Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: NFL Players Ready To Welcome Gay Teammate

I'm not usually a huge political guy, but I think this is important, especially given the medium of this site. There are two bills before Congress - the Protect IP Act (PIPA) and the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) - that would censor and impose harmful regulations on the Web.

The Senate will begin voting on January 24th. Click on the link to sign a petition and urge Congress to vote no on these bills.

4 months ago Rviy7fbgmhz5ht2dpgo6q0jfu_tiny TimAllen 153 comments 9 recs  | 

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Thank you for posting this.

It is important to get the word out to as many people as we can, to at least inform them about what is going on and hopefully get enough people to contact their congresspeople to stop this!

by Doctor_Teh on Jan 18, 2012 9:58 AM CST reply actions  

What?

No website blackout at Canishoopus? Maybe that’s too big a sacrifice. You could always refuse to post a game thread out of solidarity.

As a guy who makes a living working for internet companies, these Bills are the devil.

Michael Beasley is a Small Forward. Derrick Williams is a Power Forward.

by Ebomb on Jan 18, 2012 10:10 AM CST reply actions   1 recs

This turd sandwich

Is not going to pass. There are powerful opponents on both sides who don’t want this bill.

There is a much more constructive way to go about protecting privacy than the garbage in these bills.

Where there is a D-Williams, there is a way

by Flagrant on Jan 18, 2012 10:19 AM CST reply actions  

Agreed

This is one of the few pieces of legislation that appears to be equally hated on both sides. It appears to be dead in the house as Eric Cantor recently said it didn’t have support. However, Harry Reid is still trying to push it through the senate. If you have time please contact your Senators/Congressmen/women and let them know where you stand.

by gastrovan on Jan 18, 2012 10:29 AM CST up reply actions  

Hated by rank and file

but beloved by our political leaders who’ve got suitcases stuffed with cash from the industries flogging this heresy.

Did you know that not one major broadcast media outlet has reported on SOPA/PIPA other than in passing? All the stink over SOPA/PIPA is coming from the internet, and only the parts not owned by Fortune 500 companies.

Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!

by TMiss on Jan 18, 2012 10:32 AM CST up reply actions   2 recs

My mother

Who reads multiple newspapers (such as the Guardian and NYTimes) daily in addition to local papers and magazines had never even heard of SOPA yesterday when I talked to her about it. It is amazing to me how little coverage it has gotten from the mainstream media.

by Doctor_Teh on Jan 18, 2012 10:44 AM CST up reply actions  

I've always been a casual supporter of the...

“vast media conspiracy” theory, but nothing has made it quite as clear as the handling of SOPA/PIPA. Can there be a better argument for protecting the “free internet” than the complete lack of off-line discussion on legislation that restricts that freedom?

by vjl110 on Jan 18, 2012 12:10 PM CST up reply actions   1 recs

I don't think its a conspiracy

Almost all conspiracy theories can be explained by some simple facts. People are greedy and want more cash, and want things to go their way. If corporations that invest in media enterprises have something to gain from this, then yeah, it probably won’t get a ton of coverage. I don’t think all of the news corps are teaming up or anything.

Jonny "bag o' chips" Flynn is the GOAT

by CoffeeJanitor on Jan 18, 2012 3:37 PM CST up reply actions  

considering he uses the internet and social networking for his campaigns

Flagging for political purposes:

Dear Barack Obama,

I hope you understand that the odds of you getting re-elected if you don’t prevent these monstrosities, presented as SOPA/PIPA, from passing and becoming law are going to be slim to none. Your constituency is based largely on people who heavily use the content that is to be regulated and restricted by these legislations. Please plan accordingly.

Sincerely,

Registered Voter

If at first you don't succeed, try, try again.
If that doesn't work, cheat.

by TheEvilProfessor on Jan 18, 2012 12:57 PM CST up reply actions  

I don't think you should blame capitalists for this

This law is about protecting fools who didn’t recognize the times and have failed to evolve. Just like the TARP and the Auto/Bank bailouts our gov’t acts only when it benefits an industry/company/public school that was too stupid to save itself.

by gastrovan on Jan 18, 2012 10:34 AM CST up reply actions  

Then name a non-capitalist

who’s profiting from the current arrangement.

Modern capitalists who get technology are refusing to restrict digital distribution of content, but time and again the labels use existing laws to “take down” legit content from YouTube and they get away with it because the laws we’ve passed in recent years privilege owners over users, even when it’s a big owner bullying a little owner.

Capitalism only works when it’s regulated, and deregulation has us once again watching on the sidelines as the few pile theirs higher and higher by stealing from everyone else’s pile.

Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!

by TMiss on Jan 18, 2012 10:38 AM CST up reply actions  

I guess I should've said don't blame ALL capitalists

The fact of the matter is that capitalism at its heart is the freedom of competition. What these industry’s are full of (Movies/Music/Publishing/Financial Services/Auto) are not benefiting because they have the best ideas or products. They’re benefiting because they give lots of money to whoever happens to be in power.

Also, as far as naming a non-capitalist who has benefited? I guess I’d say George Soros has done pretty well for himself.

by gastrovan on Jan 18, 2012 10:49 AM CST up reply actions  

Is that a joke?

George Soros practically defines the word “capitalist.”

Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!

by TMiss on Jan 18, 2012 12:14 PM CST up reply actions   1 recs

You don't become a capitalist just by being successful

Soros is a dude who thinks capitalism is a dirty word. Making money doesn’t make you a capitalist. The way Soros has gone about making his money and what he does with it afterwords shows he’s no fan of capitalism.

by gastrovan on Jan 18, 2012 2:04 PM CST up reply actions  

Curious

How did George Soros make his money?

by Grover M on Jan 18, 2012 2:14 PM CST up reply actions  

Initially through a financial invest firm

but over the last few decades he’s made billions through currency manipulation. He was accused of bringing down the currency of Malaysia during the Asian financial crisis and has been called an economic war criminal.

He also initiated a financial crisis in England when he dropped billions of pounds sterling. It caused a drop in currency and he made over 1 billion in profit.

