the US is trying (most likely wont succeed against people who are not technology impaired)to stop piracy. by trying to get a firewall put up restricting access of all american computers from certain websites they deem as "illegal" or allowing people to download pirated things. which if you know anything about the WWW you'll know the BEST sites are the illegal ones, . some people say this is scary and the government is corrupt and all. im not saying i support this "US firewall"....
but look at it like this:
we've always had easy access to free music, movies, video games via download on websites like ****** and ****** but it IS indeed illegal and these are pirated objects we are TECHNICALLY "stealing". basically someone robbed a candy store, duplicated some of their candy and laid it on the street for anyone to just come and pick up, but we ARE supposed to go to the actual store and pay for it. just because someone ELSE stole it and said "hey man take it, its free " doesnt mean your not in the wrong.
ive probably, to give a rough guestimate.... "stolen" over $100,000+ in music, movies and video games....porno.... (i dont really buy anything... :X ) hundreds of thousands of songs, thousands of movies and hundreds of video games.
now people say "those companies have ENOUGH money, were like robin hood, stealing from the rich and giving to... ourselves! )
your thoughts and the US on trying to ban piracy?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"once the pretty hardcore gamers we had testing inferno found it fairly difficult, we then we doubled it" -trolololol jay wilson
It's a fairly interesting discussion point, if you really think about it technology has gone far enough that it's pretty much impossible. Look today even at pornography filters put in place to 'protect children' or 'protect workplaces' from end users who we have decided should not be able to access the content.
In the end a black list is a system which will never keep up with the content.
Not only that, but with data encryption on the fly if this went ahead and all the content switched to HTTPS and went dark (i.e. user based notification of a web site change with no public notification) it would start to become very hard for the authorities to track it down.
I suppose if the end result is to move piracy back to its roots - i.e. scene based with little or no access to the public - then it could be mildly successful. Then it would move to physical piracy again (much like 10-15 years ago) for the people "down the line".
Look forward to seeing what happens, it's easy to make a decision based on a concept - especially when you have no idea what will actually go into it's execution. And if Government has taught us anything, you don't need to understand something to make a decision about it.
Never adapt, just control and profit. That is the US. Bunch of dicks.
Yeah yeah they want to control the internet. Nothing beyond that. No shit or piracy talk matters. They just want to control everything. Nothing beyond that. Their justifications are excuses to make it happen, to control the mighty internet and make more money.
The world is always already adapting, except those morons that just keep on controlling what is happening. World can evolve but they wouldn't give a fuck if their pockets aren't involved.
Never adapt, just control and profit. That is the US. Bunch of dicks.
Yeah yeah they want to control the internet. Nothing beyond that. No shit or piracy talk matters. They just want to control everything. Nothing beyond that. Their justifications are excuses to make it happen, to control the mighty internet and make more money.
The world is always already adapting, except those morons that just keep on controlling what is happening. World can evolve but they wouldn't give a fuck if their pockets aren't involved.
you clearly missed the part where they are trying to prevent stealing, not control something.
well, control stealing. by trying to lower it lol
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"once the pretty hardcore gamers we had testing inferno found it fairly difficult, we then we doubled it" -trolololol jay wilson
Considering they're trying to push for felony charges and the like, I think it's hopeless draconian sabre rattlers backed by some expensive law firms on retainer. Viacom is still posting recrod profits, along with a lot of other major media outlets who claim to be "seriously hurt," by this stuff.
Then again, in the wake of corporate personhood, anything is possible.
I'm honestly in support of blocking piracy/torrent sites.
I cannot think of a legitimate reason not to except people who want to download from it. Piracy is NOT free speech, and if a website doesn't want to be blocked then it should simply prevent contributing to piracy.
The dangerous fact about that act isnt that they try to stop piracy by controlling the contents of websites. They use this act to close sites they deem "illegal" without ever going through a court. There is a british student that hosted a site (he bought the domain from an US firm... thats the only connection to the US) and the ICE (I think thats the ministry?) trys to get the UK to extradite him to the US to judge him... and thats whats scarry. The things the student did where legal in the UK... but the domain was bought in the US and there its illegal... and now they want to judge him in the US (he would go to jail for 5y or more...). There was also a spanish website that linked to streaming sites... again with a domain in the US... and yeah they got shut down without notice and without the whole matter going through a court. They tried to appeal but it was again shut down... because... well because they can... and they dont care about what you think about it.
