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

[WindowsStar]

I used to work for a member of Congress. This bill would not be used to take down just pirate sites. It could be used to shut down any site that the U.S. says violates U.S. Code Title 17, which includes U.S. government works, questions of fair use, etc. It also means the U.S. gov't. could shove its nose into ICANN and start dictating who gets domains and who gets them taken away. It means taxpayer dollars could go to public lawyers on behalf of private companies who seek private damages. It means ISPs are under more control of the federal government. This kind of bill was shot down a few years ago. Now there's a president and Congress who salivate at having this kind of control. Trust me, I've worked with these people - they eat this *bleep* up.

Not a fan of piracy, I'm not a black helicopter guy, but I'm not a fan of this particular bill.

You are absolutely correct; I have contracted for the Government.

I will say it again: If we keep giving the Government control we will lose our all freedoms.

 

[WindowsStar]

Illegal file sharing born with PCs. In the old times when there was no internet and copmuters, people made illegal copies of books, pictures, and everything that has a great value.
They can stop all the warez sites or turn off the whole internet, but they can not stop people to share softwares. (There are already exits several big groups that exchanging stafs on HDDs or private LAN parties.)
It would be intresting to know how much percent of the traffic made by illegal and legal transactions. I think if there were no warez on the net, we would be still using slow dial up connections.
One more intresting question is, what do you think about people who has more then 10GB monthly traffic? Don't tell me that they download every month 10gigs of freeware

My monthly download is way over 10gigs so you cannot make that blanket statement like that. I watch Netflix all the time which counts against my monthly download. I watch TV from FOX, ABC, NBC and CBS all the time from their official web sites which also counts against my monthly download. I torrent *IX distros, have access to download PTF ISO's which may be 10 DVD’s worth of ISOs. All of this counts against my monthly downloads and some months I push it to the limit.

 

[WindowsStar]

1). there is probably a free alternative for what I want and I search for it
2). and if I find the free solution doesn't meet my needs, paying for a software package that does is considered
3). So, i compare the value of my need against the cost basis of the software and if my needs outweigh the cost, I buy the software.

I do the same, I buy when a software will help me and there is no free alterative.

 

[Darician]

No point in arguing about it, we're all in agreement here (unless someone reading this has had their head in the mud for the past 9 years)... and as a matter of fact, the reason I started this thread was because I immediately saw the bill for what it is. As I posted in the other thread, throughout history the primary purpose of government has never been to protect the people, it's always been about protecting the rich from the people...

This is 100% true. This bill is about nothing more but ensuring that the rich continue to get richer. It is formatted nicely to sound like it's stopping a legal issue but in reality, it's to have more control over the internet; something the government would love to exert full control over if possible.

The internet is really a bastion of freedom at this point because it's a free exchange of ideas and it is for the most part unregulated when compared to other mediums such as radio and television. If the government is allowed to determine what constitutes a pirate site, they could define something that simply goes against their ideology as a pirate site and block it based on some legalese that they come up with. I certainly don't trust them with decisions of any kind really, especially the US Government that manages to screw up anything it touches. Don't want to get too political but this bill screams bad idea to no end.

As far as piracy being lost sales, I've heard this tired and old argument time and time again and it makes me laugh a bit more each time. I remember in 2007, the MPAA said they were losing millions and millions from all the piracy of movies yet not much later after that statement in 2007, they stated that they had set record profits for the movie industry. I thought "what's the matter, the record not high enough?" Seriously, and I am not advocating piracy, but it is extremely difficult for me to feel any sympathy for these entities because they lost a million or two out of 100 some million.

