Poll: Would you allow USA users to your website right now?

Recommended Videos

lacktheknack

Je suis joined jewels.
Jan 19, 2009
19,316
0
0
Anoni Mus said:
As much as I hate American sites that do that, specially some youtube videos, I would let everyone and anyone enter my website.

Fuck CIA, FBI and similars, come and get me .|.
<link=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/115273-British-Student-Loses-Extradition-Battle-Over-Copyright-Violation>They will. Better pay attention to your URL suffix.
 

Yopaz

Sarcastic overlord
Jun 3, 2009
6,092
0
0
Pebkio said:
Yopaz said:
I am getting incredibly annoyed whenever I am blocked from seeing something on Youtube or not being able to use certain streaming sites because I am not in America so yes. I would let Americans see my site because I have been on the wrong end of that stuff before.
Psst... don't tell anyone, but just bounce your signal off of an American server and you can see whatever you want. It's called using a proxy and it's why I now have Aali's graphic driver...

...remember, it's a secret...
Yeah, I've done that sometimes, I just usually forget about that. Oh well, thanks for reminding me anyway. Oh also this conversation never happened.
 

megarik

New member
Feb 2, 2011
34
0
0
I'd block them, because America is too unstable on the area of internet, it's also a principle matter because their goverment broke the rules they made for themselves to protect them for making bills like SOPA and PIPA.

Excuse me for any spelling mistakes I made.
 

Blade1130

New member
Sep 25, 2011
175
0
0
Well, I'm not entirely fluent in the consequences of being taken down by SOPA/Protect IP, but from my understanding all they can really do is take you off the DNS within the US. As such, if you are taken down, all your losing is your US viewers (assuming other countries don't adopt similar laws). As such, there's really no harm in allowing US citizens on your site, since if anything goes wrong you're just back to where you would be if you didn't allow them in the first place.

Also, I don't think you have to have US citizens on your site to make it take-down-able. I get that if you block it to everyone from the US, then yeah they won't pull you from the DNS, but at that point you've basically blocked yourself. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think if you're in a foreign country, (since there are no international laws on this I believe), the US government can't take you to court over it. Only pull you from the DNS. At least, I think that's the case.

Esotera said:
Almost reminds me of the guy who blocked anyone using Internet Explorer from visiting his website, and redirected them to a page telling them why they should get firefox or chrome.
Who did this? I like this guy, my website very blatantly calls you an idiot for using IE if you go to a game that doesn't work in IE. I don't redirect you, but kinda similar.
 

Connor Lonske

New member
Sep 30, 2008
2,660
0
0
Everyone in this thread implies it doesn't work both ways. You try to view any TV show on the BBC website as an American, for an example, and you don't get to see it.

Also, we get the same messages non Americans get for completely different videos on Youtube. But how would they know that? I'll tell you why you don't know that, because your only looking at it from one point of view, your own.

Anyone implying that is some cases, European governments/corporations don't do the same thing to Americans, is, preposterous.

And I would never keep someone from viewing my public media I have created, whether it be a website, a video, an essay, anything of that sort. That would remove the basic sense of freedom I think should be aloud to anyone.
 

Maveroid

New member
Apr 22, 2009
82
0
0
Honestly, how often are we going to see threads like these?
The last time I saw one of those was a week ago regarding SOPA where a really smart user suggested that all other countries should restrict Americans from using their sites because America is obviously the root of all evil.

I can't stand that assumption. Do you really believe that THAT is the right thing to do? Do you really believe that everything would be fine and dandy if you simply restrict a whole country from accessing certain content?!

Reality check, you are angry because you can't access American content that you want, so the right thing to do is just stop Americans from coming in contact with you on the internet?

Can't you just stop thinking like other people are your enemies and just try to actually fix the things that you don't like instead of breaking something that is right? There is content from certain countries in Europe that I can't access either, there just isn't that much european content that I am interested in at the moment so it doesn't actively bother me, but I agree that it is a pain in the butt. When I am in Germany, I hate all those restrictions and stuff too, so I understand where you are coming from and I am sorry if I sound rude.

What you should be asking in this poll is "Can't we do something about it?" or something like that. Can't you do something that would influence the content-owner's decision to make stuff unavailable for you? It happened for financial reasons, not because they hate you or your country.

I think that's the thing that we should all realize "Nobody hates you or your country, it has other reasons".

In contrast, you are asking whether you should restrict Americans from accessing your site because you are just pissed at them.
 

ReinWeisserRitter

New member
Nov 15, 2011
749
0
0
I'm honestly impressed at how many people haven't taken the "yeah, let the filthy Americans rot" option. There may be hope for us yet.
 

SenseOfTumour

New member
Jul 11, 2008
4,514
0
0
What bugs me, is if they've spent 1% of the time and money of SOPA and PIPA and the rest on a new law dealing with international rules on internet content, so they could relax the barriers on seeing national sites, I firmly believe that far more than half of TV piracy would be eliminated overnight.

