SOPA and PIPA your thoughts ?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for MW2ismygame
MW2ismygame

2188

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 MW2ismygame
Member since 2010 • 2188 Posts

well now SOPA and its senate version have had their time in the limelight and most people know what they are, i would like to hear your opinions on them, do you support the bill(s) or not.

(smart people only was implied because i want a civil discussion that has people actually able to articulate themselves better than a, lets say rock like in ,lets say again the SW thread)

i for one do not support the bills because our government has just drawn them up, with no research, they themselves more than likely having no clue what this could do the internet, and the fact that this is only getting this much support because of backing by big corporations to get more money and power. the things that annoys me the most about this set of bills is a draconian infringement to the first amendment and our free speech rights. now i know some of you will say "but your stealing and that negates that right" or something along those lines, but heres the problem, never before has our government had the prospect of so much control over the people its actually scary, think china. not just that but the fact that once you cross that gray line of censorship that infringes on our rights whos to say where we will stop ? we live in a technological age and a control over the internet would be a VERY POWERFUL asset to a government that even with the best of intentions can become such a horrible thing. on the othe rhand i do beleive we need to establish laws reguarding internet piracy and cpoyright infinement but only with meticulous years of research and careful implementation of such a law, with clear rules and regulations that can be well within reasonable which this is not, i would say something of a prime directive if you will (sorry for the ST reference) because this subject(censorship and anti piracy) is very touchy and ever changing not to mention eve rgrowing(as well as the internet) not to mention the fact that this decision will not only affect us but the whole world.thats the only way i feel that this would have a chance of working, and at this point SOPA and PIPA dont fit the bill ! (sorry for the pun)

Avatar image for themajormayor
themajormayor

25729

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 themajormayor
Member since 2011 • 25729 Posts

SOPA and PIPA your thoughts ?

:)

(smart people only)

:(

Avatar image for Setsa
Setsa

8431

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#3 Setsa
Member since 2005 • 8431 Posts
What you stated is exactly what's wrong with any legislation that attempts to regulate the happenings on the internet. The biggest problem is the demographic that is ultimately concocting such ideas didn't grow up with nor use it as often as the vast majority of society. The reason why some people are backing it is because they don't realize the extent to which such regulation can maim the internet. I don't download music (I use the radio) nor do I pirate movies (I'm a bargain bin shopper), but when you're creating the potential to shut down/inhibit the functioning of silly, harmless sites that just so happen to use specific images/clips often in a satirical manner, then you've just gotta wonder. I mean, what's the average age of American senators anyways?

SOPA and PIPA your thoughts ?

:)

(smart people only)

:(

themajormayor
Post ALL the ignorant uninformed opinions!
Avatar image for MW2ismygame
MW2ismygame

2188

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 MW2ismygame
Member since 2010 • 2188 Posts
[QUOTE="Setsa"]What you stated is exactly what's wrong with any legislation that attempts to regulate the happenings on the internet. The biggest problem is the demographic that is ultimately concocting such ideas didn't grow up with nor use it as often as the vast majority of society. The reason why some people are backing it is because they don't realize the extent to which such regulation can maim the internet. I don't download music (I use the radio) nor do I pirate movies (I'm a bargain bin shopper), but when you're creating the potential to shut down/inhibit the functioning of silly, harmless sites that just so happen to use specific images/clips often in a satirical manner, then you've just gotta wonder. I mean, what's the average age of American senators anyways?

SOPA and PIPA your thoughts ?

:)

(smart people only)

:(

themajormayor
Post ALL the ignorant uninformed opinions!

thats exactly whats getting me mad the people who support it are like the voters that kill their own health benefits or their own civil liberties
Avatar image for AussieePet
AussieePet

11424

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 38

User Lists: 0

#5 AussieePet
Member since 2010 • 11424 Posts

.

Avatar image for MW2ismygame
MW2ismygame

2188

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 MW2ismygame
Member since 2010 • 2188 Posts

SOPA and PIPA your thoughts ?

:)

(smart people only)

:(

themajormayor
please do i dont mind cant be as bad as half the people on SW thats for sure
Avatar image for themajormayor
themajormayor

25729

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 themajormayor
Member since 2011 • 25729 Posts
[QUOTE="themajormayor"]

SOPA and PIPA your thoughts ?

:)

(smart people only)

:(

MW2ismygame
please do i dont mind cant be as bad as half the people on SW thats for sure

Well I'm European so I don't care enough to know anything about it. Thanks anyway :)
Avatar image for Setsa
Setsa

8431

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#8 Setsa
Member since 2005 • 8431 Posts
[QUOTE="MW2ismygame"][QUOTE="Setsa"]What you stated is exactly what's wrong with any legislation that attempts to regulate the happenings on the internet. The biggest problem is the demographic that is ultimately concocting such ideas didn't grow up with nor use it as often as the vast majority of society. The reason why some people are backing it is because they don't realize the extent to which such regulation can maim the internet. I don't download music (I use the radio) nor do I pirate movies (I'm a bargain bin shopper), but when you're creating the potential to shut down/inhibit the functioning of silly, harmless sites that just so happen to use specific images/clips often in a satirical manner, then you've just gotta wonder. I mean, what's the average age of American senators anyways?

