Chinese Internet Users Relish Irony Of SOPA's Great Firewall Of America
from the shoe-on-the-other-foot dept
After being on the receiving end of the West's pointed comments about the Great Firewall of China and the online censorship it helps to enforce, Chinese Internet users are enjoying the deep irony that SOPA will effectively copy China's approach by creating a Great Firewall of America. As one wrote:
It looks like that we can finally export our technology and value to the Americans. We’re strong, advanced, and absolutely right!
The same post on Global Voices Online reports that others are taking things more seriously, and worry about the knock-on effects SOPA will have on Net freedom around the world:
Most Chinese-language blogs and microblog messages emphasize the disastrous outcomes that the bill could bring. What people worry about most are bill's endorsement of surveillance by web services and Internet companies to prevent “infringing” content, and the implications for individual privacy.
None of this will come as any surprise to Techdirt readers. But it's extraordinary that the politicians supporting SOPA can't see – or don't care about – the huge damage it will do to the international reputation of the US, and the harm it will cause human rights around the globe.
Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and on Google+
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: china, human rights, protect ip, sopa
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Classy! Way to go deep looking for the slam. Mike may give you a raise if you keep this crap up!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"yet you aren't?"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Then again, some of the folks who post here have long since stopped amazing me at the depths they can sink to. My fervent hope is that they don't breed and pass on whatever faulty gene(s) the so obviously possess.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Don't worry we are working on an app for that. It's called coitus interruptus. It will delay random emails, to content types until they are about to get frisky. Then it will bombard them with emails and phone calls.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Glynn and Mike aren't to blame for that, are they?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Troll harder.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You need to separate the self contradictory statements by at least a sentence or two.
Decent use of ad hominem though
troll rating 5/10
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I would say that makes you guys the trolls.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
(gave your identity away with that "slow with any useful response thing there, buck-o)
Tell me, do you care about anyone or anything beyond yourself? Take your time, I don't want to hurry you. I know "beyond yourself" is an alien concept so just turn it over some and get used to it before loading up your cannon with wet powder so you can get another spectacular misfire.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
If we're trolls, you're twice the trolls we might be.
[ 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:
And to go along with this, horrible rebuttals.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I would say that makes you the troll, son.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Thanks go out to Bill Hicks, whose quote I just mutilated.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to: Anonymous Coward on Dec 9th, 2011 @ 6:19am
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Everything else is just an obstacle to profit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Look at 2008, and the 'solution' to pass the massive bailout bill to 'fix' the economy. Did it fix it? Heck no, but it made them look like they were doing something, and got them massive campaign contributions from the people bailed out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Great Firewall of China blocks speech the Chinese government doesn't like.
SOPA blocks speech that corporations don't like.
See, it's not too hard to understand.
[ 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:
Vote Smarter in 2012
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Correct.
Vote Democrat.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
oh, but that doesn't agree with your worldview so better bring up WMD or something. amirite?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
And Bush didn't leave the Internet alone: he actually championed the Patriot Act that let him do electronic surveillance on suspected terrorists.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Ron Paul 2012. Liberty, justice, and the pursuit and destruction of corruption.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Stop pretending one party is "smart" and one is "dumb." That's the kind of thinking my grandmother has. Rather, recognize that both parties are full of stupid corrupt people, and both of them need to be cleaned out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
That and you know, it's a good thing the Supreme Court has already ruled that making a copy of a record IS NOT theft. It's copyright infringement. In fact, they even made the matter perfectly clear by stating that doing just that DOES NOT in fact prevent the person with copyright from continuing to produce and distribute their product.
[scratches head in wonderment] And despite that, some people still can't spot the difference between "theft" and "copyright infringement". Is Idiocracy coming true even quicker than expected?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
No one is complaining over the fact that companies are trying to do something about it. What they are complaining about is the methods they're using. The broad definitions and all that jazz, which has been pointed out repeatedly, in SOPA/PIPA. You know, that and the things like screwing up the DNS system and free speech violations.
Go ahead and do something about the "problem". By all means, knock yourself out. You won't succeed anyway. But DO NOT in your attempt to solve the problem, which you can provide no evidence/facts over just how many actual losses or whatnot it causes, violate my Constitutionally protected rights.
As for the devs. That's a crock. It's the same thing with movies. They're going to make what they know people will like. That's the way it's always worked. No one wants to take a risk anymore, luckily, there are independents who'll produce something different. Trying to blame "piracy" for shitty games is a major copy out. You sound like Ubisoft. Oh hey, we're sorry about the games and the DRM, but we HAD to do it because of all the sales we aren't making. No! The reason for the decline in sales is because of YOUR horrible, atrocious, goddamn pain in the f*cking a$$ DRM, which drives us towards other game makers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Come on dude. You have to admit it might at least be a LITTLE bit of the reason companies (yes treyarch, I'm talking to you and that piece of shit call of duty!) don't want to take risks anymore.