The fact is with lost sales, this is a flawed view because particularly with movies, I've asked people who watch some movies streamed online for free and they flat out say that if they had to pay for said movies they watched, they just wouldn't have watched them. In this regard madtownidiot is right, these are not potential customers and never will be; they are simply people who want a free lunch and if they can't get it free, then they won't bother with it. Same with software, people will use it for free if they can but if they have to pay even one penny for it, they'll either find an alternative or plain not use it. And the funny thing is I believe Steve Ballmer has said that if software is pirated, they'd rather have people pirate their software simply because it spreads their name. And it truly is a testatement to the popularity of Windows that many people would rather go through the trouble and risk of pirating Windows than getting a legally free copy of Linux. Again, not advocating piracy but these are truths.

But back to the main point, the US Government attempting to regulate anything is always a bad thing because they always manage to do it in favor of corporate interests and screw everything up. If you want an example of government regulation out of control, look at smog checks in California. Or another example, banning the use of cell phones without a hands free headset; you can talk to the companies that make all these accessories about how exactly that safety measure got passed.

 

[WindowsStar]

The internet is really a bastion of freedom at this point because it's a free exchange of ideas and it is for the most part unregulated when compared to other mediums such as radio and television. If the government is allowed to determine what constitutes a pirate site, they could define something that simply goes against their ideology as a pirate site and block it based on some legalese that they come up with. I certainly don't trust them with decisions of any kind really, especially the US Government that manages to screw up anything it touches. Don't want to get too political but this bill screams bad idea to no end.

I said basically the same thing, and completely agree.

As far as piracy being lost sales, I've heard this tired and old argument time and time again and it makes me laugh a bit more each time. I remember in 2007, the MPAA said they were losing millions and millions from all the piracy of movies yet not much later after that statement in 2007, they stated that they had set record profits for the movie industry. I thought "what's the matter, the record not high enough?" Seriously, and I am not advocating piracy, but it is extremely difficult for me to feel any sympathy for these entities because they lost a million or two out of 100 some million.

Agreed!

The music and film industry have always cried wolf on everything that is able to copy their intellectual property.

But let’s look at what really happens:

Cassette tapes come out and the music industry starts screaming they will lose billions of dollars because now everyone will just recorded the music from the radio. Truth record music sales.

Recordable CDs come out and the music industry starts screaming they will lose billions of dollars because now everyone will just digitally copy CDs. Truth record music sales.

Recordable DVD come out and the music and film industry starts screaming they will lose billions of dollars because now everyone will just digitally copy DVDs. Truth record music/film sales.

Internet downloading of music or film. Music and film industry starts screaming they will lose billions and billions of dollars because now everyone will just download digitally copies. Truth the most sales ever, because their content is being exposed to more people than ever before. Many people are exposed to music they have never heard of and go out and buy it. They see a film by someone director or writer and buy other films by them. Again record sales.

When they start to embrace the technology they make even more money. (i.e. iTunes)

Note: I do not in any way condone piracy.

 

[lorddenis]

. So....how can you say that if I would have pirated that software that no money would have been lost?

Do you honestly believe yourself?

A vast majority of people are basically honest, and have a conscience that prevents them from stealing the first place.

People who pirate software and music are not honest people. Many of them probably don't have the money to afford whatever it is they're pirating, and except for a small minority of borderline characters, the rest of them would probably never pay for some things under any circumstance.. so where's the loss?

I'm not advocating piracy by any means, but really, this proposed law only focuses on piracy because it's a good excuse to introduce a new measure of control to people's lives

how can you say that people who download are not honest people ? they cant aford somthing and so they get it like this.

for me not honest people are the ones who sel what they have pirated and make profit out of it.

This is 100% true. This bill is about nothing more but ensuring that the rich continue to get richer. It is formatted nicely to sound like it's stopping a legal issue but in reality, it's to have more control over the internet; something the government would love to exert full control over if possible.

The internet is really a bastion of freedom at this point because it's a free exchange of ideas and it is for the most part unregulated when compared to other mediums such as radio and television. If the government is allowed to determine what constitutes a pirate site, they could define something that simply goes against their ideology as a pirate site and block it based on some legalese that they come up with. I certainly don't trust them with decisions of any kind really, especially the US Government that manages to screw up anything it touches. Don't want to get too political but this bill screams bad idea to no end.