Basically he’s a Bond villain who has made it his mission in life to bring down free trade and the economies of sovereign nations (also he’s a believer in one world government).

TMiss, you are correct that he fits the definition of a capitalist. He is wealthy and he owns capital. However his actions, at least to me, point towards a man whose goal is to destroy it.

by gastrovan on Jan 18, 2012 2:34 PM CST up reply actions  

I've learned never to accuse anyone of watching Fox News

but that certainly sounds like the cartoon version of Soros they’ve painted over the years.

George Soros is indistinguishable from Warren Buffet, Carl Icahn and other scions of Wall Street who transform other people’s money into their personal financial reserves. Capitalism at its highest levels is synonymous with what Soros does. Top capitalists (investors, hedge fund managers, etc.) create nothing and cheerfully destroy jobs, communities and entire nations if it puts money in their pocket.

Under the rules the oligarchs have imposed on the rest of us, the large-scale acquisition of capital is now done by destroying jobs, gutting government programs (so those services can be privately provided), speculation (oil, currency, food) and outright trickery/thievery.

Q. What does George Soros/Warren Buffet call a deal that shatters a nation’s economy to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars but which puts one billion in his pocket?

A. A very good day’s work.

Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!

by TMiss on Jan 18, 2012 2:43 PM CST up reply actions   2 recs

Fair enough

Soros/Buffett don’t “create” anything per se. But what about those Top capitalists that do (Jobs, Gates etc.). Do you not consider them capitalists? Can private enterprise ever be good or is capitalism always a dirty word?

by gastrovan on Jan 18, 2012 2:55 PM CST up reply actions  

Bad examples

Lifelong Mac guy here but Steve Jobs never invented anything, ditto Bill Gates. Gates especially just bought other people’s technology and then put a huge effort into concealing how it worked from his customers to keep it proprietary.

Steve Jobs has even less technical expertise. But he and Gates are perfect examples of capitalists because their genius was in making money from other people’s inventions.

In a world without patents, both Jobs would have made a fortune and no one would have ever heard of Bill Gates. But because we live in Bill Gates world, Steve Jobs played by Gates’ rules and Apple is becoming a bigger shitpile of patents and abusive subcontracts by the day as a direct result.

Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!

by TMiss on Jan 18, 2012 3:03 PM CST up reply actions  

Ok

Private enterprise invented the car, mapped the human genome, and gave us a longer lasting light bulb. Are those inventions/discoveries bad because someone made a crap ton of money off of them?

by gastrovan on Jan 18, 2012 3:12 PM CST up reply actions  

Um

I think some of what you listed was developed by the government who then gave it away to the private sector who then slapped restrictive patents on everything because that’s how they say “thank you” on Wall Street.

But more to the point, you’re comfortable with the human genome being “owned” by a corporation? Do you think Big Pharma has a right to “patent” plants found in nature?

Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!

by TMiss on Jan 18, 2012 3:52 PM CST up reply actions   1 recs

As always there's a slippery slope

Do I think people/corporations should be rewarded for making a discovery/invention? You better believe it. Can they take their patent defense too far? Absolutely, I think case in point being Monsanto. Of course, their patents are close to expiring and I can only imagine the pain they’ll be in once that happens.

by gastrovan on Jan 18, 2012 4:04 PM CST up reply actions  

You really don't know much about Soros do you?

I've got good judgement from experience and experience from bad judgement.

by ArchAngel79 on Jan 18, 2012 5:24 PM CST up reply actions  

I know that he's been smeared

as being a Jewish Nazi because as a teenager he had no control over his life circumstances, and that for doing to the UK’s currency what the Koch Bros. have done to oil prices, he’s considered to be some kind of super-villain in Fox media circles.

Tens and tens of thousands of words have been posted on this subject but the bottom line is that if Fox News decides to bury someone, 25% of all Americans will grab their shovels, no proof required. But I’d gladly read any link from you on this subject so long as it doesn’t go to a Fox site or a site that’s relying on Fox for their information.

Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!

by TMiss on Jan 18, 2012 5:55 PM CST up reply actions  

This kind of post hasn't rolled around too often lately,

and it’s clearly right in his wheelhouse.

"Of what use is a philosopher who does not hurt anybody's feelings?" -Diogenes of Sinope

by Cynical Jason on Jan 19, 2012 4:21 PM CST up reply actions  

I just assumed everyone was getting tired of it

That and I am a recovering crankaholic. I’m trying to move past my anger. So far my best strategy has been upgrading from Mexican brown to MAYNHOLUP Cali green. (There’s a good reason why I don’t post during games, and having trouble finding the keyboard is part of that.)

Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!

by TMiss on Jan 21, 2012 4:06 PM CST up reply actions  

Senate Sponsor Pulls Out Of PIPA

As a note from someone who does pay attention to some of these things, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), who had initially been a co-sponsor of the PIPA bill, has withdrawn his sponsorship, which I think will slow it down quite a bit. At least someone is listening.

by TheQatarian on Jan 18, 2012 10:54 AM CST reply actions  

Leave it to the government...

…to try fixing a problem and end up adding in a bunch of extra garbage that just makes life more difficult for people who actually follow laws. Thanks for bringing this to the CH sphere Tim.

by atrainlp on Jan 18, 2012 11:26 AM CST reply actions  

Leave it to the government

To do what the campaign-funding lobbyists want them to do, and spin it like they’re trying to fix a problem.

by Dumbhead62 on Jan 18, 2012 11:33 AM CST up reply actions  

That's another way to look at it

You can take any angle on it you want, but in the end it’s all the same. Government making more laws, trying to gain more control, and imposing their stupidity on everyone through force of fine or jail time. I think everyone can agree that modern digital/media piracy is a problem, but “fixing” it isn’t done just because a bunch of old, clueless legislators sign a bill.

by atrainlp on Jan 18, 2012 11:38 AM CST up reply actions  

Government?

Don’t blame the whores for what the 1% johns pay them to do.

Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!

by TMiss on Jan 18, 2012 12:15 PM CST up reply actions  

yes, government. I’m not going down the 1% path…

by atrainlp on Jan 18, 2012 12:40 PM CST up reply actions  

You're blaming the toolbelt

for what the plumber used it for.

Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!

by TMiss on Jan 18, 2012 2:44 PM CST up reply actions   1 recs

No free ride for politicians

I don’t think Government is the correct scapegoat. Rather, it is Politicians who should be held responsible for these actions. Politicians have set up systems that allow donations to drive government policy.

by daaje on Jan 18, 2012 3:33 PM CST up reply actions  

Careful

You are starting to sound like an “Occupier” shudders

I've got good judgement from experience and experience from bad judgement.

by ArchAngel79 on Jan 18, 2012 5:26 PM CST up reply actions  

Trying to understand...

I just read an article (and now can’t find it) about a data design company who created some software, and by the time he had sold 10 Dvds, 10000 copies had been pirated online. How would you say should be dealt with?

by pirahna on Jan 18, 2012 11:43 AM CST reply actions  

Can you be more specific

about how you think paying the costs of product creation only to have it stolen and provided for free is a marketing coup?

by pirahna on Jan 18, 2012 12:01 PM CST up reply actions  

I'm sure he will

the moment you come up with a link in support of your rumor.

Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!

by TMiss on Jan 18, 2012 12:16 PM CST up reply actions  

Plus I hate Metallica for shutting down Napster...

…and not for anti-piracy reasons – business reasons! They had a conduit to touch over 25 million music enthusiasts…. and instead of working within legal bounds to reach some compromise, they shut it down. So fucking dumb. The consumers scattered to the winds (grokster, gnutella, freenet, kazaa, limewire, audiogalaxy, bearshare, etc…) and a huge leveraging opportunity was lost – without significant recoupment of revenue, mind you.

Rockstars need to stick to music. I’m talking to you Dave Navarro.

by Boss10 on Jan 18, 2012 1:08 PM CST up reply actions  

I hate Metallica

for peaking with Ride the Lightning and then churning out twenty years of crap (everything post-Justice).

"Of what use is a philosopher who does not hurt anybody's feelings?" -Diogenes of Sinope

by Cynical Jason on Jan 18, 2012 4:28 PM CST up reply actions  

No doubt.

Puppets is a great album. I just prefer Lightning because it’s more varied and more spontaneously energetic. Plus, Lightning has history’s most perfect metal song.

"Of what use is a philosopher who does not hurt anybody's feelings?" -Diogenes of Sinope

by Cynical Jason on Jan 19, 2012 4:24 PM CST up reply actions  

Fair enough!

But this line of conversation does make me feel a bit dated.

I don’t know if I grew out of it or the music changed, but these days almost all ‘metal’ sounds terrible to me. Maybe I should focus on keeping those damn kids off my lawn rather than music commentary.
Chere-oh.

by bustaone on Jan 19, 2012 4:39 PM CST up reply actions  

Yeah, there's not much more out there anymore.

But Volbeat is pretty awesome.

"Of what use is a philosopher who does not hurt anybody's feelings?" -Diogenes of Sinope

by Cynical Jason on Jan 19, 2012 7:39 PM CST up reply actions  

Thanks for those links

I’m listening to Heaven Nor Hell right now and loving it.

by zebano on Jan 20, 2012 9:27 AM CST up reply actions  

As a former metal fan

the best “new” stuff in this vein right now is usually classified as “stoner rock.” Pharoah Overlord, Acid Mother’s Temple, some of Bill Laswell’s groups, etc. Imho, once you’ve soaked up the basic metal riffs, you really need to move on towards more psychedelic offerings. Not the folksy tricksy stuff, but the really loud brain melting riffs you get from Krautrock and Japanese Metal.

Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!

by TMiss on Jan 21, 2012 4:09 PM CST up reply actions  

The answer's not obvious

if it was, we wouldn’t have the problem. I’m not even opposed to the intent of a bill like this, but the reality of what this bill actually is causes more headaches and problems for EVERYONE. It’s like excessive gun control – the people who use guns for crimes aren’t the people who follow a gun law in the first place.

by atrainlp on Jan 18, 2012 11:48 AM CST up reply actions  

atrainlp, I see what you’re saying about the bills,

and I am not playing devil’s advocate. I see clearly the problem of piracy of one’s product, but not the negatives of what the bills will do. I will accept that it is bad.

by pirahna on Jan 18, 2012 12:06 PM CST up reply actions  

I haven't read the entire bill

But what I have read would put all the pressure on online companies, ISP’s, etc to prevent and eliminate any potential pirated content from their sites. When you consider the global nature of the internet and today’s economy, the US government trying to legislate stuff like this is putting a ton of pressure on companies to regulate anything that MIGHT be pirated. The costs and hassles would be a huge damper to any start-ups and a huge cost to existing companies. Obviously online companies carry some role in this, but at the same time, the attitude that they simply don’t care unless we pass a law threatening to throw them in jail is off base.

by atrainlp on Jan 18, 2012 12:34 PM CST up reply actions  

The primary problem

is that bill reaches far beyond actual actions and lets government take down websites that contribute to enabling others to be pirates, i.e., accidentally posting a link to someone who promotes piracy or maybe just a link to someone who links to a piracy promoting site.

As these bills are written, 100% of all web sites clearly fall under their purview.

Also, I don’t mind “piracy” as nations used to use pirates/privateers to help regulate commerce. Today’s pirates are helping to regulate the entertainment industry which, if left to their own devices, would have drowned in their own manure lagoon of self-entitlement by now.

Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!

by TMiss on Jan 18, 2012 2:48 PM CST up reply actions  

Pawn Shops?

Pawn shops are not allowed to sell and profit off of merchandise that is knowingly illegally possessed. If a pawn shop knowlingly and repeatedly enables thieves to break into my house, they should be prosecuted. If the pawn shop owner tells an accomplice (thief) they know of a house that has lots of electronics to steal, when the homeowners aren’t home, and how to get there, then profits off of the sale of those items,they may be held criminally liable.