SOPA and PIPA your thoughts ?

:)

(smart people only)

:(

themajormayor
Post ALL the ignorant uninformed opinions!

thats exactly whats getting me mad the people who support it are like the voters that kill their own health benefits or their own civil liberties

Exactly. The problem is you get people (and I'm sorry if I offend anyone by saying this) that are predominantly middle-aged and older voting in favour of such legislation because they believe that the ideal fronted by the media, that these sorts of legislation EXCLUSIVELY target theft, is the sole concept on which the legislation is based. That's it's all about theft theft theft! Stealing movies and music and video-games without ever actually realizing what it would affect. I can bet there are a lot of individuals that are 40+ and regularly frequent facebook and other sites that contain large quantities of lightly mediated material that is actually "property" of someone else, yet they refuse to realize that such things could disappear on a whim if these sorts of things are voted in.
Avatar image for MW2ismygame
MW2ismygame

2188

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 MW2ismygame
Member since 2010 • 2188 Posts

[QUOTE="MW2ismygame"][QUOTE="Setsa"] Post ALL the ignorant uninformed opinions!Setsa
thats exactly whats getting me mad the people who support it are like the voters that kill their own health benefits or their own civil liberties

Exactly. The problem is you get people (and I'm sorry if I offend anyone by saying this) that are predominantly middle-aged and older voting in favour of such legislation because they believe that the ideal fronted by the media, that these sorts of legislation EXCLUSIVELY target theft, is the sole concept on which the legislation is based. That's it's all about theft theft theft! Stealing movies and music and video-games without ever actually realizing what it would affect. I can bet there are a lot of individuals that are 40+ and regularly frequent facebook and other sites that contain large quantities of lightly mediated material that is actually "property" of someone else, yet they refuse to realize that such things could disappear on a whim if these sorts of things are voted in.

i blame fox for the media part and stations lieke it, if there is one thing they do best its spew raw sewage from every being of their body

Avatar image for MW2ismygame
MW2ismygame

2188

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 MW2ismygame
Member since 2010 • 2188 Posts
[QUOTE="MW2ismygame"][QUOTE="themajormayor"]

SOPA and PIPA your thoughts ?

:)

(smart people only)

:(

themajormayor
please do i dont mind cant be as bad as half the people on SW thats for sure

Well I'm European so I don't care enough to know anything about it. Thanks anyway :)

tbh you should MANY sites are based in the US
Avatar image for themajormayor
themajormayor

25729

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#11 themajormayor
Member since 2011 • 25729 Posts
[QUOTE="MW2ismygame"][QUOTE="themajormayor"][QUOTE="MW2ismygame"] please do i dont mind cant be as bad as half the people on SW thats for sure

Well I'm European so I don't care enough to know anything about it. Thanks anyway :)

tbh you should MANY sites are based in the US

What?? this is an outrage!!! WTF they can't do this!!
Avatar image for MW2ismygame
MW2ismygame

2188

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#12 MW2ismygame
Member since 2010 • 2188 Posts
[QUOTE="themajormayor"][QUOTE="MW2ismygame"][QUOTE="themajormayor"] Well I'm European so I don't care enough to know anything about it. Thanks anyway :)

tbh you should MANY sites are based in the US

What?? this is an outrage!!! WTF they can't do this!!

yes they can and they might, the reason why some countries can selectively ban or censor a website is because it comes from an outside source again think china and google, now this would effect the source of said websites that are based in the US
Avatar image for Ace6301
Ace6301

21389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#13 Ace6301
Member since 2005 • 21389 Posts
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2399019,00.asp I'll just leave this here.
Avatar image for MissLibrarian
MissLibrarian

9589

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#14 MissLibrarian
Member since 2008 • 9589 Posts

I LIEK TURTLES \o/

Avatar image for deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51

57548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#15 deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
Member since 2004 • 57548 Posts
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2399019,00.asp I'll just leave this here. Ace6301
Interesting read there. They do make some good points about Google being hypocritical about censorship espeically in regards to its chinese policies.
Avatar image for Blue-Sky
Blue-Sky

10381

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

#16 Blue-Sky
Member since 2005 • 10381 Posts

██ ████████ ██████ ██████████ ██ ████ ██ ████ ██████████ ██. ███ ███
This comment has been found in violation of H.R. 3261, S.O.P.A and has
been removed.

Avatar image for MW2ismygame
MW2ismygame

2188

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#17 MW2ismygame
Member since 2010 • 2188 Posts

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2399019,00.asp I'll just leave this here. Ace6301
-----------------------------------------redacted----------------------------------------- im sorry but dodd is a asinine moron

Avatar image for deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51

57548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#18 deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
Member since 2004 • 57548 Posts
[QUOTE="Ace6301"]http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2399019,00.asp I'll just leave this here. MW2ismygame
well nice job adding to an intellectual discussion :roll:

What was wrong with that link that he posted? Just because something doesnt support your POV, doesnt mean it lacks intellectual value. A wise person would look at all angles.
Avatar image for weezyfb
weezyfb

14703

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#19 weezyfb
Member since 2009 • 14703 Posts
Limiting information i can see on the net is bad
Avatar image for Ace6301
Ace6301

21389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#20 Ace6301
Member since 2005 • 21389 Posts
[QUOTE="Ace6301"]http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2399019,00.asp I'll just leave this here. sonicare
Interesting read there. They do make some good points about Google being hypocritical about censorship espeically in regards to its chinese policies.

