SOPA Will Have Serious Implications For Sports Fans And Blogs
from the and-avoids-the-real-issue dept
This is a guest post from Brian Frederick, Executive Director of the Sports Fans Coalition and an assistant professor at Georgetown University.
Congress is currently considering legislation that could seriously harm sports fans and their favorite sports websites. If sports fans don’t speak up, some sports blogs could be shut down in the future for violating copyright or if users post links to sites that stream games online. Worse, those sports fans trying to find their favorite games streaming online will be more susceptible to identity theft and cyberattacks.
The Stop Online Piracy Act (the Senate version is known as PROTECT IP) is the latest attempt to crack down on illegal pirating of movies and music and sites that stream television programming. But this legislation is much more draconian than existing law — greatly expanding the reach of the federal government .
SOPA will target websites distributing pirated material and illegal online streaming by allowing copyright owners to shut down payments and ads to alleged infringers. Under current law, copyright owners (movie studios and record labels) must go to court to block such sites or demand copyrighted content be taken down. The new legislation allows copyright owners to effectively shut down websites simply by accusing them of having copyrighted materials without permission.
SOPA will also allow the Department of Justice to block those websites. The legislation lets the Attorney General get court orders sent to DNS server operators from resolving the domain names of sites in question to their corresponding Internet protocol addresses (DNS filtering). Search engines would also be required to remove or block links to sites that are accused of infringement. Finally, payment processors and Internet advertising services would be required to cease doing business with any sites that even contain links to online streaming sites.
The legislation is so extreme that a group of prominent Internet engineers penned a letter to SOPA’s sponsors stating that DNS filtering, as proposed, is “not technically feasible” and jeopardizes Internet security advances that have been in the works for 15 years. They explained that, in order to comply with court-ordered mandates in copyright cases, Internet service providers would have to choose between complying with those mandates or maintaining DNS security. In other words, this law will jeopardize total Internet security.
Of course, no one is condoning illegal websites that allow copyrighted content for free or stream copyrighted programming. But why should sports fans in particular be concerned?
For starters, as a result of this legislation, blogging networks like SB Nation, FanSided and others could effectively be shut down if users post too much copyrighted material or too many links to streaming sites. Some of these larger sites may have the resources to effectively police their comments to remove such posts but some individual fan sites may not. In addition, the legislation certainly contains a chilling effect on free speech.
More seriously, sports fans could be among the users most harmed if the DNS security is compromised. While a movie or music fan might think twice before downloading software or content from one of these sites, a sports fan faced with trying to catch the game in real time will be much more likely to throw caution to the wind and download whatever software is necessary to see the game. Sports fans are thus more likely to become victims of hackers.
Of course, sports fans shouldn’t have to turn to such sites in the first place, but the leagues take advantage of antitrust exemptions and public subsidies, yet still sell exclusive access to games. For instance, NFL fans, whose favorite team is in another city, have only one option for seeing all the games of their team: DirecTV’s Sunday Ticket package. Fans must shell out $350, switch providers and sign at least a two-year contract just to watch their favorite team.
Most of these fans would be willing to pay a fee to watch their games on the Internet, but the NFL will not offer that. So fans turn to (foreign) streaming sites on the web. As do fans who live in cities plagued by unethical and counterproductive blackouts.
When one streaming site gets shut down, another springs up, as do malicious new sites. As long as fans want access to their favorite games on the Internet – and the league is not providing it to them – these sites will continue to exist. Not only will this new legislation will be ineffectual in cracking down on such sites in general, it will likely leave sports fans who use these sites more susceptible to identity theft and cyberattacks.
Filed Under: protect ip, sopa, sports, sports fans
Comments on “SOPA Will Have Serious Implications For Sports Fans And Blogs”
“is the latest attempt to crack down on illegal pirating of movies and music and sites that stream television programming.”
SOPA is the latest attempt to censor communications, disguised as a crack down on illegal pirating of movies and music and sites that stream television programming..
FTFY
Re: Re:
Want to shut a site down? Post a streaming link in the comments and ‘Bam!’ you can make it go away
On cable
Cable TC used to have the customer PAY for the ability to watch sports..
NOW, you pay for it on cable if you want it or not. It the most expensive ADDON to the cable/sat broadcast.
Want to contest this?
Call up cable and sat. tell them:
1: you aint paying for what is in a BASIC CHANNEL selection. it should be $20 max for all the basic channels.