As far as piracy being lost sales, I've heard this tired and old argument time and time again and it makes me laugh a bit more each time. I remember in 2007, the MPAA said they were losing millions and millions from all the piracy of movies yet not much later after that statement in 2007, they stated that they had set record profits for the movie industry. I thought "what's the matter, the record not high enough?" Seriously, and I am not advocating piracy, but it is extremely difficult for me to feel any sympathy for these entities because they lost a million or two out of 100 some million.

The fact is with lost sales, this is a flawed view because particularly with movies, I've asked people who watch some movies streamed online for free and they flat out say that if they had to pay for said movies they watched, they just wouldn't have watched them. In this regard madtownidiot is right, these are not potential customers and never will be; they are simply people who want a free lunch and if they can't get it free, then they won't bother with it. Same with software, people will use it for free if they can but if they have to pay even one penny for it, they'll either find an alternative or plain not use it. And the funny thing is I believe Steve Ballmer has said that if software is pirated, they'd rather have people pirate their software simply because it spreads their name. And it truly is a testatement to the popularity of Windows that many people would rather go through the trouble and risk of pirating Windows than getting a legally free copy of Linux. Again, not advocating piracy but these are truths.

But back to the main point, the US Government attempting to regulate anything is always a bad thing because they always manage to do it in favor of corporate interests and screw everything up. If you want an example of government regulation out of control, look at smog checks in California. Or another example, banning the use of cell phones without a hands free headset; you can talk to the companies that make all these accessories about how exactly that safety measure got passed.

+1

 

[wilywombat]

For my 2 cents worth...These senators would better serve their public by forming better legislation on spam. They would serve their corporate financiers better if anti-spam legislation were more effective and do Joe Public the same favour at the same time. Spammers are really the parasites of the internet not the guys who download a program that deprives the big corps of a drop in the ocean of profits they get!...So lets see the big well meaning senators tackle spam as a priority to the benefit of all...unless of course banning spam is not to their advantage....
Just my 2 cents worth

 

[OneSerious]

A vast majority of people are basically honest, and have a conscience that prevents them from stealing the first place.

People who pirate software and music are not honest people. Many of them probably don't have the money to afford whatever it is they're pirating, and except for a small minority of borderline characters, the rest of them would probably never pay for some things under any circumstance.. so where's the loss?

I work with a bunch of honest people and I have friends that are honest people...but I've seen them all pirate software and music and they have asked me about places to get some of this software for free. And I have to admit to them that although I am an IT guy...I honestly don't know where to get this stuff.

There are lots of basically honest people who pirate software simply because it's so easy to do. So, for some of these people, they would pirate less if things were a bit more difficult.

The difference between these honest people and me being honest...is that I more or less follow a principal that says
1). there is probably a free alternative for what I want and I search for it
2). and if I find the free solution doesn't meet my needs, paying for a software package that does is considered
3). So, i compare the value of my need against the cost basis of the software and if my needs outweigh the cost, I buy the software.

Not everybody sticks to principals like this. I do realize this. And I work for a software company currently and have always worked for software companies...so I have a basic need for software to not be stolen. Obviously this sways my viewpoint.

pparks1 I've read most of your posts here. You must understand that piracy is subject to opinion. There are plenty of musicians, actors and so on out there who advocate file sharing. I mean as far as I know, copyright laws prohibit lending media purchased. You ever let your honest friends borrow a DVD or CD? Hypothetically if I buy an album and want to send it to friend why shouldn't I? I paid for it. If I want to give it to multiple friends why shouldn't I? If I want to give it away to hundreds of people online why shouldn't I? At the end of the day I paid for it and if that's what I want to do with the item that I (or somebody else) paid for, why shouldn't I? Copyright laws serve only to make the rich richer.

You said about Adobe charging for Photoshop and how maybe they would charge less for it if everybody stopped pirating and bought it. You best believe they wouldn't.

