Login / Register
 
Register of Copyrights: without SOPA, copyright "will ultimately fail"
Subscribe
#61
28th November 2011
Old 28th November 2011
  #61
Lives for gear
 
krheatman's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Location: Motorcity
Posts: 2,882

krheatman is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by AwwDeOhh View Post
Besides the point, but
Do you know how many kids/adults have died in recent years because of fake drugs and controlled narcotics that come from fake pharmacies online? Do you know that Google made a shedload of money knowingly facilitating this? Seven FBI stings of Google found that it was company policy to encourage and even had 'advisors' tell how to skirt US law to setup illegal online drug pharmacies.
Of course, in the case of Google... they'll just bilk their stockholders of $500-Million to keep thier CEO's out of prison... what a joke.
A Fire in the House of Google: What is the Congress prepared to do?


I'm still not sure what the complaint is of the Bill. You seem to have a moving target of what's wrong.
If you break the law, the internet isn't a safe haven to not have consequences. Again, this Bill just deals with what to do when the lawbreaker is operating from foriegn soil. If you don't like the US policy on drug imports... that's a completely seperate issue...

Laws don't end when you log onto the internet... just as they don't when you use the phone, use the mail service, ect.

As to who pays? if it does 1/4 of what it intends to to, it will be a net profit.
The pirates can't pay anyway.That is the problem.
#62
28th November 2011
Old 28th November 2011
  #62
Gear Guru
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Location: the big rack
Posts: 11,248

rack gear is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by AwwDeOhh View Post
Laws don't end when you log onto the internet... just as they don't when you use the phone, use the mail service, ect.
exactly, the wild west wasn't wild forever... in every change there are winners and losers, and I don't expect the losers to go quietly...

google (and the like) are going to do everything they can to protect their interests, and I am going to do everything I can to protect mine.

that's just the economic reality, this is about financial issues, not free speech or censorship, but those talking points sure to make for better headlines and google has figured that out.

I would suggest EVERYONE reading these threads to get this book, it is a fascinatingly lucid look at how the internet has been shaped by big tech agenda:

http://www.amazon.com/Free-Ride-Para.../dp/0385533764

#63
28th November 2011
Old 28th November 2011
  #63
Lives for gear
 
Joined: May 2010
Location: Wellington NZ
Posts: 1,375

Don Hills is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
...
So the absolute goal is to greatly reduce or eradicate the casual piracy, leaving you with a small percentage of infringing, which has always been more or less manageable.
I agree with that, where I think we differ is that I don't think the proposed measures will be sufficiently discouraging to reduce infringement to a "small percentage". Time will tell...
#64
28th November 2011
Old 28th November 2011
  #64
Lives for gear
 
Joined: May 2010
Location: Wellington NZ
Posts: 1,375

Don Hills is offline
#65
28th November 2011
Old 28th November 2011
  #65
Gear Guru
 
charles maynes's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Location: out in the dirt.
Posts: 15,906

charles maynes is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by AwwDeOhh View Post
Besides the point, but
Do you know how many kids/adults have died in recent years because of fake drugs and controlled narcotics that come from fake pharmacies online? Do you know that Google made a shedload of money knowingly facilitating this? Seven FBI stings of Google found that it was company policy to encourage and even had 'advisors' tell how to skirt US law to setup illegal online drug pharmacies.
Of course, in the case of Google... they'll just bilk their stockholders of $500-Million to keep thier CEO's out of prison... what a joke.
A Fire in the House of Google: What is the Congress prepared to do?


I'm still not sure what the complaint is of the Bill. You seem to have a moving target of what's wrong.
If you break the law, the internet isn't a safe haven to not have consequences. Again, this Bill just deals with what to do when the lawbreaker is operating from foriegn soil. If you don't like the US policy on drug imports... that's a completely seperate issue...

Laws don't end when you log onto the internet... just as they don't when you use the phone, use the mail service, ect.

As to who pays? if it does 1/4 of what it intends to to, it will be a net profit.
its funny how those drugs seem to work everywhere else in the world for about 1/3 the cost too....

Drink your Kool Aid. becuase its all about money, (Have you checked Mercks and GSK's last profit statement?) they have spent MILLIONS in lobbying to keep foreign pharmaceuticals out of this country in the last decade, and this is precisely the way to lock that door forever.

And tell me what that has to with Album piracy?

the question you have to ask yourself is why you are being played.... because the issue is at the end user. Do you really think there are that many users who are going to be prosecuted by the government- (vs RIAA, who has already been prosecuting pirates WITHOUT SOPA)? And frankly, until the pain hits home for the end user the problem will continue one way or the other.

The laws RIGHT NOW can be used to the same effect. If an ISP allows copyright material to be stolen there is law on the books right-the-****-now to deal with it..... the question you should be asking is why isnt happening right-the-****-now. the can be prosecuted for criminal conspiracy in the manner that a physical carrier can be prosecuted.

http://animalnewyork.com/2011/08/nyp...-in-chinatown/
http://www.randomtandem.com/2011/02/...-bootleg-dvds/
http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/d...-bootleg-dvds-

you might take a look at this as well if you want something to be depressed about....