2: you are contesting ‘the above’ problem.
Reasoning is that you cant show it when you want it. ANd that at the beginning of the game, there is a disclaimer, that there is to be NO COPYING of the broadcast without FIRST written permission.(if the cable/sat would let you record it OR NOT)
If these guys only want to broadcast COMMERCIALS to us..why arent WE paid for it. they are..and the cable company PAYS also. And so do you.
They get about $3-5 per PERSON on cable..
NOT per person that WATCHES the game… for a 60% saturation of cable and sat..thats about $3×180,000,000=$540,000,000 just from cable and sat.. YOU PAID FOR. At least a few salaries for the players. and I would think that 50% arent/wont be watching it…and they STILL ARE PAYING FOR IT.
Between this and the possibility of no 2011-2012 NBA season, it’s safe to say that this is a dark year for sports fans.
Trololol
I foresee at least one Troll jumping to the comments and calling Masnick names (including pirate) without realizing this is a guest article and an industry insider is opposing SOPA. Or blissfully ignoring all that and still calling Mike names.
Re: Trololol
Derp, not really industry insider but an insider in the sports world. Excuse my err.
A filthy pirate I tell you 😉
Bryan, not exactly sure who duped you into putting yourself out there on Masnick’s blog, but I’m happy to tell you how you too are full of shit.
blogging networks like SB Nation, FanSided and others could effectively be shut down if users post too much copyrighted material or too many links to streaming sites
SB Nation and FanSided are already subject to existing US law. You may be aware that ICE has seized several dot coms for just such behavior.
DNS blocking is limited to foreign websites. If a sports fan deliberately tries to circumvent a government-initiated DNS blocking of an infringing site and that sports fan then has his identity stolen or experiences another mishap, whose fault is that? I’d argue it’s the fault of the guy who tried to skirt the law and he reaped the consequences of his action.
Your presence here spewing this Googlesque crap is truly a testimony to the desperation of Masnick and the other piracy apologists. Yesterday the librarians, today you. Tomorrow I hear he’s lined up something from the crossing guard union president.
Re: Re:
Your fear smells funny.
Re: Re:
“Yesterday the librarians, today you.”
Didn’t the Nazis and Soviets arrest “troublemakers” along those lines?
Actually, it was “Yesterday, teachers and librarians, today…you!”
AC is in most appropriate company.
Re: Re:
Yesterday the librarians, today you.
Actually the quote that comes from would imply that you are a member of the Gestapo.
Re: Re:
“Your presence here spewing this Googlesque crap is truly a testimony to the desperation of Masnick and the other piracy apologists. Yesterday the librarians, today you. Tomorrow I hear he’s lined up something from the crossing guard union president.”
If you change “Masnick and the other piracy apologists” to “MPAA/RIAA and the other doucheb*gs, like AC trolls”, you have the same thing. What was it “firefighters” and the “troopers union” or something the other day? But that’s more credible right?
You know what’s funny, the level of hypocrisy you and a few ACs on your side show. When your side does it, all good. When anyone else does the same thing, outcry/FUD/etc.
Re: Re:
DNS blocking is limited to foreign websites.
You keep saying this. It keeps being a lie.
The private right of action allows any copyright holder to issue DNS blocks (and more) on any website, whether in the U.S. or not.
this Googlesque crap
Why the Google hate? They’ve done more – much more – to help content providers than most other sites. YouTube, for example, is a huge boon to anyone who creates videos.
Could it be that they’re actually powerful enough to be a threat to horrifying bills like this one? Let’s hope so.
Re: Re: Re:
The private right of action allows any copyright holder to issue DNS blocks (and more) on any website, whether in the U.S. or not.
Karl, read the fucking bill. Unless you are so stupid as to unable to read at a 6th grade level, you would quickly learn how full of shit you are.
Making stuff up and spreading manure around as Gospel only makes you and your fellow apologists look more desperate and dishonest (which admittedly is increasingly difficult for you). If you are too simple-minded to understand the bill on your own, be sure to watch the hearing on Wednesday on C-SPAN. Perhaps you then can understand what the bill actually says rather than what Techdirtbag Nation thinks it says.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
If you think we’re all so full of shit why do you come here? According to you you’re mentally and morally superior to all of us. Also, according to you and your ilk, this bill is a lock and we should all just STFU. If you’re right what you’re doing is equivalent to a teenager entering a foot race with 4 years olds and then fist pumping when you win.
