SOPA

[egosheep]

Yeah, I couldn't have said it better myself Erik. You can't measure 5 million illegal downloads as 5 million dollars in lost sales.

If there were 10 pallets of new Crock Pots left sitting in the middle of a Wal Mart parking lot, they would probably be gone in 2 hours. That doesn't mean they would sell the same amount if they were in a prominent store display for $29.99 each.

[winston]

It is indeed a complex problem to address Thomas......and it would seem that there is no clear answer in sight.

[nukebass]

You can't equate used sales to piracy. Each CD, for instance, contains the rights to each of those songs. I have bought many used items I had no intention of buying used because of the price (so you can't call those lost revenues), but the artist still made money on that one CD and there is still only one CD out in the market. It is different, of course, if someone copies the CD and then sells it, but I have no control of that as the end user.

I haven't read the bill so I can't really state an opinion on it. When I saw it being protested and the title I wondered what the point was since piracy is currently illegal. Technically, those YouTube video covers are illegal, but nobody is enforcing it yet. I often wonder (even though I haven't read this particular bill yet, so don't know it's true extent) why new laws are always being passed when it seems like the old laws could just be enforced if the subject is an actual issue.

[rickenbrother]

There's so that much I'd like to go on ranting about website infringement and piracy. I'm in the middle of an issue right now.
But I need to refrain and I will.

[doctorwho]

This can become all too quickly one of those contentious issues that we have seen and argued about in the past. Personally, I don't think that the current bills before Congress are the best way to solve the problems with infringement and piracy, but I do believe that Internet criminal activity needs to be brought to an end. This has to be done internationally, not just by the USA.

I will say this: there are ISPs that do try to do the right thing and enforce the existing laws, but there are some ISPs (I don't know whether they are a minority or majority) that don't care that they are turning a blind eye to illegal activity and don't want to do the right thing, and IMO, it is the latter that have helped to create the congressional perception of the "need" for SOPA and similar legislation.

[lennon211]

I completely understand it from that point, but I'd say the Cons of the Bill outweigh the Pros. This would cost the loss of all of the free information that is used for research in schools. Even if it does go through (I don't think it will, based on the fact that many people are pulling out of it) The people who have their heart set on piracy will still find a way, be it on the "deep web" or proxies, or any other way around it. If "Anonymous" (aka /b/ to some) can take down a FBI goverment institution, and hack the Playstation network. They can get past anything. Because they work together. All of this is illegal, like the massive DDOS attacks on websites, but people will still do it. I think that a few bad apples are spoiling it for everyone. I've never downloaded pirated stuff, sure I've broke some minor internet laws in order to listen to a song, and I've nabbed a password of a site to watch a TV show, but thats a drop in the bucket to most. People go wild with pirating, and they not only do it for themselves, but they try to make a profit on it aswell. I mean no disrespect to anyone saying this, I'm just voicing an opinion. If its not good Feel free to delete it.

As a teacher, Ivan, I find that much of the "free information" that is used for research is a five minute search of Wikipedia, which is great for scratching the surface, but does not constitute actual research. Most library/media centers in schools will have plenty of these things called books that are bought and paid for, as well as paid online data services that do provide ample research through reviewed periodicals and other scholarly materials.

Ultimately, there will have to be some kind of compromise made once again that curtails the "free" material available online and once again there will be those who will try to go around it. However, this isn't like Prohibition where the government outlawed an "immoral" product. This is attempting to stop the wholesale distribution of intellectual property.

[Grey]

Well both bills have been shelved for the time being. The Internet won the battle but the war is not over.

[Ivan3000]

I completely understand it from that point, but I'd say the Cons of the Bill outweigh the Pros. This would cost the loss of all of the free information that is used for research in schools. Even if it does go through (I don't think it will, based on the fact that many people are pulling out of it) The people who have their heart set on piracy will still find a way, be it on the "deep web" or proxies, or any other way around it. If "Anonymous" (aka /b/ to some) can take down a FBI goverment institution, and hack the Playstation network. They can get past anything. Because they work together. All of this is illegal, like the massive DDOS attacks on websites, but people will still do it. I think that a few bad apples are spoiling it for everyone. I've never downloaded pirated stuff, sure I've broke some minor internet laws in order to listen to a song, and I've nabbed a password of a site to watch a TV show, but thats a drop in the bucket to most. People go wild with pirating, and they not only do it for themselves, but they try to make a profit on it aswell. I mean no disrespect to anyone saying this, I'm just voicing an opinion. If its not good Feel free to delete it.