Somebody explain why web sites that profit (through advertising) by allowing posting of knowingly copyrighted materials, or provide access to it through links should be treated differently under the law than the pawn shop owner acting outside the bounds of the law?

by Rosy02001 on Jan 18, 2012 2:55 PM CST up reply actions  

Because no one's ever been arrested

for telling a stranger directions to the pawn shop where said stranger then pawns stolen goods. SOPA/PIPA doesn’t just go after the pawn shop and the thief, they go after the bystander on the street who gave directions, the Yellow Pages publisher that listed the pawn shop, and the local news team that once mentioned that pawn shop on a broadcast.

SOPA/PIPA is about thought crime more than it is about real crime.

Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!

by TMiss on Jan 18, 2012 2:58 PM CST up reply actions   1 recs

Don't you think

that it’d be just fine for the entertainment industry to drown in their own manure? It’d do one of two things:

1. Force them to make positive changes given history and the future of the industry.

or

2. They’d drown and it’d open the door for new companies to take over the vacuum that would be left.

The entertainment industry isn’t going anywhere. It’s just a matter of how it’s going to look in the future.

by atrainlp on Jan 18, 2012 3:13 PM CST up reply actions  

Could I make a word nerd's objection to the word "Piracy" itself?

There are real pirates in the world. They’re desperate people; they do things like hold oil tankers and cargo ships hostage in exchange for ransoms.

There are fictional pirates. Long John Silver is a great character; Treasure Island is a great read.

Neither of those sets of people resembles a 14-year-old girl who’s posting a mash-up of clips from Twilight to youtube in violation of copyright. Calling that girl a “pirate” is plainly overreaching.

If I cobble together some Wolves highlights and set them to a jazz song I happen to like a little, and then post that somewhere where Canis Hoopus readers can look at it, I may be in violation of copyright. I’m not committing “piracy” except in this incredibly dumb, watered-down-to-the-point-of-meaninglessness take on the word.

I probably also don’t deserve to face a maximum sentence involving years in prison for my crime, either — and something tells me the wildly disproportionate “felony for Hall and Oates songs” sentencing stuff in these sorts of bills does bear some relationship to the “piratical” tone of the language used, yeah.

"Opinion ...a confession."

by feral on Jan 18, 2012 1:06 PM CST up reply actions   1 recs

"I'm here for the downloads . . ."


“Once I have a decent copy of Lady Gaga’s ‘Poker Face’ I will let you all go. If someone blocks my IP address, you will all die.”

"Of what use is a philosopher who does not hurt anybody's feelings?" -Diogenes of Sinope

by Cynical Jason on Jan 18, 2012 4:33 PM CST up reply actions   2 recs

Alexander McCall Smith

has a fun series of books originally published as serials in the Scotsman newspaper, in which a character’s study on Indonesian pirates finally ends up in a warehouse where CDs are burned. She (the amateur anthropologist) is much chagrined.

"Opinion ...a confession."

by feral on Jan 18, 2012 9:22 PM CST up reply actions  

My mother loves AMS,

but I’ve never read him. What series is that?

"Of what use is a philosopher who does not hurt anybody's feelings?" -Diogenes of Sinope

by Cynical Jason on Jan 18, 2012 10:22 PM CST up reply actions  

First book is "44 Scotland Street."

She may know them as “the Bertie books.”

There are great CDs of them, with a Scottish actor reading. Makes a good listen on long car trips.

"Opinion ...a confession."

by feral on Jan 18, 2012 10:28 PM CST up reply actions  

Thanks for the recommendation.

My mother just finished devoured the most recent Ladies No. 1 Detective Agency book and I’ve been trying to steer her toward AMS’s other series, since she loved that one so much. I’ll have to push her in that direction.

"Of what use is a philosopher who does not hurt anybody's feelings?" -Diogenes of Sinope

by Cynical Jason on Jan 18, 2012 10:35 PM CST up reply actions  

By firing the entire executive team

Because pirated software has been going on since the time of 5 1/4" floppy disks, and if you release a product that sells 10 copies and creates 10,000 pirated downloads, you are clearly an epic failure at selling software.

Michael Beasley is a Small Forward. Derrick Williams is a Power Forward.

by Ebomb on Jan 18, 2012 11:49 AM CST up reply actions  

But not to the extent

of today’s piracy potential. It’s easy to call an executive team dumb enough to deserve firing. How exactly do you think that team should have acted to bring a digital product to market without it being stolen wholesale?

atrainlp, I see what you’re saying about the bills.

by pirahna on Jan 18, 2012 11:59 AM CST up reply actions  

Without knowing more about their product

I can’t say what specific solution they should implement. They could host the source code on their own servers and sell client side software that must access their own servers. That way, they can track who accesses the servers and determine the extent and the identity of the problem. You could hard code activiation algorithms into the software requiring a code. You can partner with a software distirubtion service that takes care of all these issues for you. You can understand that these aspects of the market exist, have existed for many years, and have still not stopped a ton of software companies from making a ton of money.

Piracy sucks. So does shoplifiting. That doesn’t mean we should pass a bill making it legal for all convenice store clerks to carry automatic weapons behind the counter and give them carte blanche to unload at any acting suspicious in their store.

Michael Beasley is a Small Forward. Derrick Williams is a Power Forward.

by Ebomb on Jan 18, 2012 12:51 PM CST up reply actions  

This reminds me of that movie Outbreak, where evil Donald Sutherland guy

wanted to nuke the town, but Dustin Hoffman said that doing so would just scatter the disease without really killing it.

And somehow in the analogy, Cuba Gooding Jr. can outfly two experienced Air Force helicopter pilots despite having only logged 40 hours of flight time.

Follow me on Twitter @timallenonline

by TimAllen on Jan 18, 2012 1:04 PM CST up reply actions  

"Piracy potential."

Because we should pass legislation that includes draconian sentencing for the poaching of Radiohead songs in order to prevent wildly extravagant abuses which are rumored to be possible to occur.

"Opinion ...a confession."

by feral on Jan 18, 2012 1:08 PM CST up reply actions  

They should talk to Louis CK

He simply asked that people not steal his stuff and they listened. I’m sure the $5 price tag helped, but he made so much off his latest show he was giving money away.

by archie2227 on Jan 18, 2012 1:46 PM CST up reply actions   1 recs

That was an awesome story.

