Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Pirate-slaying COICA censorship bill gets unanimous support

page: 2
72
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 07:47 PM
link   
Ok read some more sources what i am getting is that The Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA). introduced in September by U.S. Sens. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt) and Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), now heads to the full Senate for debate.

The committee votes on it, when the committee passes it, then it goes to the senate for debate for THEM to vote on it.. It is unlikly for the committee to pass a bill UNANIMOUSLY then sent onto the senate and that bill does not get approved.. You see orrin hatch a republican and leahy is a democrat JOINT support on this bill the left and right paradym BOTH are in bed with the MPAA RIAA and the lobbiest.

IF they do not get to the seante debate in time, the lame duck senators that are in office, will not be able to vote on it, then the new senators coming into office will vote... They might be able to get this passed through the debate and voted on though BEFORE the end of the year is up. Right now they are seizing domains though UNDER the guides that this will pass and/or collecting the blacklist now ready to pounce... Learning alot with this stuff, It looks mighty grim, I wonder when the internet of the good ol' days will not be anymore.

computer worlds view on it
www.computerworld.com...
edit on 18-11-2010 by thecinic because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 09:28 PM
link   
Most artists don't make money through what they make, but their merchandise. This bill does not look after the artists at all, but the studios. Most bands don't realize they are becoming a marketing product by signing with a label that's in it for the money. Directors get to make movies, but it's not because they got the money themselves and bought all the equipment themselves, the studios are there for them. Writers get screwed over from the publishing businesses all the time, and they must edit everything!

Our culture is fake because the studios literally have a say in what an artist can and can't produce, and they create the mainstream. We've been using the same exact melodies and rhythms in our songs for the past forty years. I can not provide the video I was going to link, but you actually hear what I'm talking about. Also, the lack of music education I've seen in schools really sucks. There should be mandatory things like that, and swimming. A French lady I know says over in France, everyone knows how to swim. Here in America, most blacks can't swim!

These studios are the ones afraid of the piracy because they quite frankly don't get it. Most music doesn't cost above ten bucks an album, and most certainly forty! Seasons are the same as games, if not over a hundred! Though these artists don't see money from these sales. It's when an artists work is illegally sold that's illegal, as is already. You know, the guys who slave away making graphic designs and someone makes a book using their works with out their permission. You can only steal an artists work if it's an actual thing, or assume their works are yours and profit.

I'm a huge fan of independent art. There's a lack of culture in America, and there's too much stuff the studios get away with. An independent lawyer should review any contract being made and then explain to the other party what they are signing, so they actually know what they are signing, because artists can sign them selves into slavery without knowing it.



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 09:52 PM
link   
Meh no bill will ever stop me from downloading and sharing music/videos/books.



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 10:13 PM
link   
I predict that when this bill passes and they start to enforce it they will target sites that they simply want to blacklist regardless of whether they violated any copyright laws. Who gets to be judge and juror of determining whether a site is in violation? What appeals process is there? If it is anything like other agencies they will be judge and juror and the appeal must go to them - who ever the enforcers will be. This is the beginning of the censorship of the web.

I also predict the TPTB will lose the game big time. People are getting fed up. People will make a stand.

LONG LIVE FREEDOM!!
edit on 18-11-2010 by MegaMind because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 10:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by MegaMind
I predict that when this bill passes and they start to enforce it they will target sites that they simply want to blacklist regardless of whether they violated any copyright laws. Who gets to be judge and juror of determining whether a site is in violation? What appeals process is there? If it is anything like other agencies they will be judge and juror and the appeal must go to them - who ever the enforcers will be. This is the beginning of the censorship of the web.

I also predict the TPTB will lose the game big time. People are getting fed up. People will make a stand.

LONG LIVE FREEDOM!!
edit on 18-11-2010 by MegaMind because: (no reason given)


From what i take the the US attorney general, ( Eric Holder is the current) Would have the blacklist/COICA'd sites, take them to a judge, which of course, will do what ever he suggests.


The bill would allow the US Attorney General Eric Holder to go after “Internet sites dedicated to infringing activities” in the US and elsewhere. If a judge finds a site to have most of its activity focused on pirating material, the site will be blocked by US-based domain name system services.
www.publicradio.org...



