I was looking at some footage from interviews with Ron Paul, and the host was asking him who he'd endorse, as if he had stepped out of the race.
I mean, come on, Ron Paul is still running himself.
But yeah, you're right, there is too much power at the broadcast level, they get to pick the candidates who are invited to the "debates". Which, btw, isn't really a debate, as that would take too much time and can't be done with commercials interstitched. The televised debates are just candidates reiterating talking points in a question and answer setting.
Debating isn't about answering stupid questions, it's about exchanging ideas, and arguing those ideas in order to try and convince the other parties in the debate.
the problem is, once these laws are in place, they will get expanded, mission creep. And they'll keep moving the goal posts, and get courts to pervert the laws into what Hollywood actually intended them to be. We've seen it before with other laws.
Once in place, you can't get rid of it. Once in place, the world is fucked.
They'll just get VPNs banned or something, calling it a tool solely used for infringing on their precious copyrightsesses. Like they are already saying about p2p tools that can be (and is) used for legal purposes.
Talking to people about piracy is also a problem. Good gracious is it frustrating when people actually think messing with DNS servers will prevent or slow down piracy.
That's because they aren't really worried about piracy...because they need that scapegoat to gain more control. Do you really think they want to get rid of piracy all together, when it creates such a great narrative for them to use on Congress? "Them thar forrin theives R steeling ar contents!"
No these bills are about control. Control on what you, the hapless moneybag, get to watch online. They want to turn the Internet into the next cable television. With only approved channels. Sure, for now, they won't attack US-based websites, but that's just a matter of time.
Heh, I'm still surprised that Cameron has got legs to stand on after his outburst during the Eurotop and his coalition partner Nick Clegg staring daggers at him.
Yeah, but what can US citizens do? After they have made thousands of calls, millions of emails opposing this stupid bill, it still has a chance of getting through congress... What is left there to do? Reelections won't be until after this bill has passed. And then it's too late.
Also, the media won't pick up on it, because it's old hat after that. No need to hold someone accountable over ancient history.
Besides. there is a new $celebrity_scandal_of_the_day to talk about for about 24 hrs.
Voting in the US seems to me (as an outsider) to be "choose between the lesser of two evils". Because you're not being given a whole lot of choice.
In The Netherlands, where I'm from, it's not a perfect system either, but we do have something like 10+ different parties.
And each party with their own viewpoints, bullet points and ideals.
The greens, the party for animal rights, the labour party, christian democrats, the socialist party, to name but a few.
After viewing that video, my mind just froze asking "what?"
That's just... WHAT?! As if that's something to be proud of. "Oh I don't have to know anything about anything in order to decide on its future." When are we (globally) going to hold our legislature accountable for the stuff they rule on?
I haven't bought a single Sony product since the rootkit scandal. Suits me just fine. Indeed, let them burn. I wouldn't pee on them if the company was on fire.
Really?! No-one would dare make content?
You, sir/madam, are a fool for believing that.
There are tonnes of people out there making games, music, movies, books and anything in between just for fun.
I have filled a large part of my bookcase with books written by independents, even though I already had the audiobooks for free from Podiobooks.com
I have a Kindle app full with ebooks written by people that aren't part of some bigwig book publishing empire, but rather publish themselves through Amazon.
I have paid good money for a number of films that weren't released by big Hollywood label X.
I have paid for a fuckload of games using the humble indie bundles and the likes. I have bought a lot of games from GOG.com, that come without any DRM (so they are easily copyable, and I could've just as easily downloaded them from pirate site Y)
But of course, without bullshit copyright enforcement no-one would ever release any content anymore. Really now?!
Here's the reply I'd send, if I were a US citizen, and if my voice would mean anything:
"I believe copyright owners should be able to prevent their works from being illegally duplicated and stolen."
Except neither the PIPA nor the SOPA bill really address that.
And "stolen"?! Copyright infringement is not theft, I'm appalled to hear a US Senator be this ignorant on the letter of the law. (never mind the fact that you are using the exact same language that the media companies are using, I guess we know who you are using as moral compass)
"These are websites that have "no significant use other than engaging in, enabling, or facilitating" copyright infringement, the sale of goods with a counterfeit trademark, or the evasion of technological measures designed to protect against copying"
The fact that you actually believe that, says a lot about your knowledge of technology. Name a single site that has no significant use other than engaging in, enabling or facilitating copyright infringement.
"The bill would not violate Internet users' First Amendment right to free speech because copyright piracy is not speech."
Oh yes, and the DMCA was only intended to attack those same infringing sites, and was never ever ever ever abused.
On the post: New Anti-SOPA Song & Crowdsourced Video From Dan Bull
Re: Re: Re: Re: Remix
On the post: Does Congress Even Realize That The Courts Appear To Think That SOPA Is Already In Force?
Re: Eh - I'm confused
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Re:
Who?
Why Hastur of course, you know HastARRGGGHHH
*carrier lost*
On the post: SOPA Markup Day 1: We Don't Understand This Bill, It Might Do Terrible Things, But Dammit, We're Passing It Now
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I mean, come on, Ron Paul is still running himself.
But yeah, you're right, there is too much power at the broadcast level, they get to pick the candidates who are invited to the "debates". Which, btw, isn't really a debate, as that would take too much time and can't be done with commercials interstitched. The televised debates are just candidates reiterating talking points in a question and answer setting.
