BT ordered to block piracy site
Old 18th November 2011
  #61
Lives for gear
 
AwwDeOhh's Avatar
 

Old 18th November 2011
  #62
Lives for gear
 

I didn't post it in support of my view. I posted it in the interests of increased understanding of the wider issues. A while back in this thread I posted about the Hargreaves review and its recommendations, which were largely considered "anti-copyright".

For the record, I'm not anti-copyright or pro-piracy. Piracy negatively affects me directly. I'm an "old school" person who prefers my music on CD, and I have "artist" friends who create music, video and other arts. My main objection is to the "hang 'em high" and "collateral damage is acceptable" attitudes expressed here by many copyright enforcement proponents. I think it's counter-productive and will increase resentment amongst the "casual pirates", making enforcement even harder.
Old 18th November 2011
  #63
Lives for gear
 
AwwDeOhh's Avatar
 

That makes sense.
I'm skeptical that it will have the negative effect that's being promoted though.
We heard the exact same arguments (almost word-for-word..) when they were considering the orgional DMCA.
At any rate, there's always room to modify the law in the future. We need a baseline to start off of though.
Old 18th November 2011
  #64
Banned
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AwwDeOhh View Post
That makes sense.
I'm skeptical that it will have the negative effect that's being promoted though.
We heard the exact same arguments (almost word-for-word..) when they were considering the orgional DMCA.
At any rate, there's always room to modify the law in the future. We need a baseline to start off of though.

Agreed
Old 18th November 2011
  #65
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AwwDeOhh View Post
... I'm skeptical that it will have the negative effect that's being promoted though. We heard the exact same arguments (almost word-for-word..) when they were considering the orgional DMCA.
At any rate, there's always room to modify the law in the future. We need a baseline to start off of though.
If there is no debate, there is no confidence that the law will prove sound. I'm sure you've been in situations where you propose a plan of action. Someone else expresses a doubt about some aspect of it. If their doubt is actually covered by the plan, you can explain it and hopefully allay their doubts. If it's not covered, you say "Ah. I didn't think of that", and you modify the plan to cover it. It is a democratic process, and last time I looked you lived in a democracy, though you need justice too, and you don't always get it... Wall St bankers.

The problem many people have with SOPA is that its language doesn't match its stated purpose. It's not just "pirates" and "freetards" who have these concerns, either - for example, see the banner at the top of Bob K's site:

Audio CD Mastering, Mixing & Replication

On the other hand, there are many people who are so desperate for something - anything - to stem piracy that they'll accept almost anything to get it. Perfectly understandable. I just hope they get what they want without it all turning to custard.
Old 18th November 2011
  #66
3 + infractions, forum membership suspended.
Old 18th November 2011
  #67
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein View Post
Great article.
Heeee's Baaaaaack!

Welcome Back John, we missed ya!
Old 18th November 2011
  #68
Lives for gear
 
AwwDeOhh's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Hills View Post
If there is no debate, there is no confidence that the law will prove sound. I'm sure you've been in situations where you propose a plan of action. Someone else expresses a doubt about some aspect of it. If their doubt is actually covered by the plan, you can explain it and hopefully allay their doubts. If it's not covered, you say "Ah. I didn't think of that", and you modify the plan to cover it. It is a democratic process, and last time I looked you lived in a democracy, though you need justice too, and you don't always get it... Wall St bankers.

The problem many people have with SOPA is that its language doesn't match its stated purpose. It's not just "pirates" and "freetards" who have these concerns, either - for example, see the banner at the top of Bob K's site:

Audio CD Mastering, Mixing & Replication

On the other hand, there are many people who are so desperate for something - anything - to stem piracy that they'll accept almost anything to get it. Perfectly understandable. I just hope they get what they want without it all turning to custard.
The thing is, legislators do hear both sides (i would argue that the hear more of the Big Tech side of the argument, as they have the most powerful and most numerous lobby, but that's neither here nor there) before writing anything. After it's written they again hear both sides, and modify. this happens over and over before there's even a final draft. [notice all the "Struck -Out" language in the Bill..]

They listen to concerns, and if warranted, change the language.
(believe me, i know... i watch C-Span sub-committee hearings when i can't sleep.. [better than warm milk!] )

You're acting like non of the Big Tech concerns were even listened to. This is not the case.

Back when i was involved in a lawsuit, we settled out of court via "mediator".
His exact quote was: When BOTH sides are equally unhappy with the the verdict, that's when i know it is balanced.

If you think there will be no discomfort -- on either side-- you're waiting for a ship that will never sail.
Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn  Submit Thread to Google+ Google+ 
 
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
 
Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.