SOPA Supporters Learning (Slowly) That Pissing Off Reddit Is A Bad Idea
from the don't-mess-with-reddit dept
There's been a lot of talk in the past few days about the companies supporting SOPA. As we've noted, it's pretty damn difficult to find too many individuals who like SOPA (or PROTECT IP), but there are a fair number of companies who might find it advantageous to be able to cause all sorts of problems for foreign competition. There are a few lists floating around of SOPA supporters, but Andrew Couts has put together a big list of 439 organizations culled both from the Judiciary Committee's website and the letter sent by the US Chamber of Commerce in support of the law.We'd noted that there was some backlash towards companies supporting SOPA, but as more and more people recognize how bad these laws are, it's getting more attention. Add to that the awesome power of Reddit... and the whole thing has kicked into overdrive.
Enemy number one on the list appears to be GoDaddy, with Redditor's organizing a day (Dec. 29th) for GoDaddy customers to transfer their domains away from the registrar. We've discussed GoDaddy's bizarre support for the law in the past -- including the fact that, under the original definitions of SOPA, GoDaddy itself qualified as a "rogue site" since it recommended people buy domains violating the trademarks of lots of big companies. Of course, it's also notable that GoDaddy recently hired a top lawyer... whose previous job was in "IP enforcement" for the federal government.
GoDaddy doesn't quite seem to know how to deal with the rising backlash on Reddit, and has (somewhat bizarrely) reissued two previous statements about SOPA. The first was what it wrote when the bill first came out, and the second was its filing for the original (November 15th) Judiciary Committee hearings on SOPA. Neither of these statements address the concerns of the folks on Reddit and appear to be very much a "talk to the hand!" response to the Reddit community. I would suggest that this may not have been the keenest strategic move on the part of GoDaddy. And it's not just small domain holders. Ben Huh, CEO of the infamous (and awesome) Cheezburger network of sites is promising to move all 1,000+ of his domains off of GoDaddy unless it changes its position on SOPA.
Others on the list of supporters are starting to feel the wrath of Reddit for supporting SOPA as well. 3M, who has been a strong supporter is discovering that their customers are not pleased:
On top of that, the backlash is coming out in other ways as well. Paul Graham, the founder/head of YCombinator (where Reddit was first incubated) has announced that he will bar employees from any of those companies from attending YCombinator's famed Demo Days. For those in the Silicon Valley/entrepreneurship/startup world, you know that YCombinator Demo Days are a big deal. It's where all sorts of amazing new stuff gets launched, and big deals are made. Barring SOPA supporters from that event can really hurt those companies. Graham made himself clear:
Several of those companies send people to Demo Day, and when I saw the list I thought: we should stop inviting them. So yes, we’ll remove anyone from those companies from the Demo Day invite list.He's apparently told the people in charge of Demo Day invites not to allow anyone from those lists. "I don’t know exactly which companies had people on the list. But I know which will now: none of them." He furthermore told TechCrunch that he'll recommend YCombinator startups not take investment money from any of those companies too: "If these companies are so clueless about technology that they think SOPA is a good idea, how could they be good investors?"
Either way, what's becoming clear is that even if some companies support the law, it's not because it's good for their customers. It's precisely the opposite. It's because it'll be useful as a protectionist law to stomp out competition or to protect against having to adapt to innovation. In the past, consumers might not have paid attention, but thanks to efforts like what Reddit and others (Tumblr, Wikipedia, etc.) are doing, it seems like those consumers are starting to speak up and make themselves heard. And the end result is going to be bad for business for the companies supporting SOPA.
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: activism, boycotts, net roots, pipa, protect ip, sopa, supporters
Companies: 3m, godaddy, reddit, ycombinator
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Great Article! Alvin Phee
Alvin Phee, Cali
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Great Article! Alvin Phee
Dark Helmet, Planet Spaceball
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Great Article! Alvin Phee
A. Coward, Undisclosed
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Great Article! Alvin Phee
Prepare for ludicrous speed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This way companies such as 3M and make-up/clothing companies (which have nothing to do with big content) end up supporting the MPAA and RIAA's corporate agenda.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Go figure.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
AND TECHDIRT!!!! Thanks TECHDIRT AND MIKE!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Wow. I read too many troll comments. It took an act of will to change the tone of your response to 'not sarcastic'.