On a simple level, really how different are the rulings about UK and US content, and is 'Big Bang Theory' or 'Dr Who' really breaking so many rules about what can be shown in either country?

Make it available, get some international advertisers, or simply charge a small dollar amount per episode, piracy massively reduced without riding over people's rights and freedoms with a large tank.

OF course, the idea of giving people MORE freedom goes against everything big business stands for, and they're happy to sacrifice sales to keep control. Control that's slipping away every year, and that's the main reason for SOPA imo.
 

Double A

New member
Jul 29, 2009
2,270
0
0
Charli said:
Yeah I'd let them, because I'm not a douche.

But I still feel sour when someone does that, but I refuse to be 'that guy'. It's annoying because I frequent accross the US and Europe because of friends and family (currently in Europe) And I can't use my Pandora radio account here. So bloody bummed out about that.
Ahhh well...

OH! Theoretically if SOPA had passed or if any future iteration of it passes, you bet your ass I'm blocking it from US residents.

(Sorry you cannot see this website because you didn't do more to stop your governement from making a stupid decision, better luck next time.)


Infact if it does happen, I'm calling on all countries hosting outside of the US to boycott them in mass protest and see how they like it. Give a little, get a little.
You'd be punishing the geeks for the inaction of sheeple.

That's about as justified as a certain Internet censorship bill.
 

Charli

New member
Nov 23, 2008
3,445
0
0
Double A said:
You'd be punishing the geeks for the inaction of sheeple.

That's about as justified as a certain Internet censorship bill.
Sitting on the internet complaining about SOPA is what the majority of people have done. I count that is severe 'well whatever' attitude. When the UK governement tried to pass a law that affected me badly, I went out in person and physically told them what I thought of it, to London, so am I punishing geeks? Hell yeah I am.

Majority of geeks are just as guilty of inaction as the 'sheeple' as you so eloquantly put it.
So through my actions, I prompt them into further action. Again this is theoretical, but harsher backlash gets the desired results. Life has taught me; "Don't know what you have until it's gone." The actual act of taking down/blocking websites was a good direction but I would band together to make sure that I fight that bill the only way a foreigner like me could. I cannot call up your government and tell them what I think, they don't care, so I'm afraid that is the penalty, the rest of the world would be welcome to view it.

Hell they'd probably block me anyway, I tend to quote "American owned verbal property" anyway.



So the people who did something about it can rally support faster and put a stop to it.
You call me hypocritical because I am one person, but it's making a point in the same way Wikipedia did.
 

Charli

New member
Nov 23, 2008
3,445
0
0
Zachary Amaranth said:
Charli said:
Yeah I'd let them, because I'm not a douche.
Covering your ass from serious charges and potential large fines/jail sentences is being a douche?
Read the rest of my post, in the event they passed that bill, I would block them.
I do not condone that kind of hypocracy in a nation, promoting free speech and then turning around and pointing fingers at the rest of the world claiming that's not allowed.
 

AhumbleKnight

New member
Apr 17, 2009
429
0
0
I wouldn't block users from the USA. That would be pointless and hyocritcal for me to do so considering my stance on SOPA etc.

I would however try and cover my ass by not hosting my site in the USA. Correct me if I am wrong but everybody who has been and is currently being extradited to the USA for breaking laws in the USA have hosted their site in the USA. Don't want to have to worry about breaking laws in the USA? Then don't host you content there. Then the worst they can do is block your site from users in the USA, which is the OP's question.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
Charli said:
Read the rest of my post, in the event they passed that bill, I would block them.
Of course, that wasn't the question.

But hell, a good chunk of the point is that they don't need SOPA to go after you.

So you're saying you wouldn't cover your ass now, though you're at risk, because you're not a douche. But if they passed bills that would leave you still at risk, you would cover your ass.

That doesn't make any sense.

Perhaps you should try and understand the issues at hand before you start talking. Or at least, before you tell me to "read the rest of my post."

In fat, you could "read the rest of the thread," where this is being pointed out. Or just have a peripheral awareness of the recent issues that have been going on. People are protesting PIPA/SOPA for powers that already exist; Megaupload demonstrates this.

But then, your summation doesn't cover the current scenario at all. You say:

promoting free speech and then turning around and pointing fingers at the rest of the world claiming that's not allowed.
Which isn't what's being done at all. Sorry.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
AhumbleKnight said:
I wouldn't block users from the USA. That would be pointless and hyocritcal for me to do so considering my stance on SOPA etc.

I would however try and cover my ass by not hosting my site in the USA. Correct me if I am wrong but everybody who has been and is currently being extradited to the USA for breaking laws in the USA have hosted their site in the USA. Don't want to have to worry about breaking laws in the USA? Then don't host you content there. Then the worst they can do is block your site from users in the USA, which is the OP's question.
TVshack was not hosted in America. That was actually the grounds on which he defended himself.
 

Esotera

New member
May 5, 2011
3,400
0
0
Don't know if it's been mentioned yet, but it seems like some people [http://uploaded.to/] are already blocking US visitors. It'd be interesting if this goes beyond more than a few websites.