SOPA

I suggest you take a look at post 26 in this thread:
http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ml#post5300536

It would basically allow the government to block all US traffic to a site if someone makes a valid claim that it infringes on copyright. It can also block their means of funding.

It targets sites that make it easy to infringe of copyright. Youtube makes it easy to upload a cartoon and infringe on copyright. There are tons of cool user-built sites that could get destroyed by this.

All porn tube sites would probably be gone and the government would have an incredible amount of power on the internet (which is the last bastion of free speech on this planet). They could effectively censor the internet.

There are also security risks that experts have warned about.

All in all, NOT good for the average person. Good for the rich guys.

There are three primary changes from SOPA.

1. If your website is outside the United States, and illegally violating copyright, the Attorney General can ask a judge to "blacklist" your domain and IP with US internet providers, payment processors, and advertising outlets.

2. If your website is inside the United States, and acting as a traffic diverter to a website illegally violating copyright, the plaintiff in a civil copyright infringement suit against the website where traffic is being diverted can ask a judge to "blacklist" your domain and IP with US payment processors and advertising outlets.

3. If you stream a video or audio recording to one or more people over the internet, this is legally defined as a "distribution" for purposes of copyright legislation.

Now, here's the "happy trail" idea of what this does:

Some nasty pirate is operating a site full of illegal software in Belize or something, and also has a site in the US which redirects traffic there through links to the other server. The Federal government can shut down all US traffic to the site in Belize, and all US advertising and payment processing for both sites, so this nasty pirate can no longer advertise or collect money or even get traffic from the United States.

And here's the "scary monster" idea:

You post something on your blog and link to a domain on a shared server where one IP leads to multiple domains, and one of those domains is a pirate site but you don't know it. The Federal government shuts off your advertising and payment processing, so you lose all your income.

Both scenarios are possible under SOPA as currently written. The opposition to SOPA is largely because people want some assurance that the "scary monster" scenario won't happen, but they don't seem to grasp that without that scenario you never get the "happy trail" scenario either. The nasty pirate in that scenario doesn't think he's a nasty pirate. He thinks the government is unfairly targeting him because they're all dicks and don't like internet marketers.

For those of you wondering why SOPA is a bad thing, here's the short version: It is over reaching, lacks due process, and is too broad to keep anybody with a web site out of the cross hairs.

Another good description of SOPA is by Jason Falls on the Social Media Explorer website:

SOPA Is Not A Black Or White Issue | Social Media Explorer

And there is also a link to sign a petition to oppose it for those who are opposed to it.

Brians post above is a good summary.

Marvin

So does SOPA good for us internet marketer or not?
From what I have read, SOPA is good right.. We want to stop piracy..

The Wikipedia article was outstanding. What scares ME is that a couple of points that were used as argument in favor but which I see as very negative:

Rights-holders see intermediaries - the companies who host, link to, and provide e-commerce around the content - as the only accessible defendants

and

John Clark, spokesman for Pfizer, testified at the committee hearing that patients could not always detect cleverly forged websites selling drugs that were either misbranded or simply counterfeit.

... Or which are Canadian (illegal to buy them, even if they're legitimate, but people are so desperate for AFFORDABLE healthcare and meds in this country that they will do that anyway).

Found this on YT this morning. Is sums it up in the first few minutes then goes into details. Very worth listening to IMHO. Find out the big corporations, such as CBS/Viacom, that are spending millions to push SOPA are the very ones that made, distributed and instructed people how to download copyrighted material -- and made money doing it

First, THIS IS NOT POLITICS. Not even close. This is POLICY and both parties put the bills together plus opposition comes from people in both parties or none, all across the country. One way or another, these bills WOULD affect the internet, WOULD potentially affect our businesses either from afar or up close and personal. We NEED to be able to discuss the implications.

I thought this excerpt from an editorial in the NYT about boht SOPA and PIPA was worth considering. It strikes terror into my heart and I can't understand why others wouldn't respond similarly:

And then there's this, and since Homeland Security was involved in some of the recent clampdowns on the Occupy movement, it's nothing to sneeze at:

Then there are sites like pinterest.com, which I adore. I go there regularly (several times a week) to take a mental vacation. I'm thinking about 100% of the content there is copyrighted, with absolutely no harm done in the process IMO. In fact, one could argue that pinterest promotes the sites where the images originated. Too, some of the content is uploaded by the owners of the photos and images. Anyway, it seems to me pinterest.com would just have to disappear, which would be a terrible loss.

