# Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA)...



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

This law is currently being debated in the USA congress. The *Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA),* which aims to do as the title says.

Here is a recent article on it from SBS news, Australia

Proponents argue that it will stop copyright infringement online from illegal downloading.

Those against it say that it will impact on freedom to access information and will impact on the effectiveness of search engines, etc. (the Wikipedia site today is being put offline for 24 hours by the owners as a kind of protest against SOPA, and other big sites like Facebook and Twitter are against it also).

Opinions? Especially from our American members, but everyone else as well, as I think this type of legislation has been talked about in other countries too...


----------



## Chi_townPhilly (Apr 21, 2007)

'Twas the subject of an earlier discussion, here.

This is an interesting political beastie, as support and opposition for this thing doesn't break down along neat party lines.

My thumbnail impression is that the resolution is the metaphorical equivalent of applying a tactical nuclear device to a varmint-hole... and I oppose it.

President Obama hunkered down and said that he would take a position on this matter (presumably while the polling data and focus-group-testing came in). A short while ago, he (finally) came out against the bill.

Thank God we're in an election-cycle now.


----------



## Crudblud (Dec 29, 2011)

I imagine if it passed many people would start using Darknet instead.


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

RYM is offline today as well...

http://rateyourmusic.com/

If the goal - or one of the goals is to stop illegal downloading of music the're 15 years too late. The music industry is dead. At this point there's no way to revive the corpse since many of it's once potential consumers have gotten out of the habit of paying for music and are instead (illegally) downloading, copying or spotifying. No way to turn back the clock, the're MUCH too late.


----------



## LordBlackudder (Nov 13, 2010)

as long as they don't assume all music is now illegal. what about remixes, arrangements, music ripped from a game, abandonware games.

i don't mind buying music but sometimes it was never released. i also feel some genres are so obscure they exist through downloads.

if a company or label doesn't release their music for sale they should expect it to be downloaded.


----------



## quack (Oct 13, 2011)

This is more about the movie, television and game industry trying to avoid going the way of the music industry because with increasing internet speeds and bandwidth, HD bluray is just as acquirable online as an album is.

It is kind of the perfect under the radar legislation, with its vague sweeping powers designed by people who mostly don't understand the issues well. They clearly wanted it to pass quietly without fuss, now it is being highlighted and talked about it has little hope of succeeding. Indeed its scope has already been greatly reduced with Obama coming out against it as he can see it is nothing but a vote loser even though supporting it may be a campaign funding bonus.

How much this would really affect wikipedia, and other sites coming out against it, is negligible, particularly in its more neutered form although the earlier drafts were much more far-ranging. But what it would do would be to severely curtail the internet for americans while leaving it free for everyone else, not something many americans are going to like even if they don't use the internet significantly.

Freedom's just another word for somethin' left to download. -- Janis Joplin (kinda)


----------



## Moscow-Mahler (Jul 8, 2010)

Well, I believe that all companies should do as BIS does - they let the user to play the album ONLINE. I do not want to buy something BLINDLY.

And why the major companies (esp. EMI) have worser sound quality then the smaller one like BIS (or TELARC wich is dead now)? I don't understand.

*I like to buy CDs,* but I live in Moscow. Outside of Moscow it is mostly impossible.

About movies. Well, I do not care much about the cinema, but more legal downloading services will be good. But I will not watch the majority of blockbusters _even for free._

About books. Well, I think that free acess is a very good thing for young authors esp. in such countries as Russia. If a person is a poet or a serious writer he usually put his texts on the net HIMSELF. The majority intelectual journals are on the net for free, at last in my country.

You can't force people to *buy* poetry, I am afraid. And public libraries system is not in a good form my country. So, I believe that authors and publishers of SERIUOS literature should put it on the net themselves. Some of them already do.

And I do not care at all about detective authors. Only them get royalties in my country. The standart tirage of a SERIOUS books is about 1000 or 2000 ex. In this case the author gets only a standart wage, without any bonuses for the addition tirage. The do not get money for EACH selled book, they have some fixed money, at last in my country.

There were an interview with an opera singing lady (in Russian). She said about this problem: "I did not get royalties from EACH disk, I got only fixed salary. So I don't care."

***
And people should not be the slaves for pop-culture. Some people download such things, that I would never watch for free. They should free their mind!

But certainly I do not mind to support a good artist with my money. Why not? I have some money, thanks God!


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

A precursor to this in the UK was the half-hearted attempts to criminalise the use of cassette tapes for recording albums - remember the inner sleeves of 80s vinyl albums bearing the legend 'HOME TAPING IS KILLING MUSIC - AND IT'S ILLEGAL'? Perhaps the likes of BASF and TDK argued to higher authorities that had everybody obeyed this stupid law then about 90% of their UK blank cassette sales would have disappeared overnight. Back then nobody took a blind bit of notice as it was legislation that was recognised more by the breaching of than in the observance - I still can't understand why the US government has to make such a big deal of this more modern variant now. And, as jhar26 says, it's too late anyway - why didn't politicians get a bee in their bonnet about this before when there was a better chance to clamp down on it? God know how much money and resources will have to be thrown at its enforcement should it get into the statute books.


