How big of a deal is this PIPA shit?

[Greatguardian]

What do the rich companies plan to do when the poor have no money left to spend on their overpriced garbage?

inb4 Apple. If it works for them, etc.

[ronin sparthos]

They can ram through legislation against piracy but can't get a jobs plan put through etc etc.

Good to know our elected officials know where the priorities lie.

[Uzor]

Been in the news for awhile now.

As for people giving a shit. No one will, that is until it actually passes & occurs.

Obligatory "This doesn't apply to me since I live in "______________".

I'd like nothing mor than to be able to say "this doesn't apply to me since I live in Sweden"; but alas, that's not true as it applies to every website stationed or have services in America - and as such me since I browse said websites.

That is unless they only block it from access within the US - in that case I'm happy. Sucks to be you though.

[Greatguardian]

They can ram through legislation against piracy but can't get a jobs plan put through etc etc.

Good to know our elected officials know where the priorities lie.

Piracy costs corporations money. Creating jobs for Americans with a minimum wage and (relatively) high standard of living costs corporations money. Sounds about right.

[Cephius]

Piracy costs corporations money. Creating jobs for Americans with a minimum wage and (relatively) high standard of living costs corporations money. Sounds about right.

Irrelevant. This Bill doesn't attack piracy, it attacks the freedom of the internet. It gives the government the right to shut down ANY website that hosts copyrighted material without proof or due process. Picture of copyrighted material on BG bucket? Sorry BG, you're now blacklisted!

Hey it's a good thing those congressman in support of the bill don't host copyrighted material on their own websites without permission or anything... Um... Er.. Oops?

[Greatguardian]

Irrelevant. This Bill doesn't attack piracy, it attacks the freedom of the internet. It gives the government the right to shut down ANY website that hosts copyrighted material without proof or due process. Picture of copyrighted material on BG bucket? Sorry BG, you're now blacklisted!

Hey it's a good thing those congressman in support of the bill don't host copyrighted material on their own websites without permission or anything... Um... Er.. Oops?

I was referring to anti-piracy bills in general, which have a habit of being slammed through congress fairly quickly, since the post I quoted seemed to be making a generalization rather than talking about this bill in particular.

I know what the bill does. I'm also fairly certain that it's really just a way for corporations to circumvent the stance that a lot of these affected websites take, eg "If you report it, we'll take it down, but we don't screen everything that users post". With the threat of being shut down without due process being held over them, companies like Google and Youtube will have to take on responsibility for actively enforcing anti-piracy/anti-infringement measures, effectively transferring that burden away from the companies sponsoring the bill.

Do people really care about shutting down BG? Probably not. It doesn't make them any money. What does save corporations money is not having to police large social hubs like Youtube or Megavideo any more.

[Cephius]

I was referring to anti-piracy bills in general, which have a habit of being slammed through congress fairly quickly, since the post I quoted seemed to be making a generalization rather than talking about this bill in particular.

I know what the bill does. I'm also fairly certain that it's really just a way for corporations to circumvent the stance that a lot of these affected websites take, eg "If you report it, we'll take it down, but we don't screen everything that users post". With the threat of being shut down without due process being held over them, companies like Google and Youtube will have to take on responsibility for actively enforcing anti-piracy/anti-infringement measures, effectively transferring that burden away from the companies sponsoring the bill.

Do people really care about shutting down BG? Probably not. It doesn't make them any money. What does save corporations money is not having to police large social hubs like Youtube or Megavideo any more.

You can't make it Google's responsibility to screen every single link that it returns via search results. Even if you think the Bill is on the right path, it's way too broad and overreaching and doesn't attack specific issues, it takes a rocket launcher to an anthill.

[Greatguardian]

You can't make it Google's responsibility to screen every single link that it returns via search results. Even if you think the Bill is on the right path, it's way too broad and overreaching and doesn't attack specific issues, it takes a rocket launcher to an anthill.

