Stop Internet Censorship!

[Gracinfields]

I see TBs video is already posted. He is quite right about the whole thing. Its reason like congress trying to pass laws on things they have extremely little knowledge or listing to only to people who shove money in their face is the reason why I think the US is pushing toward a second Civil war. As the government gets more and more out of touch with the people their suppose to sever and protect. The founding father would be highly upset with our current government as it is what they fought against. What needs to be changed is the rules governing the lobbiest in Washington and a more proactive approach that allows more of a connection between the government and the people their suppose to serve.

[HeyYou]

A lot of what he says won't make much sense if you don't know some of his videos/series.

That video should be proof to everyone that the major corporations are trying to take over. I would personally love to see them fail for trying to dictate our lives so boldly. I'm betting that this bill is going to pass, since it is apparent that the U.S. is becoming a police state. However, the reaction of the people to this will not also be so easy to predict. Let's hope for the best, plan for the worst.

 

What do you mean "Trying to take over."?? Looks to me like they have been pretty much successful.

[marharth]

A lot of what he says won't make much sense if you don't know some of his videos/series.

That video should be proof to everyone that the major corporations are trying to take over. I would personally love to see them fail for trying to dictate our lives so boldly. I'm betting that this bill is going to pass, since it is apparent that the U.S. is becoming a police state. However, the reaction of the people to this will not also be so easy to predict. Let's hope for the best, plan for the worst.

 

What do you mean "Trying to take over."?? Looks to me like they have been pretty much successful.

For the most part, we still have some things that are not under corporate control. Mainly the internet.

[Deleted1744345User]

What do you mean "Trying to take over."?? Looks to me like they have been pretty much successful.

I'll probably be ostracized for saying this, but look up NWO. That is my point. You can choose to believe it or not, but I have been convinced. Also, what they currently have just isn't enough for them. It all comes down to basic human nature, which is greed. Yes, they are that evil.

However, I do not wish to debate whether they are evil or not; I'm just putting out some supporting evidence that nothing good can come out of this bill. Except more money in their fat pockets.

[Sepherose]

Here is another interesting thing about SOPA, well, a few interesting things.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fb-_p2q90PA

[hector530]

here's govtrack.us

 

it shows a bills' progress as it becomes a law or try's to.

 

it also gives you the names of everyone who sponsored, wrote, and voted for said bill. it also shows you how to contact them.

 

and some tips on contacting them here

 

and this website will help you find who are your senators and representatives and contact them.

 

also popvox is like govtrack but is more social it also shows organizations that oppose or support it

 

now give me your kudos for helping you find how to send angry emails at your leaders

[Sepherose]

here's govtrack.us

 

it shows a bills' progress as it becomes a law or try's to.

 

it also gives you the names of everyone who sponsored, wrote, and voted for said bill. it also shows you how to contact them.

 

and some tips on contacting them here

 

and this website will help you find who are your senators and representatives and contact them.

 

also popvox is like govtrack but is more social it also shows organizations that oppose or support it

 

now give me your kudos for helping you find how to send angry emails at your leaders

 

Er, I have already sent out about 15 emails to some of the appropriate people. And you know, demanding Kudos isn't the way to get them :P (But I'll give you one anyway lol)

[hector530]

here's govtrack.us

 

it shows a bills' progress as it becomes a law or try's to.

 

it also gives you the names of everyone who sponsored, wrote, and voted for said bill. it also shows you how to contact them.

 

and some tips on contacting them here

 

and this website will help you find who are your senators and representatives and contact them.

 

also popvox is like govtrack but is more social it also shows organizations that oppose or support it

 

now give me your kudos for helping you find how to send angry emails at your leaders

 

Er, I have already sent out about 15 emails to some of the appropriate people. And you know, demanding Kudos isn't the way to get them :P (But I'll give you one anyway lol)

 

yes but not everyone knows how or who to write to or even know what their government does. most of the time its just blaming the president or blaming some else who has nothing to to with this. it also pretty sad that Americans start paying attribution to the government now that cat youtube videos wont have crappy pop music they love so much.

 

im against SOPA but S.1867 (biggest assault on constitutionally protected civil liberties since the PATRIOT act) is a much more pressing matter but no one cares. S.1867 has already passed the senate while i think SOPA will die on the senate floor.

 

as far as Americans are worried about

 

cat videos with pop music > writ of Habeus Corpus

Edited December 23, 2011 by hector530

[Sepherose]

here's govtrack.us

 

it shows a bills' progress as it becomes a law or try's to.

 

it also gives you the names of everyone who sponsored, wrote, and voted for said bill. it also shows you how to contact them.

 

and some tips on contacting them here

 

and this website will help you find who are your senators and representatives and contact them.

 

also popvox is like govtrack but is more social it also shows organizations that oppose or support it

 

now give me your kudos for helping you find how to send angry emails at your leaders

 

Er, I have already sent out about 15 emails to some of the appropriate people. And you know, demanding Kudos isn't the way to get them :P (But I'll give you one anyway lol)

 

yes but not everyone knows how or who to write to or even know what their government does. most of the time its just blaming the president or blaming some else who has nothing to to with this. it also pretty sad that Americans start paying attribution to the government now that cat youtube videos wont have crappy pop music they love so much.

