View Full Version : Geek PACs (PIPA/SOPA)
When geeks decide to take political action...
Google has a black "mourning" swatch across its logo. Google also has this statement and the attchd pdf graphic:
Millions of Americans oppose SOPA and PIPA because these bills would censor the Internet and slow economic growth in the U.S.
Two bills before Congress, known as the Protect IP Act (PIPA) in the Senate and the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the House, would censor the Web and impose harmful regulations on American business. Millions of Internet users and entrepreneurs already oppose SOPA and PIPA.
The Senate will begin voting on January 24th. Please let them know how you feel. Sign this petition urging Congress to vote NO on PIPA and SOPA before it is too late.
Wikipedia is unavailable and its main page has this statement.
Imagine a World Without Free Knowledge
For over a decade, we have spent millions of hours building the largest encyclopedia in human history. Right now, the U.S. Congress is considering legislation that could fatally damage the free and open Internet. For 24 hours, to raise awareness, we are blacking out Wikipedia.
Wikipedia's main page also has a search box for looking up your Congressman and a statement which says, "Contact your representatives."
And YouTube has this {with apologies to Don Maclean}:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=1p-TV4jaCMk
I only hope Congress doesn't piss off the Übergeek 'super hacker' crowd too much or...:eek:
And so it goes...
Richard :munchin
Putting PIPA/SOPA in perspective, I could foresee the provisions in either bill, and especially SOPA, harming PS.com. Remember, there is no fair use argument when there is no due process; I am sure there are many MSM outlets who will take advantage of those provisions with regards to linking and/or quoting content from their respective sites.
That said, the road to hell is paved with good intentions; The crux of this bill was intended to triage the intellectual property loss in this country to China, spurred on by the recent US Chamber of Commerce report[1]. Ultimately, each party crafted an overarching policy with some provisions that rival well known repressed regimes. The Dims like it because it allows the ruling liberal elite to control the "group think", and the RINO's like it because it protects critical income streams, especially Hollywood, RIAA, MPAA and that ilk(who BTW, normally despise the Repub's...except when it comes to protecting their cash flow, which is why they "pay to play" with both parties).
IMHO: There is a good chance BHO will veto any form of this:
a) It's not like getting a warrant through the current AG is so difficult to begin with, and barring that, executive order always seems to do the trick; He doesn't need Congress to execute any of those provisions, and it's a power he would probably want to reserve for BHO and Co. anyway.
b) The young people: The "Geek PAC" holds quite a bit of sway among the younger voting bloc, BHO knows this, and he also knows that this bloc was key to him in 2008, pissing them off would be a bad idea, if not political suicide.
My .02
[1]http://www.uscc.gov/annual_report/2011/annual_report_full_11.pdf
DevilSide
01-18-2012, 14:23
I'm not an ubergeek superhacker, but I can see that this bill does not need to be passed. I believe it's been proven that piracy does little to hinder the entertainment industry, which leads me to think someone just ones to censor the internet but who knows. There are other countries that censor the internet at will and I don't like the idea of us doing the same.
GratefulCitizen
01-18-2012, 15:11
Out in this area of the country, satellite internet is quite common.
If the US gov't tries to oppress internet activity, people will just get satellite internet linked to a server outside US jurisdiction.
The genie is out of the bottle; these bills are just acts of desperation by dinosaurs clinging to power.
What worries me is what the gov't will try next if this bill passes and the people find a way to go around it.
Out in this area of the country, satellite internet is quite common.
If the US gov't tries to oppress internet activity, people will just get satellite internet linked to a server outside US jurisdiction.
The genie is out of the bottle; these bills are just acts of desperation by dinosaurs clinging to power.
What worries me is what the gov't will try next if this bill passes and the people find a way to go around it.
Which under the bill, would be illegal. Sound familiar? Right, I thought so. So much for the 1st Amendment... :mad:
If you really need to use Wikipedia, you can just press the esc key before the page fully loads. At least it works for us engineering students.
ECUPirate09
01-18-2012, 22:03
If you really need to use Wikipedia, you can just press the esc key before the page fully loads. At least it works for us engineering students.
Looking at cached copies from Google works as well. However, if you're using Wiki for anything work/school/official, then you have bigger problems than the SOPA blackout.
Ret10Echo
01-19-2012, 05:45
Out in this area of the country, satellite internet is quite common.
If the US gov't tries to oppress internet activity, people will just get satellite internet linked to a server outside US jurisdiction.
The genie is out of the bottle; these bills are just acts of desperation by dinosaurs clinging to power.
What worries me is what the gov't will try next if this bill passes and the people find a way to go around it.
Interesting to watch this unfold and some of the backpeddling. There are competing requirements within the government...Administration vs Congress. There is potential for a train wreck at the international level if the U.S. steps on it's crank and tries to apply some method of controls domestically we lose all credibility internationally. Hard to fight against the regime-controls and internet filtering in places like China and Mideast, while doing that very thing at home. You can argue the "Yeah...but" all day about "We only do it to bad guys". It won't work.