The only other option is that you’re threatened by this site and its message, and you’re on here dead agenting.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Karl, read the fucking bill.
I did. Please explain this part of 103(c)(5):
So, how do you “issue an injunction” against “the domain name used by the Internet site,” that does not involve blocking the domain name?
I’m truly curious.
Re: Re: Re:
The private right of action allows any copyright holder to issue DNS blocks (and more) on any website, whether in the U.S. or not.
Fwiw, DNS blocks are only in the Attorney General side of the bill, not the private right of action. Of course, should this actually pass, you can take a guess (over/under) on how many years until DNS blocks and search engine blocks get amended into the private right of action too. You know the MPAA already has the campaign ready to go about how the current system isn’t enough…
Why the Google hate? They’ve done more – much more – to help content providers than most other sites. YouTube, for example, is a huge boon to anyone who creates videos.
Indeed. That’s the part that amazes me the most and is most telling. It shows that those fighting for this bill are not content creators themselves. They’re the folks threatened by YouTube. It’s the studios and the TV people who are freaking out that there’s disruptive innovation that’s actually helping content creators go direct, reach more fans than ever before *and* monetize their work directly.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Fwiw, DNS blocks are only in the Attorney General side of the bill, not the private right of action.
That depends entirely on how you read 103(c)(5). This allows copyright holders to take in rem action against the websites themselves, and includes this:
If you can tell me how to issue an “injunction” against “a domain name,” that doesn’t include DNS blocking, I’m all ears.
Re: Re:
First they came for the pirates, but you didn’t speak up because you weren’t a pirate.
Then they came for the librarians, but you didn’t speak up because you think reading is for nerds.
Then they came for the sports fans, but you didn’t speak up because they were playing sports in your lawn.
Then they came for you. But you were already bending over with your pants at your ankles, so they left in disgust.
Re: Re:
“Bryan”
Well, you identified the author of the article correctly for once.
“I’m happy to tell you how you too are full of shit.”
Bryan has posted his credentials. I’ll ask yet again: what are yours?
From your posts here, I picture a moron drawing unemployment because his antiquated business went under after he failed to adapt, and now spends his days ranting into his computer rather than make himself relevant. Presumably fixating on Mike because he reminds you of that guy who kept telling you how you needed to use the internet to save his business, and you can never admit that guy was right. Either that, or a 15 year old who loves trolling.
Feel free to leave evidence as to how I’m wrong.
Re: Re:
Yes, librarians know shit all about information organization and exchange. So much better to rely on the opinion of firemen.
Re: Re:
Coward, not exactly sure who pays your salary telling you to comment on Mike’s blog but I’m happy to tell you that you are spewing the same trash as all the other Corp shills.
-You may be aware that ICE has seized several dot coms for just such behavior.-
Which are questionable at best. My question is why the hell are the Immigration and Customs folk getting involved in this when it’s clearly not and immigration or customs issue?
The foreign websites thing will last about a week, just long enough for the content industry to say -See we told you it would just be the foreign sites-.
All the shills here keep saying the same thing over and over…..It’s the law…..and there have never in the history of this country been absolute shit laws written right?
I’m all for paying. If the price is reasonable for the content I’m getting….sure I’ll pay, no problem. When I’m told that I can’t get HBO go so I can watch the two shows I want to watch that they offer because I don’t subscribe through a pay TV service that’s just stupid…they have someone who’s willing to PAY for their content directly and won’t do it….that’s a business model problem, full stop.
Just because it’s the law does not ever meant it’s a good one.
2 pennies for you…..nah never mind I’m done giving you people my money.
Re: Re:
Coward, not exactly sure who pays your salary telling you to comment on Mike’s blog but I’m happy to tell you that you are spewing the same trash as all the other Corp shills.
-You may be aware that ICE has seized several dot coms for just such behavior.-
Which are questionable at best. My question is why the hell are the Immigration and Customs folk getting involved in this when it’s clearly not and immigration or customs issue?
The foreign websites thing will last about a week, just long enough for the content industry to say -See we told you it would just be the foreign sites-.
All the shills here keep saying the same thing over and over…..It’s the law…..and there have never in the history of this country been absolute shit laws written right?