"Of what use is a philosopher who does not hurt anybody's feelings?" -Diogenes of Sinope

by Cynical Jason on Jan 18, 2012 4:33 PM CST up reply actions  

Do you love him?

(Louis CK)
I feel like you two would probably be good friends.

by PDGirl on Jan 18, 2012 4:56 PM CST up reply actions  

I've watched very little of his act

and even less of his show, but what I’ve seen has been my kind of thing.

"Of what use is a philosopher who does not hurt anybody's feelings?" -Diogenes of Sinope

by Cynical Jason on Jan 18, 2012 7:49 PM CST up reply actions  

The first time my content was pirated was in the mid-'90s

I was googling some of my content and found one of my articles posted on an otherwise all-Chinese language website. I used that to boost my credibility with online buyers of my writing service.

The fact is that 98% of everything I’ve written that has been published was done for free because it all helped drive customers to my writing service. Just like bands who give away music online to sell out their shows/tours. Just like consultants who moonlight as pundits to promote themselves.

Free is a cutting edge concept if you’re trying to grow a business. My most successful client uses a blog to promote her restaurant and as a direct result now spends next to nothing on marketing and advertising. If you don’t understand how “free content” can drive customers to your business, you’re doing business in the wrong century.

Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!

by TMiss on Jan 18, 2012 12:22 PM CST reply actions  

Amen..

If artists and writers want to make poor business decisions, that should be THEIR prerogative, not mine, even if i really, really, really want their stuff for free.

by Rosy02001 on Jan 18, 2012 2:46 PM CST up reply actions  

Having someone break into your house and steal your money out of a locked safe is not the same thing as leaving money out on a table with no attendant at the busiest intersection in a large city and coming back 7 days later and being exasperated that the money isn’t still there.

Michael Beasley is a Small Forward. Derrick Williams is a Power Forward.

by Ebomb on Jan 18, 2012 2:53 PM CST up reply actions  

There's no consistency in our laws
Giving stuff away from free is not the same as having things stolen from you.

They want you to go to jail for possessing digital copies of their content yet you do not have the original content, just a perfect copy. Yet if you design fonts for a living, Bill Gates can take your Helvetica, tweak it imperceptibly and then give it away as Arial without owing a dime to Max Miedinger, the original designer. Broadway composers steal from folk music and world music constantly without being sued.

The laws are radically inconsistent when it comes to intellectual property, and increasingly laws protecting intellectual property are stifling creativity and thwarting technological progress.

Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!

by TMiss on Jan 18, 2012 3:13 PM CST up reply actions   1 recs

Every person on the planet

who owns a personal computer, font fanatics excepted. This is the story behind EVERY single font Microsoft “gives” away. They didn’t pay for any of those fonts, and they radically undercut the legit market for them (if you’re not a font fanatic, Helvetica and Arial are indistinguishable from one another).

Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!

by TMiss on Jan 18, 2012 3:18 PM CST up reply actions  

I know

I was making a joke as a “font fanatic”. I actually agree with you on fonts and their creators. They’re probably one of the few “creator” fields that get royally screwed by just about everybody.

by gastrovan on Jan 18, 2012 3:22 PM CST up reply actions  

No, there are many others

Songwriters make microscopic changes to existing tunes. Authors routinely rewrite classics, just changing names and a few plot details. The creative process is almost entirely about “stealing” then improving what’s already out there. What can you paint or photograph that’s never been painted or photographed before?

And sorry, I did wonder if you were joking about Arial.

Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!

by TMiss on Jan 18, 2012 3:55 PM CST up reply actions  

I feel like we've moved away from what makes SOPA such a bad bill

It’s not the protection of intellectual property it’s that it grants the Attorney General of the United States the power to order websites off the internet for “breaking the law”.

That’s why so many people from every political persuasion are against this bill. They’re scared that gov’t power could be directed at them if they say something negative about whatever administration or party is in power.

by gastrovan on Jan 18, 2012 4:12 PM CST up reply actions  

Agreed

it’s like the IT/intellectual content community keeps coming up with new laws that lets them punish everyone they don’t like.

These are not the people you want to have be in charge of your world.

Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!

by TMiss on Jan 18, 2012 5:16 PM CST up reply actions  

The most heinous part of these bills

is that there is no due process. In other words, anyone can accuse anyone else of a violation and unless the site in question has the money to fight the accusation, the site gets shut down Can you imagine a scenario where Comcast, for instance, finds a small competitor in a small market who starts taking away customers from them? No problem, Comcast files a violation and lets the government do the dirty work of putting a competitor out of business!

2012 the year of Twolves porcelain extraction?

by Dogpile on Jan 18, 2012 6:35 PM CST up reply actions  

it's all about generating paying foot-traffic

The fact of the matter is that if we all know that piracy is a business risk, then your business model should take that into account. Artist now use iTunes to distribute music instead of selling whole CDs. You can also buy entire albums online, but only pay for the parts you want.

Cable should also revert to that method, which would end up providing much better program content by providing a consolidated way to see the actual demand for a show/station.

My questions is how anyone thinks passing a law is going to force citizens of other countries from not doing what they are currently doing?

If at first you don't succeed, try, try again.
If that doesn't work, cheat.

by TheEvilProfessor on Jan 18, 2012 1:06 PM CST up reply actions  

(I've never yet heard a great explanation for Cable's resistance to a-la-carte service.)

It really is as if providers just can’t bend their minds around anything to do with point-to-point distribution models. No matter what their business model is now, they think it’s the only way anything could possibly happen profitably.

"Opinion ...a confession."

by feral on Jan 18, 2012 1:15 PM CST up reply actions   1 recs

I think they realize that given an a-la-carte model

People wouldn’t spend close to the amount of money they currently spend on a cable bill, which shrinks the revenue pie. For some, they might offset the reduced pie by getting a bigger slice, but the fear that their slice also goes down makes them weary of change.