Bad law, poorly presented, poorly applied. Another glaring example of Congressional failure and ignorance to reality whilst they live in their protected bubble.
We're telling China and Iran not to censor or limit internet but here we go again...
And Richard make a a great point,
I only hope Congress doesn't piss off the Übergeek 'super hacker' crowd too much or...
It's bad enough already...
:rolleyes:
It's about control. We have the WWW and they want to control it. This is what you will hear 50 years from now
"my old man told me when he was young, you could openly surf the internet for as long as you want and it was all free"
Continued stunts like Anonymous shutting down the DoJ website could give law makers and excuse put public sentiment in the back seat.
http://gizmodo.com/5877679/anonymous-kills-department-of-justice-site-in-megaupload-revenge-strike
I do wonder how much this is about freedom versus money...? For example, the likes of Google and other companies are at war with the cable companies over the issue of Net Neutrality. The Democrats/Google side says that Net Neutrality is needed, or else the cable companies could restrict content and websites. The Republicans/cable companies side says that's nonsense, and that Net Neutrality is a Fairness Doctrine for the Internet that will restrict Internet freedom and innovation. Both sides claim they're fighting for Internet freedom and I believe both sides supporters are genuine, but for the big companies involved on each side, it's $$$$ that seems to be the primary motivating factor (Google, Amazon, etc...could see their revenues affected without Net Neutrality).
On the issue of this piracy legislation, well the old media industry wants to stop piracy and protect their $$$$ of course. Outfits like Google are completely against it, citing it will lead to government controls on the Internet. I'm not saying that they're wrong, but I wonder if Google stood to make a lot more money if this legislation passed, what they're stance would be? And how they would present the issue?
I wish there had been a similar uproar over the banning of the incandescent light bulb like there is over this issue. While I do not want controls on the Internet, don't these media companies have a point about their stuff being pirated though...?
Some of this is undoubtedly about money. However, I think the services of Google, Facebook, Wikipedia, and YouTube are valued so highly by the general public that any denial of service from these companies, or public policy that effects them, will get the attention of the voting public double quick.
I think that given the public backlash over this whole thing, the bill is going to die a quiet death in committee somewhere long before the President can veto it.
My .02
GratefulCitizen
01-19-2012, 19:48
The entertainment industry and others are still clinging to an outdated business model.
A large share of the profit in business used to be in distribution.
People used to have neither the information of prices outside their area nor the means to import economically.
The internet crushed the distribution-monopoly model for information and some services.
The internet plus shipping companies like UPS and FedEx crushed the distribution-monopoly model for goods.
When their free market business model becomes obsolete, they go running to government.
The free market is the voluntary exchange of goods and services.
Government is telling you what you can't do (or must do) at the point of a gun.
Government (federal, at least) needs to be as removed from the free market as possible.
Increased involvement is nothing more that armed robbery with the government as the trigger man.
Ret10Echo
01-19-2012, 20:14
The free market is the voluntary exchange of goods and services.
Government is telling you what you can't do (or must do) at the point of a gun.
Government (federal, at least) needs to be as removed from the free market as possible.
Increased involvement is nothing more that armed robbery with the government as the trigger man.
Agree on the shift in the business model and the reaction to "legislate" or develop other regulatory processes to sustain a model that is no longer competitive or just plain outdated. (I live in Maryland...it is a way of life here. Just check out the anti-Walmart legislation that was later overturned)
Note that there is conflict within the "Government" as the Administration came out against SOPA...Congress was pushing it...until recently when they folded like a bad poker hand.
Suggest a check on the flow of lobbyists from the entertainment industry entering the Cannon or Rayburn buildings providing "motivation".
Continued stunts like Anonymous shutting down the DoJ website could give law makers and excuse put public sentiment in the back seat.
http://gizmodo.com/5877679/anonymous-kills-department-of-justice-site-in-megaupload-revenge-strike
It now seems that many, if not all of these sites are back up and operating. I wonder what is coming down the pipeline next?
It now seems that many, if not all of these sites are back up and operating. I wonder what is coming down the pipeline next?
Considering DoJ is already busting these dangerous criminals from the internet without much in the way of paper work....and they are doing it world wide I might add.......I am not quite sure why we need SOPA/PIPA.
But to answer your question, I think we all now what happens with horse play......it always gets out of control and someone gets hurt. DoJ pisses off Anonymous, Anonymous pisses off DoJ, now it is DoJ's turn to escalate matters.
During the brief intermission of hostilities I am sure we will see a new Guy Fawkes promo on You Tube and possibly we'll get a press release from the Head Decepticon at DoJ for the need of more laws to enhance his bureaucracy.
Interesting comments made by Ted.com
http://www.ted.com/talks/defend_our_freedom_to_share_or_why_sopa_is_a_bad_i dea.html
Some of the comments posted under this video were interesting too.