Post #21 · Posted at 2010-11-19 11:58:36am 13.4 years ago
 PureBlue | |
|---|---|
 |
Member |
| 2,925 Posts | |
 | |
| Reg. 2009-04-08 | |
 | |
| "I'm your thorn." | |
Quote: -Viper-
Heck, the music industry is in trouble right now because no one wants to pay musicians for their music anymore.
Maybe record labels should start paying their bands, then.
Post #22 · Posted at 2010-11-19 12:04:29pm 13.4 years ago
| Bolt-Edge | |
|---|---|
 |
Member |
| 2,361 Posts | |
| | |
| Reg. 2008-06-03 | |
| "No." | |
Quote: -Viper-
I think the quote in the opening post is really skewering the meaning and intent of the bill. All I see is the common slippery slope "hey, first they're shutting down pirating sites, next they'll be censoring the entire internet!". Well, no they won't because they define in the bill what constitutes an "infringing website". They say the only websites that can be locked are sites that are exclusively for pirating copyrighted material, so youtube/megaupload/ZIV should be safe.
You can't be suprised that the government and media companies would try to crack down on internet piracy. Heck, the music industry is in trouble right now because no one wants to pay musicians for their music anymore. Companies are loosing money on the products they are creating and it's the government's responsibility to enforce laws. It's kind of hard to make a case against it really other than "but I like being able to download stuff for free".
The problem with that is that the bill is pretty vague on what is considered "dedicated to infringing activity" and I think it could easily be exploited and abused. There is a possibility that those sites could be brought down simply because the government will possibly make an uneducated decision and think they are centered around infringement. Also, how the attorney general is determining what is considered infringement without judicial review is concerning. You can't be suprised that the government and media companies would try to crack down on internet piracy. Heck, the music industry is in trouble right now because no one wants to pay musicians for their music anymore. Companies are loosing money on the products they are creating and it's the government's responsibility to enforce laws. It's kind of hard to make a case against it really other than "but I like being able to download stuff for free".
Not only will they be taking down sites for their "infringing" material, but they will also have all of their non-infringing material be shut down. Anything creative coming out of these sites will ultimately be brought to a halt.
Musicians don't get shit from record sales. Most of it goes right to the record label. They make most of their money on shows they perform. Record labels are some of the most greedy companies around, and I'd rather see the money go to the musicians themselves through what I feel, and they feel, is appropriate.
Not to mention that some (most) of the music I listen to is stuff from out of the country. Importing music, let alone underground music, has always been difficult. Paying out the wazoo for tracks that should cost half their price due to importing costs is not something I nor most people want to do. Obtaining a lot of that music completely legally simply isn't a viable option.
ALSO FUCK PAYING FOR PORN
Post #23 · Posted at 2010-11-19 05:28:37pm 13.4 years ago
| Mercury | |
|---|---|
 |
Member+ |
| 807 Posts | |
 | |
| Reg. 2007-06-15 | |
what i find funny is the united states government has stated they are against china's internet censorship. bunch of hipocrites if you ask me
Post #24 · Posted at 2010-11-19 11:58:06pm 13.4 years ago
| Oni-91 | |
|---|---|
 |
Moderator+ |
| 13,492 Posts | |
| | |
| Reg. 2006-10-20 | |
 | |
| "Ambivalent Viennetta" | |
Ooh, I got this from Demand Progress's Mailing List:
Quote: my Inbox
Alex -- big news! Yesterday the Senate Judiciary Committee voted unanimously to send the Internet blacklist bill to the full Senate, but it was quickly stopped by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) who denounced it as "a bunker-buster cluster bomb" aimed at the Internet and pledged to "do everything I can to take the necessary steps to stop it from passing the U.S. Senate."
Wyden's opposition practically guarantees the bill is dead this year -- and next year the new Congress will have to reintroduce the bill and start all over again. But even that might not happen: Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Hollywood's own senator, told the committee that even she was uncomfortable with the Internet censorship portion of the bill and hoped it could be removed when they took it up again next year!
Wyden's opposition practically guarantees the bill is dead this year -- and next year the new Congress will have to reintroduce the bill and start all over again. But even that might not happen: Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Hollywood's own senator, told the committee that even she was uncomfortable with the Internet censorship portion of the bill and hoped it could be removed when they took it up again next year!
Post #25 · Posted at 2010-11-20 12:55:45am 13.4 years ago
| jch02140 | |
|---|---|
 |
Member |
| 1,071 Posts | |
 | |
| Reg. 2007-08-08 | |
Edit: Nevermind, just received in my gmail a minute ago... The storm seems to have died down for now...