If your having to compare your own censorship to China in order to make a point I think the point is lost. Google also isn't based out of China. But yes Google has had it's fair share of less than appreciable stances in the past. Doesn't detract from them being right in this case however.
Avatar image for MW2ismygame
MW2ismygame

2188

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#21 MW2ismygame
Member since 2010 • 2188 Posts
[QUOTE="MW2ismygame"][QUOTE="Ace6301"]http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2399019,00.asp I'll just leave this here. sonicare
well nice job adding to an intellectual discussion :roll:

What was wrong with that link that he posted? Just because something doesnt support your POV, doesnt mean it lacks intellectual value. A wise person would look at all angles.

i meant post your view 1 not others 2 that was actually my fault i did not see the rest ill admit that
Avatar image for MW2ismygame
MW2ismygame

2188

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#22 MW2ismygame
Member since 2010 • 2188 Posts

[QUOTE="sonicare"][QUOTE="Ace6301"]http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2399019,00.asp I'll just leave this here. Ace6301
Interesting read there. They do make some good points about Google being hypocritical about censorship espeically in regards to its chinese policies.

If your having to compare your own censorship to China in order to make a point I think the point is lost. Google also isn't based out of China. But yes Google has had it's fair share of less than appreciable stances in the past. Doesn't detract from them being right in this case however.

my fault look at my last post, did not see the second half

edit:just finished the second half and i must say i find this very ironic due to the subject at hand: "resorting to stunts that punish their users or turn them into their corporate pawns, rather than coming to the table to find solutions to a problem that all now seem to agree is very real and damaging." -dodd

now this makes more sense from the first paragraph, before i did not have the full context

Avatar image for snakes_codec
snakes_codec

2754

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#23 snakes_codec
Member since 2008 • 2754 Posts

[QUOTE="MW2ismygame"][QUOTE="themajormayor"] Well I'm European so I don't care enough to know anything about it. Thanks anyway :)themajormayor
tbh you should MANY sites are based in the US

What?? this is an outrage!!! WTF they can't do this!!

oh yes they can and they will imagine this someone uploads a music video or images to Gamespot that are copyrighted Gamespot could potentially be shut own if this bill is passed not just that sites like Youtube Facebook and Twitter as well as any other video streaming web site is at risk due to this we all better hope there's enough Senators in the U.S with the sense to see this will destroy the internet and is counter productive in nearly ever conceivable way .

Avatar image for sergemyster8
sergemyster8

1749

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#24 sergemyster8
Member since 2006 • 1749 Posts

Wait sorry nevermind, I'm not smart.

Avatar image for deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51

57548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#25 deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
Member since 2004 • 57548 Posts
[QUOTE="sonicare"][QUOTE="Ace6301"]http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2399019,00.asp I'll just leave this here. Ace6301
Interesting read there. They do make some good points about Google being hypocritical about censorship espeically in regards to its chinese policies.

If your having to compare your own censorship to China in order to make a point I think the point is lost. Google also isn't based out of China. But yes Google has had it's fair share of less than appreciable stances in the past. Doesn't detract from them being right in this case however.

I think the point he was making is that google is a multi-billion dollar corporation that is looking out for its own best interests. They aren't necessarily raising awareness for some noble cause, but rather to protect their business. They certainly have engaged in censorship and other less than ideal practices in the past. But in terms of SOPA, it would be nice to have more of a discussion on it. I think it's authors legitimately want to stop piracy, but may not fully understand the potential for abuse the bill can have. I think there is some misinformation and hysteria about the scope and enforceability of the bill. Listening to some people on the net, they'd have you believe that the government will be calling in airstrikes on anyone who dares quote a movie line or post a pic from a game. I'm very cynical about this bill and how well it could be applied. Certainly something will eventually need to be done about piracy, but this bill is likely not a solution. However, as even Obama has said, piracy is a problem.
Avatar image for MW2ismygame
MW2ismygame

2188

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#26 MW2ismygame
Member since 2010 • 2188 Posts
[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="sonicare"] Interesting read there. They do make some good points about Google being hypocritical about censorship espeically in regards to its chinese policies.sonicare
If your having to compare your own censorship to China in order to make a point I think the point is lost. Google also isn't based out of China. But yes Google has had it's fair share of less than appreciable stances in the past. Doesn't detract from them being right in this case however.