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 01:54 AM
link   
The majority of the people who wrote, pushed, and signed this bill know less about the internet than the average 12 year old. This bill will actually increase file sharing in my opinion.

What a waste of paper this bill is - can't believe they killed a tree for this nonsense.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 04:50 AM
link   
they tried to use their corruption and connections to swat rape the pirate bays servers, and they still failed.
america is in debt and falling apart, and their still trying to censor the internet and make you pay for music on itunes, apples money dosnt even go to the american government probably...ghhh

well all the people who are not from america have a thing to say to those a%#ho@%.
WE download EVERYTHING that we like WITHOUT PAYING.
we CHOOSE TO PAY for things that are REALLY WORTH IT. not the newest game that dosnt have anything new in it, not the #^#$% movie that wants our money.

and we dont like to friend superstarts on facebook,who dosnt even go to facebook, but their team just posts BUY OUR TICKETS OMG NEW SHOW OMG SUPPORT US.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 05:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Frontkjemper
The internet is the last true bastion of free speech. That's a grave threat to rogue governments and they'll do whatever they can to curb (control) the net. They're only using the copyright infringement bull because it's popular right now and no one would bat an eye lid at it. Truth is, it's has a snowball effect. Once one law gets passed, what's to say that they don't add an amendment here and an amendment here granting them to close other websites which they don't agree with?

One you take that first big step, the other smaller steps are easy. Like religion and the government, the internet and government should also remain separate.


Please explain what the theft of material has to do with freedom of speech? This bill goes after sites that offer illegal downloads and counterfeit materials. If a person wants to steal something like a petty thief then they should be charged as such and if that means jail time then oh well.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 05:53 AM
link   
oh and look at you paying money for bad software and overpriced chinese parts,that could have been made in america instead of china, instead of saving money so you can have food if disaster strikes.
im sure the bilderbergs payed for everything when they were poor,just like you. and they became rich the legal way.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 07:12 AM
link   
Call me a square, but since when did copyright infringement become a constitutional right?



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 07:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stillalive
WE download EVERYTHING that we like WITHOUT PAYING.
we CHOOSE TO PAY for things that are REALLY WORTH IT.

Yeah, that's not how real life works though, is it? If you don't want to pay for something because "it's not worth it", you don't buy it. You don't just steal it.
edit on 19-11-2010 by john_bmth because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 08:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by john_bmth
Call me a square, but since when did copyright infringement become a constitutional right?


I don't think that's the issue here.

The definition of what content is deemed inappropriate has been defined very broadly, leaving room for perverse interpretations which in turn could (probably will) lead to the censoring of legitimate free speech which is in no way, shape or form related to online pirating of copyrighted material.

Edit: Also remember Wikileaks. They have been accused of stealing copyrighted government material and making that material public. This is more than enough to warrant a shutdown.
edit on 19/11/2010 by serbsta because: wikileaks info



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 08:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by john_bmth
Call me a square, but since when did copyright infringement become a constitutional right?

See this is the problem - your reading exactly what they write in their little articles about passing this bill and briefly what its about. This bill gives the AG to shutdown ANY SITE he deems necessary. Piracy or not. This is their way of shutting people up. End of story. The piracy aspect is small beans.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 08:42 AM
link   
It's so nice of them to look after everyone like this.....


Keeping all those nasty fileshare people off the net....... filtering all the news so it doesn't upset people.......
They really do care about us!!!........ Isn't socialism great........
They'll be offering to bang my misses for me so i don't work up sweat next.........


We had a petition here not long ago against a propsed law to disconnect people from the internet if they were caught sharing files....... this was the response from HM Government..........



" Petition to:
abolish the proposed law that will see alleged illegal filesharers disconnected from their broadband connections, without a fair trial
This petition is now closed, as its deadline has passed.

