So. What is your personal interpratation of the SOPA and PIPA acts?

[ginnyfizz]

What gives the US Government the right to tell me, an Australian citizen, what I may and may not watch/view/use in the privacy of my own home, on legally obtained software and hardware?

The same thing that gave us the right to do pretty much everything else we've done in the entire history of the US: We're the US, and who the - is going to tell us what we can and can't do?

 

I really do hope you are being merely sardonic there, RZ1029, if you meant that remark in all seriousness then I would share Maigrets' dismay. The problem with SOPA is that it is, in effect, the USA expanding the ways in which it tells the whole of the ruddy world what to do, rather than the other way around.

 

 

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/11/us-judge-orders-hundreds-of-sites-de-indexed-from-google-twitter-bing-facebook.ars?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rss

 

Looks like they don't need SOPA anyway, sites taken down without the owners even being given a chance to contest the case.

 

That's all my genuine Chanel cosmetics and perfumes gone straight in the bin in protest!

 

Seriously, what the hell is the USA thinking of? This interference and control freakery is getting beyond the pale. When they start making blanket orders as in the above case and treating their allies no better than rogue states, it gets worrying. Most of the Americans that I know are (like your good self, HeyYou) embarassed and just as aghast as I am at it all. Perhaps, and I am hoping so, this furore will have woken people up. Maybe Britain will start by digging in their heels over the extradition of Richard O'Dwyer and refusing to ship him out.

 

It will be quite interesting to see what happens if they try to do a Megaupload number on Rapidshare who, as jim_uk has pointed out in another thread, are based in Switzerland. Let's hope they give the idea a gigantic Swiss chocolate coated razzie.

[Aurielius]

What gives the US Government the right to tell me, an Australian citizen, what I may and may not watch/view/use in the privacy of my own home, on legally obtained software and hardware?

The same thing that gave us the right to do pretty much everything else we've done in the entire history of the US: We're the US, and who the - is going to tell us what we can and can't do?

I do hope that was a joke and that you didn't emphasize the fact RZ1029, otherwise that comment and attitude earns you and like thinking people no respect and a lot of enmity.

 

@Maigrets

I am sure that RZ is referring to the concept of enacting copyright legislation for the US, but since we already know how much respect you have for us I don't think we are risking much at all. RZ is correct in the essential matter, it's a bill on the table in our Congress not anyone else's. So the bottom line is that the only opinion that matters is on Capital Hill.

 

Nice convenient misinterpretation of what I said Aurielius. Nowhere did I say I anything about me or anyone else having a lack of respect for the US or it's people and your belief about what I think is so far off base it's laughable. The way RZ1029 worded his comment sounded quite abrasive and mentioned nothing about the Bill itself. I do believe he was replying to Sync182 though in what came across as a snide and arrogant manner. The US as any other nation, has the right to do as it pleases, as long as it's internal and doesn't knowingly adversely affect other countries. I'm not suggesting that will happen with the SOPA bill, but it's highly likely it will and that's what this discussion topic is about. It's not a debate when either side tells the other what to believe is it?

 

My comment about respect and enmity was aimed at RZ1029 and people who think the same as far as rights and who is mightier, not at the Unites States or it's people in general. I'm quite sure he is able to defend himself quite adequately though, however what he has written, without clarification comes across as arrogance and your comment isn't helping.

 

If I misinterpreted what seemed to me to be a very clear sentence then perhaps he, or you would like to clarify what these rights actually mean. "We're the US, and who the - is going to tell us what we can and can't do?" Really? In your country yes, but not in others whether they want it or not. But, as you yourself said about me, and you are so wrong, it's pretty clear what your opinions are as I've read plenty of them, so you need not bother.

 

Please read his sentence again and consider that someone who is not a US citizen may be offended by it. I'd also ask you not to put words in my mouth or pretend to know what I think. I read enough of your derogatory comments to other members to have an idea what your thoughts are towards anyone who disagrees with you. You need to get off your high horse occasionally and consider other people's viewpoints Aurielius, because they are allowed to have them without being looked down upon.

 

With regards to SOPA, if the US wants to enact a bill like it or any other kind of legislation for that matter, it's their right to do it and goes without saying, but it will have an ongoing effect on the rest of the world just because of the type of legislation it is. It is SOPA and it's possible ramifications this topic is about not other US government or internal business.