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cr...re-piracy-rate
__________________
Charles Maynes credits
Charles' webpage



“Judging others makes us blind, whereas love is illuminating. By judging others we blind ourselves to our own evil and to the grace which others are just as entitled to as we are.”
? Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship
#66
28th November 2011
Old 28th November 2011
  #66
Gear Guru
 
John Eppstein's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA.
Posts: 14,443

John Eppstein is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by charles maynes View Post
Chris, if Wikileaks is blocked in the US, it effectively does- just like a pirate site, the point of a whistleblower site is to be available to the public- unlike a pirate site.... which sort of tries to go under the radar- at least since the DCMA- and the Limewire debacle.
Either the act will be ineffective (and therefore won't threaten whistleblowers at all

OR

(If your paranoia were correct on this, which I don't accept) the act poses a real threat to whistleblowers because it would actually work.

EITHER/OR. NOT both.

Pick a card.

Quote:
Again- all the act has to say is that COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS ARE THE MATERIAL TO BE PROTECTED. Read the act, it doesnt.
And for damn good reason. Noncommercial products are subject to protection by copyright just as commercial products are. Your alteration would weaken or remove this protection, conceivably opening the doo0rs to commercial exploitation of non-commercially created works without proper compensation. For example, an unrecorded, unpublished song presently has STRONGER protection than a song which has been released on a commercial recording. Once a commercial recording has been made anyone can cover it if they pay a set, statutory fee. If it has not been commercially released (which these days probably includes posted for free on the internet in at least some cases but does not include privately circulated demo recordings) nobody can record it commercially without negotiating a price with the copyright owner.

Quote:
And how is it going to do anything different prosecutionwise than the DMCA? no one seems to want to answer that....
It's been answered a number of times but you don't seem to get it.

The DMCA provides no protection against a site re-posting an infringing work after performing a takedown. That's why it's virtually impossible to get a takedown to stick. Our friend Rack has two people on staff whose job is doing nothing but filing takedown notices, over and over, on the same sites without making much of a dent. Things just don't stay taken down.

Pirates LOVE the DMCA because of this loophole.

PPOTECTIP/SOPA would make it possible to take down the SITES if they demonstrated repeat infringing activity, which would actually be effective - if not totally at least far more effective that what we have now, which is not effective at all.
__________________
All opinions expressed in my posts are solely my own: I do not represent any other forums (of which I may or may not be a member), groups, or individuals although at times my views may resemble those of other entities.

************************************
Inside every old man is a young man wondering WTF happened.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Ohlsson
The appropriate role for science is the study of observed phenomena to gain an understanding. It is not dictating what people ought or ought not to be observing.
#67
28th November 2011
Old 28th November 2011
  #67
Gear Guru
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Location: the big rack
Posts: 11,248

rack gear is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Hills View Post
You *did* obtain permission to use that image, didn't you?
Remember that by your logic, it's theft because you don't accept apologist excuses like "it's in a good cause," "they should be glad of the publicity", "it'll lead to more sales".
seriously don, it's theft when it's theft, and this isn't theft...

it's a commercial image, like an album cover, it's being used as editorial and promotion of the actual product (the product is not the cover jpg, it's actually a book) and it is in fact fair use in this context...

if I had posted a link to a crack of the book as a pdf for kindle, ipad, etc, you'd have a point, but I actually posted a link to Amazon for the PURCHASE of the book...

if you can show me the threads about the piracy of album cover jpgs and itunes links for purchasing I'm happy to look at it...
#68
28th November 2011
Old 28th November 2011
  #68
Gear Guru
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Location: the big rack
Posts: 11,248

rack gear is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by charles maynes View Post
the question you have to ask yourself is why you are being played....
with all due respect charles this is the question you should be asking yourself. by the time you figure out how badly you've manipulated by big tech it will be too late.

the entire goal of the tech side is to remove and eliminate professional content makers from the equation because it is problematic for their business model to "ask permission"

thus far, google and facebook don't seem to like to ask permission over privacy either...

as a working professional, big tech is aggressively working to replace you with any schmo with a mic and laptop, this is the basis of creative commons and lessig (financed by google).

it's funny how google seem to be the champions against content, but yet privacy is rarely addressed...

it should also be noted that the most productive and free societies also have the strongest and best IP laws... if you want to see what happens without IP laws, look at China...

again, lawlessness is not an acceptable baseline, not in the real world, and not online.
#69
28th November 2011
Old 28th November 2011
  #69
Gear Guru
 
charles maynes's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Location: out in the dirt.
Posts: 15,906

charles maynes is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
with all due respect charles this is the question you should be asking yourself. by the time you figure out how badly you've manipulated by big tech it will be too late.

the entire goal of the tech side is to remove and eliminate professional content makers from the equation because it is problematic for their business model to "ask permission"

thus far, google and facebook don't seem to like to ask permission over privacy either...

as a working professional, big tech is aggressively working to replace you with any schmo with a mic and laptop, this is the basis of creative commons and lessig (financed by google).

it's funny how google seem to be the champions against content, but yet privacy is rarely addressed...

it should also be noted that the most productive and free societies also have the strongest and best IP laws... if you want to see what happens without IP laws, look at China...

again, lawlessness is not an acceptable baseline, not in the real world, and not online.


Your failing to get the bigger picture here is actually pretty amusing- the US according to Nationmaster, ranks 107th in Software Piracy.

This act- which expands far beyond digital entertainment, is going to nothing but perhaps drive the US further down the rankings. While at the same time, Using the same laws, will provide no real new relief-

OK- we get that, and I know that you will have some clever retort to it-

before you get there-

answer two questions-

1. WHO WILL PAY FOR THE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ACT?

that is not a triviality, especially since there will be new officials posted at all the Embassies, at a likely cost of over 300k per posting to act as "media liasons". I think we have Embassies in over 120 countries.... so you can do the math...