Michael Beasley is a Small Forward. Derrick Williams is a Power Forward.

by Ebomb on Jan 18, 2012 1:48 PM CST up reply actions  

Because the law also asks service providers to block addresses from overseas sites. As for the rest I have an opinion that is not the same as most of the rest here. I will keep that to myself. A point of note, congress is obligated by the constitution to protect copyrights.

by remiel6 on Jan 18, 2012 1:55 PM CST via mobile up reply actions  

Which is exactly why

Their is a cause of action under Federal Law for private individuals to enforce copyrights.

Michael Beasley is a Small Forward. Derrick Williams is a Power Forward.

by Ebomb on Jan 18, 2012 1:59 PM CST up reply actions  

Difficult to enforce if you don’t readily know about the infringment

by remiel6 on Jan 18, 2012 2:03 PM CST via mobile up reply actions  

Then avoid the market

and die alone with all your copyrighted material that no one ever saw.

Michael Beasley is a Small Forward. Derrick Williams is a Power Forward.

by Ebomb on Jan 18, 2012 2:19 PM CST up reply actions  

Talk about an extremist reply, is it that unreasonable to ask YouTube which makes a lot of money off of infringement to bear the cost of enforcing copyright or would you rather the copyright holder spend all his time and meager money defending his constitutional right

by remiel6 on Jan 18, 2012 2:23 PM CST via mobile up reply actions  

What you want is for content provdiers to be the investigator, the adjudicator and the enforcer. Content providers are already required under law to be the enforcers, i.e., when a copyright holder alerts the content provider of a copyright violation, the content provider is required to remove the content.

What about fair use? What about a video containing your copyrighted material but that has audio comments over the top critiquing the content. Is that fair use? What about a mashup containing highlights of all Ricky Rubio plays over 3 years, is that fair use? Do you really want large internet multinationals deciding legal policy on copyrights and enforcing their own judgment of materials without any court intervention at all because copyright holders have a difficult time deciding who to sue?

Copyright holders are always in control of initial distirbution channels. How they choose to use that control often times decides how successful they are in reaping the financial rewards of their content. Under your version of things, copyright holders would no longer have any resposnibility for how their content is distributred, as no matter how its done, somebody else would always be legally responsible for making sure no one steals the copyrighted product.

Michael Beasley is a Small Forward. Derrick Williams is a Power Forward.

by Ebomb on Jan 18, 2012 2:43 PM CST up reply actions  

And the real bottom line is

the money. Much of the infringement that’s being prosecuted doesn’t involve money, just sharing (if you charge your friends for music you stole, you are a scumbag).

Existing laws prohibit anyone but the creator/copyright holder from profiting from a song or movie. If the entertainment industry would just grow up and play by the real rules (i.e., what technology allows), they’d focus on high quality copies, not the crappy stuff that makes up 90% of the torrents out there.

And then let’s take a very hard look at copyright. Why do we allow artists to copyright music that they clearly stole from other artists? I’ve seen countless music critics accuse Andrew Lloyd Weber of swiping most of his music from long dead classical composers. Why should he have copyright on a dumbed down pop arrangement of Vivaldi’s greatest hits? Yet the man is a billionaire thanks to his ability to rearrange what has already been composed. How does copyright serve the consumer here?

Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!

by TMiss on Jan 18, 2012 2:56 PM CST up reply actions  

It's not supposed to protect the consumer.

Please don’t take this as me advocating anything. Just answering the rhetorical question.

600 N First Ave "like a Pirate's cove".

by Airete on Jan 18, 2012 2:59 PM CST up reply actions  

uh...I don't think Vivaldi still retains the copyright, but point well-taken.

Love’s uncles stole (should I post it here?) ‘Surf City USA’ from Chuck Berry’s ‘Sweet Little 16’. They did lose in court.

by 1922 on Jan 18, 2012 3:01 PM CST up reply actions  

But in a democracy

what is the point of any law that does not protect the consumer? We are the consumers. Why shouldn’t our needs come first? There are 99 consumers for every rich capitalist, yet the 1% now make all our rules, laws and control our media.

Obviously the 99% is doing a very poor job of representing for themselves.

Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!

by TMiss on Jan 18, 2012 3:05 PM CST up reply actions  

Be more specific

Smart bands are giving away their music and making their money on tickets and merchandise and making tons more money than they did in the days of record label control and handlers who gave you “free” cocaine for signing stupid contracts.

Meanwhile, any car maker who wants to use your hit song to promote their cars has to pay you. Anyone who makes money from your music has to pay you. The only “stealing” here is being done by the fans who, in a sane world, would be the last people you’d want to sue.

Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!

by TMiss on Jan 18, 2012 3:16 PM CST up reply actions  

I suppose if we had a democracy, everything would be free

because the mob would vote it so. I don’t think that would work. I do advocate shorter life on a copyright, or being able to use short clips and stills.

by 1922 on Jan 18, 2012 3:15 PM CST up reply actions  

part of the problem with this "democracy" discussion

is we don’t live in a democracy, we live in a representative republic. I’m sure we’ve all heard the saying “democracy is two wolves and one sheep deciding what to eat for dinner.” The interesting part about that trite saying is that both ends of the political spectrum would agree that’s a bad way to operate a country.

by atrainlp on Jan 18, 2012 3:22 PM CST up reply actions  

Except the wolves have forgotten that

and now just assume that sheep exist solely for their benefit.

Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!

by TMiss on Jan 18, 2012 3:56 PM CST up reply actions  

to reply.

1. there is not enough time to go into the fair use doctrine and all of its legal capacity. If a person wants to they can look it up themselves. Fair use is not however a doctrine that allows people to do whatever they want with someone elses work.
2. ISP’s do not determine copyright law. there is a statute that does that and an international body as well. The laws are very similar.
3. I agree due process is a problem, however there should be a mechanism to remove the questionable material until its infringment status is taken care of.
4. the last paragraph is a silly argument. The copyright holder determines where he puts is first, but that does not allow someone else to do what ever they want with it.

listen there are things about this law that I don’t like. however, I am of the opinion that something needs to be done more to protect copyrights.

