and thats why they've tried to keep this a secret, because they would really like our advice and for us to take part.

I did actually. I just resent the "you'll have to give up your right the free [censored] on the internet" and "Because you can't live without free music" remarks. Very much so. I'm against piracy. I'm also against killing the rest of the internet to get rid of it.

It's not as simple as just "finding another way". People have been trying to kill piracy sites for years using other ways. You might be able to take one down for a little while, but it pops back up eventually. I'd cite one popular piracy site as a specific example, but I'm pretty sure it's censored on this forum and I like my warn bar the way it is. And yes, it *is* an issue, but not one worth killing the entire internet over.

Ever been in a bar with sports on the TV? It's easy to get links to some foreign network broadcasting live sport for cheap.

No. Its governments trying to but there heads in where they do not belong. If it weren't for those so called bi greedy evil corporations, the computer you are typing on wold not exist.

That's how we want you to feel.

I thought censorship in Germany was extreme.

Woo! Watch for the drop bears Seriously, those things are nasty.


I recommend Sydney, because it is the best city in Australia and has much more to do than dity Melbourne or bogany Queensland.


Oh yes and concership is bad...fight back canada.....go you...etc etc

your copyrighted works are already protected by current copyright laws

So you are anti piracy but you get offended by me talking about getting free music taken away, I'm not sure I'm understanding correctly.

In your example they have taken down sites for piracy, and when others come up they will get taken down too, and so on an so forth, such is the way of the world, pre and post Internet age.


Because those are working so well in the web...

Which acta are we suppose to stop?

He's saying that you're implying that we're all piraters, I think. And sites for piracy can't be taken down that are out of the United States just like that (especially if the country's laws don't have anything specific on piracy).

All of them.

That's what they want you to think just pay more attention and you'll notice. Who knows perhaps my computer would or wouldn't exist.

Well, as to your first point, it sounded like you were accusing people of opposing the bill because they were pirates. It's that accusation that got under my skin, and I'm sorry if I misread it, but that's how you came off as.

As to your second, the site I'm thinking of has been around for years. They might be able to take it down for a week or two at a time at the most, but it always finds a way to come back. It's barely a hindrance to pirates, and bills like this won't be much help. The point I'm trying to make is this: how would these bills take down sites like that when all other attempts for a solution have failed spectacularly?

If you are DLing movies and music without paying then you are a pirate, the purpose of laws like this are so international sites can be taken down.....

All pirates will oppose the bill, but not all people who oppose the bill are pirates.


Sure, but the ability to take down any site without warning and without due process just because it has the capability to host pirated content is FAR too abusable.

You waited til 2012 to lose faith in humanity? Mine has been gone since first year of elementary.

Both very true points, which is why I advocating speaking up not just [censored]ing and moaning.

Unfortunately, most of the groups driving this stuff have never really created anything themselves beyond ads (and even those were probably outsourced ). Publishers, record labels, etc. are the people who squeeze every last ounce of profit out of something (on behalf of their shareholders), not the people who come up with cool stuff.

They're the reason why copyright in the USA lasts for close to two entire lifetimes after the author's death[/url] -- that's [i]far beyond what is necessary to carry out its original purpose: to allow creators to profit from their work, and later for their children/significant other to have a bit of income for a while after they die. Extending copyright for such an excessively long time is theft, stealing from the public domain long after the work has been paid for and sufficiently* profited from.

*From a reasonable person's point of view.

http://lab.dyne.org/Netsukuku?

Even if no-one does anything, the fact that you tried -even just the fact you were aware- means you're doing your part (or at least a lot more of it than most people).

To be honest, I have to admit my actions don't live up to my ideals. But I've been somewhat distracted by some health problems, and there's so very much rubbish out there . Plus, as you note, trying to actually be active in one's governance leaves one very lonely (unless one happens to live in a place like Switzerland).

http://www.jamendo.com http://www.sintel.org/

If I'd had any to begin with...

It's okay for me. And nearly every western state is more liberal than america.

this

Location: Canada

As long as you don't mind funny coloured blood and don't feel a need to say no Jew has ever died*, I think it's not so bad (though a local would have a far better idea). Something they have going for them is that they appear to have some pretty good privacy protection laws and stuff.

*And are therefore entirely responsible for the world's current overpopulation .

This. If copyright law was anywhere near reasonable, I might be more inclined to support legislation with a light-touch. As it is, these IP corporations have been granted effectively perpetual copyright and are demanding even more control beyond that.

This idea that, "We all agree something must be done, just not in the way this piece of legislation accomplishes it," is bogus. When the overall effects of piracy are fuzzy in general, and the potential harm this kind of legislation can have on new technologies (how is cloud computing supposed to work exactly?), why must we do anything?

Well, I've actually heard this at least twice...

"...As a professional mathematician who works with computer engineers and computer scientists, I agree with their assessment that the DNS filtering provisions in bill are technically infeasible, ineffective at stopping piracy, and present serious new threats to internet security."

http://komplexify.com/blog/2012/01/19/blacklis/#comments