2. HOW WILL THE EXISTING LAWS BE MADE STRONGER?- since we are talking about simply enforcing laws THAT ALREADY EXIST.

have at it. and I have no interest in supporting "big tech" though I quite enjoy being allowed to view news from Al Jazeera.

as well, for an interesting view on the whole "big media" conversation, this might be a fresh perspective for you....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYm_rpDoqjY
#70
28th November 2011
Old 28th November 2011
  #70
Lives for gear
 
Joined: May 2010
Location: Wellington NZ
Posts: 1,375

Don Hills is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by charles maynes View Post
its funny how those drugs seem to work everywhere else in the world for about 1/3 the cost too....

Drink your Kool Aid. becuase its all about money, (Have you checked Mercks and GSK's last profit statement?) they have spent MILLIONS in lobbying to keep foreign pharmaceuticals out of this country in the last decade, and this is precisely the way to lock that door forever.
Not content with doing it at home, they are trying to keep "foreign" (non US manufactured or controlled) pharmaceuticals out of other countries as well. Google "TPPA Pharmac" (without the quotes) if you're interested. (I'm following the TPPA's progress because it contains IP protection clauses relevant to music.)
#71
28th November 2011
Old 28th November 2011
  #71
Lives for gear
 
Joined: May 2010
Location: Wellington NZ
Posts: 1,375

Don Hills is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
...
Ironic, seeing an anti-infringement hardliner making "piracy apologist" excuses... funny how the law doesn't apply equally to all.
#72
28th November 2011
Old 28th November 2011
  #72
Gear Guru
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Location: the big rack
Posts: 11,248

rack gear is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Hills View Post
Ironic, seeing an anti-infringement hardliner making "piracy apologist" excuses... funny how the law doesn't apply equally to all.
Speechless. Don, you have jumped the shark, you have no idea what you are talking about. Please explain to me the infringement, or better yet, ask Terry to explain it to you.

If that was actually what "infringement" is we wouldn't be having this conversation.
#73
28th November 2011
Old 28th November 2011
  #73
Lives for gear
 
AwwDeOhh's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2009
Location: State of Insomnia, sleepless USA
Posts: 2,547

AwwDeOhh is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by charles maynes View Post
its funny how those drugs seem to work everywhere else in the world for about 1/3 the cost too....

Drink your Kool Aid. becuase its all about money, (Have you checked Mercks and GSK's last profit statement?) they have spent MILLIONS in lobbying to keep foreign pharmaceuticals out of this country in the last decade, and this is precisely the way to lock that door forever.
It will lock the door until if/when import laws on drugs change. This won't change efforts to open doors to Canadian drugs..

Want to talk about money.. here's some fun facts;
Google makes Billions off of Ad Sense, one of it's best customers is Pirate Sites..
Google Funds the EFF (yes, that EFF) with MILLIONS of dollars. The EFF are little more than Google's mouthpiece these days.

Quote:
And tell me what that has to with Album piracy?
If this were just about album piracy, we'd still be swept under the rug. As it is, this is MUCH bigger than the music industry. This is the US National Economy we're talking about
From the Chamber of Commerce:
Jobs Agenda: Intellectual Property | U.S. Chamber of Commerce
Quote:
Originally Posted by US Chamber of Commerce
America’s IP-intensive industries employ more than 19 million workers—at all educational and skill levels.
From 2000 to 2007, the annual salary of all workers in IP-intensive industries averaged about 60% more than for similar workers in non-IP-intensive industries.

IP-intensive industries account for approximately 60% of total U.S. exports—rising from $665 billion in 2000 to $910 billion in 2007.

In 2008, U.S. intellectual property companies in the manufacturing and nonmanufacturing sectors generated nearly $7.7 trillion in gross output, accounting for 33.1% of total U.S. GDP.
It's 60% of exports, and 1/3rd US GDP that's at stake.
I dunno about you, but in this crappy economy.. i don't think we should just throw up our hands and say 'oh well'...

Quote:
the question you have to ask yourself is why you are being played.... because the issue is at the end user. Do you really think there are that many users who are going to be prosecuted by the government-
... this isn't about the end-user. This Bill is about hosting sites...

Quote:
The laws RIGHT NOW can be used to the same effect. If an ISP allows copyright material to be stolen there is law on the books right-the-****-now to deal with it..... the question you should be asking is why isnt happening right-the-****-now. the can be prosecuted for criminal conspiracy in the manner that a physical carrier can be prosecuted.
Sure, and some have... THAT WERE OWNED/HOSTED ON US SOIL. This bill deals with offshore sites... you know, the ones that we can't shut down...
#74
28th November 2011
Old 28th November 2011
  #74
Gear Guru
 
charles maynes's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Location: out in the dirt.
Posts: 15,906

charles maynes is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by AwwDeOhh View Post
It will lock the door until if/when import laws on drugs change. This won't change efforts to open doors to Canadian drugs..

Want to talk about money.. here's some fun facts;
Google makes Billions off of Ad Sense, one of it's best customers is Pirate Sites..
Google Funds the EFF (yes, that EFF) with MILLIONS of dollars. The EFF are little more than Google's mouthpiece these days.

If this were just about album piracy, we'd still be swept under the rug. As it is, this is MUCH bigger than the music industry. This is the US National Economy we're talking about
From the Chamber of Commerce:
Jobs Agenda: Intellectual Property | U.S. Chamber of Commerce

It's 60% of exports, and 1/3rd US GDP that's at stake.
I dunno about you, but in this crappy economy.. i don't think we should just throw up our hands and say 'oh well'...