----------



## Kopachris (May 31, 2010)

SOPA has actually been shelved by the House of Representatives (probably to be picked back up in February). Now we just need to worry about its Senate-born sister, PIPA (Protect Intellectual Property Act).


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Today's situation with illegal downloading is a much bigger problem than the old cassette issue. Somebody actually had to buy a copy of an album before a friend could tape it. Now millions of people can steal recordings with the artist receiving zero compensation for their work.

This said, SOPA and PIPA need to be rewritten, so not to force sites like YouTube to shut down immediately or face financial ruin fighting law suits.


----------



## Moscow-Mahler (Jul 8, 2010)

YouTube is in fact a free advertisment for the artists. People watch the video and go to the concert. Even pop-bands admitted that.

I personally prefer to buy something, if I really like it, but I think it's an illusion that people (esp. in the third world countries like my own country outside of Moscow) will buy something if you just force them. Though, I do not know if an artist really get that money. Even *Mariss Jansons* said in an interview that EMI paid him not much, despite the commercial success of his Shostakovich project.

And I am afraid that sometimes those companies do not think about the customers also. That scandal with Metallica had shown this. When they made some mediocre sound-quality recording, but decided not to re-record it, because the company didn't want to loose money. I think it's a good example of their cinism.

I am afraid that for an artist (I mean not a conductor or a violinist, but a composer or a poet) - esp. in the third world countries like mine - the only way is the way of Charles Ives - to have *some other work.* It's difficult of course and I personally try to support artists, if I can, but I am not sure if those big companies really think about them.


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

Fighting SOPA and PIPA news...

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/19/technology/web-protests-piracy-bill-and-2-key-senators-change-course.html?_r=1&hp

http://www.networkworld.com/news/2012/011812-wikipedia-craigslist-other-sites-black-254997.html

http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/riaa-exec-gives-sopa-foes-fresh-reason-hate-riaa


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Chi_townPhilly said:


> 'Twas the subject of an earlier discussion, here.
> 
> This is an interesting political beastie, as support and opposition for this thing doesn't break down along neat party lines.
> 
> ...


Yeah, democracy stinks. He should just ignore the people and do what God tells him to.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

I would be in favor of a bill against online piracy if it were not also a threat to ordinary sites like wikipedia and yahoo, not to mention free speech as a whole.

Incidentally, how long until online industries learn to play the political game? They'll realize they have to buy influence via donations and lobbyists, and until then the politicians will threaten them with stuff like this. Extortion by congress.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly (Apr 21, 2007)

Chi_townPhilly said:


> President Obama hunkered down and said that he would take a position on this matter (presumably while the polling data and focus-group-testing came in). A short while ago, he (finally) came out against the bill.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Larger point (which was ignored for the sake of being gratuitously contentious) is that the vast preponderance of present company don't _need_ polls and focus-group-testing to recognize that it's appropriate to put the interests of Big Entertainment Industry donors on the back burner and attend to the larger interests of the country- and I'm grateful that this seems to have been done (for now).

Of course (as *Kopachris* has pointed out), PIPA continues apace in the Senate, under the shepherding of Senate Majority Leader Reid (D-Nevada). Of course, he just got through with _his_ election-cycle, and so doesn't have that inconvenient popular pressure to concern him overly at this time.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Thank goodness TC didn't participate in the blackout. I would have cried.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Chi_townPhilly said:


> Larger point (which was ignored for the sake of being gratuitously contentious) is that the vast preponderance of present company don't _need_ polls and focus-group-testing to recognize that it's appropriate to put the interests of Big Entertainment Industry donors on the back burner and attend to the larger interests of the country- and I'm grateful that this seems to have been done (for now).
> 
> Of course (as *Kopachris* has pointed out), PIPA continues apace in the Senate, under the shepherding of Senate Majority Leader Reid (D-Nevada). Of course, he just got through with _his_ election-cycle, and so doesn't have that inconvenient popular pressure to concern him overly at this time.


And "(presumably while the polling data and focus-group-testing came in)" was not "gratuitously contentious?"


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

My understanding (and I did not read the acts directly) is that not only do these acts prohibit sites from allowing downloads of protected material but also sites cannot have links to protected material. Furthermore, the site owners are responsible for policing anything posted on it. If someone on Facebook posted a link to protected material, Facebook would be liable. These restrictions seem rather extreme.

People have suggested that these acts are like blowing up a house to get rid of termites. On the other hand, I do not know a good solution to piracy of video or music.


----------



## Fsharpmajor (Dec 14, 2008)

Chi_townPhilly said:


> Larger point (which was ignored for the sake of being gratuitously contentious) is that the vast pre
> Of course (as *Kopachris* has pointed out), PIPA continues apace in the Senate, under the shepherding of Senate Majority Leader Reid (D-Nevada). Of course, he just got through with _his_ election-cycle, and so doesn't have that inconvenient popular pressure to concern him overly at this time.