 

[jimbo45]

C'mon Peeps
GET REAL

All you have to do is logon to a private VPN server OUTSIDE the US and then you can do what you want.

Politicians DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE INTERNET.

Don't worry about the ISP stuff.

Here's for example a good PROXY site that allows P2P without too many problems. Torrents are also UNCAPPED if you logon to UK / NL / DE servers too.

YourPrivateVPN | Privacy Solutions

It always amazes me how people can pay ZILLIONS of Dollars to Bail out the banks but then seem to have it in with a vengeance for a few kids sharing music -- after all we ALL used to share our old CD's didn't we.

Most musicians these days make their money via LIVE GIGS (thank goodness these are back in vogue) or via Youtube etc.

The days of the big record labels ARE OVER whether the moguls LIKE IT OR NOT.

This is probably near the "bone" but sometimes people who have "used" pirated stuff eventually buy the legitimate versions too which they would NEVER have done had they not had a chance to try it out first.

I'm not advocating Piracy -- far from it but we need to get real as to where the ACTUAL problem lies.

For example the amount paid by the US Govt to bail out failing Banks and insurance companies would have paid for every Microsoft product to be given FREE to EVERY individual in the United states 100 times over with plenty of more money left over afterwards - but who asked questions of what the Banks were doing with this money --same old stuff as before it seems judging by the latest Wall St reports.

I always ask in these types of discussions Who is really protecting whom.

Finally I DO ocasionally UPLOAD songs to some of these sites -- When I bought CD's I could tell a colleague listen to this track you might like it.

What's the difference with that and Music I've LEGITIMATELY purchased. In any case I COULD still make a CD out of it and pass it around just as before.

Sometimes also people listen to the track and then BUY the whole Album.

Music distribution is definitely totally different to Software Piracy but the principles are essentially the same -- overcharge a desirable product and then there is NO way on this planet you'll prevent Piracy.

Hackers don't have to operate within Corporate rules and can "Release" their products out of the door at any time.

The SHEER inertia and beaurocratic processes that any change control at a large corporation have to complete will render THEIR solutions OBSOLETE long before they've implemented their fix.

Cheers
jimbo

 

[24c]

This thread is sponsored by Robin Hood and his Merry Men, you know, the guys in tights in a forest called Sherwood.

 

[Tews]

Dont forget Maid Merian!!

 

[madtownidiot]

The only reason we have any of the freedoms we have is because the people who wrote the constitution were afraid of what might have happened otherwise.. This bill is simply another step towards an inevitable progression towards a totalitarian society, which progress is only throttled by the imagination of the those in power and what they believe the administration will cooperate with.

Spam and malware domains generate income for most of the rest of the software and hardware industry, which is probably why they weren't even mentioned in the bill. Public interest is almost never the primary focus when legislation is being written. If anything the government does makes no sense, it's only because you haven't determined the most important legal factor of all.. Cui bono ..who profits?

 

[jimbo45]

This thread is sponsored by Robin Hood and his Merry Men, you know, the guys in tights in a forest called Sherwood.

Hi there
Was he actually WRONG.

In my experience Local Govt officials are about the worst example of "Mini Hitlers" in ANY country. Give "Nobody's" a tiny smidgen of power and just see what happens.


I'm sure the old Sheriff of Nottingham was a really HONEST law abiding soul who never received any Patronage from the Kings officials - did he.

I believe in those days as well Tax collectors were entitled to a %ge of what they could actually collect.

Thank goodness THOSE days and that method of tax collection are over.

Actually if you believe in "conspiracy theories" then most Virus and Malware programs are really written by people working for AV companies so they can frighten people into buying their anti Malware and Virus products.

Cheers
jimbo

 

[24c]

This thread is sponsored by Robin Hood and his Merry Men, you know, the guys in tights in a forest called Sherwood.

Hi there
Was he actually WRONG.

In my experience Local Govt officials are about the worst example of "Mini Hitlers" in ANY country. Give "Nobody's" a tiny smidgen of power and just see what happens.