Anyway, I agree. Keep it up Mike!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Action
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Dead people don't buy expensive drugs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
This is what happens when pointy haired bean counters are allowed to make medical decisions only doctors are qualified to make. There oughta be a law...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Visa?
Was there a switch in positions?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Visa?
Yes. Unfortunately. With the manager's amendment, they flipped.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Visa?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Visa?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Given GoDaddy's long, long, LONG history...
It amazes me that anyone is willing to be their customer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Given GoDaddy's long, long, LONG history...
Moving them to the extra email-service on GoDaddy "solved" the problem.
I don't trust them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Given GoDaddy's long, long, LONG history...
When the web designer was let go, I had to hash out what exactly we were paying for, blahblahblah.
We were paying for ColdFusion on beta.oursite.com, and I asked the reps in the 5 conversations we had that if we turned that one off if our site would break. "Oh No, your not even using beta.oursite.com". Ok, turn it off..
2 weeks later - no website.
Called em back...."Oh I guess we were wrong about that." Ok, fix it. Here's money, take it out out match our hosting account so it all renews at the same time.
3 weeks and 23 phone calls later, (because the site was moved to a non-coldfusion server..and then back to a different ColdFusion server....and then they moved the database to the wrong place, then the restore wouldn't
work...)...the site was back up and running.....
1 month later, GoDaddy sends a mail that they are eliminating ColdFusion hosting completely. Not wanting to recode the whole site, we find a new hosting company, and log in to GoDaddy to back up database to move to the new site.
We never could get the backups to work. Always failed, tech support couldn't manually get a backup running....we finally said 'screw it' (since we already had the data that was out there in house alerady.)
Us, and 10 other people in our little circle gave GoDaddy the finger that month.
Hopefully this list of people tired of GoDaddy will grow.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Given GoDaddy's long, long, LONG history...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"In our view, Internet policy should strive to balance the sometimes competing goals of the global free flow of information (which is clearly critical to U.S. businesses), with enforcement of the rule of law. We don’t see those competing goals as mutually exclusive, but rather, complimentary. In fact, that balance is essential to a flourishing, yet safe, Internet.
Why some members of the Internet ecosystem do not believe it is their responsibility to participate in finding that balance is unclear to us. We’ve found that balance in the past in the child protection and counterfeit pharmaceuticals contexts, for example, where we voluntarily take action against customers whose websites or domain names violate the law. So far, none of our voluntary action has stifled legitimate capitalism online. And neither will robust intellectual property enforcement."
That he thinks the above statement is somehow wrong or bad says everything you need to know about Mike Masnick.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"balance" in the approach to child protection? Are they talking about child porn? GoDaddy is in favor of "balance" for child porn? That almost sounds like they're arguing for the pedophiles...
Boycott them!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
The way the internet exists today, it follows "the rule of law."
However, SOPA supporters don't like the way the current laws function (too slow, too piecemeal, too haaaAAARRRrrd), so they are trying to get the law changed.
We rose up as a unit and said "Bullshit!", and now they don't like the backlash.
Even GoDaddy. Which would you rather be allowed to do: only remove offending materials (piece by piece), or *bloop* turn off the whole website, with no threat of recrimination?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Remember when professional sports leagues tried to claim they owned stats/facts?
Remember when ATT pushed Netflix out of the streaming market by bandwidth caps that conveniently didn't apply to ATT's services?
There's nothing balanced about what big companies are trying to do with the internet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Generally, the actual artists, the singers and the writers and whoever else usually sign away the rights to their creations.