... this isn't about the end-user. This Bill is about hosting sites...

Sure, and some have... THAT WERE OWNED/HOSTED ON US SOIL. This bill deals with offshore sites... you know, the ones that we can't shut down...
Dude- if it dealt with foreign sites I would be all for it- It doesnt-

those 106 countries who rip off more digital media than the US are going to go untouched by this....

If this went after the actual end user, I would be all for it too.... When Suzy gets slapped with a Thousand Dollar fine for downloading DVD's and Albums it will have impact.... Ever hear a squealing pig? thats what was heard when RIAA did just that..... And the public had no interest in hearing about it. Gee, someone with a clue would take note of that.

What this will do is just hide the vendor a little more....

oh yeah- check the profits in Pharma.... http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortu.../21/index.html
vs Computer Software http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortu...189/index.html
vs Telecom http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortu...157/index.html
#75
29th November 2011
Old 29th November 2011
  #75
Lives for gear
 
AwwDeOhh's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2009
Location: State of Insomnia, sleepless USA
Posts: 2,547

AwwDeOhh is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by charles maynes View Post
Dude- if it dealt with foreign sites I would be all for it- It doesnt- ]
what?
#76
29th November 2011
Old 29th November 2011
  #76
Gear Guru
 
charles maynes's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Location: out in the dirt.
Posts: 15,906

charles maynes is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by AwwDeOhh View Post
what?
are we talking about painting over a rotted wall, or are we talking about ripping the rotted wall down and rebuilding it?

How is it going to shut them down? Are we going to invade Russia? or China? or Guatemala?

It simply hides them from US users when they become known....

let me say one more time- the US is 107th in the world for Software Piracy.... How is it going to SIGNIFICANTLY affect things, more than they are addressed right now?

frankly, a STUXNET style bug would be a better strategy. And it would probably not be frowned upon in the legal community.
obviously this is an option as well... though new servers can be setup quite rapido.

http://www.dialogo-americas.com/en_G...eature-ex-2674

And why hasnt anyone said how all this was going to be paid for? Seriously....
#77
29th November 2011
Old 29th November 2011
  #77
Gear Guru
 
John Eppstein's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA.
Posts: 14,443

John Eppstein is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by charles maynes View Post
Your failing to get the bigger picture here is actually pretty amusing- the US according to Nationmaster, ranks 107th in Software Piracy.
How is that rating derived? I can think of a number of ways to manipulate the statistics and come up with wildly varying answers.

Most likely it's number of estimated illegal download per registered internet connection.. Using that figure would tend to minimize the number, as the US has a relatively large population with a large percentage of internet users with private connections.

Quote:
This act- which expands far beyond digital entertainment, is going to nothing but perhaps drive the US further down the rankings. While at the same time, Using the same laws, will provide no real new relief-
HOWZZAT???? If it drives the US down in the rankings that means a reduction in piracy, which contradicts the allegation of no real new relief. You're contradicting yourself again, but people brainwashed by doublethink often do. That's why they call it doublethink.

Quote:
OK- we get that, and I know that you will have some clever retort to it-

before you get there-

answer two questions-

1. WHO WILL PAY FOR THE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ACT?
This is bordering on the political but it needs to be asked - why is someone who claims to be a freedom fighting leftist radical who supports Wikileaks, etc, sounding like a representative of The Tea Party?

Perhaps it's because the piracy advocates you're getting much of your info from are actually fronting for right-wing financiers like the guy who bankrolled The Pirate Bay? Think carefully before you answer.

Quote:
that is not a triviality, especially since there will be new officials posted at all the Embassies, at a likely cost of over 300k per posting to act as "media liasons". I think we have Embassies in over 120 countries.... so you can do the math...
Actually, no, it is a triviality, in fact a very minor one. The cost of this program for one year wouldn't run more than one or two percent of the cost of any one of our various military expenditures for one day. It's not a drop in the bucket, it's a few molecules in an Olympic swimming pool.

$300k sounds like a lot of money until you compare it to the cost of something like a predator drone, a surface to air missile, or the amount the army spends in a single day on target practice. Of the cost of jet fuel, for that matter.

But to answer your question, the people will pay for it like they do for other forms of law enforcement, indeed all government services. And if they don't like paying for it they can change their attitudes and stop treating piracy like a non-issue. People DO tend to pay a bit more attention when their pocketbooks are involved.

Quote:
2. HOW WILL THE EXISTING LAWS BE MADE STRONGER?- since we are talking about simply enforcing laws THAT ALREADY EXIST.
Asked and answered. The last time I answered it was here:
Register of Copyrights: without SOPA, copyright "will ultimately fail"

Quote:
have at it. and I have no interest in supporting "big tech" though I quite enjoy being allowed to view news from Al Jazeera.
What does that have to do with anything? You can't seriously be suggesting that the government would block Al Jazeera?
#78
29th November 2011
Old 29th November 2011
  #78
Gear Guru
 
John Eppstein's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA.
Posts: 14,443

John Eppstein is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Hills View Post
Ironic, seeing an anti-infringement hardliner making "piracy apologist" excuses... funny how the law doesn't apply equally to all.
Not at all. Do you not understand the meaning of the legal term "fair use"?
#79
29th November 2011
Old 29th November 2011
  #79
Gear Guru
 
charles maynes's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Location: out in the dirt.
Posts: 15,906

charles maynes is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein View Post
How is that rating derived? I can think of a number of ways to manipulate the statistics and come up with wildly varying answers.

