How SOPA (as written) might kill ATS and free speech online (UPDATED)

Originally posted by davespanners
One thing I haven't seen mentioned yet is this man Lamar S. Smith Who is the sponsor of the bill.

Lamar Seeligson Smith (born November 19, 1947) is the U.S. Representative for Texas's 21st congressional district, serving since 1987. The district includes most of the wealthier sections of San Antonio and Austin, as well as nearly all of the Texas Hill Country. Congressman Smith introduced SOPA, the Stop Online Piracy Act.

His continual strategy during this whole debate has been denial that the bill does anything that any of the people against it says it does for example.

Why did you leave out the juicy part where it says he is A REPUBLICAN

The people who voted this imbecile into office should be deeply ashamed of themselves.

reply to post by angeldoll


My perspective is this...

The people who engage in business utilizing the Internet have right to engage in that business, free from the worry of having their ideas or intellectual property stolen...

Piracy (software or Internet) is antithetical to this concept...

Skeptic is worried about SOPA because he does not pay his moderators...and they could not possibly keep up with all the violations of copywrite violations that occur...So there goes his CASH COW...

He and the other site owners need to start PAYING for site moderation....that way they could demonstrate ACTION TAKEN in response to any violations....In compliance with requirements of SOPA....

Rather than do this, Skeptic and the others would just as soon keep ALL the PROFITS and try to light a match, starting another fire in the hopes it will burn out the existing fuel so the fire THAT REQUIRES THEM TO PERFORM LEGITIMATE WORK will be exhausted of fuel...

Clear enough?

reply to post by DangerDeath

Let's be fair. Government and corporations hijacks everyone's property at will. You don't complain about that? Or what?

You should have some examples of this right? Please provide some clear and concrete examples of government and corporate piracy...

In addition, please provide what action was taken in response to the government and corporate piracy...

Originally posted by jeichelberg
reply to post by DangerDeath

 

Let's be fair. Government and corporations hijacks everyone's property at will. You don't complain about that? Or what?

You should have some examples of this right? Please provide some clear and concrete examples of government and corporate piracy...

In addition, please provide what action was taken in response to the government and corporate piracy...

Examples are all around the place.
So, don't try this on me, please
They are trying to shut peoples' mouth and that's what this is about.
SOPA is the biggest example of all.

reply to post by DangerDeath


Typical OUT OF BULLETS response...You have no proof....Please go post on some tiddlywink thread...At least they exist and you will not need to support your argumentation with "the unicorn," approach...Everyone will agree that tiddlywinks exist and you will be safe...

reply to post by jeichelberg


Your position is clear, yes. Thanks.

Your beef, then, appears to basically be that you want paid moderators? I see.

Being a Moderator on ATS is typically a coveted position. There are people inquiring about how to become a Mod quite often. When this is the case, why pay? The mods are chosen partly because they are responsible people who have an intense fondness for the site and want it to do well. It's partly intelligence, and partly loyalty. I don't know if that would change, were they paid.

If it reaches that point, I think SO/Springer would pay them, were it necessary, or recruit a new group to join in with the old group, which they do from time to time.

In any case, I trust these men to continue running this site well, as they have heretofore. If those kinds of decisions need to be made, don't you think they are the best suited to make them?

By the way, I think stealing music is awful, and the people who do that should be in some kind of hot water.
It is their livelihood , same as websites are the livelihoods of the site owners.

I appreciate your explanation, although I'm not sure "paid Mods" would make a difference in this situation. Of course, I think it would be lovely if the Mods were paid. Just because.

reply to post by jeichelberg

SOPA empowers the government to take a site down upon a complaint without first giving an opportunity to the site owner to understand the grievience and redress it, making the potential for abuse very high.

Unless every post/edit is moderated and filtered for potential copyright violations before it appears on a thread, it is impossible to ensure compliance with the law. Not that it is difficult or takes more time on the part of the moderators, simply that it is impossible in a discussion forum. Which makes the motivation behind the bill itself suspect.

There may be many forums whose purpose is to share copyrighted material, but from what I have seen of ATS, it doesn't look like anybody visits this site for that purpose.

reply to post by angeldoll


If they paid their moderators, they could then use the failure (and subsequent firing of) the moderators as a "reasonable defense," to violations of SOPA...

Rather than do this, SO and others here would rather keep the profits to themselves and hope SOPA gets shutdown...

I have provided them a sure fire way around the issue...once they clear my solution with an attorney (which it will clear, trust me), you will see Skeptic's opposition to SOPA magically disappear...

reply to post by jeichelberg


Even if the moderators were paid they cannot possibly keep up with thousands of new posts and threads per day. ATS is not some cheap and obscure website forumn! All it takes is a few maligned visitors to cite a few gray-area violations and the site would go off-limits indefinitely.

You are "good" in deflection though. People who have no real arguement use a strawman!

reply to post by Observor


I understand the concerns; however, the site owner need not be responsible...He/she simply need demonstrate the ability to monitor...

I have provided the solution...Pay the moderators...hold them ACCOUNTABLE through work agreements and standards....

If the site owners want to do this to maintain their income stream, they will do it...if they do not, then bye-bye ATS...

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


There is no deflection here...I have drilled to the core issue at hand...

That is why people are required to CITE their work now...That is the purpose for SOURCE references...

The moderators would have a difficult job...NO DOUBT....but by paying them, they could be held accountable to work and performance standards...

I doubt Skeptic and the others want to pay moderators what they would then be worth in order to perform this type of work....They might find somebodies willing to do it for a nominal amount...