I think the point he was making is that google is a multi-billion dollar corporation that is looking out for its own best interests. They aren't necessarily raising awareness for some noble cause, but rather to protect their business. They certainly have engaged in censorship and other less than ideal practices in the past. But in terms of SOPA, it would be nice to have more of a discussion on it. I think it's authors legitimately want to stop piracy, but may not fully understand the potential for abuse the bill can have. I think there is some misinformation and hysteria about the scope and enforceability of the bill. Listening to some people on the net, they'd have you believe that the government will be calling in airstrikes on anyone who dares quote a movie line or post a pic from a game. I'm very cynical about this bill and how well it could be applied. Certainly something will eventually need to be done about piracy, but this bill is likely not a solution. However, as even Obama has said, piracy is a problem.

thats the problem i have, just the fact that the potential for what this can become is very scary, to be blunt
Avatar image for Ace6301
Ace6301

21389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#27 Ace6301
Member since 2005 • 21389 Posts
[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="sonicare"] Interesting read there. They do make some good points about Google being hypocritical about censorship espeically in regards to its chinese policies.sonicare
If your having to compare your own censorship to China in order to make a point I think the point is lost. Google also isn't based out of China. But yes Google has had it's fair share of less than appreciable stances in the past. Doesn't detract from them being right in this case however.

I think the point he was making is that google is a multi-billion dollar corporation that is looking out for its own best interests. They aren't necessarily raising awareness for some noble cause, but rather to protect their business. They certainly have engaged in censorship and other less than ideal practices in the past. But in terms of SOPA, it would be nice to have more of a discussion on it. I think it's authors legitimately want to stop piracy, but may not fully understand the potential for abuse the bill can have. I think there is some misinformation and hysteria about the scope and enforceability of the bill. Listening to some people on the net, they'd have you believe that the government will be calling in airstrikes on anyone who dares quote a movie line or post a pic from a game. I'm very cynical about this bill and how well it could be applied. Certainly something will eventually need to be done about piracy, but this bill is likely not a solution. However, as even Obama has said, piracy is a problem.

I'm fully aware Google has it's own interests in mind. The same could be said for pretty much every site that went black today, even if they're non-profit they could very well be shut down. The issue being that SOPA exists because other groups also have their best interests in mind and they believe they can get more money by preventing copyright infringement via this bill. I think the politicians involved here are for the most part pawns to the media corporations and publishers who are lobbying for this bill. They're mostly older, less tech savvy people and they probably honestly don't see the issues with the bill and that's part of the problem. They're trying to pass legislation on something they don't fully understand because they're being paid big bucks to think that way. Minor side point but many people who support SOPA have been saying it will help the creators of original content. The issue being that it really won't. It will help the publishers and such but copyright laws as they currently are actually hurt creativity and can in some cases increase the cost of products beyond what they should be due to copyrights being extended far past what they should. In the end I feel that much better laws could be written without the intervention of groups who have their own best interests at heart rather than that of the people which comes back to kicking lobbyists out on their ass.
Avatar image for deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51

57548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#28 deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
Member since 2004 • 57548 Posts

I guess the biggerissue is do you believe in copyrights? Should video games, music, movies, etc. simply be free public domain or should you have to pay money for them?

Avatar image for MW2ismygame
MW2ismygame

2188

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29 MW2ismygame
Member since 2010 • 2188 Posts
[QUOTE="sonicare"][QUOTE="Ace6301"] If your having to compare your own censorship to China in order to make a point I think the point is lost. Google also isn't based out of China. But yes Google has had it's fair share of less than appreciable stances in the past. Doesn't detract from them being right in this case however.Ace6301
I think the point he was making is that google is a multi-billion dollar corporation that is looking out for its own best interests. They aren't necessarily raising awareness for some noble cause, but rather to protect their business. They certainly have engaged in censorship and other less than ideal practices in the past. But in terms of SOPA, it would be nice to have more of a discussion on it. I think it's authors legitimately want to stop piracy, but may not fully understand the potential for abuse the bill can have. I think there is some misinformation and hysteria about the scope and enforceability of the bill. Listening to some people on the net, they'd have you believe that the government will be calling in airstrikes on anyone who dares quote a movie line or post a pic from a game. I'm very cynical about this bill and how well it could be applied. Certainly something will eventually need to be done about piracy, but this bill is likely not a solution. However, as even Obama has said, piracy is a problem.

I'm fully aware Google has it's own interests in mind. The same could be said for pretty much every site that went black today, even if they're non-profit they could very well be shut down. The issue being that SOPA exists because other groups also have their best interests in mind and they believe they can get more money by preventing copyright infringement via this bill. I think the politicians involved here are for the most part pawns to the media corporations and publishers who are lobbying for this bill. They're mostly older, less tech savvy people and they probably honestly don't see the issues with the bill and that's part of the problem. They're trying to pass legislation on something they don't fully understand because they're being paid big bucks to think that way. Minor side point but many people who support SOPA have been saying it will help the creators of original content. The issue being that it really won't. It will help the publishers and such but copyright laws as they currently are actually hurt creativity and can in some cases increase the cost of products beyond what they should be due to copyrights being extended far past what they should. In the end I feel that much better laws could be written without the intervention of groups who have their own best interests at heart rather than that of the people which comes back to kicking lobbyists out on their ass.

its not really the sites that are trying to get money or power right now its the MPAA as well as the ESA because they say they are losing money even though both grew and reported record profits in the entertainment industry
Avatar image for Ace6301
Ace6301

21389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#30 Ace6301
Member since 2005 • 21389 Posts

I guess the biggerissue is do you believe in copyrights? Should video games, music, movies, etc. simply be free public domain or should you have to pay money for them?