This SOPA/PIPA thing is being backed and pushed by 'middlemen'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I get the impression that they are lobbying (brown-nosing) hard for a prominent seat at the table when the National Board of Internet Regulators is created.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Enforcement of the law by sidestepping it - brilliant!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
As for the rest of GoDaddy's statements they seem more self congratulatory than anything else and more the sound of one hand clapping than anything else.
As one AC has pointed out already GoDaddy seems perfectly willing to host phishing sites (about 3/4 of my US originating spam/phishing messages a day for my sites and personal email come from sites hosted on GoDaddy, BTW).
You'll pardon me then for being skeptical about GoDaddy's statements and motivations here. And flat out ingenuousness.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Laughable.
You've proven GoDaddy has absolutely no regard for its customers' interests. They are basically saying that their customers' dissent isn't a part of the "balancing" process. This is what I see in that ridiculous statement:
"Despite your active role in this industry, GoDaddy literally does not care that you dislike this law. In fact, we don't even like to acknowledge that your opinion could be legitimate, so we're just going to act like you're lawless thieves simply for disagreeing with us."
I can't believe more people aren't offended by this complete disregard for the *professional* opinions of such an enthusiastic community. If GoDaddy is so stupid as to dismiss their customers with such indifference, they deserve to lose business.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Like what?
That's what's so funny about this; that you people think the world would stop turning if things like reddit left my life. LOL
The self importance some of these web 2.0 companies attach to themselves reminds of the dot-bomb era...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Like NBC could be removed from the internet. As in, their ISP/host/DNS turned them off after a single notice of copyright infringement, even if it was just in the comment section of a project blog.
Because SOPA specifically prevents penalties from being applied to service providers taking preemptive action.
Unless that's changed? But it couldn't could it? Wouldn't that be a *gasp* safe harbor?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Go read up on intent and spirit of the law.
This is why no one in Congress takes you people seriously.
IP hater Mike Masnick and his merry bunch of pirates make for amusing doomsayer entertainment, but nothing else.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Spirit" and "intent" are ALWAYS second to the LETTER of the law.
SEC. 105. No cause of action shall lie . . . and no liability for damages to any person shall be granted against, a service provider, payment network provider, Internet advertising service, advertiser, Internet search engine, domain name registry, domain name registrar, entity described in section 101(20)(B), or Internet Protocol Allocation entity . . . for taking the actions described in section 102(c)(2) or section 103(c)(2) with respect to an Internet site, acting in good faith and based on credible evidence, that—
(1) the Internet site is a foreign infringing site, is an Internet site dedicated to theft of U.S. property, or is an Internet site that endangers the public health; and
(2) the action is narrowly tailored and consistent with the entity’s terms of service or other contractual rights, and with the purposes of this title.
See the "or" in bullet 1? That means "any of these," not "all of these."
And you can bet your shilling ass that any and all terms of service will be amended to be as easy on the service provider as possible.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The good faith defense is as simple as "Someone told us it was."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Addendum The Second
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Did you ever hear the adage "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me"? Well, the DMCA was the first one. We're not sitting down for the second one.
If the supporters could show us RELIABLE FACTS from HONEST studies showing ACTUAL harm to the industry as a whole and not just a few large businesses, we might actually listen to your wails of despair. As it is, the only actual evidence we've seen all points to "fat cats" trying to get fatter by controlling that which they have no right to control. Until we see otherwise, we'll continue to object most vociferously.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Where can I read the secret interpretation of the law?
Also, how often does intended and actual converge? - never.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
That's what I thought. With SOPA it would be worse, much worse than that.
[ 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: Re: Re:
Whenever you allow entities to completely avoid liability for taking some action, in effect, that entity "has to" take that action.
An example: Nobody "has to" follow the DMCA notice-and-takedown provisions. In theory, the 512 safe harbors are voluntary. It's legally possible that you could completely ignore them, and still not be liable for any copyright infringement.
Yet, how many U.S. sites deliberately do not follow the 512 notice-and-takedown provisions? None of them.