Most likely it's number of estimated illegal download per registered internet connection.. Using that figure would tend to minimize the number, as the US has a relatively large population with a large percentage of internet users with private connections.



HOWZZAT???? If it drives the US down in the rankings that means a reduction in piracy, which contradicts the allegation of no real new relief. You're contradicting yourself again, but people brainwashed by doublethink often do. That's why they call it doublethink.



This is bordering on the political but it needs to be asked - why is someone who claims to be a freedom fighting leftist radical who supports Wikileaks, etc, sounding like a representative of The Tea Party?

Perhaps it's because the piracy advocates you're getting much of your info from are actually fronting for right-wing financiers like the guy who bankrolled The Pirate Bay? Think carefully before you answer.



Actually, no, it is a triviality, in fact a very minor one. The cost of this program for one year wouldn't run more than one or two percent of the cost of any one of our various military expenditures for one day. It's not a drop in the bucket, it's a few molecules in an Olympic swimming pool.

$300k sounds like a lot of money until you compare it to the cost of something like a predator drone, a surface to air missile, or the amount the army spends in a single day on target practice. Of the cost of jet fuel, for that matter.



Asked and answered. The last time I answered it was here:
Register of Copyrights: without SOPA, copyright "will ultimately fail"



What does that have to do with anything? You can't seriously be suggesting that the government would block Al Jazeera?
ok, point 1- Yes indeed it would reduce piracy. In the place that the US Govt places as the 107th ranked pirate
there is certainly good in that, but there are quite a number of populous places far ahead of the US which would be unaffected.

The also also provides no relief beyond American Companies being ripped off by Americans. so, actually, even with our population size, those same American companies will continue to be ripped off outside the legal borders of the US.

Yes, I will certainly concede it is far better to get raped 9 times instead of 12. But you are still getting raped 9 times.

point 2 I wouldnt call myself a leftist per-se, but I do like my Constitutional Rights. A lot. I do support WikiLeaks becuase I know that power corrupts. whether it is in politics or commerce.

The cost of the program- I am guessing, becuase there is no mention of budgets or fiscal impact is not stated- but I do know there are 192 countries in the UN, and at 300k per year for the media postings that are a part of that bill, the cost would be nearly 58 million dollars per year. So where is it coming from?

It sure seemed there was plenty of cash on hand for Wall Street bailouts, and Pharma gets HUGE government money.... so maybe they will pay for it....

as to our cost of war, yeah- running fulltime wars for around 10 years does take a pretty serious toll- the Libyan operation cost about 10 million per day- It seemed there was plenty of Chinese loans that were available to pay for that too.

Al Jazeera I would hope wouldnt be blocked, but who knows what the future holds. At any rate, I like having access to information from beyond American media outlets.

as to the alteration of COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS- its wasn't in place of "products in development"..... The issue is that all the pirated music that is causing the problem isnt Van Halen multitracks being used in Songsmith- its real, released product. same with Software apps- I beta test for a number of companies- I have not seen a non timebombed beta in 5 years. Even our beta ilok licenses are time limited. Proper releases tend not to be, and are a much more attractive target for piracy- so why wouldnt that be expicitly mentioned when the products in development are?

just having this conversation makes me think Denial of Service Attacks on these servers are by far the best way to solve the problem. It is a bit vigilante in nature, but it seems like a wonderful project for something like anonymous.
#80
29th November 2011
Old 29th November 2011
  #80
Gear Guru
 
John Eppstein's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA.
Posts: 14,443

John Eppstein is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by charles maynes View Post
Dude- if it dealt with foreign sites I would be all for it- It doesnt-
You keep repeating that but guess what?

*YOU'RE WRONG!*
***************
Sorry to have to put it that way, but it's the truth. Saying it over and over again won't make it change.

The bill is designed to be used to block foreign websites from the general (non-hacker) US market. It's also designed to deal with the multiple takedown whac-a-mole problem.

Quote:
those 106 countries who rip off more digital media than the US are going to go untouched by this....
First, we can only deal with our domestic market. You can't seriously be suggesting that we get into doing foreign invasions over copyright?

Second, as I pointed out, it depends on how they're figuring the piracy statistics.

I guess I need to go into detail here.......

Let's say we have four countries, A, B, C, & D.

Country A has a population of 10, of whom 9 are pirates = 90%

Country B has a population of 26, 13 of whom are pirates = 50%

Country C has a population of 100, 35 of whom are pirates = 35%

Country D has a population of 1000, 280 of whom are pirates = 28%

Country D is the lowest ranked of the four countries, percentage-wise, but has twice as many pirates as the total populations of the other three countries put together.

The total number of pirates in the other counties equal approximately 1/5 the total number in country D.

But Country D has the lowest RATE of piracy of all four countries.

Do you understand now?

For example IIRC Spain is ranked as one of the nations with the highest piracy rates, but Spain's population is less than some states in the USA.

The US may be 107 in rate of piracy, but most of those that outrank it are PEANUTS.

"Lies, damned lies, and statistics!" - Mark Twain

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lies,_d...and_statistics

Quote:
If this went after the actual end user, I would be all for it too....When Suzy gets slapped with a Thousand Dollar fine for downloading DVD's and Albums it will have impact.... Ever hear a squealing pig? thats what was heard when RIAA did just that..... And the public had no interest in hearing about it. Gee, someone with a clue would take note of that.
Yeah, well it was pretty much the same thing with drunk driving...........

