RIAA, Chamber Of Commerce: Censorship Via COICA Is Okay, Because Other Countries Censor Too
from the you-must-censor! dept
While the COICA bill introduced by Senators Patrick Leahy and Orin Hatch was initially designed to be rushed through Congress, after people pointed out that it pretty clearly violated due process and prohibitions against prior restraint, the Senators realized they needed to hold off for a bit. Everyone has expected that it will be back on the agenda after the midterm elections, and now a bunch of companies and organizations, including the RIAA and the Chamber of Commerce have asked Leahy to move forward with the bill, immediately following the elections.But most amusing of all is how they brush off the concerns about First Amendment violations and blatant censorship by the US government, at the same time as the US government is putting political pressure on countries that censor the web:
"some foreign countries have engaged in political censorship long before this bill was introduced and they will continue to do so regardless of whether this legislation is enacted."Say what?!? So it's okay for the US government to censor the web, because other countries censor as well? I recognize that their argument is that this won't change how other countries view censorship, but even that's wrong. The US is pressuring other countries not to censor the web by claiming a moral high ground. It seems particularly hypocritical to undermine that moral high ground by blatantly censoring the web as well, and then saying "but it's okay for us, because it's about protecting these companies." That just makes it easy for those other countries to respond, "well, then it's okay for us, because it's about protecting our government/way of life/etc."
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: censorship, coica
Companies: chamber of commerce, riaa
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
"Die! Die! Die!"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
It should be spelled "CACA"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
"Billy next door is allowed to stay up past 10"
I don't think we want to be walking down that "other countries do this" road.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
already worked around
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20020408-38.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3 -0-20
This bill would be a massive waste of time in any case. If you know the IP address of the site you are connecting to, then you can still connect. I've already queried DNS and all my favorite sites (including Techdirt) are backed up.
Also, since most sites hosting 'naughty things' are located outside the US, all one would have to do is add a domain name with the country code instead. Instead of 'www.mytorrentsite.com' one could go with 'www.mytorrentsite.ca.'
The following might be right or wrong:
One bad thing about this that the government might not appreciate. If the US passes this law, the DNS system is going to get thrown into an uproar.
The DNS system is designed for changes to propagate throughout the network. If this law is passed, I am assuming that the so-called domain name seizures will be handled on a DNS-server level. IE - www.piratesite.com will be forwarded to www.doj.gov.
If there are some countries that don't want to implement this US LAW (which there might be in the beginning.) then they will have to shut down/disable/hand-sort DNS updates that are supposed to propagate automatically.
So, lets say that Renraw Brothers Pictures is getting ready to release this HOT NEW MOVIE and they set up a website for it. "HOTNEWMOVIE.COM" gets put together and put out to all the social networking sites, etc. "HOTNEWMOVIE.COM" is supposed to point to 192.168.1.109/192.168.1.110, but for some reason it don't work outside the US.
That's because some DNS Gateway Updater (new position that had to be created in other countries to make sure that crappy American law didn't affect domain names outside the US.) went on vacation a day early and the "HOTNEWMOVIE.COM" update didn't get pushed out to the international DNS Servers.
That is, if I'm correct about how this law works. I might be wrong.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
It's a formula: "so long as X is worse, we're great".
And you fall prey to the relativist trend, Mike, with what I hope is merely misguided attempt at irony: "most amusing of all". If you're disgusted or outraged, at least don't undermine the meaning of words. I'm sure you think that's OKAY because YOU do it, and you're a good person, or at least are sure of your motives, but when communicating, it's hazardous.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This is almost an admission that congress isn't expected to follow the will of the people, but instead, only the will of corporate interests. Since this bill is against the will of the people it will make it more difficult for congressmen pushing for it to get (re)elected. So drop it for now and after the election you should continue it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Maybe...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
3 words
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Maybe...
Tea party? Lol, they're the republican party rehashed. Don't expect them to do anything besides serve corporate interests. Democrats are no better either.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Copyright as it is
I thought that was copyright's whole purpose these days? To protect a handful of companies and lazy rich people.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Copyright as it is
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: It's a formula: "so long as X is worse, we're great".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
i knew it
DAMN COMMIES
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
COICA, a 200 billion dollar pension bail out for the unions, funding for various progressive (ie socialist) projects, Anti coal and oil legislation, and a huge amount of legislation to redistribute wealth.
I wonder how many of our rights are going to be tramped?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Didn't we already do this?!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Keep your eye on the political money
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Holy sheep dip Batty-girl
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: rifle
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Maybe...
The problem is that any group that rises up to challenge the major parties in the US is going to need money (which is why we've had only two parties for so long) and money is why any group challenging the system can be suborned long before they become a threat.
Don't look to the parties, look to the internet and social networking. Until the majority of people understand that all the parties are the problem and band together informally, outside the party system, nothing will change.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Maybe...
A lot of people think we are on the verge of a major international overhaul. The financial meltdown has pointed up some flaws in capitalism, and the rise of China as a economic power is changing power structures. And dependence on oil has skewed political alliances.
Who would have thought a few years ago that what Detroit would become the innovative center of urban gardens? Talk about localism of food supply. It doesn't get more local than growing your own on abandoned urban lots.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The legislation is quite limited in scope, and to call it "censorship" is to give a new and expansive meaning to "hyperbole".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
It's keeping big media afloat
John Roberts' America - NYTimes.com: "Colorado is ground zero for what’s happening in John Roberts’s America, competing for the dubious distinction of being the top state in the nation for spending by shadowy outside groups telling people how to vote."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
The proposed bill can be read in full at:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:S.3804:
Note that para. (j) will almost certainly be removed from the bill.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: already worked around
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I Call Bull$hit
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Comment Held for Moderation...
It will be reviewed by our staff before it is posted."
Wow that is a first for me... I wonder what I did ...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Comment Held for Moderation...
"be hanged, shot, drawn and quartered, and burned on a pyr"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:S.3804:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
COICA vs WikiLeaks
"Fear is easy to sell, with the price of purchase being but your FREEDOM" --DrClue
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
The current bill is sponsored by Sens. Hatch and the retiring Voinovich on the GOP side, and Sens. Leahy and Whitehouse, Schumer, Kohl, Specter, Durbin, Feinstein, and the retiring Bayh on the Democratic side.
Nothing to say that the newly elected Republicans will be against the bill, but the side pushing it wants to act now rather than take that chance.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Maybe...
[ link to this | view in thread ]