SOPA In Infographic Format

from the for-the-visual-thinkers-among-you dept

Mon, Dec 12th 2011 11:06pm — Mike Masnick

The folks over at BusinessInsurance.org have put together a pretty decent infographic about SOPA (though they get confused and at one point name some Senators as "supporters," even though SOPA is in the House, not the Senate). Still, if you were looking for a decent visual representation of the whole thing, here you go:

Behind SOPA: What It Means for Business and Innovation

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: pipa, protect ip, sopa

36 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

ScytheNoire, 12 Dec 2011 @ 11:16pm

I think I found the problem
I think I found the problem. You got Copyright in my creativity. If we can just remove that, it seems like all will be fine from there on out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Getefix, 13 Dec 2011 @ 1:43am

Trade Weapon
SOPA is a trade weapon, and that is why it will pass. As more and more business is done over the internet it gives the U.S. a more delicate tool for trade sanctions. Sure, a review might clear the major Icelandic fishery websites of charges of linking to infringing content, charges that could coincidentally follow Iceland being the first Western nation to recognize Palestine, but in the meantime a lot of business could potentially be lost.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- PaulT (profile), 13 Dec 2011 @ 2:04am
  
  Re: Trade Weapon
  "delicate"
  
  Erm, from what I've read this is not the best word to describe SOPA...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - B Pickel (profile), 13 Dec 2011 @ 9:02pm
    
    Re: Re: Trade Weapon
    it is "delicate"
    
    As delicate as a brick through a window
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Andrei, 13 Dec 2011 @ 2:03am

Dell McAfee And Microsoft switched sides
Dell McAfee And Microsoft switched sides. BSA Switched sides. They are against SOPA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 13 Dec 2011 @ 2:28am

And it leaves out the the language in the current bill!

How convenient!

Nice job using Nazi Germany propaganda tactics in all this, Masnick.

But at least some of us know that you and Google are the true face of evil.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 13 Dec 2011 @ 2:29am
  
  Re:
  Go on, then. Tell us what was left out.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Hephaestus (profile), 13 Dec 2011 @ 8:10am
    
    Re: Re:
    The AC left out the alternate Goodwin of CP.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 13 Dec 2011 @ 10:53am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      I think that was called Jackson's Law.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 13 Dec 2011 @ 2:36am
  
  Re:
  You're such a sad human being.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - The Devil's Coachman (profile), 13 Dec 2011 @ 8:48am
    
    Re: Re:
    Actually, he's not sad. He is pathetic, and I take great joy in that.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 13 Dec 2011 @ 3:38am
  
  Re:
  First, Mike Masnick was "wrong"...
  
  After that, he was "stupid"...
  
  Then, he was a "pirate"...
  
  Now he's the true "face of evil"?
  
  What's next? Will Masnick be the "Anti-Christ"? "Satan"? Or "Wand of Gamelon"?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 13 Dec 2011 @ 4:03am
    
    Re: Re:
    No, probably something in the range of "douche". But that isn't my opinion, just something I heard somewhere or read or something.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 13 Dec 2011 @ 4:04am
    
    Re: Re:
    Maybe Christ will now have to be referred to as the Anti-Mansick.
    
    After all, the horror of presenting an informational graphic that is largely true, but has some possibly out of date information is clearly among the greatest evils in human history and worthy of being compared to nazism.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 13 Dec 2011 @ 5:02am
  
  Response to: Anonymous Coward on Dec 13th, 2011 @ 2:28am
  Please point out where it actually dehumanises the opposition, or stop comparing it to Nazism, you Godwinning fuck.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 13 Dec 2011 @ 2:36am

I love this sort of thing. Mike, you admit they got some of it wrong. If this was a pro-SOPA thing, you would be calling them out as spinmeisters, as incompetent, and as liars.

I guess you run it because it supports your position, even if you know that the graphic is wrong. Pathetic!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 13 Dec 2011 @ 2:56am
  
  Re:
  Careful, your desperation is showing.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 13 Dec 2011 @ 3:25am
  
  Re:
  You're complaining that he's recognising the flaw in something that you disagree with?
  
  What?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 13 Dec 2011 @ 3:39am
    
    Re: Re:
    No I am complaining that he glossed over a problem, and didn't call the rest of the information into question - which is what he would have done if it supported SOPA.
    
    Things like this just show how one sided Mike's views are.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 13 Dec 2011 @ 4:16am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Just maybe because most of the information is correct and he just bothered to point the wrong parts, different from the likes of you that come here only to troll.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Poster, 13 Dec 2011 @ 5:09am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Things like this just show how one sided Mike's views are.
      
      Yet, the very moment Mike makes a "mistake", people like you are ready to shove it in his face, call him a Nazi freetard socialist copyright-raping rat bastard, and do everything you can to show that your views are as one-sided as you claim Mike's are.
      
      If your views aren't as one-sided as your raging against Mike would have everyone believe, then you'd be able to admit that there are problems -- lots of them -- with SOPA and PIPA, and those problems stand a damned good chance of causing a lot of collateral damage.
      
