EU Parliament Warns The US To Stop Censoring The Internet
from the don't-censor-the-internet dept
What a world we live in... when foreign countries are speaking out publicly against American censorship. For a country whose identity has been built around its strong support of the First Amendment and free speech rights, to reach the level where others are condemning our own failings on free speech is really sad. The EU Parliament has adopted, "by a large majority," a statement warning the US to refrain "from unilateral measures to revoke IP addresses or domain names" due to the "need to protect the integrity of the global internet and freedom of communications." This resolution highlights both the practices prescribed in SOPA/PIPA... but also the actions of Homeland Security and ICE in seizing domain names. At what point is the federal government going to realize that these practices are completely undermining any claim the US has to a moral high ground against internet censorship elsewhere?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, domain seizures, eu, first amendment, free speech, protect ip, sopa, us
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
If you have nuclear weapons, you don't need a moral high ground.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
FUCK YOU SOPA !
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
UNBELIEVABLE
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
What a wonderful world where every government is trying to make the others look bad while they hide their own nefarious actions.
This behavior can't last forever - humans aren't known to bend over and just take it for an extended length of time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
See the difference?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
And if I recall correctly it was your content industry which forced it through
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Last I checked, these content industries you speak of are multi-national. People in the U.K. are buying their goods and supporting them just the same.
Don't pretend that just because Hollywood exists in the United States that the companies going after consumers are also solely based in the U.S.
This is a worldwide problem - not something you can solely blame on the U.S.... Now granted, the U.S. government has certainly catered to lobbyists and is being used as a lever to manipulate the governments of other nations - I'll grant you that, but the governments in these other nations are still accountable to their constituents to produce proper laws.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
They've gone as far as actually blackmailing other countries into passing legislation that suits American industries.
Oh, and before you ask for a citation, check Wikileaks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Yet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: 'Moral High Ground'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The UK, Denmark, Germany, and many others actively pursue blocking of websites.
Many EU countries are safe havens for pirate sites, and permit many things which are not legally acceptable in the US.
I don't think they have a lot of high ground to stand on.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Many EU countries are safe havens for pirate sites, and permit many things which are not legally acceptable in the US.
Ummm...which is it? If it's damn near impossible to run a website in the EU, than how are there so many of these so called pirate sites?
The UK, Denmark, Germany, and many others actively pursue blocking of websites.
Basically your saying that since three other countries that do not hold the Constitution as the highest law in the land do it, so we should too. Sad.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Not sure if I mis-phrased it, but sorry if that is all you took from my post.
"Basically your saying that since three other countries that do not hold the Constitution as the highest law in the land do it, so we should too. Sad."
Actually, I think they all hold their respective constitutions highly - I also think they understand that the internet presents new challenges, and creates difficult legal situations, where people can get away with things online that the law does not allow in the real world.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Sorry Mr. Allen, I do not agree, the people of the UK have never expressed the need for an all encompassing document which, when voted for, can be amended in any way the current "rulers" see fit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I'll be back later, could take you a while...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Do i win a prize? :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Also, unfortunately, I dont know who to make the smartarse reward out to?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
So what you tend to get is idealism in Brussels and pragmatism in Berlin, Paris, etc. It is more often the case that pragmatism wins out and the edicts from Brussels get a "that's nice, thanks for your opinion son" pat on the head while they go on about governing their territories.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
my SNP MEP
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wikileaks
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wikileaks
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Wikileaks
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Wikileaks
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Wikileaks
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Wikileaks
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Wikileaks
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just as the community can police the contents of Wikipedia, I have no doubt that the community of users can police other sites. Remove the pirated content or be shut down.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
liberty
SOPA does more than let the internet police itself, it grants Federal agencies and even private business the ability to censor sites at their whim. It won't even stop pirated content because it simply removes the DNS record for the site, this is easy to circumvent for anyone who still wants to pirate. Your logic is flawed, this will simply make it harder for small sites to get off the ground by making so much red tape to cut through, it essentially does to the internet what corporate monopolies over broadband infrastructure have done to small time ISP's. Granting more power to the Feds is never really the answer...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Also doesn't change the fact that copyright is unverifiable outside a courtroom.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The EU is a bunch of fascists too, though.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The EU is a bunch of fascists too, though.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The EU is a bunch of fascists too, though.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: The EU is a bunch of fascists too, though.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The EU is a bunch of fascists too, though.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The EU is a bunch of fascists too, though.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
About Goddamn time!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If a real world business openly traded in stolen goods on the high street, you'd want it shut down. Even moreso if some of the goods they sold for profit were yours. You'd be effing livid if it were continuously ignored or giant loopholes allowed them to continue while you lost money.
Piracy of digital goods is no different, regardless of the weak arguments of pirates.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Copyright infringement is not theft.
One is a civil matter, the other is a criminal matter.
Don't conflate the two.
And there are no sites that solely exist to profit from other's creations. (nope, not even the Pirate Bay, as there is also loads of stuff on there, that's legal, such as albums uploaded by bands themselves, and Linux torrents, and archive.org files)
Besides, as long as a website offers the general public to upload their own works, chances are illegally acquired copyrighted material could show up there. Youtube could be taken off the net with SOPA, that's a clear violation of freedom of speech, as a lot of people use the Youtube platform to showcase their own works. To vent their own opinions.
Also, how do you distinguish the illegally uploaded copyrighted material from the legally uploaded copyrighted material? Anyone can call themselves "Universal_Music", who is to say that they are the real one?
These are all issues and hooks hanging on this badly written law, that have severe real world implications and problems.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Swedish ccTLD .SE criticise the proposal
https://www.iis.se/en/blogg/protester-mot-stop-online-piracy-act
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Probably because it is so blatantly obvious to everybody that SOPA and the likes are, in fact, censorship...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Further, the courts have already ruled that some protected speech may be harmed when illegal speech is dealt with,and that is disappointing but acceptable. The courts did not want protected speech to be used as a "human shield" for illegal activities.
So no, it's not censorship, not matter how many times Mike repeats it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
If you allow anyone, private party or federal agency, to block and put out of business an entire site without any adversary hearing (or, for that matter, any procedure in court) solely on the basis of an accusation, you have de facto created a way to censor anything on the internet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
By that definition, China doesn't do any censorship either.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]