At first.

The problem with the RIAA action was that they stopped.

The other problem was that they were a private, industry sponsored organization, not the government.

People pay a lot more attention when the government does something. That's why we need government action - this is beyond the effectiveness of civil suits.

It's time that the damn government do what we're paying them for. If they had more legitimate action to deal with maybe they wouldn't get in so much trouble elsewhere..... (probably wishful thinking.)
#81
29th November 2011
Old 29th November 2011
  #81
Lives for gear
 
krheatman's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Location: Motorcity
Posts: 2,882

krheatman is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by charles maynes View Post
ok, point 1- Yes indeed it would reduce piracy. In the place that the US Govt places as the 107th ranked pirate
there is certainly good in that, but there are quite a number of populous places far ahead of the US which would be unaffected.

The also also provides no relief beyond American Companies being ripped off by Americans. so, actually, even with our population size, those same American companies will continue to be ripped off outside the legal borders of the US.

Yes, I will certainly concede it is far better to get raped 9 times instead of 12. But you are still getting raped 9 times.

point 2 I wouldnt call myself a leftist per-se, but I do like my Constitutional Rights. A lot. I do support WikiLeaks becuase I know that power corrupts. whether it is in politics or commerce.

The cost of the program- I am guessing, becuase there is no mention of budgets or fiscal impact is not stated- but I do know there are 192 countries in the UN, and at 300k per year for the media postings that are a part of that bill, the cost would be nearly 58 million dollars per year. So where is it coming from?

It sure seemed there was plenty of cash on hand for Wall Street bailouts, and Pharma gets HUGE government money.... so maybe they will pay for it....

as to our cost of war, yeah- running fulltime wars for around 10 years does take a pretty serious toll- the Libyan operation cost about 10 million per day- It seemed there was plenty of Chinese loans that were available to pay for that too.

Al Jazeera I would hope wouldnt be blocked, but who knows what the future holds. At any rate, I like having access to information from beyond American media outlets.

as to the alteration of COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS- its wasn't in place of "products in development"..... The issue is that all the pirated music that is causing the problem isnt Van Halen multitracks being used in Songsmith- its real, released product. same with Software apps- I beta test for a number of companies- I have not seen a non timebombed beta in 5 years. Even our beta ilok licenses are time limited. Proper releases tend not to be, and are a much more attractive target for piracy- so why wouldnt that be expicitly mentioned when the products in development are?

just having this conversation makes me think Denial of Service Attacks on these servers are by far the best way to solve the problem. It is a bit vigilante in nature, but it seems like a wonderful project for something like anonymous.
Charles,
In our war on terrorism and this is cyber terrorism if you ask me,Obama is good at using drones,get him on this.
This has taken more than a few people hostage I am sure.
Now don't laugh at my avitar because I suggested using drones against the rebel alliance.
But couldn't we in the name of terrorism find these sites and wipe them out?
Cyber Mercenaries.
#82
29th November 2011
Old 29th November 2011
  #82
Lives for gear
 
Joined: May 2010
Location: Wellington NZ
Posts: 1,375

Don Hills is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
...
... so there's one law for you, and one law for "piracy apologists"? The point is not whether this specific case is likely to be pursued by the copyright holder. You could argue fair use. But you also trotted out the same arguments that you don't accept from anyone else. The point, which you are doing your best to dodge, is that if you advocate an absolutist line you should toe it yourself.
#83
29th November 2011
Old 29th November 2011
  #83
Gear Guru
 
John Eppstein's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA.
Posts: 14,443

John Eppstein is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by charles maynes View Post

Are we going to invade .... Guatemala?
Didn't we already invade Guatemala?

Quote:
It simply hides them from US users when they become known....
The US happens to be one of the largest markets in the world. Damned lies and statistics aside, significantly reducing piracy in the US would have a significant effect on the real financial situation of affected IP owners.

Quote:
let me say one more time- the US is 107th in the world for Software Piracy.... How is it going to SIGNIFICANTLY affect things, more than they are addressed right now?
Please see my above post where I explained how the statistics are manipulated here.

So the figures are for Software piracy? How about MUSIC piracy?

Quote:
frankly, a STUXNET style bug would be a better strategy. And it would probably not be frowned upon in the legal community.
obviously this is an option as well... though new servers can be setup quite rapido.
AHEM! That's illegal. Only black ops agencies of governments can get away with that kind of stuff. And reportedly Stuxnet took a couple years to set up and target on just one system.

Quote:
http://www.dialogo-americas.com/en_GB/articles/rmisa/features/technology/2011/11/17/feature-ex-2674
Quote:

And why hasnt anyone said how all this was going to be paid for? Seriously....
I already did.

Why are you so worried about paying for it? The cost would be inconsequential compared to almost everything the government spends money on, and the benefit to the economy would be sufficiently profound that it would increase tax revenue above it cost. We're talking a large percentage of the GNP that's involved here.

That's a Tea Party tactic - if you can't come up with any more effective reason to oppose something you're against you complain about the cost.

