If one removed Google and all it's services from the web, it'd take... a week to recover. I'd be grumpy about losing GMail, people would use Bing, youtube would be replaced quite quickly, and no one would notice + was gone.
During the senate write in campaign I wrote "my" senator- Mr. Leahy. His response reeks of a "Pft! what ever, I'll do what I want"
Thank you for contacting me about the Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property (PROTECT IP) Act. I appreciate hearing from you on this issue.
The growth of the digital marketplace is extraordinary and it gives creators and producers new opportunities to reach consumers, but it also brings with it the perils of piracy and counterfeiting. The increased usage and accessibility of the Internet has transformed it into the new Main Street. Internet purchases have become so commonplace that consumers are less wary of online shopping and therefore more easily victimized by online products that are unsafe or stolen. Online piracy and the sale of counterfeit goods cost the American economy billions of dollars. This is unacceptable in any economic climate, but it is devastating today.
I introduced the bipartisan PROTECT IP Act on May 12, 2011, and the full Senate was set to begin consideration of it on January 24, 2012. Unfortunately, debate on this important bill has been postponed. It is disappointing that the Senate could not proceed to debate solutions to a problem on which there is consensus – that the theft of American intellectual property by foreign websites devastates our economy.
The PROTECT IP Act is a balanced solution that gives law enforcement the tools to go after foreign websites that do nothing but steal our intellectual property. Websites that engage in this behavior in the United States are subject to a number of remedies, including copyright infringement lawsuits, Digital Millennium Copyright Act takedown notices, and even civil forfeiture of domain names. Meanwhile, foreign websites can steal American intellectual property without fear of recourse as they exist beyond the scope of American laws. It is unacceptable that we have a system in place that treats foreign websites engaged in criminal activity better than we treat American sites that do the same.
The PROTECT IP Act targets only the worst of the worst foreign websites, those that have no significant use other than infringement. I support this narrow definition of a rogue website even though it would allow many websites outside of the United States that engage in the theft of American intellectual property to continue to reach the U.S. market. In my view it is important to have a narrow definition, as well as explicitly include significant due process protections for websites, because these are safeguards that will prevent abuse and ensure that only the most egregious and potentially dangerous websites are targeted.
In drafting this bill, I have been committed to an open process. I have been open to hearing and addressing concerns from all stakeholders, which is why I have been willing to hold back one of the most significant remedies contained in the bill for future study. That the Senate cannot debate even the most narrowly tailored solutions to this problem is indicative of the political climate we live in today. I will continue to work on solutions to put an end to this rampant theft because it must be stopped.
Thank you again for contacting me. Please keep in touch.
True, but the last time mid term elections generated a >40% turnout was 1970 (http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781453.html)and if we assume most people who signed those petitions intend to vote, that puts it closer to 6%. Then consider the number of people who didn't sign the petition for one reason or another. Awareness is much higher then 2.5% there are many issues I've been aware of but I didn't sign a petition about. I just used my vote... Many people are of that mind set.
I still can't wrap my head around how an original idea can be sold. If you bought it, you didn't create it. If you didn't create it, you shouldn't be given the rights and protections awarded to creators.
I think if you originator dies or abandons a work, it should become public domain. Make IP nontransferable!
Actually, wireless tether has been built into android's code since 2.2, carriers remove the feature cause they want you to pay more. Then people make apps, and now verizon is trying to break the phones again.
As a Vermonter 'Writing my senator' meant Writing Sen. Leahy. Here is the reply I received. Thank you for contacting me about the use of body scanners in airports and new security screening procedures. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue, and understand your concerns.
After September 11, 2001, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) implemented a pilot program to test whole-body scanners in airports before they were put into widespread use. In October 2009, the TSA ordered 150 whole-body scanners to be deployed in airports across the nation, and in March 2010, the TSA purchased an additional 450 scanners that are currently being deployed nationwide. In the wake of this deployment, many Americans have expressed concerns over personal privacy as the whole-body scanners are used to screen passengers, and the security of those captured images.
On October 28, 2010, the TSA announced that it would begin to utilize new pat-down techniques at airport security checkpoints for persons who refuse to be screened by airport scanners, and for those who trigger the scanners while they are screened. I have seen news reports describing the pat-down searches and heard from numerous Vermonters who oppose such procedures. I am also troubled by these more stringent and invasive pat-downs, and believe that while the TSA must effectively ensure airline and passenger safety, it must not sacrifice our privacy.
I have also heard from Vermonters who are concerned over the potential radiation hazards that may be posed by widespread implementation of whole-body scanners. While the risks associated with radiation from these machines are said to be minute, I believe that we need to ensure that public health is not put in jeopardy with the deployment of any screening technology.
As Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, I intend to ensure that the Department of Homeland Security is held accountable for ensuring that we are successful in protecting both passenger safety and privacy. I believe that we can successfully accomplish this goal without sacrificing either. You can be sure that I will keep your thoughts in mind when the Judiciary Committee holds its next oversight hearing of the Department of Homeland Security and continue to closely monitor this issue.