If it passes, the limitation on liability under SOPA will become just as "optional" as not following the DMCA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Arghhh!!! Says Dave while wearing a techdirt eyepatch.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The link was to the official FXUK website, and was to a free show called "The Booth at the End".
Tom respond to this notice, please give over this poster's credit card details, SOcial Security number and all e-mail addresses, along with passwords and usernames to all sites of which this poster was a member.
Failure to comply with thius will result inj suit being filed, and redress of $500,000 dollars being sought for copyright infringment by Warner Wros. Studios for linking to this infringing content.
Kind Regards,
S. Gibson
New Righthaven (a subsidiary of Stephens Media)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Spirit and intent has nothing to do with practical matters now does it?
Because if it had copyright wouldn't last for life + 95 years, music, movies and fiction publishing wouldn't be covered, but here we are with a monopoly monstrosity that is enabling censorship wholesale.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Then go read up on the fact that none of that means much of anything when a bill is passed into law.
At that point it's what's in the Act itself, any regulations pursuant to that act, precedence, jurisprudence, evidence and then, maybe, just maybe "spirit and intent" and even than only at the highest levels of appeal courts as a rule.
Sorta like Indiana once tried to regulate the value of the constant pi just because some politican thought it was too darned complicated and wanted something similar. So he whipped off a bill that almost passed. So any fool can write a bill. But that doesn't make it reality.
The Indiana foolishness stopped when a math professor pointed out that the number was needed to measure and built round and circular things among other details. So they couldn't really change it.
SOPA/PIPA have wonderful(?) intentions and spirit though they won't stop piracy and counterfeiting. The RIAA and MPAA won't adapt fast enough, if at all, to stop the first and, at least in high fashion, that's been going on since high fashion was "invented" in the 19th Century and this won't stop it. Very sadly it won't stop the dangerous stuff either like fake pharmaceuticals until the price of the real stuff comes down from the stratosphere to where real people can afford it.
The downside of both bills, on the other hand, is somewhere between horrible and unthinkable if you believe in such things like the US Bill of Rights innovation, free speech and freedom and liberty.
There are times, however where I'm convinced there were too, too many spirits involved in the formulation of the intentions built into this legislation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Your statement about Congress not taking us seriously just reflects a dire need for sweeping changes in American leadership that will take into account the greater common view over their own short sighted, and more often than not, self serving point of view.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I think it was Einstein who said that trying to achieve different results doing the same thing is madness.
We got the tools now and we can do it another way today.
We can bring the political discussion to everyone.
TED: Chris Anderson - How YouTube is driving innovation
Youtube can create LXD(League of Extraordinary Dancers), can create grassroots movements overnight(OWS: Occupy Wall Street) and it can deliver useful work(i.e. Duolingo can translate Wikipedia in minutes to another language, or people can find new substances playing games online).
What we need is to takeout the power of decision from a group of lobbying people and put it out into the public view, where people decide and draft the laws they want, there are some hints of how this can be done already.
http://personaldemocracy.com/media/maptivism-how-crowdsource-political-action
http://ww w.good.is/post/iceland-is-crowdsourcing-its-new-constitution/
http://radiationnetwork.com/
The internet people can bring about a silent revolution one that would shake the foundations of modern politics and become even more democratic.
Instead of electing "representatives" people should be electing "ideas", then it doesn't matter who is in there, but what they do for the people and where they get their information from, right now those people in there get their cues from special interests is time to change that and put people who take their cues from the people, but the people must show what those representatives should stand for.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
You can keep that head in the sand as long as you like, but your only hope of it not coming back to bite you in the end is if you die fairly soon. Web technology is already ubiquitous and bordering on mission-critical for the entire world economy. Declare war on it at your own peril.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
You people are delusional.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Moving on to your second challenge. Capitalism has no morals (and indeed drives anti-morality by its very nature), and as capitalistic companies I must admit that you are correct. All of the above have been perfectly content to bow to Chinese and other countries' demands for censorship, and it's certain they will bow to US demands as well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
How long do you think that's going to work for you? Especially online, where everything is recorded and searchable? Or am I being delusional too?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Funny, that's not what I'm hearing from Vint Cerf at Google.