Edit: Oh and the paragraphs concerning whats illegal and whats legal are very vague/squishy and even some search engines like google or things like clouds (amazone etc.) could fall under this law and thus they could be deemed illegal...
a person in another country using something from/in the US to do illegal things that US citizens are accessing/downloading or whatever, thats perfectly reasonable to try and extradite him to america, just because your body is physically in another place doesnt mean your not doing something wrong regardless of his personal country's laws. that's like throwing a rock over the border and breaking a window in america and saying "in my country its ok to throw rocks n break stuff so neener neener". he's violated another country's laws therefor he can/should be punished. if his home page had "only for bla bla country, by clicking accept your saying you are not from listed countries that this is illegal in blabla" which is a loophole the kid could of used and therefor never got in trouble i the first place.
america isnt going to shut down google. lmao. there going to TRY and block (not shut down, they've failed at that, they cant 'shut down' a website without the courts still, but they CAN 'try' to block it). sites like piratebay, torrentz, and other sites like this that offer illegal downloads is what they are after. thats the entire point of the act. period. it's not some conspiracy for total control.
some people need to put on their tinfoil hat's and begone
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"once the pretty hardcore gamers we had testing inferno found it fairly difficult, we then we doubled it" -trolololol jay wilson
I could really care less if they try to ban Piracy again.
That isn't what they are doing.
You can be arrested and sent to prison for posting a 5 minute clip of CNN with your own personal comentary on Youtube. This is currently completely legal.
Hell, Youtube could be taken down completely.
This isn't about Piracy, this is about the entertainment industry wanting more money.
I could really care less if they try to ban Piracy again.
That isn't what they are doing.
You can be arrested and sent to prison for posting a 5 minute clip of CNN with your own personal comentary on Youtube. This is currently completely legal.
Hell, Youtube could be taken down completely.
This isn't about Piracy, this is about the entertainment industry wanting more money.
Period.
a company wanting less people to steal the product they made = they're greedy bastards? trolololololololol
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"once the pretty hardcore gamers we had testing inferno found it fairly difficult, we then we doubled it" -trolololol jay wilson
I could really care less if they try to ban Piracy again.
That isn't what they are doing.
You can be arrested and sent to prison for posting a 5 minute clip of CNN with your own personal comentary on Youtube. This is currently completely legal.
Hell, Youtube could be taken down completely.
This isn't about Piracy, this is about the entertainment industry wanting more money.
Period.
Ya, it's that simple.
Not.
People are stealing music. Period. The artists need to be compensated. Their work should not be stolen.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I want to say something but I'll keep it to myself I guess and leave this useless post behind to make you aware that there WAS something... "
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
People are stealing music. Period. The artists need to be compensated. Their work should not be stolen.
Are you just stating this because you think he's saying their work should be stolen (which he didn't say, he didn't even hint at all that piracy was right or fine), and/or are you actually trying to justify the actions they take to help these people, on the basis that these people should not have their work stolen?
Not sure here. I don't see why twice in a row, people take LinkX's post and try to defend the people negatively affected by piracy, like it had anything to do with what he said.
Linkx said it wasn't about piracy when it clearly is.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I want to say something but I'll keep it to myself I guess and leave this useless post behind to make you aware that there WAS something... "
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
I would post my opinion here but I've not enough knowledge of the issue even though it's been circulating around the Internet. Anyone have a link concerning the issue (preferably that which consists of the exact wording of the bill being proposed)
a company wanting less people to steal the product they made = they're greedy bastards? trolololololololol
So if I were to take a video of Fox News and comentate on why Bill O'Reilly is a dumbass, under current law, that's legal, under the new law, that's illegal. That means, somehow in your head, that they want...less people...to watch their shows...or something like that?
I don't think know what your saying, and moreover, I don't think you know what you are saying.
(No offense or anything. Don't want this thread closed too.)
Not sure here. I don't see why twice in a row, people take LinkX's post and try to defend the people negatively affected by piracy, like it had anything to do with what he said.
The language used could allow me to be sent to PRISON for using the likeness of the character known as Link used in the video game titled "The Legend of Zelda".
Likewise for you and your use of the character known as "Reptar" from the childrens television show "Rugrats".
But we are pirating stuff and thus stealing from companies, right?
Again, I say this: If it was simple piracy, I'd have no problem with the two bills, of which one I linked. But these bills go far and beyond the scope of intellectual property.
I'm aware of the issues with the bill. However, something will eventually be done. There is massive amount of pirating taking place that is instilling the government to take action. Maybe the pirating is just the pretty cover they want to put on it and hide all of their dirty secrets inside. But at the end, the pirating of all of this intellectual property is an issue that does need to be addressed. Hopefully when it finally is, more good will be done than bad.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I want to say something but I'll keep it to myself I guess and leave this useless post behind to make you aware that there WAS something... "
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
Considering that people like you and I can be sent to jail, companies like Youtube and Facebook can be shut down, and sites like Rap****are and Pir****ay will still be accessible via ip address, this bill will do nothing more then terrorize the citizens.