I’m all for paying. If the price is reasonable for the content I’m getting….sure I’ll pay, no problem. When I’m told that I can’t get HBO go so I can watch the two shows I want to watch that they offer because I don’t subscribe through a pay TV service that’s just stupid…they have someone who’s willing to PAY for their content directly and won’t do it….that’s a business model problem, full stop.
Just because it’s the law does not ever meant it’s a good one.
2 pennies for you…..nah never mind I’m done giving you people my money.
Re: Re:
Coward, not exactly sure who pays your salary telling you to comment on Mike’s blog but I’m happy to tell you that you are spewing the same trash as all the other Corp shills.
-You may be aware that ICE has seized several dot coms for just such behavior.-
Which are questionable at best. My question is why the hell are the Immigration and Customs folk getting involved in this when it’s clearly not and immigration or customs issue?
The foreign websites thing will last about a week, just long enough for the content industry to say -See we told you it would just be the foreign sites-.
All the shills here keep saying the same thing over and over…..It’s the law…..and there have never in the history of this country been absolute shit laws written right?
I’m all for paying. If the price is reasonable for the content I’m getting….sure I’ll pay, no problem. When I’m told that I can’t get HBO go so I can watch the two shows I want to watch that they offer because I don’t subscribe through a pay TV service that’s just stupid…they have someone who’s willing to PAY for their content directly and won’t do it….that’s a business model problem, full stop.
Just because it’s the law does not ever meant it’s a good one.
2 pennies for you…..nah never mind I’m done giving you people my money.
Re: Re: Re:
I’m sorry to all for the triple post here folks. Not sure what happened.
Great! I'm starting to actually /like/ SOPA!
>>> “Congress is currently considering legislation that could seriously harm sports fans and their favorite sports websites.”
Could, eh? Let’s take worst case: you’d have to get your sports fix only from authorized channels. You’re harmed how?
>>> “Of course, no one is condoning illegal websites that allow copyrighted content for free or stream copyrighted programming.”
You’re either new here or consider that narrowly true. In fact, many here advocate exactly that (Rojadirect), and state that they’re entitled to stream whatever content they wish.
>>> “Most of these fans would be willing to pay a fee to watch their games on the Internet, but the NFL will not offer that.”
That’s entirely the NFL’s choice. YOU’VE NO SAY in the matter. I’d abolish the NFL entirely as state-authorized monopoly, but you’re /for/ that monopoly, so TOUGH, that’s just what monopolies DO, dang it.
>>> “As long as fans want access to their favorite games on the Internet – and the league is not providing it to them – these sites will continue to exist.”
OH, I’m betting that this “breaking the internet” will work nearly entirely. Thanks to you “sports” fans and other pirates, /I’m/ going to be hampered, so I don’t regard you greedy mindless dolts with any good will.
>>> “Not only will this new legislation will be ineffectual in cracking down on such sites in general,”
So it’s going to be “ineffectual” but “seriously harm” you…
>>> “it will likely leave sports fans who use these sites more susceptible to identity theft and cyberattacks.”
If you hang out with criminals who are stealing content, you can hardly complain when they try to cheat YOU too!
Re: Great! I'm starting to actually /like/ SOPA!
I think this post from OoTB unequivocally proves that he has absolutely no idea what he’s talking about. I’d point out where he’s wrong, but I’d have to quote and argue every single word. I just don’t feel like doing that for the hundredth time.
Re: Great! I'm starting to actually /like/ SOPA!
You’ll note he’s probably not a sports fan, but then, most bluenoses usually aren’t. 😉
Re: Great! I'm starting to actually /like/ SOPA!
To address a few points:
“Could, eh? Let’s take worst case: you’d have to get your sports fix only from authorized channels. You’re harmed how?”
Reduced competition only helps the seller and hurts the consumer.
“That’s entirely the NFL’s choice. YOU’VE NO SAY in the matter. I’d abolish the NFL entirely as state-authorized monopoly, but you’re /for/ that monopoly, so TOUGH, that’s just what monopolies DO, dang it.”
I find that a bit quixotical – I think as a customer I should always have a say in the matter. Granted, the seller can ignore my input, but isn’t that bad for business to ignore what your customers want?
“So it’s going to be “ineffectual” but “seriously harm” you…”
Yep. Let me give you an example: DRM. It is extremely ineffectual in preventing piracy, but it is incredibly damaging for all legitimate users. In other words, SOPA will drastically impact the people who want to be legitimate in their uses (consumers, businesses, etc.), but those who don’t will absolutely be able to get around this.