Forgot the NYT link: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/16/op...eech.html?_r=3

Looks like a lot of opinion, conjecture, and even some plain old, superstition, but you know that is what I love about the Internet, if you want to be a geek you can, and if you want to be totally uninformed you can also do that.,

So why not spread the table the right way, the thing is most of the time the Internet works, sure its not perfect, and yes, there are, from time to time, some things that should not exist online. But who should decide, what should have a place online and what should not exist at all, that is something that is not so easily decided, and while sometimes you might be able to point to a website and say that should not exist, there are other websites and places online where it is not so easy to figure out and should we allow a minority of the people to decide what is and what is not suitable for consumption, (remember not so long ago, to have an alcoholic drink was against the law) But hey that is just my few cents worth, if you want some more interesting facts or even a few well researched articles, have a look below.

If you want a good analysis of this issue, have a look at the following article.

What is SOPA Bill 2012?

7 Things to Know About Controversial Legislation

What I find of particular interest is that the burden or proof here is passed from the plaintiff to the defendant, that is the number one thing I see that is just pure EVIL.

Another interesting thing here is that by farting in church you can almost always find someone that will still laugh out loud, even though most of the people would be terribly embarrassed for the poor soul who managed to time that accident at just the wrong time.

If your not that into the legal system or reading long boring legal language, I like this quote the best of any reply posted to this thread.

That does it for me, but if your still not convinced of the latent EVIL in this issue.

please do continue reading.

There have been too many of these "supposedly well intentioned bills, over the last year"

First it was protect against porn sites, (protect our children from porn) Anyone would support that right, sure, but really what it was as they say was a unicorn disguised as something else entirely, a bill that seemed like it would be a good thing because there is just way too much porn on the internet and its just not decent…

But we found out that at the heart of the bill there was language that would restrict the freedom of religious expression, (making it unconstitutional) (not I know that those clowns in congress are supposedly the smartest people in the room)

Congress Tries To Hide Massive Data Retention Law By Pretending It's An Anti-Child Porn Law
Imagine that, (now this really makes you think about things) Who would not support this law?
Congress Tries To Hide Massive Data Retention Law By Pretending It's An Anti-Child Porn Law | Techdirt

Then we had Protect IP act, which also was a real mess,

Background
If passed by Congress, Protect IP Act would allow the government to curb public access to websites that have “no significant use” other than infringing copyright, enabling or facilitating copyright infringement. It would also make unauthorized media streaming an act of felony and hold the web publishers and hosting services responsible for curbing their users from posting copyright-infringed content.
source, knowyourmeme.com

In addition, Stop Online Piracy Act would effectively rid of the safe harbor provisions in the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, which grants Web sites immunity from prosecution as long as they act in good faith to take down infringing content upon notice. Under strict interpretation, a wide range of online communities and social networks including YouTube, Twitter and Facebook would have to censor users or get shut down and ordinary users could be imprisoned for five years or posting any copyrighted work.


(Now we had SOPA) Yet another attempt at (Intensive regulation of the internet)

What next, will they introduce a bill to protect our internet screens from damaging pixels?

It would be for our own good because were just not smart enough to figure out what is best for us right?

when you consider the implications of a bill that is not designed to serve a purpose but to oppress a people or regulate the internet that is something that should cause you to loose sleep at night.

As you can see, just because a bill sounds good on the surface does not mean that it is good.

Just as DDT seemed like a great thing to kill mosquitoes in the 60s and 70s but later we found out that
the results of using materials without fully testing out the effect on the environment caused consequences that no one seemed to realize at the time, (I remember kids used to chase after those DDT spraying mosquito trucks)

We did not think much about it because the Government knew what it was doing right?

Folks, all three of these "Bills" might seem like a good thing but like DDT it is Poison and it will cause a horrible situation if we are not firm on what we the "people" will allow…

If you remain unconvinced, likely your part of the 20 percent that support this travesty of justice and in that case nothing will convince you that your wrong…

If that is the case, then I am not talking to the 20 percent at all but the 80 percent that actually do go out and vote in elections, because congress needs an overhaul and 2012 is the best time, to get it started.

