Poll: S.O.P.A (The Real Story)

[Akyho]

S.O.P.A, (Stop Online Piracy Act) A lot of people seem to be protesting this bill heavily. Although I myself am not to eager for this bill to pass. It would be great if some of you actually knew what the objective of the bill is. A lot of people (no idea why) seem to think that SOPA's main purpose is to censor the internet and make everything shitty with black bars all over their favourite sites stopping them from enjoying content. That however is incorrect. The bill is meant to do Exactly what the name is, stop piracy. Protecting intellectual property is not the same as censorship; the First Amendment does not protect stealing goods off trucks. So why would it protect downloading things illegally from the internet. The only thing that makes me weary about this bill is the lack of clarity. I think it should be revised Heavily before anyone even thinks of passing it. Just remember to learn the facts before you make your decision on whether to Yay or nay this bill.

My thoughts on S.O.P.A

We know this. Its copyright law. However look on this page alone most of us are breaking copyright law with our Avatars. We break Copyright law alooooooooooot. However we are against Sopa because its so unspecified. Meaning if it is passed it is a free pass to abuse it and break freedom of speech. SOPA isnt aimed however companies are not above useing such things badly.

Look at copyright law as it is. 8year old girls being arrested for nursery rhymes. Yes she broke the law however they could have went about it a bit better. If that is us with our current laws I dont want to think about unspecific and vague laws.

 

[chadachada123]

First off, the good news: at tonight's GOP debate, all four candidates came out against SOPA. This means, no matter who wins in 2012, we will very likely have a president who is against SOPA for the next four years.

Or it could just mean that these candidates simply said this to gain votes and could give rats ass about the fate of the internet.

I don't buy it one bit from them.

That's basically the foundation of Democracy. He doesn't have to care, he just has to want to get (re-)elected.

I hate to do this info-drop, but I really do wish that this is read.

Ron Paul has always been against SOPA/PIPA, and was against the NDAA (and did a speech the day of the blackout wanting to remove section 1021 of the NDAA, the indefinite detention part).
Ron Paul has been against SOPA since before the Iowa (goddamned) caucus: http://torrentfreak.com/presidential-candidate-ron-paul-slams-sopa-111229/

The other candidates only came out at the debate, but Paul put it on his Facebook page the morning of Wednesday. Quote: "My campaign, and the entire freedom movement, would not be as strong as they are today without a free Internet, and that's just one of the reasons why the establishment hopes to censor it with SOPA and PIPA. I'm proud to see so many taking a stand today. Contact your representative and senators and tell them to oppose these disastrous bills."

Oh, and his son, Rand Paul, a US Senator? He's already said that he will filibuster any attempts to pass PIPA. Both Rand and Ron Paul clearly oppose the legislation not because it gets brownie points, but because the legislation is clearly giving the Feds too much power. The OTHER candidates are clearly just piggybacking off of Ron Paul to try and sway internet voters.

Edit: Just one more quick fact. Paul has voted against every pay increase for Congress, saying that Congressmen should not be paid this much for such an ineffective job. He's refused to accept, for 20 years, a government pension, saying it would be "immoral and hypocritical." When he says something, he means it, and unlike the other candidates, he has never gone back on his word to waste money or liberty.

 

[silversnake4133]

Large sweeping legislation like SOPA, PIPA, and the NDAA have FAR too much gray area involved to be as "black and white" as the OP makes it out to be. The only thing with stuff like this is that our government likes to keep the general public naive and gullible, that's why they only provide so much information in the things they produce (textbooks, news stories, website information *that they claim as being fully legal*, etc.). This essentially is how they can easily control us. They provide half-truths and comforting lies to keep the populous happy. Heck if it wasn't for the Internet, we probably wouldn't be as informed as we are today.

Personally, I believe that SOPA and PIPA were given "blanket statements" to the general public in order to keep the older, voting generations happy. Only the very black and white information was provided while all of the gray area was left behind coded bars. SOPA and PIPA are NO DIFFERENT than what the DMCA was. The Entertainment industry became upset because people were downloading content online for free and not buying their products. However, the DMCA was lenient enough to allow for a clause called "The Safe Harbor" that essentially allowed the use and distribution of copyrighted material as long as it was for educational, medical, or scientific purposes, or as long as the person distributing the stuff didn't do so to profit off of it. (Making cds or tapes for a friend to enjoy/sample.)