I realize you did not make the napster reference, but before people fall on the sword for Napster, the operators of that site made millions of dollars at the expense of Metalica. They were not altruistic people out to fight for the rights of the little guy that they have been made out to be. Look up the case and read it.

by remiel6 on Jan 18, 2012 4:39 PM CST up reply actions  

No they didn't
the operators of that site made millions of dollars at the expense of Metalica

That’s the industry’s math. They insist that every stolen copy is a purchase they were robbed of when the truth is 90%+ of those filesharers would have never paid $17 for a Metallica CD. Hell, I downloaded their collaboration with Lou Reed just to say I did and then threw it in the trash.

Studies show what my friends have already proven to me: the biggest downloaders almost always have the biggest bought and paid for music collections.

Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!

by TMiss on Jan 18, 2012 5:21 PM CST up reply actions  

The operators of Napster made Millions and millions of dollars, that is a fact. Read the case. Without the copyrighted matierial they would have made nothing, ergo, they made millions of dollars off of infringment

by remiel6 on Jan 19, 2012 4:47 PM CST up reply actions  

But the real bottom line to that story

is how the music industry held its breath until everyone else turned blue. I was very active in following digital rights in the ’90s, and the music and movie industries were complete trolls, refusing to let anyone do anything digitally without first paying usurious tolls. Instead of figuring out how to make money from digital, RIAA and MPAA shoveled money into lobbyists to buy Congress.

The work that went into Napster deserved to be rewarded, but the same bastards who refused to explore new sales channels swooped in after the fact and stole profits that were far in excess of anything Metallica would have made online by themselves.

Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!

by TMiss on Jan 21, 2012 4:16 PM CST up reply actions   1 recs

One may not agree with the business choices that a person makes with their legal property. However, it is their right to make bad choices.
I agree the industry did not handle the new technology correctly. This does not justify stealing. It never has and never will.
The bottom line is that Napster made a lot of money by distributing protected material. They did this without persmission. They did this by selling advertising dollars, which is why this was a provision of Sopa.
Parts of this bill will pass, what parts I am not sure, but part of it will.

by remiel6 on Jan 22, 2012 5:58 PM CST up reply actions  

Glad I'm a huge troll

and was keeping an eye on this discussion.

Study the history of the recording industry. For every good guy making local acts famous, there are ten scumbags giving drugs to artists then screwing them on record deals.

Once famous acts don’t do lounges and Indian casinos in their ‘70s because they love to live on a bus. They do it because they didn’t get their fair share of the profits when they were hitting it big (or blew it, but wasn’t the label supposed to watch out over their artists?).

Whatever arguments you can make in favor of record labels vanished with digital technology and universal distribution. All today’s bands need is a good groove and someone who knows how to mix their sound.

The movie studios have a much better case but they need to stop beating up their fans. It never occurs to them that many of the folks who download Russian camcordings of their movies also saw them in the theater and then later bought them on DVD. That’s what FANS do. They’ll make you rich if you don’t sue them to death first.

Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!

by TMiss on Jan 27, 2012 10:03 AM CST up reply actions  

I made the Napster reference.

Um. Did you even read what I wrote above about Napster?

Here it is for you again.

I hate Metallica for shutting down Napster……and not for anti-piracy reasons – for business reasons! They had a conduit to touch over 25 million music enthusiasts…. and instead of working within legal bounds to reach some compromise, they shut it down. So fucking dumb. The consumers scattered to the winds (grokster, gnutella, freenet, kazaa, limewire, audiogalaxy, bearshare, etc…) and a huge leveraging opportunity was lost – without significant recoupment of revenue, mind you. Rockstars need to stick to music. I’m talking to you Dave Navarro.

Not a whole lot of sword falling or claims of altruism going on there….

by Boss10 on Jan 18, 2012 5:34 PM CST up reply actions  

Disagree with every point you make

1. This is exactly my point, the fair use doctrine is not a bright line rule where a potential infringer can know with certainty whether their use is fair use. It’s a blancing test of many factors.

2. Never argued that they did, but like stated in regards to number 1, copyright law is not a certainty for everything. Now, if someone uploads an entire episode of the Simpsons to Youtube, while that’s certainly not fair use, but that type of content isn’t appearing on YouTube for that very reason.

3. Due process is a huge problem because essentially your giving a non-court non government agency the right to determine rights. Removing content prior to adjudication essentially makes all content removable, slippery slope.

And now to the main point in regards to Number 4. Copyright holders want the best of both worlds with no sacrifies. They want a medium to sell their product that anybody can use to play it, in terms of music, but they want to be able to control the medium so that no one they did not license their product to can use it. The dichotomy becomes, create a music file that is so secure that equipment needed to play the file becomes more expensive, and therefore, only adopted by a few. Or create a music file that anyone can play, increasing your potential customer base, but is easily pirated by others.

The powers that be in the music industry gambled on the second option, but in reality, didn’t acknowledge the market realities, and lost big time. It took someone outside the industry, Apple, to develop a more secure music file that is more expensive to play, for them to see they made the wrong choice.

Now, because they no longer control the physical medium on which their product resides, and because they made terrible business decisions in losing that control, we all must give the government the right to shut down any webiste that even mentions file sharing. Fuck that and Fuck them. Apple is making tons of money, bands are still making money playing live shows, the only people losing money are the free loading producers who had their niche in the market replaced by Apple. Yes, you can point to statistics that tell me that the music industry sales are down, and theirfore the bands are losing money off album sales, but smart bands are able to cut out the middle man and make more per song even if they are selling less songs, because they no longer have expenses related to distribution.

I am not arguing that stealing copyrighted music is a birthright, what I am arguing is that Copyright producers, i.e. the music industry, needs to take back control of the product it produces and deal with a more limited secure market, which Apple has already has done to some extent, and retrain a generation of consumers it already shit the bed in enabling them to steal their own product.

Michael Beasley is a Small Forward. Derrick Williams is a Power Forward.

by Ebomb on Jan 18, 2012 5:47 PM CST up reply actions  

Copyright and copyright extensions last way too long.