sonicare
Of course I think you should have to pay for that sort of stuff. I am not however anti-piracy. I understand they claim to lose large amount of money to piracy but in many cases their claims are generally working off the best possible outcome and, let's face it, it's not going to work out the way they want it to. I'm all for the creators of content making more money but honestly publishers (record labels and that ilk) can largely go f*ck themselves. Not that I have any sort of personal reason for that stance...
Avatar image for oooo0000oooo000
oooo0000oooo000

839

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#31 oooo0000oooo000
Member since 2004 • 839 Posts
[QUOTE="sonicare"][QUOTE="Ace6301"] If your having to compare your own censorship to China in order to make a point I think the point is lost. Google also isn't based out of China. But yes Google has had it's fair share of less than appreciable stances in the past. Doesn't detract from them being right in this case however.Ace6301
I think the point he was making is that google is a multi-billion dollar corporation that is looking out for its own best interests. They aren't necessarily raising awareness for some noble cause, but rather to protect their business. They certainly have engaged in censorship and other less than ideal practices in the past. But in terms of SOPA, it would be nice to have more of a discussion on it. I think it's authors legitimately want to stop piracy, but may not fully understand the potential for abuse the bill can have. I think there is some misinformation and hysteria about the scope and enforceability of the bill. Listening to some people on the net, they'd have you believe that the government will be calling in airstrikes on anyone who dares quote a movie line or post a pic from a game. I'm very cynical about this bill and how well it could be applied. Certainly something will eventually need to be done about piracy, but this bill is likely not a solution. However, as even Obama has said, piracy is a problem.

I'm fully aware Google has it's own interests in mind. The same could be said for pretty much every site that went black today, even if they're non-profit they could very well be shut down. The issue being that SOPA exists because other groups also have their best interests in mind and they believe they can get more money by preventing copyright infringement via this bill. I think the politicians involved here are for the most part pawns to the media corporations and publishers who are lobbying for this bill. They're mostly older, less tech savvy people and they probably honestly don't see the issues with the bill and that's part of the problem. They're trying to pass legislation on something they don't fully understand because they're being paid big bucks to think that way. Minor side point but many people who support SOPA have been saying it will help the creators of original content. The issue being that it really won't. It will help the publishers and such but copyright laws as they currently are actually hurt creativity and can in some cases increase the cost of products beyond what they should be due to copyrights being extended far past what they should. In the end I feel that much better laws could be written without the intervention of groups who have their own best interests at heart rather than that of the people which comes back to kicking lobbyists out on their ass.

This sums it up quite well. This piece of legislative is too ambiguous to pass, but the same could have been said about the National Defense Authorization Act. :/
Avatar image for mattbbpl
mattbbpl

20796

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#32 mattbbpl
Member since 2006 • 20796 Posts

I guess the biggerissue is do you believe in copyrights? Should video games, music, movies, etc. simply be free public domain or should you have to pay money for them?

sonicare
I don't think that's the core of the SOPA/PIPA debate at all. The devil is in the details in this bill, and I think trying to boil it down to a simple, "You're either for paying for IP or your not," completely trivializes the issues at hand.

The issues are with the implementation. Not the overarching concept of IP protection.
Avatar image for deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51

57548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#33 deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
Member since 2004 • 57548 Posts

[QUOTE="sonicare"]

I guess the biggerissue is do you believe in copyrights? Should video games, music, movies, etc. simply be free public domain or should you have to pay money for them?

Ace6301

Of course I think you should have to pay for that sort of stuff. I am not however anti-piracy. I understand they claim to lose large amount of money to piracy but in many cases their claims are generally working off the best possible outcome and, let's face it, it's not going to work out the way they want it to. I'm all for the creators of content making more money but honestly publishers (record labels and that ilk) can largely go f*ck themselves. Not that I have any sort of personal reason for that stance...

I agree with you on that point -> I would like to see the distribution of income be more favorable to the creators of products than the publishers/corporations. I think the team/workers that create the video game, movie, music, etc. should be the ones that benefit the most from it. Certainly investors are going to look for some return on their investment, but the distrbution could be more ideal. However, I must admit, I am being completely naive on how much these products cost to make, how much risk each group takes, etc.

Avatar image for deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51

57548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#34 deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
Member since 2004 • 57548 Posts

[QUOTE="sonicare"]

I guess the biggerissue is do you believe in copyrights? Should video games, music, movies, etc. simply be free public domain or should you have to pay money for them?

mattbbpl

I don't think that's the core of the SOPA/PIPA debate at all. The devil is in the details in this bill, and I think trying to boil it down to a simple, "You're either for paying for IP or your not," completely trivializes the issues at hand.

The issues are with the implementation. Not the overarching concept of IP protection.

I think the bill is centered around IP and copyrights. Granted it's a misguided attempt, but I suspect that's what its congressional authors had in mind. It's methods may be flawed, but those can likely be better worded in the future. But should such an attempt even be made?

