New Bill Would Require U.S. ISPs to Block Pirate Sites

Here.. lets just put all the side arguments that might be speculated on to rest and post the Actual Bill....

QUOTE - "While this bill has the noble-sounding goal of preventing online piracy, handing the federal government authority over the Internet would set a troubling precedent that would imperil Internet freedom in America and across the world."

"Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act" or S.3804.IS

Side Article about this whole thing

Please be very sure that you do not miss this little line...

"To combat online infringement, and for other purposes."

If that is not your red flag, I do not know what is.

Catswold said:

bobtran said:

Catswold said:

Corporations cannot pay taxes, only their customers pay taxes. That's one thing people need to understand. You can't force corporations to pay taxes, precisely because they are legal agreements. Any taxes placed on a corporation invariably get added to the cost of doing business and are automatically passed on to the consumer as an additional tax.

Charge Exxon or BP a "corporate tax," the unit price of gasoline rises commensurately to cover that tax. Any "corporate tax" is a tax on the people. Raise taxes on corporations, you automatically raise taxes on everyone who uses their product.

Obama promised not to raise taxes on those earning under $250,000/year, but by raising corporate taxes, he automatically violates that pledge.

I have repeated what I said in a couple of ways, because this is a fundamental fact that needs to be understood by everyone. Corporations don't pay taxes, only customers pay taxes.

You are correct which is why no corporation should ever be granted personhood under the law (and no I am not arguing both sides of issue, I am stating my opinion related to the granting of privileges without the responsibilities inherent in the concept of personhood).

YOur argument is a non-sequitur. Many people don't pay taxes, are they thus not to be granted "personhood?" Is paying taxes one of the defining characteristics of being a person? Also, though the entity doesn't pay taxes, the owners all pay taxes from their share of profits derived from the corporation doing business.

Laws do not grant "personhood" to corporations, it is part of their definition. Corporations have been in existence since Roman times at least. The reason they are treated as a person is because they are an association of individuals. Corporation, from the Latin word "corpus" meaning "body" as in a "body of people."

If you remove "personhood" from a corporation, then you remove some of their responsibilities as well. A corporation can be sued, just as can an individual.

From Wiki:

In the late eighteenth century, Stewart Kyd, the author of the first treatise on corporate law in English, defined a corporation as,

a collection of many individuals united into one body, under a special denomination, having perpetual succession under an artificial form, and vested, by policy of the law, with the capacity of acting, in several respects, as an individual, particularly of taking and granting property, of contracting obligations, and of suing and being sued, of enjoying privileges and immunities in common, and of exercising a variety of political rights, more or less extensive, according to the design of its institution, or the powers conferred upon it, either at the time of its creation, or at any subsequent period of its existence.

Corporations are one of the most essential cogs which drives the engine of our economies. Don't dis' the corporation.

I made an error posting a personal feeling about the direction that politics are going in this country and the way in which corps are treated to the detriment of the legitimate citizens in this country.

This is WAY off topic and does not belong on SevenForums where we talk about IT and it's ramifications to our society.

Tepid said:

Here.. lets just put all the side arguments that might be speculated on to rest and post the Actual Bill....

QUOTE - "While this bill has the noble-sounding goal of preventing online piracy, handing the federal government authority over the Internet would set a troubling precedent that would imperil Internet freedom in America and across the world."

"Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act"

Side Article about this whole thing

Please be very sure that you do not miss this little line...

"To combat online infringement, and for other purposes."

If that is not your red flag, I do not know what is.

noble ? dont make me laught. they just want too fill their pockets!

fseal said:

Combatting internet piracy is a noble cause. Most bills are wrapped up in noble causes in order to get them passed. It's the hidden text that virtually no one knows is there (except those that wrote the bill) that is the real trouble.

Freqently bills (such as this possibly) are created JUST to give a "noble cause" to a real hidden adgenda which, in this case, really does look like the government wants filter taps on all ISPs runnning all the time for live filtering and surveilance /in the name of combatting piracy/ but of course if passed, to be used "for other purposes" as they see fit.

today nothing is noble its all about the money.