As a teacher, Ivan, I find that much of the "free information" that is used for research is a five minute search of Wikipedia, which is great for scratching the surface, but does not constitute actual research. Most library/media centers in schools will have plenty of these things called books that are bought and paid for, as well as paid online data services that do provide ample research through reviewed periodicals and other scholarly materials.

Ultimately, there will have to be some kind of compromise made once again that curtails the "free" material available online and once again there will be those who will try to go around it. However, this isn't like Prohibition where the government outlawed an "immoral" product. This is attempting to stop the wholesale distribution of intellectual property.

I see your point, but not everything is in a book. Books are very useful, and a hell of a lot easier to MLA site than webpages, but when information is literally at your fingertips, its fantastic. I'm on the cusp of old school days. I once did have to use books to research, so I know that its so much nicer to use the internet, than books.

From a teachers standpoint though, it may make researching easy, and students don't have to work as much, so I can see that.

[egosheep]

There is a lot of great information on the internet, and there will be much more as time moves on and more books are scanned and made available. A great portion of the books in our history(anything before 1923) are now out of copyright, and perfectly legal to be shared. Bittorrent allows literature and art to be spread far and wide for anyone who wants to share and be educated. Never before have so many people had the ability to, for instance, download a high resolution photo of every Van Gogh painting, all at once and within a few minutes. It's way beyond getting a book off a library shelf. So it's a tool you can use in a lot of ways... whether you want to just "scratch the surface" or dive right down the rabbit hole, is up to you.

[Grey]

Most library/media centers in schools will have plenty of these things called books that are bought and paid for, as well as paid online data services that do provide ample research through reviewed periodicals and other scholarly materials.

So you're saying information and knowledge should be limited to people who have access to those resources, rather than by anyone with a computer and a desire to learn?

[lennon211]

Most library/media centers in schools will have plenty of these things called books that are bought and paid for, as well as paid online data services that do provide ample research through reviewed periodicals and other scholarly materials.

So you're saying information and knowledge should be limited to people who have access to those resources, rather than by anyone with a computer and a desire to learn?

Not at all. I was more pointing out a rather common assumption on the part of students that I hear a lot. I too feel like I've already said too much in just trying to point this simple academic point out. I did not want to get political, and simply intended to contribute.

[Clint]

Most library/media centers in schools will have plenty of these things called books that are bought and paid for, as well as paid online data services that do provide ample research through reviewed periodicals and other scholarly materials.

So you're saying information and knowledge should be limited to people who have access to those resources, rather than by anyone with a computer and a desire to learn?

As far as North America is concerned, a lot more people have access to Public Libraries than the internet.

[rickenbrother]

There are 'Dummy info storage" sites with ads, making money off other people's efforts. One site might even be using vids from other forum members besides me. Nice, YOU go through the trouble, someone else cashes in.

[cjj]

That definitely sucks...

[T.A.R.]

My congressman(Jim Langevin) informed me of Online Protection and Enforcement of Digital Trade (OPEN) Act. This is an excerpt from his letter I'm using it because I feel he can explain better than I. I can say that I'm glad the process is being worked on and I hope that a reasonable solution can be found.

"For that reason, I was proud to join my colleague Rep. Darrell Issa in introducing the Online Protection and Enforcement of Digital Trade (OPEN) Act. Unlike SOPA and PIPA, the OPEN Act uses a constrained definition of "infringing site," to ensure that only those who willfully engage in counterfeiting or other intellectual property theft will be targeted. The OPEN Act confines its reach to payment processing companies and advertisers, making it a powerful tool for law enforcement without censoring the open web. Finally, the OPEN Act relies on the International Trade Commission (ITC), a well-respected panel of copyright experts, to determine whether a site is a violator rather than relying on general courts. I am confident that the swift passage of the OPEN Act will protect intellectual property owners and maintain the open nature of the internet."