Avatar image for MW2ismygame
MW2ismygame

2188

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#35 MW2ismygame
Member since 2010 • 2188 Posts
oooo0000oooo000
This sums it up quite well. This piece of legislative is too ambiguous to pass, but the same could have been said about the National Defense Authorization Act. :/

well i believe that they will try to pass it one bit at a time with other legislation so as to be under the radar but if they only did some research and fine tailored the bill(s) to be much more favorable and fair this would be fine is some respects, for instance with the whole ironic stance on "helping creativity" by stopping the theft of intellectual property will actually hurt so much more as Ace6301 said, im thinking mods from other games that turned into counter strike and the like
Avatar image for deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51

57548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#36 deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
Member since 2004 • 57548 Posts

I dont know about counterstrike. Were those mods illegal? I thought the game developers liked the mod community and supported them, but I could be wrong. There are however, several game companies that love mod communities and encourage them.

Avatar image for MW2ismygame
MW2ismygame

2188

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#37 MW2ismygame
Member since 2010 • 2188 Posts

[QUOTE="mattbbpl"][QUOTE="sonicare"]

I guess the biggerissue is do you believe in copyrights? Should video games, music, movies, etc. simply be free public domain or should you have to pay money for them?

sonicare

I don't think that's the core of the SOPA/PIPA debate at all. The devil is in the details in this bill, and I think trying to boil it down to a simple, "You're either for paying for IP or your not," completely trivializes the issues at hand.

The issues are with the implementation. Not the overarching concept of IP protection.

I think the bill is centered around IP and copyrights. Granted it's a misguided attempt, but I suspect that's what its congressional authors had in mind. It's methods may be flawed, but those can likely be better worded in the future. But should such an attempt even be made?

i believe that there are some much needed legislation to be made on the internet and its operation but not in the way that the congress wants to implement it because as stated before, whose to say how far is to far ? there should be more of a focus on the internet now because of what a powerful tool it has become, but in the wrong hands can be used for much worse, there should also be consideration of how this will effect foreign relations as we are also dictating terms to them with the US base websites that this effects
Avatar image for MW2ismygame
MW2ismygame

2188

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#38 MW2ismygame
Member since 2010 • 2188 Posts

I dont know about counterstrike. Were those mods illegal? I thought the game developers liked the mod community and supported them, but I could be wrong. There are however, several game companies that love mod communities and encourage them.

sonicare

they were not illegal but they were popular and it turned into an actual ip that is still today making money, thats another problem with the bill not only could a mod be conisdered illegal without concent but it would never get that popular because of the censorship, think youtube and how many people hear about (on topic) mods just from there that otherwise would never be used

Avatar image for Ace6301
Ace6301

21389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#39 Ace6301
Member since 2005 • 21389 Posts

[QUOTE="mattbbpl"][QUOTE="sonicare"]

I guess the biggerissue is do you believe in copyrights? Should video games, music, movies, etc. simply be free public domain or should you have to pay money for them?

sonicare

I don't think that's the core of the SOPA/PIPA debate at all. The devil is in the details in this bill, and I think trying to boil it down to a simple, "You're either for paying for IP or your not," completely trivializes the issues at hand.

The issues are with the implementation. Not the overarching concept of IP protection.

I think the bill is centered around IP and copyrights. Granted it's a misguided attempt, but I suspect that's what its congressional authors had in mind. It's methods may be flawed, but those can likely be better worded in the future. But should such an attempt even be made?

Probably not. Honestly the attempts to curb piracy at the moment are largely overblown when compared to the amount of money they would realistically be making with stricter anti-piracy measures. I mean look how much money has been thrown into lobbying for SOPA and PIPA. Piracy is bad and all but honestly it's not something that you can totally attribute to loss of profits. A great example of a company that has to deal with piracy more than almost every other sort of business is Valve. They've had their 7th year in a row of 100% profit growth and don't have insane DRM like Ubisoft and other certain developers. Businesses just need to adapt and focus on the people who are actually buying things rather than whining about the people who aren't. It's like saying Amish people have a negative impact on the media sector because they don't give toward profit.
Avatar image for mattbbpl
mattbbpl

20796

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#40 mattbbpl
Member since 2006 • 20796 Posts

[QUOTE="mattbbpl"][QUOTE="sonicare"]

I guess the biggerissue is do you believe in copyrights? Should video games, music, movies, etc. simply be free public domain or should you have to pay money for them?

sonicare

I don't think that's the core of the SOPA/PIPA debate at all. The devil is in the details in this bill, and I think trying to boil it down to a simple, "You're either for paying for IP or your not," completely trivializes the issues at hand.

The issues are with the implementation. Not the overarching concept of IP protection.

I think the bill is centered around IP and copyrights. Granted it's a misguided attempt, but I suspect that's what its congressional authors had in mind. It's methods may be flawed, but those can likely be better worded in the future. But should such an attempt even be made?

I'm firmly against this bill - extremely so, in fact. Although I don't think such an attempt at IP protection in general is unwarranted - it's really a matter of how far we should go.

Frankly, I think we've already gone too far. Copying and distribution is already illegal with stiff penalties, which is fine (although the merit of the severities can be debated, I guess). However, we took away much of the fair use rights and some freedom of information rights that I'd like back. We also snuck in some NASTY EULA precedences that need to be revoked. We've been snowballing further and further from consumer IP property rights for years.
Avatar image for deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51

57548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#41 deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
Member since 2004 • 57548 Posts

[QUOTE="sonicare"]

[QUOTE="mattbbpl"] I don't think that's the core of the SOPA/PIPA debate at all. The devil is in the details in this bill, and I think trying to boil it down to a simple, "You're either for paying for IP or your not," completely trivializes the issues at hand.