 

im against SOPA but S.1867 (biggest assault on constitutionally protected civil liberties since the PATRIOT act) is a much more pressing matter but no one cares. S.1867 has already passed the senate while i think SOPA will die on the senate floor.

 

as far as Americans are worried about

 

cat videos with pop music > writ of Habeus Corpus

 

I do agree that s. 1867 is a bit more pressing. (That's an understatement.)

And sorry if it seemed like I was brushing you off, I was trying to be a bit silly, since the whole thread got a tad tense before. You gave useful info, so thank you :)

 

I think there is a thread somewhere around here that has to do with S. 1867 if you haven't seen it.

 

Ah, here it is.

[lukertin]

Wrong: Any Judge in the US is a part of at LEAST one of the 94 district courts that are part of the structure of the Judicial branch of government. Also, you seem to be saying that if a website gets shut down under a different guise than censorship, that it isn't censorship. At the very least you imply that since the Judges sole job is not to examine and close down the site, therefore it isn't censorship.

The Judicial branch of government is not a governing body of the Federal system of government. Governing body implies the executive branch of government, since it's the actual part of the government responsible for enforcing laws. I.e., it's the governing body. Do you understand this?

 

Suffice to say, I'll put it this way, but again I will say that I do NOT support piracy: Breaking the law through piracy or some other means is technically a way to express oneself, providing illegal materials is again the same thing, essentially we have the right to choose to do it or not, but have to deal with LEGAL recourse if we break the law. Now, to elaborate, I would like to say that I have no issue with an illegal site being shut down so long as there is sufficient evidence that it was illegal.

And SOPA doesn't do anything more than what you have no issue with. So why do you have an issue?

 

As for the article I posted that started this whole back and forth, I would like to point out that it was supposed counterfeiting. This would have been easy to prove, as all Chanel would have had to do was show that these sites are selling their brand on items they didn't produce. This, as far as I know was not the case with the exception of a few. Here, read this, it's an excerpt, and I will go over how this is WRONG:

 

The case has been a remarkable one. Concerned about counterfeiting, Chanel has filed a joint suit in Nevada against nearly 700 domain names that appear to have nothing in common. When Chanel finds more names, it simply uses the same case and files new requests for more seizures. (A recent November 14 order went after an additional 228 sites; none had a chance to contest the request until after it was approved and the names had been seized.)

 

How were the sites investigated? For the most recent batch of names, Chanel hired a Nevada investigator to order from three of the 228 sites in question. When the orders arrived, they were reviewed by a Chanel official and declared counterfeit. The other 225 sites were seized based on a Chanel anti-counterfeiting specialist browsing the Web.

 

1. Chanel can simply put in a request form, and add NEW sites to the list of ones ruled against in the original case, rather than a new case being started. This is circumvention of due process, and SOPA would allow this regularly.

Actually, no. Simply because one judge failed to understand the grounds for issuing a preliminary injunction, and failed to understand basic in rem jurisdiction principles any first-year law student is familiar with, does not mean SOPA would "allow this regularly" SOPA cannot overrule Title 28 of the US Code, Supreme Court regulations on Civil Procedure, or the Bill of the Rights.

 

2. No site was contacted until AFTER the seizure order had been given.

 

3. "The other 225 sites were seized based on a Chanel anti-counterfeiting specialist browsing the Web." Notice how that last sentence says NOTHING about a court appointed individual? It was a behind closed doors decision of an EMPLOYEE of Chanel, when it should have been cross checked, at the very least, by an impartial court appointee.

See above.

 

4. Taking into account points 1,2, & 3, the case was not carried out by following legal means, corners were cut that removed the rights of the defendants, therefore, the whole trial was illegal.

 

So, notice that only a very small fraction of a percent of those sites had solid proof against it? That is my problem, primarily. I have no issue with those that broke the law being punished. It's the others without due process being punished at the whim of a company.

Since SOPA wasn't implicated in this failure of the judicial system what does it have to do with anything? It isn't like there aren't safeguards against improper injunctions--you realize Chanel probably had to front a substantial bond to the court in case it was wrong. Like, millions of dollars in bonds. So the wronged defendants can counter-sue for damages.

 

Now, how is this censorship? Alright, I'll put it this way: What if many of those companies, rather than counterfeiting Chanel products, were making legitimate generic versions? Like generic or "off-brand" shampoo/cereal/etc. This is a possibility, and THIS is where censorship comes into the mix, because if those companies are only producing "off-brand" versions of name brand products, they are exercising their right in this economic model to do so. If that happens it is because the name brand company has decided that it is "objectionable", and therefore should be shut down or seized. It is, in the end, censorship in those cases.

Assuming they were making generic versions, I concede you that point. Assuming.

Edited December 26, 2011 by lukertin