American bill will allow the government to censor Internet domains.

[Cynical skeptic]

I doubt they would go insane and delete websites straight away on sight, that would be over ridiculous.

www.filespump.com

 

[Catalyst6]

This means that any site with copyright infringement of any kind could be shut down (incuding youtube).

I'm fairly sure that they've been doing this already, seeing that copyright infringement is, you know, illegal. There's a good reason why Pirate Bay is wherever the hell it is this week.

 

[Grey_Focks]

...you people realize this will NEVER pass, right?

 

[Snake Plissken]

Hehe, I can now finally sound like an old man and it would be accurate.

"It's those GODDAMNED Democrats!"

That was fun. Check the names associated with the bill. 9 of the 11 are democratic senators.

Note: This was not intended to incite political discussion. If you feel the need to argue with me about whose fault it really is, go choke. I don't really believe that the problem lies within party lines. I just thought it was a funny thing to note.

 

[Cynical skeptic]

...you people realize this will NEVER pass, right?

Thats what the multi-billion dollar corporations undermining your republic with lobbyists and money want you to think.

 

[Plurralbles]

And let the "AAAHHHHHH WE'RE TURNING INTO A DICTATORSHIP GAME OVER MAN GAME OVER!!!" comments flow in...

But seriously, there are retarded proposals like this all the damn time(Does anyone remember ACTA?)And all of them are swatted down like an annoying flies.

This one won't be any different.

The problem I'm having is who the fuck is even proposing these laws? Can we shoot them? Please? they have no right to have power.

Hehe, I can now finally sound like an old man and it would be accurate.

"It's those GODDAMNED Democrats!"

That was fun. Check the names associated with the bill. 9 of the 11 are democratic senators.

Note: This was not intended to incite political discussion. If you feel the need to argue with me about whose fault it really is, go choke. I don't really believe that the problem lies within party lines. I just thought it was a funny thing to note.

not debating with you. Just quoted to say that was awesome.

Edit: Though I think that the knowledge that it's democrats makes me cry a little inside... Tehre's not one freakin party anyone can turn to to see rights be defended.

 

[Abanic]

The COICA bill is referred to as S.3804 and is sponsored by Sen. Patrick Leahy [D-VT]

The bill's Cosponsors are:
Lamar Alexander [R-TN]
Evan Bayh [D-IN]
Benjamin Cardin [D-MD]
Thomas Coburn [R-OK]
Richard Durbin [D-IL]
Dianne Feinstein [D-CA]
Lindsey Graham [R-SC]
Charles Grassley [R-IA]
Orrin Hatch [R-UT]
Amy Klobuchar [D-MN]
Herbert Kohl [D-WI]
Charles Schumer [D-NY]
Arlen Specter [D-PA]
George Voinovich [R-OH]
Sheldon Whitehouse [D-RI]

If you disagree with the contents of this bill, do your best to make sure that the preceding Senators are replaced when their re-election comes around. I personally do not have a problem with the government creating a law to prevent online infringement of copyright laws, but the bill adds "and for other purposes" to its description of what it is designed to accomplish (and vague language like that scares the Hell out of me).


How To Contact Your Senator [http://www.senate.gov/reference/common/faq/How_to_contact_senators.htm]

 

[SnipErlite]

But youcan't censor the internet - Anything that violates some copyright and is removed will just pop up on a new video sharing site created that very morning.

 

[Plurralbles]

The COICA bill is referred to as S.3804 and is sponsored by Sen. Patrick Leahy [D-VT]

The bill's Cosponsors are:
Lamar Alexander [R-TN]
Evan Bayh [D-IN]
Benjamin Cardin [D-MD]
Thomas Coburn [R-OK]
Richard Durbin [D-IL]
Dianne Feinstein [D-CA]
Lindsey Graham [R-SC]
Charles Grassley [R-IA]
Orrin Hatch [R-UT]
Amy Klobuchar [D-MN]
Herbert Kohl [D-WI]
Charles Schumer [D-NY]
Arlen Specter [D-PA]
George Voinovich [R-OH]
Sheldon Whitehouse [D-RI]

If you disagree with the contents of this bill, do your best to make sure that the preceding Senators are replaced when their re-election comes around. I personally do not have a problem with the government creating a law to prevent online infringement of copyright laws, but the bill adds "and for other purposes" to its description of what it is designed to accomplish (and vague language like that scares the Hell out of me).

