American Censorship Day (Internet Censorship)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Karma Kramer said:
The media is controlled by the same corporations that would want this bill passed.
Click to expand...

Yes I know, but with OWS movement and people just generally in a pissed off mood, you would think this would rile some feathers to the point that at least there would be more outrage in general. This seems like the Citizens United Supreme Court case where nobody was talking about it until after the damage had been done and then there was an outcry. If this passes I see a similar situation.
 
slit said:
Yes I know, but with OWS movement and people just generally in a pissed off mood, you would think this would rile some feathers to the point that at least there would be more outrage in general. This seems like the Citizens United Supreme Court case where nobody was talking about it until after the damage had been done and then there was an outcry. If this passes I see a similar situation.
Click to expand...

Thats the situation the media frames. They focus on what suits them. Majority of the public does not pay close enough attention to these problems and if they do they only gain information that has been filtered by the media.
 
The_Technomancer said:
Self regulation is the ideal solution. As a user I'm annoyed when YouTube gives me a "copyrighted content taken down" message, but I know its better then the alternative. And I'm opposing this bill completely because I know what a mess its going to be.

But here's where the argument gets interesting for me: do people have a right to access any page on the internet regardless of content? Should the government be able to block access to ThePirateBay, a site which is explicitly run to enable copyright violation?
Click to expand...

Corporations absolutely have a right to protect their content. I don't necessarily agree with this bill's implementation, but people don't have a right to pirate content they don't own. I know that people here aren't arguing that they do, but there are those out there who think they have some sort of a right to this content for free. They don't.

I don't agree with this bill, but something needs to be done about online piracy. Not this, but something.
 
Karma Kramer said:
Thats the situation the media frames. They focus on what suits them. Majority of the public does not pay close enough attention to these problems and if they do they only gain information that has been filtered by the media.
Click to expand...

Yeah I agree, I was just hoping against hope that things might have started to change a least a little and people would start paying more attention. It was a long shot I know.
 
not gonna pass calm down chicken littles

dudeinfrontofdesolateiraqiwarfrontassuringeveryonehusseinisstillincontrol.gif
 
Jenga said:
not gonna pass calm down chicken littles

dudeinfrontofdesolateiraqiwarfrontassuringeveryonehusseinisstillincontrol.gif
Click to expand...
And finally this picture is explained.

I always thought he looked like he was from Iraq, but figured it was from a movie or something.

yencid said:
52-46

http://www.engadget.com/2011/11/10/senate-to-vote-on-net-neutrality-repeal-today-obama-counters-wi/
Click to expand...
Different bill.

Edit:

I know David Vitter is against the bill, so that would be one Republican who voted against Net Neutrality who is also voting against this.

However, I've also heard of a few Democrats supporting this bill. Kinda weird the mix of support for this one.
 
At Wednesday's hearing, Google was the only corporation to speak against the legislation on a panel stacked with representatives of Hollywood studios, pharmaceutical giants and intellectual property hawks from the Obama administration. Unfortunately, Google is one of the worst allies to have in Washington today, as it faces an antitrust investigation as well as government scrutiny for directing consumers to unregulated online pharmacies. Google paid a $500 million penalty in August to settle complaints involving illicit online pharmacies from the Department of Justice and the Food and Drug Administration.

Members of both parties piled on Wednesday, banging away at Google for the pharmacy scandal -- a public declaration that the company's lobbying might not help to moderate SOPA.
Click to expand...

google getting owned



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/1...n_1098255.html
 
Raitosaito said:
We vote the unqualified to make a bill on things they know nothing about and influenced by content holders?

Good God
Click to expand...

Pretty much this. I hate anybody who thinks this is a good idea.
 
jayhawker said:
Copyright protection powers are explicitly granted to Congress in the Constitution.
Click to expand...

First amendment protections are, however, substantial. If a law will prohibit speech that is impermissible, like copyright violation or obscenity, but also produces a chilling effect on constitutionally protected speech, that law is unconstitutional.

balladofwindfishes said:
we have a highly politicized supreme court controlled by corporations. There's no checks to anything in this country if a corporation throws enough money at it.

In theory, yes, this would probably be unconstitutional. However, I don't have a lot of faith in our current Supreme Court.
Click to expand...

That's one way to look at it, but I think that's a particularly blinkered way of doing it. No court in the history of the country has been as solicitous of free speech rights as this one, even going so far as to uphold freedom of speech when it conflicted with some pretty valid policy goals in Citizens United. If any court would hold this law unconstitutional, it would be this one.
 
makingmusic476 said:
I know David Vitter is against the bill, so that would be one Republican who voted against Net Neutrality who is also voting against this.