Mere ignorant newbies such as yourself should probably not presume to know the minds of those of us who built this network. Unlike you, we aren't all so greedy that profit is our only goal and our only value. Nearly all of us set out to change the world -- and we have. Surely you don't think we'll allow a few whiners from dying businesses and some pipsqueak politicians to get in our way; even you can't be that naive.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
And I vote for the people who created the damn thing to have the ability to very swiftly make these corporations regret their decisions.
They panicked when some script kiddied DDOS'ed paypal, what do you think will happen when you piss off the very technically minded who wrote and built the system?
The internet is not something you can take hostage, it is alive... and I fear for many of these companies that they have awakened the Internets immune system.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
There will be no more PIPAs or SOPAs for the next hundred years...and we can finally start undermining the absurd government granted monopoly privileges that you monopolists think you're entitled to.
You are on the wrong side of history. But we will not bury you.
We will make you irrelevant...and that is good enough for us.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Don't bet on it.
At a minimum, the 'net must be perceived as the decisive factor in significant, national elections.
Even then, old habits and old modes of thinking die hard. The politicians and lobbyists who have grown fat and set in their ways during the age of television will most likely never really gain a new set of political instincts.
I do not think that even rioting in the street —pepper-spray and flash-bangs mixed with internet-enabled cellphones— will send the message home. The history of the press is all too violent and bloody.
Given time, a new generation, grown up with new technology, saturated in new media, might be expected to naturally gain new patterns of perception. Not even consciously. But there can't be time: The old and new powers now clash.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
If even those people who would sell anybody out are against it, they obviously have a very good notion of where their money is coming from and it is not from people like you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
umm, like read the article, in this case like getting barred from YCombinator Demo Days.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Other won't be able to find it, the fact that you don't know how to use the internet doesn't preclude others from knowing how to benefit from it.
The internet is more important than copyrights, it brings in more money, jobs and opportunities than does the entertainment industry, people can go without watching movies or listening to music but their lifes will be very negatively impacted without free(as in freedom) communications.
Which reminds me that copyrights are not that important at all for society, they are a barrier that aggravates an already bad situation, copyrights are the seeds of a police state and it is what is driving right now people to pass censor bills.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Beca use morons like this should TOTALLY be allowed to keep stealing people's shit and claiming it as their own. Copyright definitely shouldn't be life+95 years, (this is coming from a musician btw) but there's no reason why someone can't have the rights to their own work until they die.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
A defined (and far shortened) term of length for copyright and obligatory *registration* of copyrighted works would be better for all, we'd all know where we stand, rightsholders included (you think you can't be sued over copyright just because you're a rightsholder? don't think it works like that).
Copyright is a pact between the creator/rightsholder and the public - and the public at large is the only true grantor of this privelege. The pact is broken when copyright, an unnatural right that goes against innate human behavior and communication, is extended or elevated above the consent of the public to the point that the public no longer can understand or respect it.
We are long past that point.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
But what would you have copyright be if you were to change it? Because a measly year or two isn't fair to the creator at all, especially not in these days where most people can rip a creator's core product off the internet for free. Copyright may have evolved to some crazy shit beyond what it was meant for, but it doesn't mean it's not necessary. Don't think for a second that your favorite video game/music/whatever would have been made if the creator wasn't able to make money off of it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Disappearing Content
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
3M & SOPA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
GoDaddy / Gibson
On the other hand, after I and several others posted comments on Gibson's facebook they said this:
"Hey guys - Gibson does NOT support this legislation. Gibson's CEO has demanded that Gibson be removed from the list of company's supporting SOPA. Don't believe everything you read on the Internet! ~ Sean"
http://www.facebook.com/GibsonGuitar/posts/10150428903850718?notif_t=feed_comment_reply (you may need to Like Gibson in order to see this)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: GoDaddy / Gibson
What's fascinating is this: that letter, from the US Chamber of Commerce and addressed to the members of Congress, lists Gibson (among many other companies and organizations) as a SOPA supporter.