 

<snip>

 

It was also found that there was more to it than the piracy issue which was actually a secondary consideration in it's presentation, and there were plans to censor books, movies, games and of course the internet. Until it rears it''s ugly head again some time in the future and they try again we can rest easy. Maybe. Hopefully that will be after I'm gone or too old to care because I believe in self censorship and one's own sense of what's right or just wrong, not having it forced on us according to what someone else in power thinks is good for us.

You seem to know quite a bit how I think for someone who doesn't like being told what they think, actually was using your prior postings as a reference point of views on the US. It still changes nothing about whom gets to decide whether the legislation gets passed or shelved only the Capital Hill people will have the final say no matter what you opine here or elsewhere. For someone who has no vote you are very vociferous about what we should or should not enact or have policies on and seem to resent being reminded of your non say in these matters. Unlike you, RZ ,myself and other Americans do have a say, limited as it may be.

 

As for the line by line parsing of RZ's intent , that I will leave to him to do since unlike some I don't know what was going on in his head when he composed it, reading the untyped intent of a post is something I leave to more accomplished seers such as yourself.

 

This in the long run is a trade issue in which some elements of the country feel that their intellectual property is being stolen without recourse to civil or criminal penalties. What I find droll is that only when we (US) enact legislation that is protective then the hue and cry goes up, not a damn thing is ever said about the EU's protectionist barriers or China's rampant theft of copyrighted materials.

Edited January 21, 2012 by Aurielius

[ginnyfizz]

I hold no brief for the EU and their protectionist barriers, but this situation is just not comparable. What the US Government is, in effect, doing is going far beyond protection, it amounts to a cyber invasion of other sovereign nations, a massive power grab over the internet. So are they going to take on the Chinese over their rampant thievery, or just smaller fry who can't fight back?

[Aurielius]

I hold no brief for the EU and their protectionist barriers, but this situation is just not comparable. What the US Government is, in effect, doing is going far beyond protection, it amounts to a cyber invasion of other sovereign nations, a massive power grab over the internet. So are they going to take on the Chinese over their rampant thievery, or just smaller fry who can't fight back?

The probability is that this gutless administration doesn't have to stomach to go after the real big bad guys, so my guess is that they will attempt to make examples out of the more egregious offenders. But then again 1600 Pennsylvania Ave or the Hill doesn't email me their plans. :whistling:

Edited January 21, 2012 by Aurielius

[Marxist ßastard]

doesn't have to stomach to go after the real big bad guys, so my guess is that they will attempt to make examples out of the more egregious offenders

You are aware that "egregious offenders" means "real big bad guys," right? Or are you tripping over your own hippopotomonstrosesquipedalianisms?

[Aurielius]

doesn't have to stomach to go after the real big bad guys, so my guess is that they will attempt to make examples out of the more egregious offenders

You are aware that "egregious offenders" means "real big bad guys," right? Or are you tripping over your own hippopotomonstrosesquipedalianisms?

I find it so droll when you attempt pedagogical admonishments of my use of English, hope that google was sufficient for your triple decker malapropism ( even I had never heard of that one), wouldn't want you to have to resort to what you have at the neural ready. BTW I tend to doubt that egregious offenders and really bad guys are synonymous. But if I provided you with amusement then my life's work is complete, did you lose a series of spelling bees when a youth hence your derision of the use of the English language as a precise tool?

Edited January 22, 2012 by Aurielius

[Marxist ßastard]

the use of the English language as a precise tool?

Um, you said "they won't go after the real big bad guys, so my guess is that they'll go after the real big bad guys." I'm just asking what you meant.

[Aurielius]

the use of the English language as a precise tool?

Um, you said "they won't go after the real big bad guys, so my guess is that they'll go after the real big bad guys." I'm just asking what you meant.

Sigh..sure you were....why don't we leave it as a conundrum that you can puzzle over, that way we both will be amused.

[Keanumoreira]

SOPA has bad written all over it as far as I'm concerned. For whatever reason they have to pretend that they have everybody's best interests' at heart, I'm not buying it. They don't have problems with poverty in the streets or the failing economy, which is an obvious threat to their seats in Congress, yet all of a sudden, they're so concerned about stopping piracy? That's the best line in bull that I've ever heard. :down:

[huntsman2310]

Yes. I am Australian too. A citizien of the world.

 

So why should something that is passed in the United States, a nation across the pacific, be allowed to affect us and everyone else too?