Dig it - effective social change costs money, but the benefits far outweigh the cost.
#84
29th November 2011
Old 29th November 2011
  #84
Gear Guru
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Location: the big rack
Posts: 11,248

rack gear is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Hills View Post
... so there's one law for you, and one law for "piracy apologists"? The point is not whether this specific case is likely to be pursued by the copyright holder. You could argue fair use. But you also trotted out the same arguments that you don't accept from anyone else. The point, which you are doing your best to dodge, is that if you advocate an absolutist line you should toe it yourself.
absolutely not true don, and I'd like to see you prove it. if I had posted a link to the product itself, and not a BUY LINK to PURCHASE you may have a point, but you are just completely and factually wrong while making a unsuccessful attempt at reach that can't be made... but keep running yourself in circles grasping at ghosts.

show me where I've argued against promoting and selling product...

whom do you think is being hurt by a book cover being posted in a blog to which it is being talk about?

how does it remove a sale of the book itself, when there is a buy link to the book?

book covers are promotion to sell the book... and the product is the book, not the cover.

do you think publishers charge or license for the use of book covers to promote their books?

wow, don, wow... you just really don't get how the law works and what infringement actually is.

oh don, look out... here comes another one... tell me where the infringement is in this:

You should buy the Drive Soundtrack Album, it's amazing!
Only $5 on Amazon for just a few more days...

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B005GSY23M/



fair use is fair use and piracy is piracy
#85
29th November 2011
Old 29th November 2011
  #85
Gear Guru
 
John Eppstein's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA.
Posts: 14,443

John Eppstein is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by charles maynes View Post
The cost of the program- I am guessing, becuase there is no mention of budgets or fiscal impact is not stated- but I do know there are 192 countries in the UN, and at 300k per year for the media postings that are a part of that bill, the cost would be nearly 58 million dollars per year. So where is it coming from?
$58 million is the cost of what? Maybe 1.5 dozen Stinger missles. Maybe less.

The cost of lost drones in Afghanistan is over $55 million

The Problem With the Predator Half the Predators and both Global Hawks deployed crashed.

Quote:
It sure seemed there was plenty of cash on hand for Wall Street bailouts, and Pharma gets HUGE government money.... so maybe they will pay for it....

as to our cost of war, yeah- running fulltime wars for around 10 years does take a pretty serious toll- the Libyan operation cost about 10 million per day- It seemed there was plenty of Chinese loans that were available to pay for that too.
Now you're starting to think. It's time some of that money was spent on something beneficial to the US economy.

Quote:
Al Jazeera I would hope wouldnt be blocked, but who knows what the future holds. At any rate, I like having access to information from beyond American media outlets.
They wouldn't block AJ, they need it to demonstrate our freedom of the press. And anyway AJ co-operates with our government to some extent - they don't want to jeopardize their press passes.

Quote:
as to the alteration of COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS- its wasn't in place of "products in development"..... The issue is that all the pirated music that is causing the problem isnt Van Halen multitracks being used in Songsmith- its real, released product. same with Software apps- I beta test for a number of companies- I have not seen a non timebombed beta in 5 years. Even our beta ilok licenses are time limited. Proper releases tend not to be, and are a much more attractive target for piracy- so why wouldnt that be expicitly mentioned when the products in development are?
Whjat isn't a commercial product today may be tomorrow. And anyway, ALL intellectual property merits equal protection. Otherwise big companies with in house legal departments could rip individuals off, claim it wasn't a commercial product, and out litigate the rightful owners.

Quote:
just having this conversation makes me think Denial of Service Attacks on these servers are by far the best way to solve the problem. It is a bit vigilante in nature, but it seems like a wonderful project for something like anonymous.
Except that Anonymous is firmly in the pro-pirate, anti-copyright camp. They launch DDOS attacks on antipiracy sites.

And anyway, it's illegal.
#86
29th November 2011
Old 29th November 2011
  #86
Gear Guru
 
John Eppstein's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA.
Posts: 14,443

John Eppstein is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Hills View Post
... so there's one law for you, and one law for "piracy apologists"? The point is not whether this specific case is likely to be pursued by the copyright holder. You could argue fair use. But you also trotted out the same arguments that you don't accept from anyone else. The point, which you are doing your best to dodge, is that if you advocate an absolutist line you should toe it yourself.
No.

Fair use is fair use. Nobody has any objections to fair use.

The key is understanding what fair use is and what it isn't.

The pro-piracy crowd has a tendency to holler "FAIR USE!" about things where it doesn't even REMOTELY apply.
#87
29th November 2011
Old 29th November 2011
  #87
Gear Guru
 
charles maynes's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Location: out in the dirt.
Posts: 15,906

charles maynes is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein View Post
Didn't we already invade Guatemala?

The US happens to be one of the largest markets in the world. Damned lies and statistics aside, significantly reducing piracy in the US would have a significant effect on the real financial situation of affected IP owners.

Please see my above post where I explained how the statistics are manipulated here.

So the figures are for Software piracy? How about MUSIC piracy?

AHEM! That's illegal. Only black ops agencies of governments can get away with that kind of stuff. And reportedly Stuxnet took a couple years to set up and target on just one system.

I already did.

Why are you so worried about paying for it? The cost would be inconsequential compared to almost everything the government spends money on, and the benefit to the economy would be sufficiently profound that it would increase tax revenue above it cost. We're talking a large percentage of the GNP that's involved here.

That's a Tea Party tactic - if you can't come up with any more effective reason to oppose something you're against you complain about the cost.

Dig it - effective social change costs money, but the benefits far outweigh the cost.
the cost will be passed on to the end user- whether that is the record company or the consumer, it will not be absorbed by the government.

As far as social change costing money- yes it sure does. but this is a matter of calling a crime something else, and its quite orwellian in its scope- The masses cannot be trusted, therefore we treat them like children.

an anlogy would be like this- Is torture reasonable to protect the common good? Even if it has been shown to be unreliable in its outcome? That has been pretty well established actually, as people will say anything to make torture stop.