Which leaves us with two possibilities.
One, Gibson signed on to that letter, but has now reversed course in the face of public outcry.
Two, the USCoC put Gibson on that list without bothering to ask Gibson if they wanted to be on it.
If the latter is the case, then we must ask: which other names are on that list for the same reason?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: GoDaddy / Gibson
Two, the USCoC put Gibson on that list without bothering to ask Gibson if they wanted to be on it.
If the latter is the case, then we must ask: which other names are on that list for the same reason?
We've been hearing they're not the only ones who claim to know nothing about the list...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: GoDaddy / Gibson
Notifying companies what they bills they support do might just put an end to this practice.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: GoDaddy / Gibson
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: GoDaddy / Gibson
We are talking about people who create false grassroot campaigns, tried to employ a security researcher to deploy social network puppets on a large scale(i.e. remember Anonymous owning the guy) and it is associated with people who put dead people in their letters before.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: GoDaddy / Gibson
Shock.
You mean the US CoC would knowingly and willfully use a company's trademark fraudulently?
Sounds like under SOPA, they should have their domain seized, all their funds impounded, and held for a year without any due process.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hmm...
There's a spectacular amount of *nothing* about SOPA on digg. Even in their political page. Is it just me, or is that kinda weird?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hmm...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Hmm...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Hmm...
http://blogs.alternet.org/oleo leolson/2010/08/05/massive-censorship-of-digg-uncovered/
http://www.geekosystem.com/digg-v4-rebel lion/
... and many more.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Thinking about moving your domain names to an European country to avoid SOPA?... Think Again
A - VeriSign Global Registry Services
B - University of Southern California - Information Sciences Institute
C - Cogent Communications
D - University of Maryland
E - NASA Ames Research Center
F - Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.
G - U.S. DOD Network Information Center
H - U.S. Army Research Lab
I - Autonomica/NORDUnet
J - VeriSign Global Registry Services
K - RIPE NCC
L - ICANN
M - WIDE Project
When it's mentioned that the SOPA master sleuths will contact your ISP to block your domain name, most probably they are referring to removing your domain name entries at these root servers, not much work if you asked me. They just need to do it through [IANA](http://www.iana.org/root-management.htm)
After such an action, the removal of your domain name from the root servers, will propagate in a mater of days to "ALL" the caching name servers in the world that use US based root servers directly or indirectly. By the end of a month (with any luck) perhaps your domain names will still be visible in Armenia, and Tuvalu.
In other words, if you are using .com, .net, and .org, you don't stand a chance.
Anyhow, the Justice Department, is already using this method for blocking domain names with total impunity, which leads to the question as to why all the fuzz with SOPA and Protect IP, since they already got what they want.
Someone please correct me if I am wrong Please (probably I am)
References:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNS_root_zone
http://www.isoc.org/briefings/020/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Thinking about moving your domain names to an European country to avoid SOPA?... Think Again
The root servers have nothing to do with this situation. All they do is to point to the next level. So, for instance for .com, they answer:
com. 172800 IN NS a.gtld-servers.net.
com. 172800 IN NS b.gtld-servers.net.
[...goe s up to m...]
And for .co.uk, they answer:
uk. 172800 IN NS ns1.nic.uk.
uk. 172800 IN NS ns2.nic.uk.
[...another long list of alternatives...]
Notice that they only point to the next level. The only way the root servers could remove for instance example.co.uk, would be to remove *all* of .uk. Which they won't; the fallout would be immense, and alternative roots would quickly appear.
The problematic domains are .com, .net, and .org, since their registrars are in the US. If you are using one of these three, you are vulnerable to US laws.
