LOGO: Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines. A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman. Winner 2013 Webby Awards for Best Political Website
May 23, 2013

 Choose a size
Text Size

Trending:     chris hedges     economy     elizabeth warren     politics     robert scheer
Most Read

A Call to Action

Bizarre, Apparently Jihadist Slaying in London (Video)

Hell on Earth for Greeks

Revenge of the Bear: Russia Strikes Back in Syria

Another Memorial Day in This Endless War

Most Comments
Most Emailed

Reports

Ear to the Ground

A/V Booth

Arts & Culture
 * NEW! * A Call to Action
Act of Congress
Daily Rituals

Digs

Truthdig Bazaar more items

 
A/V Booth

Your SOPA and PIPA Crash Course

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Jan 18, 2012
lifehacker

With big corporate hitters on both sides of the issue slugging it out over SOPA and PIPA—two bills that would place Internet censorship capabilities in the hands of the entertainment industry—the legislation is losing some congressional support. Simple, articulate videos like this one are helping to make it happen. —ARK

PROTECT IP / SOPA Breaks The Internet from Fight for the Future on Vimeo.

lifehacker:

SOPA and PIPA were initially designed to do two things. The first was to make it possible for companies to block the domain names of web sites that are simply capable of, or seem to encourage copyright infringement. This would have been bad for everyone because such a measure doesn’t actually prevent piracy. The reason that blocking a domain name isn’t effective is because any blocked site can still be accessed via its numeric IP address. For example, if lifehacker.com were blocked, you could still find it by visiting a number-based address. In fact, before the bills were even supposed to come to a vote, tools were created to automatically route domain names to their IP addresses to completely render this measure of SOPA and PIPA useless. As a result, the IP-blocking provisions have been removed from both bills.

The other, still-active measure present in the SOPA and PIPA bills would allow rights holders to cut of the source of funding of any potentially infringing web site. This means any other companies doing business with this site would have to stop. Whether that means advertising, links in search engines, or any other listings would have to be removed.

Advertisement

Read more


New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By sabrina105, January 19, 2012 at 7:57 pm Link to this comment

Sorry Hollywood, it’s your turn deal with the implications of the information age.  Look at it this way.  We cannot let misguided devotion to the archaic forms (broadcast, cable, theatrical, print, audio, visual) you rely upon for never ending royalties to impede the people from realizing the full benefits of open, global communications.  The old media industry has increased reliance on computing/networking to create, distribute, and broadcast visual fantasy, reducing production costs and increasing their profits, and as usual the industry must rob the people of the full benefit of our amazing and collective technological achievements. 
Additionally, in these times of political turmoil and crisis issues of a global scale we must remain vigilant guardians of the future as the profiteers of the past must do all they can to ensure their complete control of the media, even as all forms of traditional media are supplanted by our Internet-enabled (and vastly more reliable and efficient) crowd-sourced news and information.  Hence, SOPA & PIPA, both completely unnecessary. 
What about the exalted free market?  Don’t both of these laws fly in the face of the idealized free-market?

Report this

By Blacheart, January 19, 2012 at 6:52 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

@thethirdman

Gym, I’m guessing you don’t have a job in the
entertainment industry. In fact, it’s likely that you don’t
have job at all.

You probably don’t make anything of enough value
that someone would want to steal it you probably
fritter your days enjoying the work of other people,
and thinking you’re part of some “scene”.

Let’s see how you feel when you have something to
lose.

Report this

By thethirdman, January 19, 2012 at 5:49 am Link to this comment

Blackheart, I’m guessing you’re over 50.

Get real man.  America was built on piracy.  Whether it was the theft of resources
or the outright theft of patents and inventions, Americans have rarely had a
problem taking.  One could argue that piracy contributes to the flourishing of
creative ideas as protected material is being built upon in new and interesting
ways.  As you can see from the video, this is not simply about stealing music from
Napster.  And it has nothing to do with stealing your neighbor’s tomatoes. 

Also, it’s not the “thieves” who endanger internet freedom, it’s most certainly the
federal government.

Report this

By marian griffith, January 19, 2012 at 2:19 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

@blackheart
It would be wrong to vilefy the big music and movie entertainment corporastions.
Except that they have a trackrecord of using any tool, stretching its applicability to its limits and then use it as a sledgehammer to produce as much carnage as possible under the assumption that it will scare other offenders into behaving.

If you honestly believe that these companies will not use these laws as a blunt object to try and beat everybody into submission you have not been paying much attention these past ten years. They already did it with laws that were worded much more restricted by stretching the interpretation and see how far they could get with it (hint: there was practically no legal backlash to the practise from the side of lawyers, judges or government who all seemed to believe it is perfectly normal to demand millions worth of damages for sharing a couple of hundred songs, from somebody who in all likelyhood did not even do the sharing to begin with).

These new laws are written for, and by, these corporations and essentially give them unlimited freedom to shut down any site they want; with almost no chance of appeal from the side of the sites they set their sights on. And I don’t think I am cynical if I say that they will abuse this freedom to its maximum extent. After all they have been doing just that for decades (since the invention of the tape recorder).

Report this

By Jil Jennewein, January 18, 2012 at 6:41 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Land of the FREE! We the people! Do NOT take away our rights! Uphold the constitution!

Report this

By Blackheart, January 18, 2012 at 12:27 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

While the potential for abuse of PIPA/SOPA is a legitimate concern, vilifying the
film industry isn’t a legitimate tactic to use against them.

The entertainment industries are dealing with an economic tsunami called piracy.
If consumers were to steal tires or flashlights or tomatoes the way they steal
movies and music, you can bet there would a far greater public and gov’t outcry.

Tomatoes may “want to be free”, but it costs somebody a whole lot of scratch to
grow them. If you think they are too expensive, don’t buy them, but using that as
a rationale for stealing tomatoes just makes you a garden-variety thief.

It’s the thieves who endanger internet freedom, not the entertainment industry.

Report this
Newsletter

sign up to get updates


 
 
 
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
© 2013 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.