Another way to think of it is this is a bad game of whack-a-mole. You know, there’s the mole where you get points for hitting (piracy) and there’s the other things that pop up that make you lose points (legitimate users). In this case, I’d say that copyright holders have a score of about -10000000000. But I think that’s about as high as the game can go before it just maxes out the negative score.
“If you hang out with criminals who are stealing content, you can hardly complain when they try to cheat YOU too!”
Errrm… what? Stealing is for physical goods. This is copyright infringement. I know it’s common to refer to it as “stealing” but it isn’t.
And secondly, sharing my thoughts on a “criminal’s” website means I don’t get a vote? Goodbye 1st Amendment?
Re: Great! I'm starting to actually /like/ SOPA!
Let’s take worst case: you’d have to get your sports fix only from authorized channels. You’re harmed how?
That is hardly the worst case.
A more likely scenario is that fan sites get shut down.
Another likely scenario is that many won’t get their sports fix from authorized channels. But, since DNS blocking interferes with internet security, those unauthorized channels would be much more dangerous.
In fact, many here advocate exactly that (Rojadirect), and state that they’re entitled to stream whatever content they wish.
By “many here,” I assume you mean the Spanish Supreme Court, who declared the site totally legal, right?
You also missed the fact that Rojadireca never streamed anything. The streams were already out there on the net, they just let users aggregate them.
Thanks to you “sports” fans and other pirates, /I’m/ going to be hampered, so I don’t regard you greedy mindless dolts with any good will.
That’s a neat little trick: shifting the blame from those who would actually be responsible for hampering you (supporters of SOPA), onto the nearly non-existent “threat” that they use as an excuse to do so.
Re: Great! I'm starting to actually /like/ SOPA!
>> Could, eh? Let’s take worst case: you’d have to get your sports fix only from authorized channels. You’re harmed how?
Unlike so many gonads who have made their sublime maestro abhorrent to us, ruffians remain friendly. When a ridiculously lowly shadow hides, a swamp related to the curse ruminates. He called her Jacques (or was it Toscanini?). Some darling gypsy is ungodly. Google!
>> You’re either new here or consider that narrowly true. In fact, many here advocate exactly that (Rojadirect), and state that they’re entitled to stream whatever content they wish.
Sometimes a piroshki toward an alchemist returns home, but a piroshki //always shares// a shower with the ghastly pocket! Indeed, another //slovenly shadow// carelessly pees on the nefarious mirror. CAPITALISM!
>> That’s entirely the NFL’s choice. YOU’VE NO SAY in the matter. I’d abolish the NFL entirely as state-authorized monopoly, but you’re /for/ that monopoly, so TOUGH, that’s just what monopolies DO, dang it.
When a clodhopper inside a bride ceases to exist, the bicep meditates. If a maestro from the cleavage feverishly admonishes the toothache, then a wily toothache meditates. The chic bubble bath finds subtle faults with the toothpick for a stalactite. Now and then, some darling menag? ? trois prefers another rascally ribbon. Rich People!
>> OH, I’m betting that this “breaking the internet” will work nearly entirely. Thanks to you “sports” fans and other pirates, /I’m/ going to be hampered, so I don’t regard you greedy mindless dolts with any good will.
The slovenly pocket THOROUGHLY sells the shadow to a taxidermist. The widow dances with the snow. A rapacious coward pours freezing //cold water// on the uxorious gypsy. A ribbon living with a trombone assimilates a hand. Pirate Mike!
>> So it’s going to be “ineffectual” but “seriously harm” you…
A marzipan underhandedly buries a dahlia for a dahlia. The saintly //midwife// inexorably boogies the boy, and a dilettante over a taxidermist //buries// the cup around a mirror. The ruffian prefers a haunch beyond the swamp. //Sycophants//!
>> If you hang out with criminals who are stealing content, you can hardly complain when they try to cheat YOU too!
The lunatic over some mastadon //trembles/, and a debutante about the //somnambulist caricatures// the bonbon. //Broadbrush// Mike!
Re: Re: Great! I'm starting to actually /like/ SOPA!
Wow. I used to think you had an IQ around room temperature. Now it appears that you’re simply a nut job. There may be medications that can help you. But don’t buy from a rogue pharmacy.
