I'd like to ask that the deviation into the general nature of the politics that we live in be put in another thread. It's not that I think it's not relevant to this topic, I just wish to keep the topic about the bill and about copyright law in general.

I will add that while politicians, Hollywood, and the Silicon Valley (and Seattle) were arguing over the merits of this bill, the Justice Department did shut down "Megaupload" without the need or benefit from whatever SOPA or PIPA would do, and it sounded like it didn't take them long at all to martial up this campaign.

Of course, this just leaves about 999 more file uploading sites to sift through for the Justice Department and most are probably ready to pack up their servers to another country anyway.

Yeah. I think this is right there at the heart of the problem:

MPAA Directly & Publicly Threatens Politicians Who Aren't Corrupt Enough To Stay Bought

ampersand wrote:I will add that while politicians, Hollywood, and the Silicon Valley (and Seattle) were arguing over the merits of this bill, the Justice Department did shut down "Megaupload" without the need or benefit from whatever SOPA or PIPA would do, and it sounded like it didn't take them long at all to martial up this campaign.

I expect that we'll learn that the investigation into this started months ago, or perhaps longer, and possibly with an internal source that turned over records. It was merely a matter of timing, the convenience of which is high on either side. For Hollywood, it's proof that there are indeed massive operations of this sort that need to be shut down. For the anti-SOPA crowd, it's proof that the tools it would introduce are not needed.

I suspect there is a reason that the government was OK with dropping these horrendous pieces of legislation. Oh, here it is! Another nice sounding bill name that will destroy the free, open, and private Internet we have right now - and this time it's justification is "won't someone think of the children!?".

In addition, last year President Obama signed the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, which (although he claims it doesn't change US law, so doesn't need to be ratified by the Senate) is ostensibly WORSE than SOPA with the same object in mind.

And it's all being done by people like those in this clip:



Oh, crap! Copyrighted material on RLF! We're all going to end up in jail! Also, I love The IT Crowd.

How long until this is the penalty for piracy:

collegestudent22 wrote:I suspect there is a reason that the government was OK with dropping these horrendous pieces of legislation. Oh, here it is! Another nice sounding bill name that will destroy the free, open, and private Internet we have right now - and this time it's justification is "won't someone think of the children!?".

I think it's important to look at the actual legislation. It's not really that long. Here's what it covers as of the point where it was reported to the House.

• 20 years in prison and/or a fine for buying or attempting to buy child pornography or something that will be used to help access child pornography (would probably including buying a web service, membership, etc.)
• Adds child porn to activities chargeable under racketeering law
• Requires ISPs to retain for one year a log of IP addresses assigned to each customer
• Makes it easier to provide restraining orders against people who may attempt to intimidate a child witness and provides that the publication of the photo of a child witness be considered harassment or intimidation absent certain listed purposes
• Enhances prison terms for possession of child porn
• Allows administrative subpoenas to be issued under certain new circumstances

Of these, only the ISP provision seems problematic to me. Providers not already logging get six months to begin, but I worry about the effects of such data being stored.

In addition, last year President Obama signed the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, which (although he claims it doesn't change US law, so doesn't need to be ratified by the Senate) is ostensibly WORSE than SOPA with the same object in mind.

Ars Technica posted an article about the claims going around. In short, yes, ACTA sucks, but it's not quite as bad as people have been claiming. There is no forcing of ISPs to monitor all packets; generic drugs are not being banned; SOPA/PIPA-style laws are not mandated; and ISPs are not forced to constantly monitor for copyrighted material. It's a good read, and reminds us of an important point that it's best to win an argument based on the facts and not on random claims.

Martin Blank wrote:

collegestudent22 wrote:I suspect there is a reason that the government was OK with dropping these horrendous pieces of legislation. Oh, here it is! Another nice sounding bill name that will destroy the free, open, and private Internet we have right now - and this time it's justification is "won't someone think of the children!?".

I think it's important to look at the actual legislation. It's not really that long. Here's what it covers as of the point where it was reported to the House.

• 20 years in prison and/or a fine for buying or attempting to buy child pornography or something that will be used to help access child pornography (would probably including buying a web service, membership, etc.)
• Adds child porn to activities chargeable under racketeering law
• Requires ISPs to retain for one year a log of IP addresses assigned to each customer
• Makes it easier to provide restraining orders against people who may attempt to intimidate a child witness and provides that the publication of the photo of a child witness be considered harassment or intimidation absent certain listed purposes
• Enhances prison terms for possession of child porn
• Allows administrative subpoenas to be issued under certain new circumstances

Of these, only the ISP provision seems problematic to me. Providers not already logging get six months to begin, but I worry about the effects of such data being stored.

The ISP part I was referring to, especially since it requires them to log this data and allows for the government to access these records without a warrant.

The rest only bothers me in terms of my opposition to racketeering law in the first place - that and I wasn't aware that child porn was a business, much less one run by organized crime syndicates.

collegestudent22 wrote:I wasn't aware that child porn was a business, much less one run by organized crime syndicates.

The number of things you're unaware of is rather large.

Yes, well, I don't go around googling things related to child porn.

I still stand by my point on anti-racketeering laws - namely, that these crimes are already against the law, and the racketeering point only opens up double jeopardy and cruel punishment (like tacking on an additional 20 years because someone committed a crime without physical violence, such as embezzlement, twice) concerns.