See other Dead Constitution Articles
Title: Dead On Arrival: SOPA Shelved Indefinitely, Obama Succumbs to Pressure, Issues Official Veto Threat
Source:
[None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Jan 16, 2012
Author: infowars
Post Date: 2012-01-16 12:40:25 by Jethro Tull
Keywords: None
Views: 118
Comments: 5
Mac Slavo SHTFPlan.com Monday, January 16, 2012 Amid significant pressure from tens of thousands of internet users and major web behemoths like Google, Facebook, and Reddit, the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) is, in its current form, Dead on Arrival: Misguided efforts to combat online privacy have been threatening to stifle innovation, suppress free speech, and even, in some cases, undermine national security. As of yesterday, though, there’s a lot less to worry about. The first sign that the bills’ prospects were dwindling came Friday, when SOPA sponsors agreed to drop a key provision that would have required service providers to block access to international sites accused of piracy. The legislation ran into an even more significant problem yesterday when the White House announced its opposition to the bills. Though the administration’s chief technology officials officials acknowledged the problem of online privacy, the White House statement presented a fairly detailed critique of the measures and concluded, “We will not support legislation that reduces freedom of expression, increases cybersecurity risk or undermines the dynamic, innovative global Internet.” It added that any proposed legislation “must not tamper with the technical architecture of the Internet.” … Though the administration did issue a formal veto threat, the White House’s opposition signaled the end of these bills, at least in their current form. A few hours later, Congress shelved SOPA, putting off action on the bill indefinitely. Sourced From Washington Monthly via The Daily Sheeple Sponsored primarily by purported free speech advocates that include democrats and republicans alike, the SOPA would have fundamentally transformed the internet as we know it today. As Daisy Luther writes at Inalienably Yours, the bill was nothing short of a direct attack against the first Amendment and the right to free speech: On closer inspection, the legalese in the bill has the potential to eviscerate free speech….and like NDAA, without proof…only with suspicion of “wrong-doing”. It’s all about copyright infringement. If you tick off the powers that be, and you’ve quoted someone, somewhere, saying something, you may have infringed on their copyright. As a defendant, you are not even present at the legal proceeding allowing “them” to shut you down until you prove yourself innocent. How do they shut you down? Search engines are required to remove you from their listings. Internet Service Providers can be ordered to block access to your site. Advertising networks and payment providers can also be forced to cease doing business with you. This continues until you are proven INNOCENT. Wait – I thought it was innocent until proven guilty….oh….that was “before” the NDAA. Source: The Internet: The Last Bastion of Free Speech While this bill of goods was being sold to the American public as a way to reduce online piracy originating on foreign shores, in essence the legislation would have made it possible for any organization (with the financial assets and access to attorneys to do so) to target web sites (foreign or domestic) using excerpts, quotes, and videos without express permission of the authors or producers of such content. Furthermore, any web site linking to suspected copyrighted content would be guilty by association for fascilitating the infringement. By linking to and excerpting Daisy’s article above, for example, this particular web site, and anyone who republishes this article, excerpts it, or pulls a link from it, could be shut down on the service provider level until such time they prove their innocence.(*Note to DHS, et. al.: Daisy has given us permission to reprint her article or portions of it, and the excerpt from Washington Monthly has been reprinted under Fair Use to advance understanding of this political and Constitutional issue*) The scariest part of the legislation, as Daisy points out above, is that due process would have been eliminated (just like in the NDAA), forcing internet providers, search engines and ad networks to simply shut down a web site(s) based on just the complaintant’s accusations, leaving those web site owners who were shut down to deal with the fallout with costly legal expenses and lengthy court battles. You may recall that in 2010 the government shut down 73,000 web sites in exactly this manner. Though the owners of the majority of the targeted sites were not technically infringing copyrights, some were linking to other sites that did, making them an accessory. Even more alarming is the ability, under legislation such as SOPA, of the government to control the flow of information across major internet providers. Articles or videos criticizing political figures or policies could easily be targeted, as they were in October of this year when the government moved to shut down rogue publishers of critical content . What it boils down to is that SOPA was an attempt to put the power of information back in the hands of an elite few who are rapidly losing the ability to control what the masses are reading, hearing and seeing. Alternative news and ‘extremist’ information was the target (and still is). While we applaud President Obama (yes, we agree with him on this move) for formally issuing a veto threat, we remain skeptical of his