As long as the Entertainment Industry exists, there will constantly be bills like SOPA and the DMCA that will pop up in government, each one nastier than the last. So if anything guys, prepare for the real endless war.

 

[DrOswald]

S.O.P.A, (Stop Online Piracy Act) A lot of people seem to be protesting this bill heavily. Although I myself am not to eager for this bill to pass. It would be great if some of you actually knew what the objective of the bill is. A lot of people (no idea why) seem to think that SOPA's main purpose is to censor the internet and make everything shitty with black bars all over their favourite sites stopping them from enjoying content. That however is incorrect. The bill is meant to do Exactly what the name is, stop piracy. Protecting intellectual property is not the same as censorship; the First Amendment does not protect stealing goods off trucks. So why would it protect downloading things illegally from the internet. The only thing that makes me weary about this bill is the lack of clarity. I think it should be revised Heavily before anyone even thinks of passing it. Just remember to learn the facts before you make your decision on whether to Yay or nay this bill.

My thoughts on S.O.P.A

I have no problem with the intent of the bill, stopping piracy. But that was never the issue. The problem is that there is huge potential for abuse by government and big businesses. And quite frankly I don't trust either of those groups.

This is an issue of free speech because it threatens free speech, whatever the intent.

 

[silversnake4133]

When movies and games and whatnot stop making hundreds of millions of dollars, then I'll believe there's a real problem. Not until then. The MPAA and RIAA will still make their millions and billions, and so will everyone else, cuz their prices are so damn high. They won't win this fight and then lower their prices. It's yet another attempt to squeeze every last dollar out of the American consumer by buying a law that suits them and ignores the people.

"Piracy" needs to be redefined, and SOPA needs to be thrown out and rewritten entirely to work, as Daystar suggested, like a sniper rifle, picking off the ones that need to be picked off while not abridging the lives of the rest.

Either that or more direct distribution sites like iTunes and Steam need to be made where the creators of the content can be paid directly instead of going through a "Middle Man". Of course there are the obvious drawbacks where people can still distribute songs to countless other people through the use of burning information onto cds, but the prices online are SOOO much cheaper than they are in the stores. Perhaps that's why these kind of distributors still manage to make a profit despite the Internet pirates.

 

[Joccaren]

I think most people knew that it was meant to stop Piracy.
The main problem is that it COULD be used to censor the Internet.
That, and it would do nothing to actually stop piracy, so it fails at its goal and succeeds at possibly infringing on freedom of speech.
The sort of crap going on with Megaupload ATM is what we wanted to avoid, this is the sort of stuff most were fighting against SOPA to stop from happening on a larger scale. Personally, I don't care too much that Megaupload is down, what I do care about is the US government not announcing plans to take down Megaupload, resulting in me being surprised by it being gone today, and now missing several legitimate files I needed that I had stored on the site due to me running out of HD space. Thanks to the US government, I've got to redo a lot of work. Thanks.

A public warning would have been more effective.
It would warn Megaupload to get rid of their illegal content.
It would alert people to back up their Megaupload files so as not to lose them.
It would get people on your side telling Megaupload to take down their illegal files.
It would not come across as so much of a retaliation against the SOPA protests (Seriously, the day afterwords they take down Mega. I'm sorry, but that's sus)

Most importantly, they wouldn't look like such A-holes. What is one of the first things you are taught when growing up? When that kid over there insults you, don't go punch his face in, go tell the teacher and get them to deal with it. Communication over reaction. US government: Grow up.

 

[The Funslinger]

This quote is used way too much, but it just fits:

He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither.

I've often wondered what Thomas Hobbes would have thought of that viewpoint.

I may be being completely thick but, I'll admit it, I have no idea what you are getting at.

He was a philosopher who believed all humans were inherently self serving, and that without a firm guiding hand, humanity would devolve into chaotic backstabbing. He saw the only solution to this to be if everyone surrendered certain freedoms and money (taxes) to a single, all powerful monarch in return for a secure society. Admittedly, we have elements of that in today's society with taxes and certain less inherent laws, but he was a bit more extremist.

 

[Chairman Miaow]

This quote is used way too much, but it just fits:

He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither.

I've often wondered what Thomas Hobbes would have thought of that viewpoint.

I may be being completely thick but, I'll admit it, I have no idea what you are getting at.

He was a philosopher who believed all humans were inherently self serving, and that without a firm guiding hand, humanity would devolve into chaotic backstabbing. He saw the only solution to this to be if everyone surrendered certain freedoms and money (taxes) to a single, all powerful monarch in return for a secure society. Admittedly, we have elements of that in today's society with taxes and certain less inherent laws, but he was a bit more extremist.

