. Corporations concerned about users illegally downloading music could use SOPA to force Visa and Mastercard to cut off donations to Torproject.org—despite Tor’s aim to facilitate human rights activism, not piracy.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/1...d-human-rights

[Winehole23]

Emerging nonprofit whistleblower sites could find themselves in the jaws of SOPA if they post any do ents related to corporate corruption or law breaking, if those do ents contain trade secrets or are copyrightable. In 2010, Microsoft unsuccessfully tried to knock the whistleblower website Cryptome offline in a comparable situation. Now, the offended corporation may simply send a notice to the payment processor alleging the posted do ents violate their rights and the processors will have five days to cut off the whistleblowing site’s service. Those sites could be starved out of existence before they can ever gain traction to defend themselves. Potential whistleblowers wishing to prevent the next Enron could be shut out of the Internet, even though the Enron whistleblower herself has said how important sites like WikiLeaks can be for exposing corporate wrongdoing.

ibid

[ElNono]

We had this discussion before during the "copyright-infringement = theft" discussion and I was told there was nothing to worry about. Only sites with flagrant violations would be targeted.

I'm glad there's more people that disagree.

[velik_m]

http://boingboing.net/2011/11/16/int...-full-pag.html

Congress may not want to hear from opponents of the Stop Online Piracy Act at today's hearing, but that hasn't stopped a broad coalition of (often fierce) compe ors representing the Internet's giants from placing an ad in today's NYT, signed by Google, Facebook, Mozilla, Zynga, eBay, Twitter, Yahoo, LinkedIn, and AOL.

[cheguevara]

it's a sad day when a monster like Google is fighting for the rights of citizens

[101A]

The myriad methods those in govt. could (no doubt would) abuse this are frightening.

[cheguevara]

yup. spurstalk could easily be shutdown at the snap of 2 fingers

[boutons_deux]

such power is absolutely going to be abused.

copywright enforcement is a fog to hide the real targets: Anonymous, Wikeleaks, whisteblowers.

[velik_m]

The European Parliament has adopted a resolution which criticizes domain name seizures of “infringing” websites by US authorities. According to the resolution these measures need to be countered as they endanger “the integrity of the global internet and freedom of communication.”

https://torrentfreak.com/eu-adopts-r...ziures-111117/

[ElNono]

EU Speaks Out Against US Censorship

"The EU Parliament has adopted, 'by a large majority,' a statement warning the US to refrain 'from unilateral measures to revoke IP addresses or domain names' due to the 'need to protect the integrity of the global internet and freedom of communications.' This resolution highlights both the practices prescribed in SOPA/PIPA... but also the actions of Homeland Security and ICE in seizing domain names. By adopting a resolution against domains seizures the European Parliament recognizes the dangerous precedent the pending SOPA legislation would set, and it wouldn't be a surprise if more foreign criticism follows. No country should have the ability to simply take over international domain names, and surely the US would feel the same if this plan was put in motion by a foreign country. Or as some 60 press freedom and human rights advocate groups put it in their letter to the US representatives: 'This is as unacceptable to the international community as it would be if a foreign country were to impose similar measures on the United States.'"

[The Reckoning]

this. seizing sites for "copyright violation."

"our illegal procedures are copyrighted, so all your base are belong to us."

[leemajors]

Pelosi spoke out against this today, and I believe several others said this has little chance of being passed. it looks like the pe ions by the people and the companies who spoke out against it worked.

[velik_m]

And Pelosi is far from the only member of Congress opposed to the legislation. On Tuesday, ten members of Congress signed a "dear colleague" letter expressing concerns with the bill. The signers were nine Democrats plus Rep Ron Paul (R-TX), a libertarian-leaning candidate for the GOP presidential nomination.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/n...opposition.ars

[ElNono]

It's a big smokescreen... Pelosi gets showered with big media contributions all the time...
She'll oppose this, but if it doesn't get approved, she'll relabel it TOPA and push it through...

[Wild Cobra]

http://www.mozilla.org/sopa/

So what's your opinion on this proposed legislation?

I'm kind of torn: on one hand USA handicapping itself like this could be a good boost for Euro economy, on the other hand our soon to be elected right wing government will probably copy this legislation all too happily...

Without a HR number, I say these people. Give me something tangible I can look up, or I will consider them trolls.

[Wild Cobra]

Still, sucks for Americans. It's possible 100s or 1000s of legit websites could be shut down.

Why?

I did find a bill reference. In the beginning it states:

1 SEC. 2. SAVINGS AND SEVERABILITY CLAUSES.
2 (a) SAVINGS CLAUSES.—
3 (1) FIRST AMENDMENT.—Nothing in this Act
4 shall be construed to impose a prior restraint on free
5 speech or the press protected under the 1st Amendment to the Cons ution.
7 (2) LE 17 LIABILITY.—Nothing in le I
8 shall be construed to enlarge or diminish liability, including vicarious or contributory liability, for any
10 cause of action available under le 17, United
11 States Code, including any limitations on liability
12 under such le.

Now consider the part of the cons ution that specifically states:

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.

Now I will admit to not reading all the bill yet, but copyright protection is part of congress' responsibility.