Debating isn't about answering stupid questions, it's about exchanging ideas, and arguing those ideas in order to try and convince the other parties in the debate.
On the post: SOPA Markup Runs Out Of Time; Likely Delayed Until 2012 [Update: Or Not...]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Much to do about nothing
On the post: SOPA Markup Runs Out Of Time; Likely Delayed Until 2012 [Update: Or Not...]
Re: Re: Re: Much to do about nothing
On the post: SOPA Markup Runs Out Of Time; Likely Delayed Until 2012 [Update: Or Not...]
Re: Much to do about nothing
Once in place, you can't get rid of it. Once in place, the world is fucked.
They'll just get VPNs banned or something, calling it a tool solely used for infringing on their precious copyrightsesses. Like they are already saying about p2p tools that can be (and is) used for legal purposes.
On the post: SOPA Markup Runs Out Of Time; Likely Delayed Until 2012 [Update: Or Not...]
Re:
(and yes, I'm serious in this, this is not me trolling you)
On the post: Dear Congress, It's No Longer OK To Not Know How The Internet Works
Re: Frustrations
That's because they aren't really worried about piracy...because they need that scapegoat to gain more control. Do you really think they want to get rid of piracy all together, when it creates such a great narrative for them to use on Congress? "Them thar forrin theives R steeling ar contents!"
No these bills are about control. Control on what you, the hapless moneybag, get to watch online. They want to turn the Internet into the next cable television. With only approved channels. Sure, for now, they won't attack US-based websites, but that's just a matter of time.
On the post: SOPA Markup Day 1: We Don't Understand This Bill, It Might Do Terrible Things, But Dammit, We're Passing It Now
Re:
On the post: SOPA Markup Day 1: We Don't Understand This Bill, It Might Do Terrible Things, But Dammit, We're Passing It Now
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Also, the media won't pick up on it, because it's old hat after that. No need to hold someone accountable over ancient history.
Besides. there is a new $celebrity_scandal_of_the_day to talk about for about 24 hrs.
On the post: SOPA Markup Day 1: We Don't Understand This Bill, It Might Do Terrible Things, But Dammit, We're Passing It Now
Re: Re: Re:
In The Netherlands, where I'm from, it's not a perfect system either, but we do have something like 10+ different parties.
And each party with their own viewpoints, bullet points and ideals.
The greens, the party for animal rights, the labour party, christian democrats, the socialist party, to name but a few.
On the post: Dear Congress, It's No Longer OK To Not Know How The Internet Works
Re: This says it all:
That's just... WHAT?! As if that's something to be proud of. "Oh I don't have to know anything about anything in order to decide on its future." When are we (globally) going to hold our legislature accountable for the stuff they rule on?
On the post: SOPA Markup Day 1: We Don't Understand This Bill, It Might Do Terrible Things, But Dammit, We're Passing It Now
On the post: CCIA Slams Congressional Representatives Who Unfairly Attack US Companies For Speaking Up Against SOPA
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Journalists And Key Engineers Who Built The Internet: Completely Opposed To SOPA
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Judge Says OtherOS Removal Was A Bad Business Decision But Not Illegal
Re: Years after the rookit debacle...
On the post: Lessig On The Daily Show: The Corruption And Extortion Of Congress
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Lessig On The Daily Show: The Corruption And Extortion Of Congress
Re: Re: Re:
You, sir/madam, are a fool for believing that.
There are tonnes of people out there making games, music, movies, books and anything in between just for fun.
I have filled a large part of my bookcase with books written by independents, even though I already had the audiobooks for free from Podiobooks.com
I have a Kindle app full with ebooks written by people that aren't part of some bigwig book publishing empire, but rather publish themselves through Amazon.
I have paid good money for a number of films that weren't released by big Hollywood label X.
I have paid for a fuckload of games using the humble indie bundles and the likes. I have bought a lot of games from GOG.com, that come without any DRM (so they are easily copyable, and I could've just as easily downloaded them from pirate site Y)
But of course, without bullshit copyright enforcement no-one would ever release any content anymore. Really now?!
On the post: Senator Dianne Feinstein: So Out Of Touch, She Doesn't Realize Tech Companies Are Vehemently Against PROTECT IP
Re: Here is Senator Feinstein's response letter
"I believe copyright owners should be able to prevent their works from being illegally duplicated and stolen."
Except neither the PIPA nor the SOPA bill really address that.
And "stolen"?! Copyright infringement is not theft, I'm appalled to hear a US Senator be this ignorant on the letter of the law. (never mind the fact that you are using the exact same language that the media companies are using, I guess we know who you are using as moral compass)
"These are websites that have "no significant use other than engaging in, enabling, or facilitating" copyright infringement, the sale of goods with a counterfeit trademark, or the evasion of technological measures designed to protect against copying"
The fact that you actually believe that, says a lot about your knowledge of technology. Name a single site that has no significant use other than engaging in, enabling or facilitating copyright infringement.
"The bill would not violate Internet users' First Amendment right to free speech because copyright piracy is not speech."
Oh yes, and the DMCA was only intended to attack those same infringing sites, and was never ever ever ever abused.
Next >>