As far as "strawman," I think you and everyone else here knows I have posted no strawman here....you would not even bother to respond to any strawman, as sharp a cookie as you are...

Originally posted by bigyin
I have to chuckle. Don't get me wrong I love the internet, but the internet as most people know it is hardly even 10 years old, and now we can't live without it !

During the 90's when us computer enthusiasts (otherwise known as nerds or geeks) were experimenting with communicating with other computers it was all great fun and very exciting.

I find much of it now completely boring.

If these laws come to pass it's big business that will be hurt. Maybe the enthusiasts can get back to finding ways to still communicate while everyone else is looking at blank screens.

..I was just about to post that when you said it for me
Of course the old BBS and Ham systems will work just fine (if terribly slow)..
If this happens, future ATS posts will be in plain text, limited to 128 characters, updated once a day
Not funny, but still workable, IMO.
ETA; We used to send blurry pics of naked women via Telex to each other's work/school etc

reply to post by jeichelberg

Straw man

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is about the logical fallacy. For other uses, see Straw man (disambiguation).

"Man of straw" redirects here. For the novel by Heinrich Mann, see Der Untertan.

A straw man is a component of an argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.[1]

You are making the claim that SOPA is to prevent the piracy of intellectual property, but if that is the case then what did the prior copyright laws exist for? In fact this legislation is too broad in what it encompasses and not only will not solve anything, it will probably be used to shut down sites that are overly critical of the government and/or target small and medium business that is somewhat competive with big business.

MPAA is the prime backer of it. I do NOT support piracy but it does not mean I have to support a trojan horse either. Perhaps you should re-examine SOPA and PIPA so you do not sound foolish with your bold assertions.

As for paid moderation, I would rather not have to pay to use ATS or any other alternative site of my choice. I think the management/owners understand this and try to keep costs down. Paid moderation will not really solve anything if the government is out to get us. Look what happened to middle eastern nations when the governments were ready to fall. America is no exception. The controllers must be getting desperate!

Anyone with an average IQ, and one moment of clear analytical thought can see this is one more step toward the Orwellian nightmare, and has absolutely zilch to do with piracy. The "digital age" is ALL about control. The "digital age" makes it possible to finally bring the totalitarian control grid online. And they are wringing their hands with excitement and glee at the prospect.

Piracy btw, is exacerbated and perpetrated by the very corporations supposedly fighting against it. All the movies, music, and software that are to be found online through various outlets "illegitimately" are not there by mistake or theft.

"Piracy" benefits those industries, and is making them richer, and more powerful by the minute. Which is the very reason they themselves perpetuate it.

Think about it.

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


I want you to fully understand my philosophy, so you will not continue to "look foolish," as you purport me to be...granted, you would probably win that argument in your own mind, on the basis of POST popularity in terms of STARS or other MEANINGLESS DISPLAY of support...

Perhaps you should demonstrate exactly HOW SOPA will harm Skeptic...instead of throwing out fear...

I for one believe all laws are meaningless...after all, LOCKS ARE THERE TO PREVENT HONEST PEOPLE from breaking into other peoples' homes...

So keep these things in mind when trying to put together something other than your HARPY-like answers...So far, all you have done is engage in shrilled mimicry....try to get some thoughts together please...

Get real, you don't care about free speech, you care about advertising revenue and ensuring that you obtain rights through the Creative Commons to everything your users post, image and video-wise. That's more what this is about.

Originally posted by Klassified
Anyone with an average IQ, and one moment of clear analytical thought can see this is one more step toward the Orwellian nightmare, and has absolutely zilch to do with piracy. The "digital age" is ALL about control. The "digital age" makes it possible to finally bring the totalitarian control grid online. And they are wringing their hands with excitement and glee at the prospect.

Yet, here you are engaged in the "core," and miraculously "out-of-pocket..."

Piracy btw, is exacerbated and perpetrated by the very corporations supposedly fighting against it. All the movies, music, and software that are to be found online through various outlets "illegitimately" are not there by mistake or theft.

This is like saying fires are set by fire fighters...or computer viruses are written by programmers from Symantec or McAfee...perhaps this is true, but it takes a lot more than your unsupported claims....please provide CLEAR EXAMPLES...

"Piracy" benefits those industries, and is making them richer, and more powerful by the minute. Which is the very reason they themselves perpetuate it.

Again...Where is the PROOF of these claims?

Think about it.

We are thinking, but what I really think right now, is that you just want everybody to take your word for it and not think at all...

reply to post by Klassified


I don't think big business appreciates piracy, but they along with the government are allowing it, to have the perfect excuse to ram some trojan horse legislation down our throat before the gullible masses ever realise they have been taken for a ride.

Much like allowing 9-11 to happen so they could ram DHS and the opportunity to invade two sovereign nations. The people behind coporate globalisation have a dubious agenda. I won't call it sinister just yet, but their surreptitious methods are truely worrying to people who are informed.

Originally posted by DocEmrick
Get real, you don't care about free speech, you care about advertising revenue and ensuring that you obtain rights through the Creative Commons to everything your users post, image and video-wise. That's more what this is about.

BINGO!!! What do we have for the winner Johnny!?!?!

reply to post by jeichelberg


On one level, your idea is interesting to the effect that it addresses compliance, and continued revenue for the site. From my perspective though, the problem with your solution is its short sightedness. It addresses the thread, instead of the sword hanging by it.

Should we not address the oppressive legislation first and foremost?
Then should that fail, we can address creative compliance, and the proverbial covering of our nakedness.