We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to abolish the proposed law that will see alleged illegal filesharers disconnected from their broadband connections, without a fair trial. More details

Submitted by Andrew Heaney of TalkTalk – Deadline to sign up by: 06 June 2010 – Signatures: 35,369

More details from petition creator
This petition has been set up in response to the Government’s proposal to cut off internet access to those who are caught illegally downloading copyrighted files. We think this has one fundamental flaw, as illegal filesharers will simply hack into other peoples WiFi networks to do their dirty work. This will result in innocent people being disconnected from the internet. What's more, such a punishment should be dealt with in the proper way, in a court of law. This guilty until proven innocent approach violates basic human rights.

petitions.number10.gov.uk...

Government response
It is clear that online copyright infringement inflicts considerable damage on the UK’s creative economy including music, TV and film, games, sports and software. Industry estimates place this harm at £400m pa.

The Digital Economy Act includes a number of measures to tackle the problem and we expect these to be successful in significantly reducing online copyright infringement. However this is an area of rapid technological change and developing consumer behaviour. The Act therefore includes a reserve power to introduce further “technical” measures if the initial measures do not succeed. These technical measures would limit or restrict an infringers’ access to the internet. They do not include disconnection. "

I'm all of a quiver to find out what these " technical " measures will be...... exciting times aren't they?.......




posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 08:43 AM
link   
Bonified Ween & serbsta, you may well be right, I was referring more to the comments that condoned piracy.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 09:05 AM
link   
So they're going to remove these listings from the top level domain name servers. It's not actually shutting the site down, it's just "removing" your means to get there. Now for the amusing part, on every OS there is a Hosts file. Not familiar enough with Apple and Linux to tell you where to find it, but on Windows machines it's in a plain text file you can edit with notepad. Every time you make a DNS request, the OS will query the Hosts file first before any other DNS resolution is done. So say your favorite site will no longer resolve in your browser but you've got the IP address handy. Edit your Hosts file to include the domain name for that IP and bam, normal browsing once more.

Now for my opinion on this. It's all money changing hands at higher levels, the "industries" think this is going to be a big payout for them. Unfortunately if no one bought your crappy movie/cd/book yesterday, if this passes, no one will buy it tomorrow. Every time they try this heavy handed stuff it backfires on them horribly. Take the video game Spore for example, tons of DRM protection, hyped as un-pirateable. One of the most pirated pieces of software ever. Why? Because they basically walked over to the pirate community, removed their glove and smacked them in the face with it.

Hopefully this never passes, however if it does I hope it's mired in years of legal challenges before it can be enforced. I would chip in a few hundred to that legal fund, how about you?



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 09:22 AM
link   
The same 'senate' that voted not to investigate the BP oil spill, the aftermath, the deaths both natural and 'unnatural'. These are some recent betrayals, acts of treason, how far back does one need to go?

The Senate is owned and compromised and is clearly estranged from the people, the taxpayers paying for their own demise.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 09:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Frontkjemper
Please explain what the theft of material has to do with freedom of speech? This bill goes after sites that offer illegal downloads and counterfeit materials. If a person wants to steal something like a petty thief then they should be charged as such and if that means jail time then oh well.


Just to clear things up, because plenty of people think the same way you do - the downloaders are not breaking a law or stealing.

The UPLOADERS who SHARE the copyrighted material are breaking the COPYRIGHT LAW of DISTRIBUTING copyrighted material.

The people who "Steal something like a petty thief" are not stealing anything, and aren't getting charged for anything, and are not going to jail. There is no law preventing people from acquiring copyrighted materials, only distributing them.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 09:45 AM
link   
The Judiciary Committee passed this unanimously, so it will go to the Senate. This is not a HUGE deal, since the committee only consists of 18 people- and the Senate consists of 100. This will not pass.

judiciary.senate.gov...

What I find most disappointing, I guess, is that the senator of MY state is in the committee... and thus, voted to pass this encroaching bill.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 10:28 AM
link   
Your missing something though, this is a bi-partisan bill meaning, Patrick Leahy (D-Vt) and Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), a democrat and a republican, are the ones who introduced it, and supporting it... It is not even a left versus right. It is basically both parties coming together to stick it to us... If it was a democrat only bill, even a republican only bill, then we might have a chance at this not passing, but the committee is made up of both democrats AND republicans, they ALL are in on it... The best chance we have is maybe, just maybe, they don't do the official vote which has to take place within 60 days, BEFORE the new senators arrive in office.





new topics

top topics



 
72
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join