Ah, well then, I personally think he was an idiot. obviously the whole freedom for security thing shouldn't be taken too far either, people shouldn't have freedom to murder and whatnot.

 

[Something Amyss]

A lot of people (no idea why) seem to think that SOPA's main purpose is to censor the internet and make everything shitty with black bars all over their favourite sites stopping them from enjoying content.

It's not the "intended purpose" that people are worried about, so please don't phrase it that way. It's the outcome of hastily crafted, poorly thought out legislation.

Also, the question is whether it "affected" our opinion on SOPA.

 

[Flac00]

Snip

The major problem with the bill is this: It was created by the corporations that promote it (record industry, movie industry, etc.) so it inherently has major flaws. The issue is, the bill does not attempt to stop piracy, in fact it wouldn't because of the nature of piracy and the bill itself, but instead enforce major restrictions on copy-write infringement. This is fine on paper, but it means that if your video contains ANYTHING that has anything to do with the copy-written material you could go to jail. A video of 2 kids singing Justin Beiber? ILLEGAL. Thats just wrong. Stopping piracy requires a different kind of effort.
1: Change the culture on the internet to be less accepting for piracy.
2: Make a distinction between piracy and simple copy-write infringement. There should be a law making the two as distinct things that require different punishments.
3: Ensure that people that are innocent or have no connection to piracy are not harmed or punished for the actions of others.

SOPA and PIPA do none of this, instead they hurt innocent individuals who have no connection to piracy without ever addressing the real problem (see above).
The other reason for opposing this is it gives too much power to people we do not want to give any power to in the first place, corporations. If you think power corrupts absolutely in government, it gets a whole lot worse in the private sector. Giving them free reign to detirmine what is illegal and what is not will destroy the internet. Not to mention the 3rd reason, it gives the government the ability to shut down websites that they don't like legally. Those are the same tactics as China and Iran, we should not follow suit at all.

This bill is greater than the sum of its parts, it should never have been considered, and now it needs to be stopped.

 

[Pyro Paul]

S.O.P.A, (Stop Online Piracy Act) A lot of people seem to be protesting this bill heavily. Although I myself am not to eager for this bill to pass. It would be great if some of you actually knew what the objective of the bill is. A lot of people (no idea why) seem to think that SOPA's main purpose is to censor the internet and make everything shitty with black bars all over their favourite sites stopping them from enjoying content. That however is incorrect. The bill is meant to do Exactly what the name is, stop piracy. Protecting intellectual property is not the same as censorship; the First Amendment does not protect stealing goods off trucks. So why would it protect downloading things illegally from the internet. The only thing that makes me weary about this bill is the lack of clarity. I think it should be revised Heavily before anyone even thinks of passing it. Just remember to learn the facts before you make your decision on whether to Yay or nay this bill.

My thoughts on S.O.P.A

When it comes down to it, the Name or Intent does not matter.
What truely matters is what it acctually does.

You could call the Bill 'Pretty Butterflies Act'
Your intention could be to bring Peace to the world.

does that all acctually matter when the solution to that is to Kill anyone that disagrees with it? When it Abolishes Free speech and Civil Rights so that they have absolute control?

remember:
The road to Hell is paved with Good Intentions.

 

[smokeyninjas]

S.O.P.A, (Stop Online Piracy Act) A lot of people seem to be protesting this bill heavily. Although I myself am not to eager for this bill to pass. It would be great if some of you actually knew what the objective of the bill is. A lot of people (no idea why) seem to think that SOPA's main purpose is to censor the internet and make everything shitty with black bars all over their favourite sites stopping them from enjoying content. That however is incorrect. The bill is meant to do Exactly what the name is, stop piracy. Protecting intellectual property is not the same as censorship; the First Amendment does not protect stealing goods off trucks. So why would it protect downloading things illegally from the internet. The only thing that makes me weary about this bill is the lack of clarity. I think it should be revised Heavily before anyone even thinks of passing it. Just remember to learn the facts before you make your decision on whether to Yay or nay this bill.