One easy way to avoid this is to simply use a domain name from another country. Instead of example.com, use example.co.uk, and now the registrar is on the other side of the ocean.
So how SOPA and similar evil law proposals pretend to deal with it? By forcing *every* US provider to somehow block or even worse manipulate the DNS responses for these domains, and make illegal bypassing, attempting to bypass, or even discussing how to bypass it. I won't bore you with a pages-long rant on how this is evil, breaks things, and kills kittens; let me just say that, among other things, it goes completely against the current push for DNSSEC, which is designed to protect against hackers hijacking your connection in ways not very dissimilar to what these guys are proposing.
And by the way, the root servers are NOT all hosted in the US. For performance and reliability reasons, they are mirrored all over the world. Just F alone (the ISC one) is mirrored in several countries (with the same IP addresses, using the magic of anycast routing).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Thinking about moving your domain names to an European country to avoid SOPA?... Think Again
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_DNS_root
http://dot-bit.org/Main_Page
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Thinking about moving your domain names to an European country to avoid SOPA?... Think Again
http://root-servers.org/
Quote:
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Root_name_server#Root_zone_file
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Thinking about moving your domain names to an European country to avoid SOPA?... Think Again
It's just about giving the money to somebody else. Of course moving to other registrars won't magically protect your domains.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
SOPA and counterfeiting
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Boycotts are very effective on big companies
If you can cut their income by just 10% many of them won't be able to pay their creditors and when the accountants take over a company, they will fire the people who triggered the failure.
Also, when it comes to virtual goods and fresh retail orders, the speed at which you can switch providers will astound them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Boycotts are very effective on big companies
They pay the same $8 or so for a dot com domain, and they sell it on for $10 or so. But they only pay the $8 if you actually take a domain and pay the year lease on it. If you don't, they don't pay a thing.
Until you get them down to a very low number of domains (where they can no longer pay for servers and staff, net) they will not really notice your protest.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That's it, I'm done with GoDaddy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: That's it, I'm done with GoDaddy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: That's it, I'm done with GoDaddy
Oh ya... Fuck GoDaddy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
GoDaddy
I have been with GoDaddy for like 10 years so this would also be one seriously long move away.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If they support this they will loose a TON more money than most of those other companies. A SINGLE datacenter that wants to expand and hears of this could easily cost APC/Schneider Electric 100K or more! they could have losses in the high millions.
That's a very dangerous name to have on there! Please confirm this!
I suggest contacting them, however, be nice and professional. Thank you!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Same for Gibson, Visa, Go Daddy and others.
Remember words mean nothing in public affairs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to: mike allen on Dec 23rd, 2011 @ 12:19am
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Response to: mike allen on Dec 23rd, 2011 @ 12:19am
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Response to: mike allen on Dec 23rd, 2011 @ 12:19am
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Response to: mike allen on Dec 23rd, 2011 @ 12:19am
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: GoDaddy
Up next is to convince a lot of other GoDaddy domain owners to move as well. I think GoDaddy are totally crazy to support SOPA but they have their reasons.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: GoDaddy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Page linked to is now gone
Rather than changing that position, obviously, it's easier to delete the page.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Page linked to is now gone
In other words, they admit that they did support the entire piece of crap, but the threat of the walkout made them change their mind where the extreme odiousness of the proposed legislation could not.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Reddit convinces Alan Schaaf (Imagur.com) to switch from GoDaddy
Alan Schaaf is a member of Reddit.com (MrGrim). Here's the thread asking for suggestions of where to move his domains to.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Find out from your bandwidth providers who your last mile provider is and get some quotes to get that changed.
Then call up TWC and tell them they have 60 days to change their stand. Then send them a letter.
If no response, then change.
I send 50K a month of business to TWC and that WILL change.
If you are in a colo, find out who THEY use.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
more boycotts
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
4chan
TOTALLY not the work of 4chan... assfucks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
VERY DISSAPPOINTED!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Boycott
[ link to this | view in chronology ]