They lost 10K+ accounts. So what?

They have millions.

This is a publicity stunt they have been pulling for years to gain more customers. Now all attention is on them. They are gaining new sign ups like crazy right now.

What was that other story... elephant hunting? Same thing.

It's unethical, but it works in their favor.

It's a bad thing, you can think about why and with what agenda someone would want to define "copyright violation".

One example would be Wikileaks which without a doubt would have been blocked under the guise of "copyright violation".

There are other implications, like privacy intrusion, giving the ISP the right to check and tap-into your internet traffic and similar.

Short..it's a really bad bill which will ONLY benefit the major corporates for their profit...and it will have negative effects up to and including CENSORSHIP for the majority of internet users.

Think about the equivalent of the Chinese Internet Firewall..built in America, SOLELY run and controlled by and for corporate interests.

As soon as you open the door to government control, you open it to corrupt manipulation by the lobby powers...why do you think the owners of large media stores want it. They will create a monopoly for themselves and raise the value of their assets at the expense of everyone else. Same game new media.

Good Day All;

Well as I see it many of the replies here regards SOPA, are way off base.

So many of you run GO DADDY down, yet you use them. I have not found a perfect host yet. You may complain about a certain host(s), yet they may be the one that will give me better service.

Please tell me which providers for hosting, domains are the ones that do not support SOPA, and are in the top five. As far as I understand most of the good one are working for you regards this.

Most of the good ones will support this new act. The only ones that will not are the ones that it will truly affect because they will have to find another way to screw you, and or the one's that will not take the time to find out all the info.

Let's look at this in another window. I enjoy hunting birds,moose,elk,deer, also fishing. Coming home skunked is ok with me, the farmer makes more money. There are many rules/laws within this area also. Guess who complain the most and do not mark their licenses when they get the moose that they want and the pochers.

NOW you YANKS have lots of elections coming up over the year. Let your REPRESENTATIVE know, that they will not get your vote if this new law passes and have them enforce the laws that you have better. We all know that the internet is international and VERY HUGE. You pay you reps in your taxes. Make them earn it.

International laws are not the same as your country laws are. The law makers need to work with all of the world for International problems. Not Just Their Own Country.

Lets compare apples to apples and not peaches to lemons!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Have Your Reps in Government Work The International Scene.

FYI I am getting 20 more from a domain seller, in the near furture. My sites will be starting to go live in 2012.

I have problems with two others name/hosting providers and will not use them. Both are fairly large, and many of you use them.

Watch the video and listen too the video that is on this post 2-4 times again, it does not tell you exactly as to the new law. It is more of an Andy Rooney style and it is his own opinion.

I don't think it's a bad thing for those of us doing the right thing. however, here's scenario: You link to a site that puts up a video that infringes on copyright and all of a sudden your website is blocked for diverting traffic to a site with a copyright infringement.

I'm sorry, I'm not anti-government or anything, but the government has a habit of twisting laws to fit their needs when it suits them, and this is one law that I hope does not pass.

We've already lost too may rights in this country.

Watch this:

People don't understand that SOPA is the beginning of the government being able to control the Internet. This bill is not good for the Internet, even if it doesn't reach too far for some people yet, it will be the start of the government trying to regulate the internet.

I wouldn't be surprised if this bill passes if there's other bills behind it to get rid of net neutrality and let your ISP charge you more to access premium sites (like facebook)

Quite a few of the congressmen/women trying to pass SOPA don't even know how the Internet works, they are just doing the work of corporations.

SOPA is the thin end of the wedge.

Quote:
"Indeed, legal experts agreed: SOPA did open a lot of dangerous doors, many of which could lead to the widespread censorship of the Internet. Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe recently even argued recently that the bill violates the First Amendment."

Source:
The Titans of Silicon Valley Rally Around the SOPA Alternative - Politics - The Atlantic Wire

None of the large tech companies want SOPA. They are in favor of a more workable bill called OPEN.

SOPA will make sites like Youtube unworkable. Youtube knows that. They cannot police every video uploaded. Google and other search engines cannot review every site they index.

SOPA would kill WEB 2.0. The proposed alternative;OPEN,is a process to stop piracy. It is not what amounts to the summary execution of websites aka SOPA.

Yes, if SOPA / PIPA don't get passed, something else will ... we have to be vigilant.