God damnit... GOD FREAKIN' damnit.

Freakin'g George Voinovich... my own state's man... What a piece of shit... I'm writing a letter.

 

[Wardnath]

And meanwhile in Australia, the internet filter's effectively died.

Who the fuck's laughing now, guys?

Edit: Wait 'till you see what happens when they try to censor 4chan. XD XD XD

 

[Atmos Duality]

... 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.

Any initiatives proposed like this could (should) be struck down as Unconstitutional; the wording of the bill is presently too vague; too open to personal interpretation.

Hypothetically, if it were not declared Unconstitutional, this places a tremendous amount of power in the hands of private companies, essentially giving them rights to legally control the internet. If you put up a site for your own personal usage and a company claims you are distributing "contraband" or are in any way violating copyright law (too easy to do unwittingly) then you can be censored from the internet.

The reason for a private company to do so are innumerable; perhaps you provide technical assistance that competes with them (economic incentive), or discussion that they do not want published (political or economic incentive). Perhaps you pissed off their vice-president and he's going to take it out on you directly (personal incentive).

That's too much room for abuse; even if its claimed ethical precedent is legitimate (stopping piracy).

The other problem with vague/interpretive wording is that those tend to be relegated to Civil Court disputes, but this bill is clearly trying to become something akin to that of a Criminal Law.
It's the difference between a Policy and a Rule.

 

[Abanic]

Just when I think that the tea party is crazy when they talk about our freedoms being taken away, shit like this happens.

I think that it's funny when a group of Americans gets together and complains about their rights being taken away and that they want their country back, that the knee-jerk reaction is to think of those people as crazy.

 

[The_ModeRazor]

AND YOU WILL KNOW MY NAME IS THE TROLL WHEN I LAY MY VENGEANCE UPON THEE!
Scary law, but will not pass. Or if it somehow will, it simply won't do anything much.
In any case, I'm stocking up on Jackboot-Repellant.
And I don't even live in America!

 

[Scarnehu]

Well that's just a F***ing load of BullSh**. Where the H*** is the first amendment? I mean, people will rally to save a convict from death row, but if the internet is going to be monitored than nobody gives a d***?

(this comment proudly edited by the united states government)

 

[zfactor]

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:

Spoiler: Take it away Craig

Agree with that, here's hoping it doesn't get passed and if it does it gets destroyed by the courts. Also agree with his point on if you don't vote, you can't complain about where this country goes.

 

[Rakkana]

Bad obama. Bad!

Seems like all America have been trying to do in the last few decades is become the biggest hypocrite on the planet.

 

[Abanic]

God damnit... GOD FREAKIN' damnit.

Freakin'g George Voinovich... my own state's man... What a piece of shit... I'm writing a letter.

I don't know if you were serious, but in case you are:


How To Contact Your Senator [http://www.senate.gov/reference/common/faq/How_to_contact_senators.htm]

 

[Cynical skeptic]

Just when I think that the tea party is crazy when they talk about our freedoms being taken away, shit like this happens.

I think that it's funny when a group of Americans gets together and complains about their rights being taken away and that they want their country back, that the knee-jerk reaction is to think of those people as crazy.

The problem is those people are crazy. They, essentially do nothing but regurgitate whatever is on fox news.

Hence, they're silent on this, as ACTA and by extension, this, were pushed into existence by media conglomerates such as newscorp.

 

[Nannernade]

So, whose ready to go to Canada then? We haven't heard from them in awhile, so things must be going pretty good up there, let's go fuck it up!