It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


SOPA - Worse Than You Think

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 11:43 PM
If SOPA gets passed, I think I'm going to be pretty pissed off. The government obviously cares about our safety and freedoms (#Sarcasm) I personally think its the U.S.A's way of repaying the debt to China, secretly turning our standards to theirs.

posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 11:59 PM
reply to post by tw0330

All I can say right now is that "what if" redirect from ATS scared the # out of me.

Not in a sarcastic way, I clicked on a link to a thread, that popped up and it took me about 15 seconds to realize it wasn't real, just ATS saying "this could happen"

...scary ass 15 seconds

posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 01:02 AM
I've sent a slew of e-mails to congressmen about SOPA and my views on how wrong it is. Not a single one has bothered to write back. Which, to me, proves that politicians have already decided to pass it. The future is bleak.

posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 01:27 AM

Originally posted by tw0330
If this act passes, it would give 100% control of the internet to large corporations to do as they please with it.

And there is why this is being considered. It has nothing to do with "security" or internet attacks or anything of the sort. It is about control - and money.

posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 02:13 AM
wow i'd be so pissed if this actually passes, which it probably will. i've written a letter regarding this and received no response...

seriously how much more control do they want? -___-

posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 02:20 AM
Well it was inevitable, the internet and its power has increased dramatically even in just the last 10 years, i don't think many people in power saw it coming. You can post one picture or one video about an issue and get possibly hundreds of millions of people focused on that issue, bringing it to mainstream attention for discussion and doing something about utterly chaotic and extremely powerful tool that they have absolute no control over? these people are terrified of the possibilities something like that has.
edit on 9-1-2012 by Solomons because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 04:50 AM
As always, OP, the trolls are out in full force.

I agree with you. If you have clients set up where they can post their own content on their site, whether it's via a simple php script of some kind of CMS, how are you possibly going to monitor every website, every day? I do something very similar, albeit not professionally, just as kind of a hobby on the side. The first thing that comes to mind is message boards, where ANYONE can register and post a copyrighted YouTube video or pull and article. What's scarier, is that big corporate websites will be ramping up dev teams to create sophisticated crawlers to seek out where on the web their content has been published.

Instead of finding a way to argue with the OP, why not put yourself in his shoes.

posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 06:23 AM
If this is a global agenda, then complaining about it wont change a damn thing, it will get driven over a bunch of nuns crossing the road if that is what it would take.
Bilderturd, Crazy Frikkin Rats, Present Nuclear Armageddon Collectivists, and a whole bunch of other people and organisations that do not like seeing their own words used on the internet are screaming for some sort of protection from repostings of their own damnable evidence of malfeasance.
Things would have been a hell of a lot easier if the internet hadn't been invented...guess who said that?

The one thing i believe will happen as an offshoot of this law is, a massive amount of people who didn't care about their privacy all of a sudden are going to become very educated in ways to ensure the internet maintains connectivity with the outside world if they try and pull the plug.

This will give rise to the darknet for sure.
edit on 9-1-2012 by The X because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 08:39 AM
The bill also has grave implications for existing U.S., foreign and international laws and is sure to spend decades in court challenges.

posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 08:53 AM
[removed unnecessary quote of the entire opening post]

We the people will set up our own dns system if they try this. It will likely be distributed dns (DDNS).

edit on 1/9/2012 by 12m8keall2c because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 10:04 AM
reply to post by tw0330

I'm right there with you. I also run a small web development business and host domains for some of my clients.

I've taken steps to ensure stable alternate sources of revenue.

I love technology, but too many people in power are afraid of it, and that does not bode well for the wee folks of the US.

Somehow, in the minds of these lawmakers, anyone who isn't bought is a threat. Or, maybe it's because anyone who isn't bought by the same lobbyist financiers as the lawmakers is a threat?


ETA: And, yes, I do have clauses written into my contracts absolving me of legal responsibility if the customer's site is taken down by anyone other than me. That's not the point. The principle of the matter is, you, I, and anyone else who is not a paid shill could potentially be censored. I'm not sure how some of you don't understand this?
edit on 1/9/2012 by ottobot because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 11:34 AM
I have hosting and domains through GoDaddy.

As far as copywritted material being reposted on another website is BS.

Two days ago I tried to post a video on facebook. They would not let because it was copywritted. If it is copywrited and on youtube, then does youtube have the copywrite? It is put out to the world. When I tried to share it on facebook, I did not claim it as mine. That would be like saying I can't put a movie (DVD, bought or given to me, youtube gave me the video) on my TV. I simply wanted to share a great video with my friends. Is not the web public domain? If it is, then anything on it is for the masses just like a public park. You cannot claim you own a park bench but you can share it with someone. You do not have to use the park or the bench but if you go to the park and sit on the bench, don't be a jack-a?? and not allow some else to share it with you. So, does the worker who installed the bench have all the rights to that bench? He did the work. Or was it the maker of the bench? Or is the tax payers who paid for it? Or is it all the politicians who went through all the paper work to create the park?
I have a problem with copywrites and patents. They are patenting life now, by patenting seeds. Are they going to patent processes also? I'm a drywall contractor, is someone going to be allowed to patent the process in which I complete my work???????? It's all crazy! As, far as I understand, there are processes patented, like processing oil to gas, or making plastic.
As far as patents, there is an easy way around them all. Anyone can go into the US Patent Office (online) and find the patent diagrams. You can even make the product and use it, you just can't sell it. So, the Charles Nelson Pogue carburetor can be made and used by everyone. You can even get around providing that product to people without legally breaking the patent laws. You form an organization that has a membership fee, part of the benefits of being a member is a free vapor carburetor. Now, I'm not saying that you won't be killed but when big oil and/or brother continue to suppress great things, I get a little pissed off. Greed, the love of money is a sin. All good inventions were suppressed because of greed.
Welcome to 2012.

posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 01:14 AM
Wiki has a really good read on SOPA.

As reported by David Carr of the New York Times in an article critical of SOPA and PIPA, Google, Facebook, Twitter and other companies sent a joint letter to Congress, stating "We support the bills’ stated goals — providing additional enforcement tools to combat foreign ‘rogue’ Web sites that are dedicated to copyright infringement or counterfeiting. However, the bills as drafted would expose law-abiding U.S. Internet and technology companies to new uncertain liabilities, private rights of action and technology mandates that would require monitoring of Web sites.”[26][48] In response to Carr's article, bill sponsor and Committee Chairman Lamar Smith said the article "unfairly criticizes the Stop Online Piracy Act", and, "does not point to any language in the bill to back up the claims. SOPA targets only foreign Web sites that are primarily dedicated to illegal and infringing activity. Domestic Web sites, like blogs, are not covered by this legislation." Lamar also said that Carr incorrectly framed the debate as between the entertainment industry and high-tech companies, noting support by more than "120 groups and associations across diverse industries, including the United States Chamber of Commerce".[49]

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2   >>

log in