Most of the time the copyright outlives all the people involved who already made their money from it, then have been in their graves 30 years.

by 1922 on Jan 18, 2012 2:55 PM CST reply actions  

Actually it’s 70 years after their death and I might agree that, that is too long.

by remiel6 on Jan 18, 2012 3:17 PM CST via mobile up reply actions  

Only if they wait 40 years to bury them

by remiel6 on Jan 18, 2012 3:23 PM CST via mobile up reply actions  

The length of copyrights

gets extended every time “Steam Boat Willy” is about to expire. Once he goes we can use Mickey Mouse whenever we want!!! wOOt

by gastrovan on Jan 18, 2012 3:26 PM CST up reply actions  

this is sadly true. and is that a “woot” for mickey mouse porn?
lol

by remiel6 on Jan 18, 2012 4:40 PM CST up reply actions  

You're right

I should’ve also added a “and however we want” to that.

by gastrovan on Jan 18, 2012 4:59 PM CST up reply actions  

I downloaded something once only to see a scene where an actor had a heart attack during filming. Some of his scenes were

left in. Maybe morbid, but I only had it for that, then deleted it. It wasn’t like I was going to buy the movie just for that scene.

by 1922 on Jan 18, 2012 3:12 PM CST reply actions  

Anyway, my wife scored me 4 tickets to the Timberwolves @ Lakers game for Feb. 29th.

I’ll be wearing a powder blur Timberwolves cap right behind Jack Nicholson.

by 1922 on Jan 18, 2012 3:20 PM CST reply actions  

We should all make sure to at the very least email our reps in congress, or more

I hope this bill does not go through. It is ridiculous and will probably ruin the free internet.

Jonny "bag o' chips" Flynn is the GOAT

by CoffeeJanitor on Jan 18, 2012 3:35 PM CST reply actions  

Last thing I'll say

I think we’re all ultimately on the same side of this topic regardless of our reasons – this stupid bill shouldn’t pass.

Go Wolves! (the basketball ones)

by atrainlp on Jan 18, 2012 4:32 PM CST reply actions  

Even I can agree, I like the bills purpose, but there are parts of it that need to be reworked.

by remiel6 on Jan 18, 2012 4:41 PM CST up reply actions  

yep - that was my original point.

intent is one thing, but the reality of the bill’s implications is another.

by atrainlp on Jan 18, 2012 4:42 PM CST up reply actions  

Right value

Three or four years ago, a postman in Mass. stole about three thousand netflix DVD’s. The DVD’s were valued at about 36.000$, and the sentence guidelines for these type of crime call for about one year in custody.
A Boston student who illegally downloaded and shared, not for profit, 30 (thirty) songs in the internet was condemned to pay $675,000 in damages, later slashed by the district judge to a “mere” $67,500.
The postman had the original complete DVD’s to do as he pleased. The student, the electronic equivalent to a couple CD’s but of much worse quality and without any commercial additions. But we can see how differently were valued.

by themaltesecat on Jan 21, 2012 3:26 PM CST reply actions  

Right value

Forgot to say that illegal downloading of music can carry up to 5 years of jail,

by themaltesecat on Jan 21, 2012 3:29 PM CST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Canis Hoopus is straight T-Wolves straight from Minnesota.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Rubio_wolfrider_small
2011/2012 Rookie Review
Abby_s_030_small
Top Ten Reasons David Kahn is a Better Basketball Mind than Sam Presti
Rubio_wolfrider_small
Ricky Rubio: Probably not as good as you think...
Small
Around the League: Atlanta Hawks

Recent FanPosts

Rubio_wolfrider_small
PA100 Atlantic Division
Small
End of Dan Harmon - Community
New_look_primary_logo_1989-96_100_small
Jae Crowder participated in NJ combine...
Small
Possible that Perry Jones = Paul George?
Small
Evan Fournier
557415_10101880206283470_13960869_76835255_1401292386_n_small
Poll: Do the NBA playoffs live up to their potential?
Rubio_wolfrider_small
PA100 Northwest Division

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Canis Hoopus Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Hoopus Features

    HOOPUS FAQ

    Salary Cap Info

    Draft Info

    Player Movement Flow Charts

    Draft Boards

    Former Tag Lines:

    • In desperate need of an epic dose of basketball Viagra
    • Your source of radical left wing politics cleverly disguised as basketball fandom
    • Palin-Free since before statehood
    • Despairy Home Companion
    • The world's leading exporter of small area quickness
    • Sorry…I have no idea who is Joe Mauer
    • Home of the Peja deep douche
    • Vote McGrady!
    • Bork, bork, bork, bork, bork
    • Wir Sind Darko
    • Weird, unhealthy Darko mania
    • les goûts et les couleurs ne se discutent pas
    • Basketball success makes character issues forgivable
    • Building the Boogie Bandwagon
    • Building the Dream....One Power Forward At A Time
    • Kids, Puppy Dogs, And Long Walks In The Park
    • SWITCH THE FLIP!!!
    • Team Red Pill.
    • December is Bunny Month. Survive it with insincerity and Merle Haggard.
    • Like having a really good seat at a beheading.
    • We've got to have rules and obey them. After all, we're not savages. We're Wolves fans, and Wolves fans are best at everything.
    • Getting Real Mythological
    • Trapped in Punxsawawney
    • BIIYYYOOOMMMBOOOOOOO!!!
    • Estoy llevando mi talento a Minnesota
    • Where sharks do battle with giant eagles
    • You don’t put a saddle and reins on a magical unicorn, you bareback it and put faith in nature
    • Toeing the line between nerd and loser
    • If Theo Ratliff’s Expiring Contract could see us now...

    Hoopus Recipe Book

    Let's Settle This:


    Self-Promotion

    BallHype Sports Blog Rankings


    Managers

    Dr wyn

    Journey_small Stop-n-Pop

    Rviy7fbgmhz5ht2dpgo6q0jfu_small TimAllen

    Editors

    Wolveslogo_small Oceanary

    Authors

    Small SG

    Hrbek_small Jon Marthaler