The issues are with the implementation. Not the overarching concept of IP protection.mattbbpl

I think the bill is centered around IP and copyrights. Granted it's a misguided attempt, but I suspect that's what its congressional authors had in mind. It's methods may be flawed, but those can likely be better worded in the future. But should such an attempt even be made?

I'm firmly against this bill - extremely so, in fact. Although I don't think such an attempt at IP protection in general is unwarranted - it's really a matter of how far we should go.

Frankly, I think we've already gone too far. Copying and distribution is already illegal with stiff penalties, which is fine (although the merit of the severities can be debated, I guess). However, we took away much of the fair use rights and some freedom of information rights that I'd like back. We also snuck in some NASTY EULA precedences that need to be revoked. We've been snowballing further and further from consumer IP property rights for years.

I agree with what you said.

Avatar image for MW2ismygame
MW2ismygame

2188

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#42 MW2ismygame
Member since 2010 • 2188 Posts

[QUOTE="sonicare"]

[QUOTE="mattbbpl"] I don't think that's the core of the SOPA/PIPA debate at all. The devil is in the details in this bill, and I think trying to boil it down to a simple, "You're either for paying for IP or your not," completely trivializes the issues at hand.

The issues are with the implementation. Not the overarching concept of IP protection.mattbbpl

I think the bill is centered around IP and copyrights. Granted it's a misguided attempt, but I suspect that's what its congressional authors had in mind. It's methods may be flawed, but those can likely be better worded in the future. But should such an attempt even be made?

I'm firmly against this bill - extremely so, in fact. Although I don't think such an attempt at IP protection in general is unwarranted - it's really a matter of how far we should go.

Frankly, I think we've already gone too far. Copying and distribution is already illegal with stiff penalties, which is fine (although the merit of the severities can be debated, I guess). However, we took away much of the fair use rights and some freedom of information rights that I'd like back. We also snuck in some NASTY EULA precedences that need to be revoked. We've been snowballing further and further from consumer IP property rights for years.

thats the thing, the people who drew up the bills did not mention that part one bit and thats what the scary part is

Avatar image for Ace6301
Ace6301

21389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#43 Ace6301
Member since 2005 • 21389 Posts
[QUOTE="sonicare"]

[QUOTE="mattbbpl"] I don't think that's the core of the SOPA/PIPA debate at all. The devil is in the details in this bill, and I think trying to boil it down to a simple, "You're either for paying for IP or your not," completely trivializes the issues at hand.

The issues are with the implementation. Not the overarching concept of IP protection.mattbbpl

I think the bill is centered around IP and copyrights. Granted it's a misguided attempt, but I suspect that's what its congressional authors had in mind. It's methods may be flawed, but those can likely be better worded in the future. But should such an attempt even be made?

I'm firmly against this bill - extremely so, in fact. Although I don't think such an attempt at IP protection in general is unwarranted - it's really a matter of how far we should go.

Frankly, I think we've already gone too far. Copying and distribution is already illegal with stiff penalties, which is fine (although the merit of the severities can be debated, I guess). However, we took away much of the fair use rights and some freedom of information rights that I'd like back. We also snuck in some NASTY EULA precedences that need to be revoked. We've been snowballing further and further from consumer IP property rights for years.

Amen to that EULA comment. Certain companies like Sony and EA have literally forced people to sign their right to sue away just to use a product that the customer already has paid for. That's pretty f*cked up.
Avatar image for MW2ismygame
MW2ismygame

2188

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#44 MW2ismygame
Member since 2010 • 2188 Posts

[QUOTE="mattbbpl"][QUOTE="sonicare"] I think the bill is centered around IP and copyrights. Granted it's a misguided attempt, but I suspect that's what its congressional authors had in mind. It's methods may be flawed, but those can likely be better worded in the future. But should such an attempt even be made?

Ace6301

I'm firmly against this bill - extremely so, in fact. Although I don't think such an attempt at IP protection in general is unwarranted - it's really a matter of how far we should go.

Frankly, I think we've already gone too far. Copying and distribution is already illegal with stiff penalties, which is fine (although the merit of the severities can be debated, I guess). However, we took away much of the fair use rights and some freedom of information rights that I'd like back. We also snuck in some NASTY EULA precedences that need to be revoked. We've been snowballing further and further from consumer IP property rights for years.

Amen to that EULA comment. Certain companies like Sony and EA have literally forced people to sign their right to sue away just to use a product that the customer already has paid for. That's pretty f*cked up.

while true that what sony did as an example was way overboard, they are also a company and sometimes i dont blame them because look back a few months at the utterly stupid lawsuits drawn up against them, im not condoning sony just saying every action has a reaction and those suits and the whole system key fiasco just amplified the problems that they had from that OS snarl

Avatar image for deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51

57548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#45 deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
Member since 2004 • 57548 Posts

[QUOTE="mattbbpl"][QUOTE="sonicare"] I think the bill is centered around IP and copyrights. Granted it's a misguided attempt, but I suspect that's what its congressional authors had in mind. It's methods may be flawed, but those can likely be better worded in the future. But should such an attempt even be made?