My thoughts on S.O.P.A

Its seems like you haven't researched SOPA at all or what the far reaching implications of it passing would be to put it very simply its reverses the innocent until proven guilty to assuming everyone is guilty thereby forcing online services like youtube to police every bit of content before it gets uploaded as any infringement could get the whole thing pulled down without any trial or court proceedings this is just the latest step in whats been a twenty year long battle agaist are rights to share with each other going all the way back to mix tapes

 

[Xanthious]

S.O.P.A, (Stop Online Piracy Act) A lot of people seem to be protesting this bill heavily. Although I myself am not to eager for this bill to pass. It would be great if some of you actually knew what the objective of the bill is. A lot of people (no idea why) seem to think that SOPA's main purpose is to censor the internet and make everything shitty with black bars all over their favourite sites stopping them from enjoying content. That however is incorrect. The bill is meant to do Exactly what the name is, stop piracy. Protecting intellectual property is not the same as censorship; the First Amendment does not protect stealing goods off trucks. So why would it protect downloading things illegally from the internet. The only thing that makes me weary about this bill is the lack of clarity. I think it should be revised Heavily before anyone even thinks of passing it. Just remember to learn the facts before you make your decision on whether to Yay or nay this bill.

My thoughts on S.O.P.A

The only problem with this premise is that the bill will do fuck all to stop piracy. The government puts up DNS blocks and the pirates will simply use alternate DNS servers or access sites by their IP address. The government will take down sites and multiple new sites will pop up for every site taken down. Whatever the government thinks to do the pirates are prepared for multiple times over.

Piracy has always been around and will continue to be around for as long as people are making songs/movies/games/television shows. Trying to stop it is simply a fool's errand. The best way to lessen the effects of piracy is to offer a quality product for a fair price and not worry about what you can't control.

Above and beyond that though companies need to stop clinging to outdated business models. The times they are a changin' and companies that adapt with the times are rewarded by the consuming public while companies that cling to outdated business practices and models are left to suffer. You need only look to companies like Apple, Amazon, HBO and Netflix to see what right way is to do these things.

Bottom line is don't rely on lawmakers to save your outdated business practices. Either adapt or die.

 

[fenrizz]

Oh.. Now I get it.
SOPA is there to stop piracy and nothing else.

Much the same as rifles are manufactured for hunting only.

Surely that could never go wrong.
Because who would ever dream of abusing an innocent, fully automatic rifle (with a scope, laser targeting and explosive bullets)?

 

[darthotaku]

It isn't that the bill would actually censur the internet, as it would make it impossible for any website to remain up. emagine how much it'd cost if the escapist was forced to go through every link and block out the ones that lead to international sites and sites that could show how to copy content. the sheer resources needed to do it would crush the escapist, as would the punishment for not being able to.
It isn't that fighting copywrite piracy is bad, its that the way they were going about it are impossible for any website to uphold. therefor, either the bill goes unenforced and just costs taxpayers millions, or it is enforced and any site that doesn't have the ability to throw away millions of dollars will be unable to stay up.

 

[Icyheart]

If there's one thing about people I've learned while on this earth, it's that no one cares what the intentions of an action are so much as its affect on them directly. Case in point: taxes; this is a necessary invention to keep our roads in tact, our schools running, and our government functioning, but all people want to acknowledge is the fact that the money is coming out of their pockets. The SOPA bill is the same way. People don't care what its purpose is, only its implications.

 

[RatRace123]

In a sense, I agree. The problem with SOPA was that the bill was worded so vaguely and it gave so much power to the government and copyright holders that they could censor the internet and place black bars over everything.

If it passed, we would essentially be relying on them not to abuse the power that they totally could legally abuse without any drawbacks if they felt like it.
I guess the web community was just nervous about trusting the "nuke the internet" button to people who seem to only be able to see the world in dollar signs.

 

[BabySinclair]

I don't doubt that many of the politicians that were supporting the bill honestly thought that they were protecting IP holders and the economy. What they didn't understand was that the lobbyists that paid them to support the bill knew full well the abuses it would allow and were trying to keep that out of the public's eye so the bill would be passed and then abused to kill the newest "threat" to the entertainment industry, much like they tried with DVD's, VHS, and MP3 players. Sure some of them probably knew but they're asshats that need to be voted out of office.

 

[evilneko]

If there's one thing about people I've learned while on this earth, it's that no one cares what the intentions of an action are so much as its affect on them directly. Case in point: taxes; this is a necessary invention to keep our roads in tact, our schools running, and our government functioning, but all people want to acknowledge is the fact that the money is coming out of their pockets. The SOPA bill is the same way. People don't care what its purpose is, only its implications.

Well I'd kinda hate to live in a world where people only considered the purpose of an action. I think it's pretty safe to say anyone would.