"What they are complaining about is the methods they're using. The broad definitions and all that jazz, which has been pointed out repeatedly, in SOPA/PIPA. You know, that and the things like screwing up the DNS system and free speech violations."
Yes, I too agree the bill doesn't define things well. But it's not like congress is actually gonna change it or anything. But being prevented from pirating stuff (I know the bill isn't actually gonna do shit, but just humor me for a sec) isn't taking away your free speech rights.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The truth is, in regards to games, piracy is NOT the reason they don't want to take risk. While it COULD be a reason, it's not THE reason. You and I both know what the real reason is. They DO NOT need to take risk. If hundreds of millions of copies of Call of Duty (such a stupid and repetitious game, year in and year out with little to nothing to distinguish and make them better than last year's version) are able to sell year in and year out, that's all the incentive they need to not take risk. Obviously, people don't care about innovation or something new. They want the same old thing and are willing to pay for it every year over and over.
And I know Congress isn't going to change it or anything. That's a given. And yes, stopping someone from pirating something DOES NOT take away my free speech rights per se. But it does put that possibility out there, based on the BROAD definitions of the bill. People seem to think the following, like you said, "downloading a file isn't free speech", "trying to keep you from downloading a file isn't violating your free speech". Right? That's what you're saying exactly. Okay, now stop and think for a moment. We have a bill, with definitions SO broad, that it literally should be called the "Yay! We can do what we want Bill." The DMCA is routinely abused, no punishments at all for those who abuse it. Now we have this new bill, which has clearly been stated, by ACTUAL experts nonetheless, as definitely going to place limits on and censor free speech (online). Are you denying that? I don't mean denying that that'll happen. I mean, are you saying these legal and Constitutional experts are all wrong? I don't think they are, and in this day and age, I think it's naive to dismiss that outright just because you may have a problem with people making a COPY of a song.
It's like the whole "throwing out the baby with the bath water" thing. To stop one problem, which has no verifiable negative effect (that is based on a legitimate unbiased study, that is), they're willing to allow and encourage the abuse of a law which as I pointed out will allow for censorship of free speech, or prevent it entirely (in some ways) and will destroy the internet as it has been building up towards. Come on. That's pretty extreme, don't you think?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"It's probably why stuff like video games have been getting so shitty over the last few years"
That sure didn't seem like I was saying it's the ONLY reason.
"Okay, now stop and think for a moment. We have a bill, with definitions SO broad, that it literally should be called the "Yay! We can do what we want Bill."
Which is why I think they should actually define shit instead of leaving wiggle room.
"Now we have this new bill, which has clearly been stated, by ACTUAL experts nonetheless, as definitely going to place limits on and censor free speech (online). Are you denying that?"
No, I don't think those experts are wrong. Which is why I think actual people in the industries affected by piracy that AREN'T MPAA/RIAA/whatever fatcats should help congress make a bill that will actually do something against piracy. Maybe something like a small fine plus whatever the retail value of the pirated thing is?
"Come on. That's pretty extreme, don't you think?"
Yeah, maybe it is extreme. But it doesn't change the fact that congress probably IS going to pass this bill to make their fatcat buddies happy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"Al-Qaida" loves the Patriot Act and military detentions.
Just look at this absurdity: someone attacks buildings in New York, so the Bush admin launches two full scale wars in the Middle East, kills hundreds of thousands, wounds and destroys the lives of millions, and foments fear in the US by which it brings about a police state that takes all of your vaunted rights. -- The absurdity is that /I'm/ called a conspiracy theorist! It's no longer theory, people, you see it put in place daily...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "Al-Qaida" loves the Patriot Act and military detentions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: "Al-Qaida" loves the Patriot Act and military detentions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: "Al-Qaida" loves the Patriot Act and military detentions.
I'll admit that this post was brilliant. Maybe he remembered to take his medicine?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: "Al-Qaida" loves the Patriot Act and military detentions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "Al-Qaida" loves the Patriot Act and military detentions.
And SOPA is the latest tool to achieve that goal!
Thanks for putting it so eloquently, OotB!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "Al-Qaida" loves the Patriot Act and military detentions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "Al-Qaida" loves the Patriot Act and military detentions.
"Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain."
Stupid works far better than conspiracy, every time. Other than that I agree with damned near every word.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wow..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wow..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Kinda reminds me of Egypt's protests...
One of the military's justifications for suppressing the protests? "They do it in the West, too" - a clear reference to how the US handles the Occupy movement.
When will our government learn that other nations do not fall for "do as I say, not as I do".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
In this video you'll find a prime example of hypocrisy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6yBTRKyh8w
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Follow the money
All American politicians care about is the money. Dam the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and free speech.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Politicans think?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not that "extraordinary"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
More thinking, less rhetoric
The negative effects of SOPA are blown out of proportion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: More thinking, less rhetoric
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
HAHAHAHA!!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]