The issue is one of justice. if Piracy is a crime. A crime has consequences. The criminal is the one to be punished, not the society. To frame it in other light is to be either intellectually dishonest, or to be an apologist. I am not an apologist. I have great disaffection for pirates, and I have probably lost upwards of 50k to losses I have absorbed by the endeavor.

If Piracy is treated as the war on drugs was, we would have Delta Force kicking in doors around the world dealing with it- but we dont need to- we can target IP addresses and go after them specifically. If we declare war formally, those options become legal ones to pursue.

and actually, China and India are big markets for pirated music.... just fyi.
#88
29th November 2011
Old 29th November 2011
  #88
Lives for gear
 
AwwDeOhh's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2009
Location: State of Insomnia, sleepless USA
Posts: 2,547

AwwDeOhh is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by charles maynes View Post
are we talking about painting over a rotted wall, or are we talking about ripping the rotted wall down and rebuilding it?

How is it going to shut them down? Are we going to invade Russia? or China? or Guatemala?

It simply hides them from US users when they become known....

let me say one more time- the US is 107th in the world for Software Piracy.... How is it going to SIGNIFICANTLY affect things, more than they are addressed right now?

frankly, a STUXNET style bug would be a better strategy. And it would probably not be frowned upon in the legal community.
obviously this is an option as well... though new servers can be setup quite rapido.

U.S. RESERVES RIGHT TO MEET CYBER ATTACK WITH FORCE - Dialogo forum Breaking News From South America the Caribbean

And why hasnt anyone said how all this was going to be paid for? Seriously....
"The Congressional Budget Office estimated that implementation of the bill would cost the federal government $47 million through 2016, to cover enforcement costs and the hiring and training of 22 new special agents and 26 support staff"
so what's that? 12mil a year initially? really? The congress wipes their ass with that kind of chump change.

What was the latest US estimate of IP losses due to piracy? Something like 50-60 BILLION a year? (on the LOW end)
Even if this Bill affects 1% of that number... if you consider a say 30% tax rate on earned income, On the LOW END --they'd profit 140 million for every 12 they spend...
For every percentage point you can multiply that number.

This won't cost a penny to the unaffected tax-payers...in fact it will help pay down the Natl' debt

The cost is a non-issue.

Quote:
It simply hides them from US users when they become known....
Now you're catching on!
We can't police and make laws for the entire world... we can only make laws here in the US.
You can bet though, if this Bill has the desired affect, more countries will implement a similar solution....
#89
29th November 2011
Old 29th November 2011
  #89
Gear Guru
 
John Eppstein's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA.
Posts: 14,443

John Eppstein is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by charles maynes View Post
the cost will be passed on to the end user- whether that is the record company or the consumer, it will not be absorbed by the government.
No, the taxpayer. As with all law enforcement services. This idea that somebody specific should pay the cost of copyright enforcement is peculiar and anomalous.

Quote:
an anlogy would be like this- Is torture reasonable to protect the common good? Even if it has been shown to be unreliable in its outcome? That has been pretty well established actually, as people will say anything to make torture stop.
You're equating copyright enforcement with torture?

Really?

You can't be serious.

Quote:
The issue is one of justice. if Piracy is a crime. A crime has consequences. The criminal is the one to be punished, not the society. To frame it in other light is to be either intellectually dishonest, or to be an apologist. I am not an apologist. I have great disaffection for pirates, and I have probably lost upwards of 50k to losses I have absorbed by the endeavor.
Nobody's "punishing society".

Paying for law enforcement services - which most of us will never need, hopefully - is not "punishment", it's our civic responsibility.

Quote:
If Piracy is treated as the war on drugs was, we would have Delta Force kicking in doors around the world dealing with it- but we dont need to- we can target IP addresses and go after them specifically. If we declare war formally, those options become legal ones to pursue.
Spare me the "War On Drugs" nonsense. I already took that one down in our PM exchange. We can't discuss it adequately in the forum without running afoul of Jules.

Quote:
and actually, China and India are big markets for pirated music.... just fyi.
Actually, in the last few months China has done a turn-around and is co-operating on piracy issues. How well we shall see.....

India remains a problem, as does Russia. India, however, largely pirates Indian product as I understand it. They pirate ours too, of course, but a lot of their stuff is home grown.

I personally think we should put a big firewall around Russia. I bet they'd clean house in about 6 months.
#90
29th November 2011
Old 29th November 2011
  #90
Lives for gear
 
krheatman's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Location: Motorcity
Posts: 2,882

krheatman is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein View Post

Now you're starting to think. It's time some of that money was spent on something beneficial to the US economy.
What like green jobs,fixing roads and bridges.
how about some more billion dollar loans that create 350 jobs.

How about shutting down our borders and leveling the playing field with trade.Restore the manufacturing base in the U.S. It shouldn't be cheaper to manufacture things in China.Tariff imports.

But they won't do that because there is too much money to be made overseas in China.We have been sold out.Corporate greed lobbies congress and they are all in the lobbiests pockets for campaign donations and God only knows what else.

Any politician that sells us out for corporate greed is guilty of treason in my book.
That includes Clinton and the Republican led Congress who signed the economy away his last day in office 1999.The idiots at Fannie May and Freddie Mack who have cost us billions.The list goes on.

You can't count on the government.Were screwed.
Unless that is,Chuck Norris gets involved.
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

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.