American bill will allow the government to censor Internet domains.

Recommended Videos

etherlance

New member
Apr 1, 2009
762
0
0
8bitmaster said:
wait wait wait wait wait wait wait......... does that mean no more porn?

Oh shit he's right!!!

What about the porn people???
Won't someone please think of the porn!!!


 

Cynical skeptic

New member
Apr 19, 2010
799
0
0
8bitmaster said:
wait wait wait wait wait wait wait......... does that mean no more porn?
Yes.

Its already illegal to transport obscene materials through interstate means, but since no one can differentiate between "obscene" data and bullshit on yahoo.com (arguably more obscene, in my opinion (thus illegal)) as it passes through the series of tubes, and theres also that whole neutrality thing, where any attempt to monitor any part of the internet means you become responsible and liable for everything on the internet, internet porn is currently protected.

The biggest problem is any sort of effort to gain even the slightest amount of internet based jurisdiction would open a floodgate to every moronic law on the books.
 

spartan231490

New member
Jan 14, 2010
5,186
0
0
joemegson94 said:
America, land of the free.
Amen. to think, mr. orwel(or however you spell it) was only what, 26 years off? One can hope that such a horrific infringment of so many rights "protected" by the bill of rights could never pass, but the patriot act is worse, and passed twice!
 

scorptatious

The Resident Team ICO Fanboy
May 14, 2009
7,405
0
0
It's kind of disturbing how much the American government is becoming like Britain when they ruled over the colonists so long ago...

To quote Abe from Oddworld Abe's Exoddus: We have forgotten out past, and now it's costing us our future. And even our souls...
 

BrownGaijin

New member
Jan 31, 2009
895
0
0
My thoughts about this whole thing - placed in simple terms. Disclaimer the stick is a metaphor
Odds of bill passing: Not likely.
Odds of bill being declared unconstitutional if passed: Very likely.
Odds of being held up and argued over and over and over before being allowed to be implemented only to be argued to be unconstitutional again at the last second, thus starting the whole cycle over: Probable.

This is America.
America is part of the world.
The world is filled with very stupid people.
Very stupid people have the knowledge to swing a stick.
Very stupid people have been known to acquire seats of power by swinging stick.
America is also the home of the brave.
The brave have been known stand up to very stupid people.

To wrap it up, if you want to hold on to those freedoms you cherish so much, then you better start cheering on the brave ones who are going to stand up for your rights, and/or become a brave one yourself by taking initiative in your government's actions.

And now some words from a brave man, Craig Ferguson:

 

spartan231490

New member
Jan 14, 2010
5,186
0
0
i would like to think that such a blatant attempt to supplant the rights that all americans have "protected" by the bill of rights couldnt pass, but the patriot act is worse and passed not just once, but twice. welcome to the slow and calculated shift of the american government from a republic to an empire. This happened in rome, and most people still don't see that it's happening.
 

mr_rubino

New member
Sep 19, 2010
721
0
0
I'm guessing this topic is/will be soon filled with Europeans going "Derp. What's the problem?"
 

thiosk

New member
Sep 18, 2008
5,410
0
0
Doctor What said:
Just when I think that the tea party is crazy when they talk about our freedoms being taken away, shit like this happens.
I keep trying to tell everyone that George Bush and Obama are aliens trying to control us through the medical industrial complex, but no one believes me.

Maybe now they will.

Now they will.
 

ribonuge

New member
Dec 7, 2009
1,479
0
0
Scout Tactical said:
Ribonuge said:
Scout Tactical said:
I'm pretty sure you failed to read your own post. The central activity of YouTube is not to post copyright infringing videos: in fact, YouTube does a good job of removing those videos on request (but not without request). This also means that they cannot shut down any site with any kind of infringement. Critical reading skills, please. The sites they will be targeting are places like ThePirateBay, probably.

Please read your own post before you hit the submission button.
You really think a condescending attitude actually helps someone to realise a mistake? No it just makes them annoyed and frustrated.

Here you go, this is from the article I posted, if you had bothered to read it.

One example of what this means in practice: sites like YouTube could be censored in the US. Copyright holders like Viacom often argue copyrighted material is central to the activity of YouTube, but under current US law, YouTube is perfectly legal as long as they take down copyrighted material when they're informed about it -- which is why Viacom lost to YouTube in court.
Basically the potential of what could come from this law is what worries people. You should read a little more into things before posting. Check that submission button, y'know?
Your argument reinforces my own. Your article says essentially what I said, so I don't see why you should doubt MY reading prowess.

That court case in particular shows that the United States (which is the only entity that in this case matters, not Viacom for instance) currently believes sites like YouTube are perfectly acceptable. Unless what you're getting at is that if this law is passed and a lot of Viacom employees are appointed to become Federal justices of the law we'll be in trouble, then I don't see your point.

Maybe you should have thought twice before you hit the submission button.
Ok I am going to spell this out and end it.

You said in your first post:
The central activity of YouTube is not to post copyright infringing videos: in fact, YouTube does a good job of removing those videos on request (but not without request). This also means that they cannot shut down any site with any kind of infringement.
So then I posted this from the article, showing that Viacom argued copyrighted material is central to the activity of YouTube (Note:Argued).
One example of what this means in practice: sites like YouTube could be censored in the US. Copyright holders like Viacom often argue copyrighted material is central to the activity of YouTube, but under current US law, YouTube is perfectly legal as long as they take down copyrighted material when they're informed about it -- which is why Viacom lost to YouTube in court.
You then said that the central activity of Youtube is not to post copyright infringing videos. Viacom argued that it was.

Do you understand why you were wrong now? You and Viacom have differing opinions. I have nothing to do with this and neither does my reading acumen.

Also, you stated
That court case in particular shows that the United States currently believes sites like YouTube are perfectly acceptable.
This is not current. This bill has not yet been passed, but it could be. If it is then the US may not believe sites like Youtube are acceptable anymore.
 
Apr 28, 2008
14,634
0
0
Wow. Just... wow.

This is just sad.

Well, its official, the government doesn't give a shit about the constitution anymore. I just can't believe something like this would even be considered.

First ACTA, now this. If things keep going the way they are, the US will turn into the next China.
 

JWAN

New member
Dec 27, 2008
2,725
0
0
mr_rubino said:
I'm guessing this topic is/will be soon filled with Europeans going "Derp. What's the problem?"
This^

There reasoning is cyber attacks on our government and banking system occur on an almost daily basis, that being said why dont they just unplug their own systems and not totally rely on the interwebz.
 

Zykon TheLich

Extra Heretical!
Legacy
Jun 6, 2008
3,506
850
118
Country
UK
Oh you stupid Limeys with all your government censorship, if you had a constitution guaranteeing freedom of speech like the US this wouldn't happen...wait...Fuck.
 

Cynical skeptic

New member
Apr 19, 2010
799
0
0
Atmos Duality said:
First ACTA and now this.

It's like a revolving door of Unconstitutional Acts these past few months.
Irridium said:
Wow. Just... wow.

This is just sad.

Well, its official, the government doesn't give a shit about the constitution anymore. I just can't believe something like this would even be considered.

First ACTA, now this. If things keep going the way they are, the US will turn into the next China.
... Well, ACTA has been on the table since, at least, '08. Its also an international treaty. It, on it's own, has no power to directly influence anything.

What it does is prompt each signing nation to create their own laws policy in respect to it.

Which is what this would be, if, as it appears, ACTA's ratification is simply a matter of time.