However, I've also heard of a few Democrats supporting this bill. Kinda weird the mix of support for this one.
Click to expand...
Both parties are pretty good at kowtowing to the RIAA/MPAA bunch. One of the few areas where we get bipartisan consensus!
 
ivysaur12 said:
Corporations absolutely have a right to protect their content. I don't necessarily agree with this bill's implementation, but people don't have a right to pirate content they don't own. I know that people here aren't arguing that they do, but there are those out there who think they have some sort of a right to this content for free. They don't.

I don't agree with this bill, but something needs to be done about online piracy. Not this, but something.
Click to expand...
There is nothing you can do. We still have anonymous networks and anonymous P2P sharing and they are something that are almost impossible to fight against without turning into Orwellian society.


whitehawk said:
YouTube would just move their servers to sweden if this passed. No biggie.

Not really. I just doubt this will get passed.
Click to expand...
Doesn't YouTube live on ad money? If suddenly YouTube.com would be blocked in US I would say they were facing rather hard times.
 
I feel like this bill is too ridiculous to pass, but I guess that doesn't mean it won't. I mean threatening sites like YouTube? It's one of the most important websites out there. I'm sure they have a lot of employees and with their parter program they allow some people to make a living or extra money.

I thought Obama was all for net neutrality. Hopefully if it somehow does get he vote he would veto it.

This bill also shows how fucked up the govt. is, it's not for the people. I guarantee you ask anyone and they would say it is a bad idea.
 
G-Fex said:
If this passes it kills youtube, Justin.tv/USTREAM, Thatguywiththeglasses, angry video game nerd and all the people from TGWTG like Spoony and Brad will be out of a job. As would every youtube personality you love.
Click to expand...

How will it do that?
edit: oh shit I read the finer details.

Yikes, good luck with that America
 
kaskade said:
I thought Obama was all for net neutrality. Hopefully if it somehow does get he vote he would veto it.
Click to expand...
Net neutrality does not mean right to any form of content. I'm pretty sure we're all in agreement that places distributing child porn should be taken down.
The issue here is one of implementation: its far too broad and hits places like YouTube where copyright violations mostly consist of sampling creative work. (And YouTube is pretty good at sellf policing really explicit violations anyway)
 
ClovingSteam said:
Why are you shocked? Obama has supported this type of legislation since he came into office.
Click to expand...
I don't follow politics enough tbh, but I know I love my internet privacy. This is bullshit.
 
KHarvey16 said:
Can I have next week's lottery numbers? This bill won't even be voted on until next year.

Edit

Wow, date fail.
Click to expand...

If you have been paying attention to Obama and both parties with this type of legislation you'd realize that its a shoe in.
 
slit said:
Yes I know, but with OWS movement and people just generally in a pissed off mood, you would think this would rile some feathers to the point that at least there would be more outrage in general. This seems like the Citizens United Supreme Court case where nobody was talking about it until after the damage had been done and then there was an outcry. If this passes I see a similar situation.
Click to expand...

Hasn't Obama already declared he will veto this? I can't see him not doing this- it will hurt him hard if this passes on his watch.
 
Mudkips said:
Obama says a lot of things.
This will pass.
Click to expand...
Why would he not veto this when he's running for re-election? One of the major reasons he won was by getting younger people to vote. This would alienate those people.
 
alstein said:
Hasn't Obama already declared he will veto this? I can't see him not doing this- it will hurt him hard if this passes on his watch.
Click to expand...

No, he said he'd veto the Republican's attempt to gut the net neutrality law.

Billychu said:
Why would he not veto this when he's running for re-election? One of the major reasons he won was by getting younger people to vote. This would alienate those people.
Click to expand...

He also received the support of Hollywood with the film and recording industry. The young crowd is so focused on jobs, the economy, occupy wall street that they're not too focused on this. This will be passed.
 
ep2Et.jpg


That was the ad on this page. lol
 
ClovingSteam said:
No, he said he'd veto the Republican's attempt to gut the net neutrality law.



He also received the support of Hollywood with the film and recording industry. The young crowd is so focused on jobs, the economy, occupy wall street that they're not too focused on this. This will be passed.
Click to expand...

That's why we gotta equate this with all of that. Make it one big thing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Zuck: Meta will follow X’s lead, add community notes, simplify policies, prioritize free expression over censorship
2 3 4
198
10K
Bert Big Balls replied
  • Locked
Happy Election Day, fellow Americans!
2
2K
EviLore replied
Dead Internet Theory becoming more real every day: Meta to allow AI 'Users' on FB and Insta
28
2K
Wandering Leopard replied
American Primeval (Netflix)
|OT| 
4
905
I collect VHS tapes replied
are there any cool places on the internet to discuss movies?
40
967
N0S replied
Top Bottom