I'm sure the old Sheriff of Nottingham was a really HONEST law abiding soul who never received any Patronage from the Kings officials - did he.

I believe in those days as well Tax collectors were entitled to a %ge of what they could actually collect.

Thank goodness THOSE days and that method of tax collection are over.

Actually if you believe in "conspiracy theories" then most Virus and Malware programs are really written by people working for AV companies so they can frighten people into buying their anti Malware and Virus products.

Cheers
jimbo

Taking something that doesn't belong to you is wrong. Feel free to justify it all you want/ need to - it is still wrong.

 

[jimbo45]

This thread is sponsored by Robin Hood and his Merry Men, you know, the guys in tights in a forest called Sherwood.

Hi there
Was he actually WRONG.

In my experience Local Govt officials are about the worst example of "Mini Hitlers" in ANY country. Give "Nobody's" a tiny smidgen of power and just see what happens.


I'm sure the old Sheriff of Nottingham was a really HONEST law abiding soul who never received any Patronage from the Kings officials - did he.

I believe in those days as well Tax collectors were entitled to a %ge of what they could actually collect.

Thank goodness THOSE days and that method of tax collection are over.

Actually if you believe in "conspiracy theories" then most Virus and Malware programs are really written by people working for AV companies so they can frighten people into buying their anti Malware and Virus products.

Cheers
jimbo

Taking something that doesn't belong to you is wrong. Feel free to justify it all you want/ need to - it is still wrong.

Hi there
My post was about UPLOADING stuff that I've PAID for the same as I could do with a CD track -- why not -- I don't support Piracy -- and I certainly DO NOT support any organsation that will attempt to block ISP's.

We can see where all this will lead to if left unchecked -- any left wing or Union organisation in the USA could have their websites shut down by a future Republican or relatively Right Wing govt for supporting "Subversive" views - and by the nature of typical Politicians these days "Subersive" can tend to mean different to those from the ruling party.

Even worse these days they can even throw "Anti Terrorist" legislation against these sites -- much harder to defend against.

Once we go down this road there isn't any end until maybe the events of 1939 - 1945 rears up an ugly head again.

Cheers
Jimbo

 

[24c]

OK!

 

[Bootz]

Hi there
Was he actually WRONG.

In my experience Local Govt officials are about the worst example of "Mini Hitlers" in ANY country. Give "Nobody's" a tiny smidgen of power and just see what happens.


I'm sure the old Sheriff of Nottingham was a really HONEST law abiding soul who never received any Patronage from the Kings officials - did he.

I believe in those days as well Tax collectors were entitled to a %ge of what they could actually collect.

Thank goodness THOSE days and that method of tax collection are over.

Actually if you believe in "conspiracy theories" then most Virus and Malware programs are really written by people working for AV companies so they can frighten people into buying their anti Malware and Virus products.

Cheers
jimbo

Taking something that doesn't belong to you is wrong. Feel free to justify it all you want/ need to - it is still wrong.

Hi there
My post was about UPLOADING stuff that I've PAID for the same as I could do with a CD track -- why not -- I don't support Piracy -- and I certainly DO NOT support any organsation that will attempt to block ISP's.

We can see where all this will lead to if left unchecked -- any left wing or Union organisation in the USA could have their websites shut down by a future Republican or relatively Right Wing govt for supporting "Subversive" views - and by the nature of typical Politicians these days "Subersive" can tend to mean different to those from the ruling party.

Even worse these days they can even throw "Anti Terrorist" legislation against these sites -- much harder to defend against.

Once we go down this road there isn't any end until maybe the events of 1939 - 1945 rears up an ugly head again.

Cheers
Jimbo

I agree accept you seem to have it backwards... The left are the ones in power right now and are responable for trying to pass this bill.

