Details On SOPA/PIPA Alternative Released… With Open Requests For Feedback
from the check-it-out dept
As expected, the effort by Senator Wyden and Rep. Issa to put together an alternative to SOPA/PIPA has now been released. And while we can dig into the specifics in a bit, what may be most interesting is how they’ve released the text. Unlike the standard “here’s a pdf if you can find it,” they’ve put up an entire website, called KeepTheWebOpen.com, which is designed to encourage participation and feedback. Compare that to the backroom dealings behind PIPA and SOPA, where the industry folks helped craft the bill with no input whatsoever from those it would impact most. If only all bills were released this way…
Filed Under: copyright, internet, open, pipa, protect ip, sopa, trade
Comments on “Details On SOPA/PIPA Alternative Released… With Open Requests For Feedback”
oh, oh pick me!! I have one.
High fines, 5 years of jail time, and $150,000 USD fine for falsely using this law to take down a web site.
and why do we need an ‘alternative’?
If anything, IP laws need to be mostly redacted.
Re: Re:
I think repealed is a better word choice than redacted.
Re: Re: Re:
I agree.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I bet that most of it is redacted in secret laws….
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Although redacted might be par for the course for how things are going. Not only are they oppressive, arbitrary, and capricious, but now you would also have no idea what they are!
Re: Re: Re:
So go make the suggestion that OPEN include that.
Re: Re:
Hmmm… A bill opening up copyright to fair use doctrine… If everyone can agree to limit enforcement, and open up exceptions to copyright, we can possibly reverse ALL the problems with copyright. I’ll have to look at this and see what comes out of this bill.
Re: Re: Re:
Not quite sure how to break the news, but fair use has been a mainstay of copyright law for a very, very long time.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Hahaha! How sopa runs over fair use is hilarious. I could sit and point out all day the problems of the enforcement approach.
For those of you checking out the website keepthewebopen.com check out the SOPA vs PIPA vs OPEN page. Very nice comparison.
…they’ve put up an entire website, called KeepTheWebOpen.com, which is designed to encourage participation and feedback.
Is this close to an example of “transparency in government”?
I’ve been wondering if that elusive, mystical creature even existed outside of the political rhetoric tossed about around election time.
Re: Re:
And it’s the only example you’ll ever see, well at least with this administration.
I feel all hopey & changey now
Better idea, lets just get rid of all the ridiculous and over burdensome intellectual property laws. They’re clearly hurting the economy and killing jobs and businesses.
Re: Re:
Marked as funny!
Re: Re:
Marked as insightful.
"designed to encourage participation and feedback"
That’s because it’s designed to fool people into thinking a participatory democracy exists. It’s a way of diverting opposition into futile outlets.
Re: Awww....
You say that like it’s a bad thing.
Re: "designed to encourage participation and feedback"
It must be snowing in hell because I agree with this. I don’t think this is the real OOTB because there are no /slash/ marks denoting emphasis and it made sense.
Re: Re: "designed to encourage participation and feedback"
No, it’s definitely OOTB. Just one more example for his “the country is progressing into a fascist police state, but I support their efforts to make the spreading of ideas illegal” list of hypocritical positions.
Re: Re: Re: "designed to encourage participation and feedback"
But blue, by his words and actions is cheering loudly as the country progresses into a fascist police state.
Then again, he is operating off the script the RIAA sent him along with the cheque he got plus the promise to train him on how to use a movie or video camera.
Something to beware of is thinking we need any new laws at all.
I’ve seen used car salesmen try this technique… they offer to buy at an outrageously bad price, and shock the seller into accepting something far worse than they needed to.
I don’t see any evidence that we need “intellectual property” at all. I don’t see any evidence that it benefits anyone other than corporations who want to extract monopoly rents, and a tiny, tiny handful of “artists” who are agrandised to the point of dysfunction, and who are then held up as being some kind of norm that we should all expire to…
… but really, “IP” isn’t for our benefit, it’s for corporations – and as it is an logical and physical impossibility, it’s going to wind up hurting us.
Re: Re:
Copyright law, when properly implemented, is a boon to content creators. What we have now is an abomination. It needs to be greatly scaled back
Imagine if Jonathan Coulton had no protection and a Sony backed artist used his music. He would quickly be pushed to the side in favor of someone who had a huge pocketbook and deals in place with iTunes, radio stations (including satellite radio), music blogs, etc. A reasonable copyright law would protect him, and other independent musicians, from that.
