On September 28 2010 17:15 0tso wrote:
"If passed, this law will allow the government, under the command of the media copanies, to censor the internet as they see fit

This line disturbs me.

sCuMBaG

United Kingdom1144 Posts

September 28 2010 14:07 GMT

#42

that might actuall suck hard^^

me for example. i like to watch movies and series in the original english/american synchro, cause obviously german stuff really really sucks hard. now i have the choice to buy a season of let's say two and a half men AFTER IT WAS PUBLISHED IN GERMANY (which takes about a year or more), just to switch to english and watch it.
or i use the internet -.-

Redunzl

862 Posts

September 28 2010 14:12 GMT

#43

On September 28 2010 12:36 Diuqil wrote:
This is fucking scary to be honest. Watch, just watch, if this shit passes everything is going to go down hill. America is losing its freedom. Wiretapping internet, censoring internet, whats next?

'Merica lost its freedom long ago. It has just been a very slow fall to the ground since we were so high up there. After the Cold War, in order to secure her place as #1 stunna, the US and its Project for a New American Century set out to make its hegemony concrete. This sort of stuff in the OP is just an echo of the bodyslam to your liberty that occured in the late 80s.

-fj.

Samoa462 Posts

September 28 2010 14:31 GMT

#44

You know, they can also just claim copyright infringement on anything they don't like, like popular subversive websites. Hell, it worked for the patriot act...

Kurr

Canada2338 Posts

September 28 2010 14:44 GMT

#45

On September 28 2010 20:49 ragingfungus wrote:
I find it funny that alot of people are arguing that this is hurting our freedom or something when this bill from what ive read is specifically designed to stop piracy. Thats kind of like saying arresting criminals is harming our freedom. Personally I think if properly implemented this could possibly provide a bit of a boon to the economy by forcing all the people illegally downloading things to instead be forced to pay for what they want.

The thing is, I would never pay for any of the shows or movies I watch online. Nor the music. All this does is limit what I can do online.

If this passes through I'll just find a new hobby... like playing tennis or something.

Edit : And it also has to potential to stop legitimate sites if they simply don't like them as well.

Trowabarton756

United States870 Posts

September 28 2010 15:01 GMT

#46

.....Im not scared. While I'd rather not have to go through the hassles of this shit theres always another way, always another site, and always more people willing to do it. So the American government thinks they can regulate the internet? HA, I just can't wait to see this fall on their faces, VIA LE REVOLUTION!

ragingfungus

United States271 Posts

September 28 2010 15:09 GMT

#47

On September 28 2010 22:50 Hizzo wrote:

Show nested quote +

This line disturbs me.

I would say thats an effect of the site against the bill blowing things out of proportion to get you to side with them. I didnt find anything in the bill that said anything like that, though I could have missed it, but Im pretty sure Its just those against it trying to decieve the misinformed. I would urge anyone to glance over the actual bill before making harsh judgements. It seems to me they are trying to make people believe they can just censor whatever they want. When in reality they can only censor illegal sites involved in copyright infringement. Again I could be wrong on this as I am by no means a legal expert, but I am quite sure that I am not.

ragingfungus

United States271 Posts

September 28 2010 15:18 GMT

#48

On September 28 2010 23:44 Kurr wrote:

Show nested quote +

Sure, but thats only your specific case. There are plenty of people(I know some personally) that download pretty much every movie/game/music they have ever used. If those people had to actually pay for things like the rest of us I think it could help the industry a bit. As for your comment about stopping legitimate sites simply because they dont like them. I fail to see anywhere in this bill that would give them the power to do that, but feel free to show me otherwise.

hifriend

China7935 Posts

September 28 2010 15:19 GMT

#49

Lol americans.. Really stepping up the insanity this time.

Kalles

Sweden83 Posts

September 28 2010 15:23 GMT

#50

Wikileaks is hosting copyrighted documents I assume, (since they are leaked documents from the state or whatever ... ). Ie this law can (and therefore will) be used to silence critism, whistleblowers etc. Preventing whistleblowers etc is not in the best interest of the people .... aka this law is a bad idea.