The Democrats only hold the Senate by a slim majority, though. Reid will lose his job as leader if it goes Republican in 2012. I would guess that the Senators of both parties who are up for re-election this time around will be biting their nails over which way to vote on PIPA--what's to stop Google from putting a simple list on its home page of the Senators, Democrat and Republican, who vote in favour of it?


----------



## TrazomGangflow (Sep 9, 2011)

From what I have read it will seem to have little effect against piracy. It will slow the growth of online corporations with its regulations and therefore effect the economy. I also don't like the government regulating anything, they rarely do a good job.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

They pulled the bill! Yay!  We're safe for now.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

Did anyone else have full access to Wikipedia when it was apparently backed out? I did and I only found out that it was blacked out an hour before it finished.


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

Just a question. We use a lot of youtube videos here, for knowing new pieces, etc. Now, most of those videos are constructed from mp3 files obtained by copying, into your computer, an actual legal copy of the cd, say of your personal collection (which you buy in a store, for example; say, the EMI edition of Argerich's hits, whatever). This is actually illegal, right?

Examples:






(Dutoit conducting Ravel's Alborada del Gracioso, Montreal Symphony Orchestra)


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

aleazk said:


> Just a question. We use a lot of youtube videos here, for knowing new pieces, etc. Now, most of those videos are constructed from mp3 files obtained by copying, into your computer, an actual legal copy of the cd, say of your personal collection (which you buy in a store, for example; say, the EMI edition of Argerich's hits, whatever). This is actually illegal, right?
> 
> Examples:
> 
> ...


What if it was uploaded by a company such as this recording of Monteverdi's Chiome D'oro by the Australian Brandenburg Orchestra?


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> What if it was uploaded by a company such as this recording of Monteverdi's Chiome D'oro by the Australian Brandenburg Orchestra?


well, I suppose that in those cases is legal.


----------



## Kopachris (May 31, 2010)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Did anyone else have full access to Wikipedia when it was apparently backed out? I did and I only found out that it was blacked out an hour before it finished.


If you had Javascript disabled or you were going somewhere other than http://en.wikipedia.org (e.g. http://it.wikipedia.org, http://de.wikipedia.org, http://se.wikipedia.org, etc.), it wouldn't have been blacked out for you.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

Kopachris said:


> If you had Javascript disabled or you were going somewhere other than http://en.wikipedia.org (e.g. http://it.wikipedia.org, http://de.wikipedia.org, http://se.wikipedia.org, etc.), it wouldn't have been blacked out for you.


I think JavaScript must have been disabled then.


----------



## Guest (Jan 21, 2012)

If I thought it would kill digital downloads and bring back the likes of Tower Records, I'd be all for it. Downloading has seriously damaged the CD and music industry in general.


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

violadude said:


> They pulled the bill! Yay!  We're safe for now.


I prefer to say they're dead for now.

http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/sopa-pipa-look-be-dead-least-now


----------



## Metalkitsune (Jul 11, 2011)

Actually the bill is delayed,not dead. Trust me i know how Politicians work,they will probably try to sneak the bill into another bill. There is a news article about someone who snuck a wolf hunting bill unto a Defense Authorization bill. So be on your guard.

contact info for congress.

CONGRESS
Congressional Switchboard - 1-866-220-0044

https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml

Tell them to support the OPEN act.

http://www.geekwire.com/2012/microsoft-opposes-sopa-bill-as-drafted

Looks like Microsoft is also against it,something must be really wrong with the bill if Microsoft and Bill Gates are against it.


----------



## bassClef (Oct 29, 2006)

I download a lot of music, but only as a means for previewing - if I don't like it I delete it, if I love it I buy the CD. If I'm not sure I may keep it a few months before deciding, but at least there's still a chance this leads to a purchase. Without this means of previewing in full, I'd have to use the snippets you get on Amazon etc, I'm not sure that's enough to fill me with confidence to purchase a new CD. My library is solid enough, so I might just stop buying new CDs.


----------



## Kryten (Jan 23, 2012)

bassClef said:


> I download a lot of music, but only as a means for previewing - if I don't like it I delete it, if I love it I buy the CD. If I'm not sure I may keep it a few months before deciding, but at least there's still a chance this leads to a purchase. Without this means of previewing in full, I'd have to use the snippets you get on Amazon etc, I'm not sure that's enough to fill me with confidence to purchase a new CD. My library is solid enough, so I might just stop buying new CDs.


I'm pretty much the same - I don't want to take my chances paying full-price for a CD that won't be listened to a month down the line so I download first and judge its worth later. If I can get it used for a negligible amount (say £2 or less), I'll take the gamble and forego the downloading. Illegal downloading can have its ethical uses (such as personal-use backups, download-with-intent-to-purchase and when your card's been charged but you just can't wait for the CD to arrive in the post), but they only see the black and white of it all.

Besides, I think they're more bothered about protecting new releases - they'll have you in the gallows for downloading the latest blockbuster or L**y G**a CD; but won't bat an eyelid about a 20yr old recording that sells only a negligible amount each week.


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

Blackout aftermath...

http://www.networkworld.com/columnists/2012/012012-backspin.html


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

More on SOPA/PIPA...

http://www.networkworld.com/columnists/2012/012712-backspin.html


----------