motivations. This being an election year, the last thing the President needs to be dealing with along with the economic crisis and tensions in the middle east, is the protests of millions of voters who would have undoubtedly taken to the streets when access to their favorite web sites like Youtube, Google, Facebook, and Twitter were shut down because of alleged SOPA violations. Moreover, we aren’t one bit convinced that this veto was done in the interests of free expression, as the administration may claim. In November, the President issued a similar veto threat about the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which allows for the detention of American citizens determined to be threats to national security and public safety on the domestic (U.S.) battlefront. He flip-flopped on the issue just a couple of weeks later, and signed the bill into law over New Year’s weekend to complete silence from the mainstream media. It is our view that SOPA, in one form or another, will return with a vengeance. Poster Comment: YOU stopped this bill from becoming law. Well, let me back up, those who aren't HELPLESS AND HOPELESS killed this bill. Congratulations all.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Jethro Tull (#0)
The history of bills such as this, many of which have been pushed from behind the scenes by AIPAC and ADL to stifle criticism of Israel's abominable human rights record - and questioning of the specifics of the Holoco$t, is that they will not stop pushing it. This is a victory for those who would preserve and defend free speech, but those who feel their interests are threatened by the free exchange and dissemination of information as well as exposing their lies will not give up. They are psychotic and they have a deep seated fear of having their crimes exposed. Criminals work best under the cover of dark. Violation of legitimate property rights does need to be remedied but it is not remedied by providing pretext to shut down the free flow of information which is vital to understanding the real issues at play in our world. The would-be Masters do not like us "serfs" being able to talk about and expose their plans and actions. So, they will be back as they know that their dark deeds cannot survive the sanitizing influence of sunlight. The title makes Obama's actions sound like a bad thing, when he did exactly the right thing. I wonder if Mittens/Newton/Rick would have done the same had they been in office?
I think not.
In order to stop bills like this in the future we have to put an end to their basis, PERMINANT COPYRIGHT. Currently we can't go back to the original spacific time limited copyright terms of the Constitution without either breaking or formally withdrawing from several international treaties however there is a way we can rescind most of today's permanent copyrights or at least their anti Internet Freedom effects legally without radically reducing copyright terms from the current near permanent and constantly extending status suggested by the brand of software "piracy" called "Abandonware" distrubution. Basically what we can do is propose a law that would say that the DELIBERATE ABANDONMENT of a given piece of Intellectual property by its owner legally abandons the copyright or patent to it as well and puts it in the Public Domain. I would even be very liberal on what constitutes abandonment. It would be keeping a given piece of IP out of market circulation (movies, television shows, etc.), out of print (books, comics, magazines, etc.) or out of production (obsolete software versions) for at least five years, (A one year amnesty would be allowed on the abandoned IP already meating this five year or older requirement for continuing its copyrigt by returning it to the open market. For the purposes of this amnesty Returning a product to the open market would constitute one of the following choices. 1. Remarketing the copyrighted product or product version under an "obsolete product" reduced price at least a quarter of the price of any current version of the copyrighted product or less. Support would not be required for software sold under this choice. 2. Making the copyrighted product or product version if it is consodered to be not profitable any longer Freeware exclusively distributed by the copyright holder. Support would not be required for software given away under this plan. 3. Putting the copyrights to obsolete and unprofitable products under some form of Open Source or Free Distribution licensing with some copyright restrictions still allowed. (As a forinstance of the latter if Disney or Werner Brothers wanted to Open Source or Free Distribution license cartoons that they find to be unprofitable they could still use the copyright to prohibit pornographic, pro drug, pro crime or other dirivitive work themes that would destroy the character's current value as a character aimed mainly at children's and family entertainment in their Open Source / Free Distribution license. This, CS, is a very sharp idea. I like it.
It is our view that SOPA, in one form or another, will return with a vengeance.
#2. To: Jethro Tull (#0)
#3. To: JRiggs (#2)
I wonder if Mittens/Newton/Rick would have done the same had they been in office?
#4. To: Jethro Tull (#0)
The FARO RESERVE BANK!!! 
#5. To: Coral Snake (#4)
Basically what we can do is propose a law that would say that the DELIBERATE ABANDONMENT of a given piece of Intellectual property by its owner legally abandons the copyright or patent to it as well and puts it in the Public Domain. I would even be very liberal on what constitutes abandonment.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest