United states to close Youtube

[KeyMaster45]

So basically, the government & big businesses wanted to find the easiest way to sue as many middle & lower class people as possible so that they'd be the only citizens with any money at all, & when the American economy finally collapses, the rich bastards would flee to Europe & Australia to continue their reign of destruction & evil. Is that what you're trying to tell me?

It sounds like a bad James Bond plot if you ask me....pass the popcorn I want to watch this play out.

As for a reliable source, Wired isn't some two bit online magazine its an industry tech magazine that's a rather large player when it comes to that overall world, the names I've seen rattled off in this thread, those are the ones that sound like questionable sources.

 

[similar.squirrel]

Shoot. Does this mean I have to record all my music from videos before they go?

 

[zombflux]

Won't happen

:<

 

[DCFowl]

Even if they do this, the underground will find a new way of communicating. Once there were blue boxes, soon there will be blue USBs.

Not saying you wrong just that we shouldn't have to do it underground

 

[Compatriot Block]

I wonder if the people who suggested this know how the internet works. That would be an interesting meeting to watch...


Bob: There's a large amount of content being uploaded daily that violates copyright law.

Joe: Well then, we'll have to shut it down.

Bob: The whole int-?

Joe: THE WHOLE INTERNET.

 

[Lord Krunk]

Wait, it's possible to download things from Youtube? Since when?

Since Firefox.

EDIT: On-topic, this is horrifying. If America's doing it, there's no doubt Australia will too.

I'll give the government the benefit of the doubt. Gotta have hope, people!

 

[Nannernade]

I would like to apologise for the extremely poor quality of my original posts. It was late and I was in a big hurry

I'm having a hard time believing this as for one it's not copy and pasted as there are way too many errors in the print... so until proof is provided whatever. =\

Youre right again Im sorry
Here is a link to the actual leak
http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2009/11/actadoc1.pdf
This is where I found the leak
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/11/acta/
This is where I first heard about this
http://www.thedailyswarm.com/headlines/leaked-anti-counterfeiting-trade-agreement-threatens-destroy-internet-we-know-it-buh-bye-youtube-flickr-blogger-et-al/

Things like this is what makes me glad I live in Canada.

Well I live in England so... does this affect me too?

Yes this will affect YOU, this is an international trade agreement, thats going to be crucial to sneaking it past congress
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/11/policy-laundering/
But it means that it will affect all of the USs trading partners, I.E. EVERYONE
http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/fo/intellect_property.aspx
http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2008/08/20/231915/uk-in-talks-over-anti-counterfeiting-trade-agreement.htm
http://www.trademinister.gov.au/releases/2008/sc_012.html
As a short list of governments actively pushing this through
United States, Mexico, the European Union, Switzerland, Japan, South Korea, New Zealand, UK, Australia.
Any one who thinks that they cant do this has forgotten the United states patriot act

Youtube will not be taken down for 3 reasons:

2) It will be rezed somewhere else

That is the point, it isnt just YouTube it is any file sharing site, the term they use is internet service provider(ISP).

The copy right issues aside this goes to a much deeper issue of censorship and the presumption of innocents.

The agreement will mean that any organization can claim copy right infringement and YouTube will have to take it down. Any negative press coverage any negative Video Blogging, that person/ organization can claim copyright and have the video taken down. The poster has to fight a court battle to have the video back. This is directly opposed to the presumption of innocents that you have to prove that someone has broken the law before taking punitive action.

There is also the problem that large entertainment companies ( Vi@com) will make bad faith claims. They will claim that they own video knowing that they dont because the individual does not have the resources to sue.

To all those saying that this isnt going to happen well that is just not the point. They are writing the document knowing that it will be watered down, but the end result is still going to more internet censorship. If the government were to draft a law saying that you could be held indefinitely without charge, it is no victory for the law to be watered down to being held for seven days without charge because it is still a successful attack on our rights
To those that dislike the current YouTube, no one is stopping you from starting a new site that demands a minimum quality of work but that is exactly what this legislation would stop you from doing, allowing you freedom of creativity on the web.

I really Dont want this to happen, anyone can disprove any of the sources I sighted, find any proof Im wrong let us know so that I can stop worrying, please
DCFOWL

Thanks America you rock... take a bow and cry your little eyes out in the dillusion that you're actually doing good, bravo... bravo... *Sarcastic clap*

 

[Russian_Assassin]

If this means nuking the youtube community, I'm game. I mean I watched a video today about a banned sexual add for Sprite. I glance at the comment section and ALL the comment are about how whites are the master race, that black people are inferior and basically are violent rapist monkeys and they all had like a billion thumbs up. Is this worth destroying or what?

Ok, maybe we'll miss the sometimes useful and funny videos, but it's a small price to pay! Although I may be shocked for being subjected to such retardation after spending a year in he escapist forums...

 

[Perception]

I'm not too worried.

This kind of legislation is very hard to enforce, and there are even more reasons why youtube and similar sites will not be affected.

#1: Unenforcable laws mean nothing. One might be able to take down select big actors, but due to the very nature of the Internet there'll be a dozen smaller replacements popping up for every big'un you take down.

#2: It depends on international cooperation. Most EU nations conveniently ignore or deprioritize enforcement of laws they feel are forced upon them. Some will even jump through hoops to find reasons to reject legislation outright - attempts at "three strikes" legislation with regards to Internet access are being countered on such inventive grounds as human rights.

#3: Big business likes youtube. It's actually useful to them, and any losses suffered by copyright owners is minimal, at best. Seriously, who thinks youtube replaces buying records or movies?

#4: The only real effect this will have on Youtube and the like is obliging it to take down unathorized content. OH WAIT; THEY ALREADY DO THIS.

Youtube is owned by Google. Google is a US-registered company last I checked. This piece of legislation is about the US trying to make everyone else adopt the same laws as them regarding copyright, and changes for US companies should be minimal at best as they are already subject to the same rules.

Did you even bother to read up, or did you just pick up some sensationalist crap from a blog and decide to perpetuate the spread of disinformation? I wish people would actually think before running out into the street shouting "the end is nigh!"