Oddysay

Canada597 Posts

September 28 2010 16:10 GMT

#51

edit : im angry the way people act .

better remove my post , sorry

sylverfyre

United States8298 Posts

September 28 2010 16:28 GMT

#52

On September 29 2010 00:23 Kalles wrote:
Wikileaks is hosting copyrighted documents I assume, (since they are leaked documents from the state or whatever ... ). Ie this law can (and therefore will) be used to silence critism, whistleblowers etc. Preventing whistleblowers etc is not in the best interest of the people .... aka this law is a bad idea.

Wikileaks is pretty retarded though. You could (should) get convicted with treason if you were a US citizen and got caught making some of those documents available to anyone in the world. Whistleblowing is one thing. Treason is another.

What really worries me is how much power the media industry is going to have in determining what is and isn't an infringing website. The last thing the RIAA should get be getting is more power.

Also, if they can't shut down foreign websites, are we going to start seeing a replica of the Great Firewall of China in the USA? *shudder*

I don't like this one bit.

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Ben Franklin

FindingPride

United States1001 Posts

September 28 2010 18:34 GMT

#53

On September 29 2010 01:28 sylverfyre wrote:

Show nested quote +

Why dont we use there own words against them. What do they have to hide if they've done nothing wrong?
let the whistleblowers whistle sir.

GreEny K

Germany7312 Posts

September 28 2010 18:46 GMT

#54

On September 28 2010 10:03 Playguuu wrote:
Put your name on the list so they know who to go after when the brownshirts come.

Seriously though, this is frightening.

Yeah i saw the petition and moved right past it to continue to the movie I wanted to find. No way in hell am i signing anything that goes against the government when it is illegal anyway -_- just asking for it then.

nbourg8

1 Post

September 30 2010 07:26 GMT

#55

Plato says, "The penalty for not participating in politics is you become governed by your inferiors."

Hitlers rise to power involved:
Taking over the Banks, Automobiles, Health System, Free Speech and Guns
(sound familiar?)

4/5 Mr. Heussien... not long now before people start getting asked who they voted for by the fearless leader.

BlackJack

United States10574 Posts

September 30 2010 09:40 GMT

#56

^ don't feed the troll

BlackJack

United States10574 Posts

September 30 2010 09:56 GMT

#57

If this bill gets passed we can at least hope that the U.S. supreme court does the right thing. At least they don't pander to lobbyist interests.

dybydx

Canada1764 Posts

September 30 2010 20:55 GMT

#58

i wonder if they consider Youtube or Google to be violators under this new law.

it would be grossly unfair for websites to be shut down just because a few bad apples in the bucket.

agarfin

United States106 Posts

October 01 2010 01:03 GMT

#59

Bumping to save the interwebs! This really needs more attention. 98,000 people have already signed the petition at http://demandprogress.org/blacklist/ and the bill has been stalled. Its so ironic they introduce a massive censorship bill during banned book week ><

Regardless of whether you think piracy is immoral and wrong this bill should not be passed. There are far better methods to stop piracy that dont involve giving the DOJ the power to blacklist web pages with little to no evidence.

ragingfungus

United States271 Posts

October 06 2010 05:31 GMT

#60

On October 01 2010 10:03 agarfin wrote:
Bumping to save the interwebs! This really needs more attention. 98,000 people have already signed the petition at http://demandprogress.org/blacklist/ and the bill has been stalled. Its so ironic they introduce a massive censorship bill during banned book week ><

Regardless of whether you think piracy is immoral and wrong this bill should not be passed. There are far better methods to stop piracy that dont involve giving the DOJ the power to blacklist web pages with little to no evidence.

Im willing to bet that 90% of the people that signed havent even read the bill. They probably just read something on the site about the government trying to censor the web and went omg. Personally I think the government would only shut down sites that realistically should be shut down, but your free to your own opinion. I just wish people would educate themselves on what the bill actually states.