Only huge corporations (not artists) benefit from no IP law, just like they benefit from the monstrosity that they have today. Reasonable copyright law would protect corporations and indies equally.
Re: Re: Re:
Copyright law only can be applied in a country with sane people, unfortunately there is no such country in the world.
Corporations benefit by copyright more than they do without it, if they are so powerful why are they afraid of free distribution? It is completely done by faceless people, no names, no money people who make it or brake it the market you are in, that vision of yours may have been true when distribution channels where few and far in between the internet is not like that, it is a billion strong channel of distribution. Try to plagiarize something on the internet and someone will point you to the original and if you are found to be dishonest they will turn on you very quickly specially if you are trying to scam the minor guy, which a system much more preferable than to have the government decide what is or not that people can do.
Besides Jonathan Coulton should be copied and emulated by others he should have to compete in that market with other musicians who make derivatives of his work, he also should get some credit but that is all, if others are the ones singing and creating a market and attracting fans and making that music heard they deserve all the glory and money, nobody is going to pay $300 dollars to hear Obama sing Jonathan Coulton’s music they may pay Madonna for it and she will have to do all the work so why should she pay Jonathan Coulton when he did nothing?
Is like bubble gum you do yours I do my and we try to sell it, the one who deserve it more will sell it more the other will go out of business. Heck if you are a nice guy I could even hire you because you know how to make good bubble gum but you don’t know the rest of the business.
I don’t care if people make millions, I do care when they make millions and try to say only them can make millions and nobody else is allowed.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I submit that corporations are not afraid of free distribution by those who create their own, original works, and not those who try and ride the coat tails of those works in which copyright is held by another.
People and companies make investments of time and money to create digital products (content and utilitarian) in the hope that the products will find favor in the marketplace. They do not make these investments on behalf of others, and for those others to simply ignore the law and do as they please to compete using the works of investors is the heighth or arrogance and pure laziness.
Re: Re: Re:
I agree that current copyright law is an abomination compared to what it was originally intended for (as is current patent law).
Ironically part of the reason copyright came into existence was top protect publishers from themselves as all too often they found they were publishing the same title by the same author at the same time. And maybe one of them had actually paid the author.
So in part the Statue of Anne provided for copyright for the author so that only one copy was printed in return for the author getting paid for the work. Well kinda, after signing off the copyright to the publisher and the subsequent invention of creative accounting. The other purpose was the promotion of education to ensure that works were available to the public. Not locked behind a walled garden.
And the terms of the granted copyright monopoly were much shorter than they are now as they reach unto the generations yet to be born.
Reasonable length copyright might, in a perfect, world actually lead to more publishers, recording companies and studios to produce creative works, too. (I know, I’m dreaming. But I can do that for a minute or two, can’t I? :))
Switzerland has the right idea when they say that there is virtually no harm done to the entertainment industries by downloading, as the money is most likely spent on the real items anyway. the entertainment industries need to concentrate more on adapting to the internet age, rather than how to continue to monetize off the back of an outdated business model. if IP laws are needed, which i dont think they are, doing more harm than good except to a few certain individuals, at least make the laws fair and reasonable, with sensible processes to follow. trying to shut down the whole internet, jam up the courts with law suits, banning people from using the ‘net’ for the slightest indiscretion (decided by an over-zealous, self-interested party) and throwing countless numbers of people into prison for perhaps committing minor crimes is not the way to go! jeez! the banking crisis caused more problems than ‘file sharing’ ever could. look at the punishments dished out to those concerned in comparison!
Re: Re:
It won’t work, hollywood has too much money
Freedom to blog or journalize
Thank you for exposing this type of thing !
We need more of this grassroots awareness to prevent going backwards in history in our government and it’s invasion of our freedom and constitutional rights!
Re: Freedom to blog or journalize
This is why their bring all the illegal aliens into the country and trying to give them the vote, they don’t oppose anything the goverment does, they just work.
re
i this for real…I mean its like they are trying to be open and open to compromise, so unlike them
Why do we need an alternative for something we don’t need?