I think you're misunderstanding me. I'm not sympathizing with congress, nor do I support this bill at all. I know exactly what this bill has the potential to do, and I think it's deplorable. I was simply saying that I don't think this bill was designed in this way with the express intent to shut down arbitrary websites for any contrived reason. I'm sure it would probably be used that way at some point, especially on sites like Wikileaks. But honestly, the corporate sponsors of this bill care about one thing: Money. Transferring the opus for screening content to website hosts rather than license holders saves those license holders a lot of money. That's really all it comes down to for them. Arbitrary suppression of legitimate free speech is more of a side-effect than anything else.

[Gwynplaine]

Also I want to articulate what bothers me about claiming streaming video game playing falls under IP rights. I can see that type of IP protection (not necessarily in the form this bill takes, but in principle) for things like visual media like movies and T.V. When it comes to T.V. and movies that's all there is to it, is viewing. For video games the visual viewing is a part of, but not its primary market utility. You buy it to play and interact with the game itself, something stream viewing doesn't make possible. It feels kind of analogous to the makers of Play Doh claiming IP rights for a stream viewing of some kids playing with Play Doh.

"Well I just saw everything Play Doh can do! So hell, why do I need to buy it now? It was fun to watch though!"

Are there any BG users in law who have a hold of what these two bills would really do?

[hey]

It doesn't really matter what they intend to use the bill for. It allows them to arbitrarily shut down any site they want, without a court order. "well we can, but trust us, we won't shut down youtubes" isn't good enough. The purpose of the bill doesn't matter. It gives the government almost unlimited power over the internet. As far as i'm concerned, that is the only thing that needs to be discussed. Any "benefits" (i use quotes because it would actually be bad for everyone, including those who do not pirate anything) of it are irrelevant.

[hey]

Also I want to articulate what bothers me about claiming streaming video game playing falls under IP rights. I can see that type of IP protection (not necessarily in the form this bill takes, but in principle) for things like visual media like movies and T.V. When it comes to T.V. and movies that's all there is to it, is viewing. For video games the visual viewing is a part of, but not its primary market utility. You buy it to play and interact with the game itself, something stream viewing doesn't make possible. It feels kind of analogous to the makers of Play Doh claiming IP rights for a stream viewing of some kids playing with Play Doh.

"Well I just saw everything Play Doh can do! So hell, why do I need to buy it now? It was fun to watch though!"

Are there any BG users in law who have a hold of what these two bills would really do?

Except play doh is not a copyrighted work. Video games are.

[Greatguardian]

Except play doh is not a copyrighted work. Video games are.

I doubt it's that simple. Would it be copyright infringement for me to summarize the plot of a copyrighted novel for you? To quote or cite from a copyrighted novel without permission?

Video game streams don't reproduce copyrighted games any more than a book report reproduces copyrighted books.

[Priran]

nvm

[hey]

I doubt it's that simple. Would it be copyright infringement for me to summarize the plot of a copyrighted novel for you? To quote or cite from a copyrighted novel without permission?

Video game streams don't reproduce copyrighted games any more than a book report reproduces copyrighted books.

Yes it does. it shows the entire story and leaves nothing out.

[Syntex]

Anyone else watch the video on the first page?

I think the guy has a point in saying that the music and movie industry are suffering but not from piracy as a major problem but their lack of ability to adapt to new and growing trends. Look how long napster was running before itunes and other pay methods to buy songs finally surfaced I mean seriously they think people still want to pay 20 bucks for a shitty cd when all they want is one song?

He goes on to to summarize that in combination to what I stated above that the economy is doing bad and when people who make minimum wage, if they have a job, are not really going to drop 20 bucks at the theater when times are hard. Using the loss of sales they aim their crosshairs on piracy as the PROBLEM THATS KILLING THE INDUSTRY which is complete bullshit.

[ronin sparthos]

The very fact that we're all arguing what does and doesn't constitute as copyrighted material shows exactly why this bill is a crock of shit.

One industry is mad it isn't pulling in maximum profit margins so its solution is to drag down others with it.

[hey]

I think the guy has a point in saying that the music and movie industry are suffering but not from piracy as a major problem but their lack of ability to adapt to new and growing trends. Look how long napster was running before itunes and other pay methods to buy songs finally surfaced I mean seriously they think people still want to pay 20 bucks for a shitty cd when all they want is one song?

That. My entertainment budget comes out to ~$100 per year. Of which i spend $0 on movies/tv shows, $0 on music, and rest is video games that cannot be pirated, and video game consoles.

Movies are outrageous. There is no way in hell i would ever pay $10-20+ to see a 1-2 hour movie. It's not happening. But you know what? I just might pay $1-2. Unfortunately, the only way to legally acquire moves for that price is rental. Redbox is nice for this, but requires going out to one, which takes time, and money for gas, and is entirely inconvenient. Services like netflix would be good, but unfortunately i do not watch enough movies to justify the price. All it would take is offering BR quality movies for $1-2 via torrent (faster downloads, and cheaper bandwidth for them, win-win), and suddenly i'd pay for every single movie i watched.

$1 per song for music from itunes, amazon, etc is not bad for casuals, but in the last year, i have downloaded ~500 songs. Unfortunately i could not afford that even if i wanted to. And of course some of it was in fact not worth paying for (but may still be worth listening to). A "pay what you want" business model can work, and would indeed get a lot more people to pay for music, myself included.

Finally, video games. These are a fucking joke. How does one justify $60 for a game that lasts 10 hours? If i paid for every video game i played, i'd be looking at upwards of $2k per year.

These companies need to realize they can compete with piracy. We WANT to support them. As soon as they allow us to do so, in an affordable manner, we will.

[Talint]

I think the guy has a point in saying that the music and movie industry are suffering but not from piracy as a major problem but their lack of ability to adapt to new and growing trends. Look how long napster was running before itunes and other pay methods to buy songs finally surfaced I mean seriously they think people still want to pay 20 bucks for a shitty cd when all they want is one song?

This has been the modus operandi of the RIAA (and MPAA) since vinyls. "Technology sucks and should be banned until we get complete control over it. Then it's cool."

Lest we forget this fun case. I'll always fucking love irony!

-edit-

Finally, video games. These are a fucking joke. How does one justify $60 for a game that lasts 10 hours? If i paid for every video game i played, i'd be looking at upwards of $2k per year.

...what AAA title lasts 10 hours and costs $60?

[Yugl]

it takes a rocket launcher to an anthill.

Shouldn't build anthills in a warfield.

Anyone else watch the video on the first page?

I think the guy has a point in saying that the music and movie industry are suffering but not from piracy as a major problem but their lack of ability to adapt to new and growing trends. Look how long napster was running before itunes and other pay methods to buy songs finally surfaced I mean seriously they think people still want to pay 20 bucks for a shitty cd when all they want is one song?

He goes on to to summarize that in combination to what I stated above that the economy is doing bad and when people who make minimum wage, if they have a job, are not really going to drop 20 bucks at the theater when times are hard. Using the loss of sales they aim their crosshairs on piracy as the PROBLEM THATS KILLING THE INDUSTRY which is complete bullshit.

Regardless of your stance on the situation, this argument is insufficient for a rebuttal. People still don't buy songs even when they're on itunes for $0.99. There are exceptions where the song doesn't exist on itunes, but I imagine a vast majority of people don't buy from alternative legal avenues either. It's not a matter of "adapting" it's a matter of free is free. What rational reason do people have to buy a product they can get for free at the same or better quality?

Are there any BG users in law who have a hold of what these two bills would really do?

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h112-3261

You can find the other one on the same site. Choose "Full Text" instead of "summary" for the entire bill. Enjoy.

[Silenka]

The nature of piracy means it will survive long after this bill has breathed its last. People will ALWAYS find new, innovative ways to pirate stuff. If the govt cracks down on websites, maybe everyone moves their shit to unsearchable sites like darkweb. Plus, there's always IRC, you can still dl everything on there. The government thinks it's slaying a dragon, but it's really cutting the head off a hydra; several more will grow in its place and it's unstoppable. They will only end up making their perceived problem worse.