America is getting good at that these days.
Censored to conform to site rules.
Edit: I urdge everybody to call your local congressman or congresswoman, and tell them that a vote for this bill will insure a vote against them this coming election cycle. Tell them that this bill does not represent the people or the people's best interest. Tell them that it is a bad bill and should not pass!
I'm honestly in support of blocking piracy/torrent sites.
I cannot think of a legitimate reason not to except people who want to download from it. Piracy is NOT free speech, and if a website doesn't want to be blocked then it should simply prevent contributing to piracy.
You know that whole thing about it being illegal but not morally wrong to steal a loaf of bread to keep from starving to death, yadda yadda? With the recession we're in and the ridiculously high unemployment rates, is it so illegitimate and immortal to pirate content instead of just doing without? I know myself & many friends have pirated a CD of a band we never had heard of, it got us really into their stuff, and then we bought tickets to see them in concert. No pirating that CD = no ticket sold to us, because why would we have been interested in the first place?
-------------------
Anyways, the bigger deal here in general is the bill is NOT 100% intended to control piracy, it's to control the use of the internet under the guise of stopping copyright infringement.
I'm honestly in support of blocking piracy/torrent sites.
I cannot think of a legitimate reason not to except people who want to download from it. Piracy is NOT free speech, and if a website doesn't want to be blocked then it should simply prevent contributing to piracy.
You know that whole thing about it being illegal but not morally wrong to steal a loaf of bread to keep from starving to death, yadda yadda? With the recession we're in and the ridiculously high unemployment rates, is it so illegitimate and immortal to pirate content instead of just doing without? I know myself & many friends have pirated a CD of a band we never had heard of, it got us really into their stuff, and then we bought tickets to see them in concert. No pirating that CD = no ticket sold to us, because why would we have been interested in the first place?
That's a stretch and you know it (hopefully). The ends don't justify the means, and comparing it to stealing a loaf of bread to feed a starving family is, well, silly.
Anyways, the bigger deal here in general is the bill is NOT 100% intended to control piracy, it's to control the use of the internet under the guise of stopping copyright infringement.
No, it's about piracy. All this tinfoil hat, we never landed on the moon thinking is baseless.
Bottom line is the bill is already dead in the water. It doesn't have the votes. I certainly agree that something needs to be done about piracy, but this is much too restrictive. In the end, the taxpayers will end up footing the bill for something these media companies could easily afford.
the US is trying (most likely wont succeed against people who are not technology impaired)to stop piracy. by trying to get a firewall put up restricting access of all american computers from certain websites they deem as "illegal" or allowing people to download pirated things. which if you know anything about the WWW you'll know the BEST sites are the illegal ones,
but look at it like this:
we've always had easy access to free music, movies, video games via download on websites like ****** and ****** but it IS indeed illegal and these are pirated objects we are TECHNICALLY "stealing". basically someone robbed a candy store, duplicated some of their candy and laid it on the street for anyone to just come and pick up, but we ARE supposed to go to the actual store and pay for it. just because someone ELSE stole it and said "hey man take it, its free
ive probably, to give a rough guestimate.... "stolen" over $100,000+ in music, movies and video games....porno.... (i dont really buy anything... :X ) hundreds of thousands of songs, thousands of movies and hundreds of video games.
now people say "those companies have ENOUGH money, were like robin hood, stealing from the rich and giving to... ourselves!
your thoughts and the US on trying to ban piracy?
In the end a black list is a system which will never keep up with the content.
Not only that, but with data encryption on the fly if this went ahead and all the content switched to HTTPS and went dark (i.e. user based notification of a web site change with no public notification) it would start to become very hard for the authorities to track it down.
I suppose if the end result is to move piracy back to its roots - i.e. scene based with little or no access to the public - then it could be mildly successful. Then it would move to physical piracy again (much like 10-15 years ago) for the people "down the line".
Look forward to seeing what happens, it's easy to make a decision based on a concept - especially when you have no idea what will actually go into it's execution. And if Government has taught us anything, you don't need to understand something to make a decision about it.
Yeah yeah they want to control the internet. Nothing beyond that. No shit or piracy talk matters. They just want to control everything. Nothing beyond that. Their justifications are excuses to make it happen, to control the mighty internet and make more money.
The world is always already adapting, except those morons that just keep on controlling what is happening. World can evolve but they wouldn't give a fuck if their pockets aren't involved.
you clearly missed the part where they are trying to prevent stealing, not control something.
well, control stealing. by trying to lower it lol
Then again, in the wake of corporate personhood, anything is possible.