 

[geekfreak]

No point in arguing about it, we're all in agreement here (unless someone reading this has had their head in the mud for the past 9 years)... and as a matter of fact, the reason I started this thread was because I immediately saw the bill for what it is. As I posted in the other thread, throughout history the primary purpose of government has never been to protect the people, it's always been about protecting the rich from the people...

This is 100% true. This bill is about nothing more but ensuring that the rich continue to get richer. It is formatted nicely to sound like it's stopping a legal issue but in reality, it's to have more control over the internet; something the government would love to exert full control over if possible.

The internet is really a bastion of freedom at this point because it's a free exchange of ideas and it is for the most part unregulated when compared to other mediums such as radio and television. If the government is allowed to determine what constitutes a pirate site, they could define something that simply goes against their ideology as a pirate site and block it based on some legalese that they come up with. I certainly don't trust them with decisions of any kind really, especially the US Government that manages to screw up anything it touches. Don't want to get too political but this bill screams bad idea to no end.

As far as piracy being lost sales, I've heard this tired and old argument time and time again and it makes me laugh a bit more each time. I remember in 2007, the MPAA said they were losing millions and millions from all the piracy of movies yet not much later after that statement in 2007, they stated that they had set record profits for the movie industry. I thought "what's the matter, the record not high enough?" Seriously, and I am not advocating piracy, but it is extremely difficult for me to feel any sympathy for these entities because they lost a million or two out of 100 some million.

The fact is with lost sales, this is a flawed view because particularly with movies, I've asked people who watch some movies streamed online for free and they flat out say that if they had to pay for said movies they watched, they just wouldn't have watched them. In this regard madtownidiot is right, these are not potential customers and never will be; they are simply people who want a free lunch and if they can't get it free, then they won't bother with it. Same with software, people will use it for free if they can but if they have to pay even one penny for it, they'll either find an alternative or plain not use it. And the funny thing is I believe Steve Ballmer has said that if software is pirated, they'd rather have people pirate their software simply because it spreads their name. And it truly is a testatement to the popularity of Windows that many people would rather go through the trouble and risk of pirating Windows than getting a legally free copy of Linux. Again, not advocating piracy but these are truths.

But back to the main point, the US Government attempting to regulate anything is always a bad thing because they always manage to do it in favor of corporate interests and screw everything up. If you want an example of government regulation out of control, look at smog checks in California. Or another example, banning the use of cell phones without a hands free headset; you can talk to the companies that make all these accessories about how exactly that safety measure got passed.

Darician Triple A+

 

[jimbo45]

Taking something that doesn't belong to you is wrong. Feel free to justify it all you want/ need to - it is still wrong.

Hi there
My post was about UPLOADING stuff that I've PAID for the same as I could do with a CD track -- why not -- I don't support Piracy -- and I certainly DO NOT support any organsation that will attempt to block ISP's.

We can see where all this will lead to if left unchecked -- any left wing or Union organisation in the USA could have their websites shut down by a future Republican or relatively Right Wing govt for supporting "Subversive" views - and by the nature of typical Politicians these days "Subersive" can tend to mean different to those from the ruling party.

Even worse these days they can even throw "Anti Terrorist" legislation against these sites -- much harder to defend against.

Once we go down this road there isn't any end until maybe the events of 1939 - 1945 rears up an ugly head again.

Cheers
Jimbo

I agree accept you seem to have it backwards... The left are the ones in power right now and are responable for trying to pass this bill.

Hi there
it works EITHER way round -- I'm not too familiar with the Internal Politics of the USA but the point was to say that organisations CONTRARY to the views of the Ruling party WHETHER LEFT OR RIGHT could easily have their websites banned by this type of legislation.

Cheers
jimbo

 

[OneSerious]

Taking something that doesn't belong to you is wrong. Feel free to justify it all you want/ need to - it is still wrong.

Like I said earlier, according to copyright laws you aren't even aloud to lend, yes lend the media you purchase. Now I've never met anybody who doesn't do that. So it makes me smile when people high and mighty about piracy.

So where does it stop? Go round fining people for letting their mate watch a DVD they bought.