      I'm willing to admit that piracy is an issue that deserves smart, laser-guided legislation to deal with (if the Big Media companies are truly set on not adapting to modern day technologies).
      
      Are you willing to admit that SOPA and PIPA could censor legitimate websites/content, force existing Internet services to drastically change the way they operate in order to avoid legal liability, and prevent new Internet services from starting up in the face of massive legal liabilities?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 13 Dec 2011 @ 5:12am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        There are issues with SOPA - but there are issues with the current state of affairs that cannot be tolerated.
        
        "Are you willing to admit that SOPA and PIPA could censor legitimate websites/content"
        
        No. Not at all. There is nothing that says this will happen, except the scare mongers. Legal, legit websites with legal, legit content don't have anything to fear. Websites who don't check content, or don't give a shit what is on their sites will suffer - and they should.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 13 Dec 2011 @ 5:44am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        I heard this one website receives 60 hours of content per second, and you want them to check it all? For infringing content?
        
        Good luck with that.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 13 Dec 2011 @ 6:45am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        
        Websites who don't check content, or don't give a shit what is on their sites will suffer - and they should.
        
        So you are admitting that you want to get rid of the DMCA's safe harbor?
        
        The DMCA does not require a site to monitor user generated content, only taking down infringing content after a valid DMCA notice.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 13 Dec 2011 @ 6:46am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        
        Websites who don't check content, or don't give a shit what is on their sites will suffer - and they should.
        
        So you are admitting that you want to get rid of the DMCA's safe harbor?
        
        The DMCA does not require a site to monitor user generated content, only taking down infringing content after a valid DMCA notice.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 13 Dec 2011 @ 6:47am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        
        Websites who don't check content, or don't give a shit what is on their sites will suffer - and they should.
        
        So you are admitting that you want to get rid of the DMCA's safe harbor?
        
        The DMCA does not require a site to monitor user generated content, only taking down infringing content after a valid DMCA notice.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 13 Dec 2011 @ 7:03am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        The safe harbor is a wonderful idea, but has been abused by certain companies and individuals to the point where it is no longer doing what it should do.
        
        It has created a situation where anyone can post anything, without rights, and profit from it until someone says "oh, wait, that's mine... you can't be using it". Then the website takes it down, and says "oh, sorry!". But they keep the profits. Oh, and they can have another "rogue user" upload it again minutes later, and since it's a new URL, it needs to be DMCA'ed by the owner again, if they find it.
        
        Basically, it turned into an open license to use content without permission, and with no downside to doing so.
        
        So yeah, for many sites, the safe harbor provisions of DMCA are too much.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        The Devil's Coachman (profile), 13 Dec 2011 @ 8:50am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Situational ethics is what I believe you are in support of.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 13 Dec 2011 @ 4:57pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        I've been pointing it out in the other thread and this series of responses just cements it - for the troll(s), they don't/he doesn't really care if Wikipedia does get shut down based on SOPA accusations despite their insistence that it wouldn't. Indiana Gregg or anyone with a want to suppress/claim copyright over information will just say "Fugg dis shit mang" and complain that Wikipedia didn't take down the information quickly enough.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 13 Dec 2011 @ 7:05am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        :There are issues with SOPA - but there are issues with the current state of affairs that cannot be tolerated."
        that is so true...
        there should be some sort of law to prosecute any organization that tries to hold back innovation and harm society as a whole by buying stupid ineffective laws...
        
        funny how SOPA supporters always claim it will only harm those evil pirates, even though everyone knows SOPA will have 0 effect on piracy, just like every other stupid law put forth by our Benevolent Media Overlords...
        the genie is out of the bottle, and it is only going to get worse...
        they have gone from fight ctrl=c/ctrl-v to trying to fight single mouse click... wonder what will be next?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        apparently, 13 Dec 2011 @ 1:35pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        your one of those retards that think you can just push a button and scan the internet.
        
        but what did i epect from the country that came up with the idea of preventive war?
        
        PS: i am american....sadly...
        
        *gets depressed thinking of why i was not born in iceland*
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Spaceman Spiff (profile), 13 Dec 2011 @ 7:48am

Al Franken?
The illustration of Al Franken being a supporter of this train-wreck-waiting-to-happen really surprised me, given his support for many more sensible and progressive agendas. Did someone hypnotize him? Bamboozle him will bullshit? Hold his kids hostage?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Jay (profile), 14 Dec 2011 @ 8:34am
  
  Re: Al Franken?
  He used to work in the movie industry. So yes, he supports pipa.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 13 Dec 2011 @ 11:28am

Comments held for moderation
Why are comments held for moderation for several hours?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- PaulT (profile), 13 Dec 2011 @ 12:19pm
  
  Re: Comments held for moderation
  They're not, unless you write something that gets caught up in the spam filter. Try creating an account and logging in, or not pasting a lot of links? One of those might help.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Jay (profile), 13 Dec 2011 @ 5:47pm
    
    Re: Re: Comments held for moderation
    I've had one of my posts caught as well. It happens.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]