Ace6301

I'm firmly against this bill - extremely so, in fact. Although I don't think such an attempt at IP protection in general is unwarranted - it's really a matter of how far we should go.

Frankly, I think we've already gone too far. Copying and distribution is already illegal with stiff penalties, which is fine (although the merit of the severities can be debated, I guess). However, we took away much of the fair use rights and some freedom of information rights that I'd like back. We also snuck in some NASTY EULA precedences that need to be revoked. We've been snowballing further and further from consumer IP property rights for years.

Amen to that EULA comment. Certain companies like Sony and EA have literally forced people to sign their right to sue away just to use a product that the customer already has paid for. That's pretty f*cked up.

Yeah that is wrong, but I'm not sure how well that would hold up in a court of law. Doctors have these consent forms they have you sign which say that all these bad things can happen during surgery, but you can still sue them even if you sign the consent. I suspect something similar applies to the EULAs, or at least I hope so. But yes, the pendulum has swung away from the favor of consumer rights.

Avatar image for tjoeb123
tjoeb123

6843

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#46 tjoeb123
Member since 2004 • 6843 Posts
I just have 5 words to sum it all up: F**k you SOPA and PIPA.
Avatar image for mattbbpl
mattbbpl

20796

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#47 mattbbpl
Member since 2006 • 20796 Posts

[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="mattbbpl"] I'm firmly against this bill - extremely so, in fact. Although I don't think such an attempt at IP protection in general is unwarranted - it's really a matter of how far we should go.

Frankly, I think we've already gone too far. Copying and distribution is already illegal with stiff penalties, which is fine (although the merit of the severities can be debated, I guess). However, we took away much of the fair use rights and some freedom of information rights that I'd like back. We also snuck in some NASTY EULA precedences that need to be revoked. We've been snowballing further and further from consumer IP property rights for years.sonicare

Amen to that EULA comment. Certain companies like Sony and EA have literally forced people to sign their right to sue away just to use a product that the customer already has paid for. That's pretty f*cked up.

Yeah that is wrong, but I'm not sure how well that would hold up in a court of law. Doctors have these consent forms they have you sign which say that all these bad things can happen during surgery, but you can still sue them even if you sign the consent. I suspect something similar applies to the EULAs, or at least I hope so. But yes, the pendulum has swung away from the favor of consumer rights.

What's screwed up is it's already been challenged in court. It went all the way to the Supreme Court and was upheld. I believe it was an AT&T case that set the precedent. Although I'd like to clarify an apparent misconception here - you can still sue under such EULA's, but it has to be separate. You can't sue as part of a class action.
Avatar image for MW2ismygame
MW2ismygame

2188

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#48 MW2ismygame
Member since 2010 • 2188 Posts
[QUOTE="sonicare"]

[QUOTE="Ace6301"] Amen to that EULA comment. Certain companies like Sony and EA have literally forced people to sign their right to sue away just to use a product that the customer already has paid for. That's pretty f*cked up.mattbbpl

Yeah that is wrong, but I'm not sure how well that would hold up in a court of law. Doctors have these consent forms they have you sign which say that all these bad things can happen during surgery, but you can still sue them even if you sign the consent. I suspect something similar applies to the EULAs, or at least I hope so. But yes, the pendulum has swung away from the favor of consumer rights.

What's screwed up is it's already been challenged in court. It went all the way to the Supreme Court and was upheld. I believe it was an AT&T case that set the precedent. Although I'd like to clarify an apparent misconception here - you can still sue under such EULA's, but it has to be separate. You can't sue as part of a class action.

was that because of the massive class action(or attemot of it idk) after the hacking ?
Avatar image for deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51

57548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#49 deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
Member since 2004 • 57548 Posts

Ah, thanks for clearing that up. Clever on their part to prevent the class action suit. Because the damages to any one person may be small, but to a large population you could get nailed. Not going to be worth your while for an individual lawsuit over a 60$ game. Not unless you can show some major damages. Tricky companies.

Avatar image for mattbbpl
mattbbpl

20796

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#50 mattbbpl
Member since 2006 • 20796 Posts

[QUOTE="mattbbpl"][QUOTE="sonicare"] Yeah that is wrong, but I'm not sure how well that would hold up in a court of law. Doctors have these consent forms they have you sign which say that all these bad things can happen during surgery, but you can still sue them even if you sign the consent. I suspect something similar applies to the EULAs, or at least I hope so. But yes, the pendulum has swung away from the favor of consumer rights.

MW2ismygame

What's screwed up is it's already been challenged in court. It went all the way to the Supreme Court and was upheld. I believe it was an AT&T case that set the precedent. Although I'd like to clarify an apparent misconception here - you can still sue under such EULA's, but it has to be separate. You can't sue as part of a class action.

was that because of the massive class action(or attemot of it idk) after the hacking ?

No, this was prior to that. AT&T was sticking such provisions in it's service contracts for things like wireless plans.