I cannot think of a legitimate reason not to except people who want to download from it. Piracy is NOT free speech, and if a website doesn't want to be blocked then it should simply prevent contributing to piracy.
a person in another country using something from/in the US to do illegal things that US citizens are accessing/downloading or whatever, thats perfectly reasonable to try and extradite him to america, just because your body is physically in another place doesnt mean your not doing something wrong regardless of his personal country's laws. that's like throwing a rock over the border and breaking a window in america and saying "in my country its ok to throw rocks n break stuff so neener neener". he's violated another country's laws therefor he can/should be punished. if his home page had "only for bla bla country, by clicking accept your saying you are not from listed countries that this is illegal in blabla" which is a loophole the kid could of used and therefor never got in trouble i the first place.
america isnt going to shut down google. lmao. there going to TRY and block (not shut down, they've failed at that, they cant 'shut down' a website without the courts still, but they CAN 'try' to block it). sites like piratebay, torrentz, and other sites like this that offer illegal downloads is what they are after. thats the entire point of the act. period. it's not some conspiracy for total control.
some people need to put on their tinfoil hat's and begone
That isn't what they are doing.
You can be arrested and sent to prison for posting a 5 minute clip of CNN with your own personal comentary on Youtube. This is currently completely legal.
Hell, Youtube could be taken down completely.
This isn't about Piracy, this is about the entertainment industry wanting more money.
Period.
a company wanting less people to steal the product they made = they're greedy bastards? trolololololololol
Ya, it's that simple.
Not.
People are stealing music. Period. The artists need to be compensated. Their work should not be stolen.
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
Are you just stating this because you think he's saying their work should be stolen (which he didn't say, he didn't even hint at all that piracy was right or fine), and/or are you actually trying to justify the actions they take to help these people, on the basis that these people should not have their work stolen?
Not sure here. I don't see why twice in a row, people take LinkX's post and try to defend the people negatively affected by piracy, like it had anything to do with what he said.
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
So if I were to take a video of Fox News and comentate on why Bill O'Reilly is a dumbass, under current law, that's legal, under the new law, that's illegal. That means, somehow in your head, that they want...less people...to watch their shows...or something like that?
I don't think know what your saying, and moreover, I don't think you know what you are saying.
(No offense or anything. Don't want this thread closed too.)
If the bill was that simple, I'd agree. But it's not that simple.
If it was that simple, I'd agree. It's not that simple.
(By the way, you can go to jail for putting a video of you playing Diablo 3 on Youtube. Just fyi.)
You get used to it. *Shrug.*
Read.
leahy.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/BillText-PROTECTIPAct.pdf
The language used could allow me to be sent to PRISON for using the likeness of the character known as Link used in the video game titled "The Legend of Zelda".
Likewise for you and your use of the character known as "Reptar" from the childrens television show "Rugrats".
But we are pirating stuff and thus stealing from companies, right?
Again, I say this: If it was simple piracy, I'd have no problem with the two bills, of which one I linked. But these bills go far and beyond the scope of intellectual property.
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
America is getting good at that these days.
Censored to conform to site rules.
Edit: I urdge everybody to call your local congressman or congresswoman, and tell them that a vote for this bill will insure a vote against them this coming election cycle. Tell them that this bill does not represent the people or the people's best interest. Tell them that it is a bad bill and should not pass!
Use these two sites to find your congressman or congresswoman's phone number and address:
http://www.house.gov/representatives/
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions#!/petition/amend-constitution-making-internet-unalienable-right/YJ3fXQcm
You know that whole thing about it being illegal but not morally wrong to steal a loaf of bread to keep from starving to death, yadda yadda? With the recession we're in and the ridiculously high unemployment rates, is it so illegitimate and immortal to pirate content instead of just doing without? I know myself & many friends have pirated a CD of a band we never had heard of, it got us really into their stuff, and then we bought tickets to see them in concert. No pirating that CD = no ticket sold to us, because why would we have been interested in the first place?
-------------------
Anyways, the bigger deal here in general is the bill is NOT 100% intended to control piracy, it's to control the use of the internet under the guise of stopping copyright infringement.
Edit: If you DON'T want this ridiculous bill passed, go to https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions#!/petition/amend-constitution-making-internet-unalienable-right/YJ3fXQcm (whitehouse.gov website) and sign the petition to take it out before it's put in place!
That's a stretch and you know it (hopefully). The ends don't justify the means, and comparing it to stealing a loaf of bread to feed a starving family is, well, silly.
No, it's about piracy. All this tinfoil hat, we never landed on the moon thinking is baseless.
Bottom line is the bill is already dead in the water. It doesn't have the votes. I certainly agree that something needs to be done about piracy, but this is much too restrictive. In the end, the taxpayers will end up footing the bill for something these media companies could easily afford.
also, start using google DNS.
problem solved