Re: Re: Re: Great! I'm starting to actually /like/ SOPA!
I thought it was funny. Granted it would explain a lot if OoTB had some form of aphasia.
Re: Re: Re: Great! I'm starting to actually /like/ SOPA!
My medications didn’t work, and I had to pay ?9001/month for them. I was bankrupt within a week. Now I pirate them from Europe and they only cost 10p for the same length of time.
Perhaps your nuttery is less helpful than mine.
Re: Re: Great! I'm starting to actually /like/ SOPA!
Um, I’ve had either not enough coffee or ludes to be able to comprehend that.
Re: Re: Great! I'm starting to actually /like/ SOPA!
Well done sir.
OK Brian, now I get it. Gigi Sohn, the chief piracy apologist from Public Knowledge (who sits on your board of directors) wrote this for you.
Looking back at some of the mountain of anti-SOPA articles, it’s evident that Masnick has turned Techdirt into PK’s press room. As apparently no one reads Gigi’s own blog.
Re: Re:
Do you have any point to make at all? Or are you just going to continue to try (and fail) to discredit people?
Re: Re: Re:
Do you have any point to make at all? Or are you just going to continue to try (and fail) to discredit people?
Actually he succeeds in discreditng one person – himself!
Re: Re:
whoopee freakin do da?
who is even listening to you?
Re: Re: Re:
“who is even listening to you?”
More than are listening to you, child.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I expected at least “chubby”, “parents basement”, and/or “acne”.
“Child” is not even on the words for last month. Get with the program or we will cut your pay.
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
To be fair, we should be helping him get attention for his rant. We should be directing users of the Sports Fan Coalition website to his commentary about how he described their executive director as an idiot, and dismissed all their concerns.
The squeaky wheel gets the grease, so they say. Or does the squeaky wheel simply get replaced?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
“More than are listening to you, child.”
Riiiiight. Here you are playing the conspiracy theorists favorite game, connect the dots, to try to discredit people who post an opinionated article.
Gasp! A PK boardmember sits on his board. But wait, there’s more! Knowledge is a synonym for illuminated, or brightness. And then…wait, follow with me here…you can realize that the name Lucifer MEANS illuminated one! Holy fuckballs shittastic rimjobs, Batman! I’m pretty sure that I’ve just proved that Techdirt is actually written by the DEVIL!!!!
BURN THE WITCH. BUUUUUURRN HER! Build a bridge out of ‘er!
Idiot.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
“who is even listening to you?”
More than are listening to you, child.
[Citation Needed]
ie identify yourself or we have no reason to believe you.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Really? Is that the best you can do? Give it another shot!
Re: Re: Re: Re:
If you’d have left off the last world, you would have inadvertently rhymed the 2 sentences. This would probably have represented the most intelligence, imagination and creativity you’ve ever displayed here, even if it had been accidental.
Re: Re: Re:
whoopee freakin do da?
who is even listening to you?
Apparently the 40+ co-sponsors of the PROTECT IP Act, the 25+ sponsors of the Stop Online Piracy Act and the many members who will soon be joining as co sponsors. In any event, more than Gigi and her Charlie McCarthy dummy.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
So, you’re the lobbyist the helped them write the bill?
That explains why you’re so vocal about it.
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
*ding* *ding* *ding*
Re: Re:
Gigi Sohn, the chief piracy apologist from Public Knowledge (who sits on your board of directors) wrote this for you.
Who writes your witticisms, Rick Perry?
Re: Re: Re:
He was elected our chief? I must have missed the memo.
Re: Re:
Gigi Sohn, the chief piracy apologist from Public Knowledge
I’d like you to point me to a single time where Sohn, or anyone else from Public Knowledge, has ever been an apologist for piracy.
You can’t, because they didn’t, and you know it.
I’d also like you to provide any evidence whatsoever that Sohn “wrote this.” How do you know it wasn’t David Goodfriend, former Deputy Staff Secretary under President Clinton? Or Brad Blakeman, founder and former CEO of Freedom Watch? Or Mark Walsh, senior executive at GE, AOL, and HBO? Or Dave Zirin, sports writer and commentator for Sports Illustrated Online, ESPN, Huffington Post, MSNBC, and NPR, host of “The Edge of Sports” on Sirius, and author of “A People?s History of Sports in the United States?”
After all, those people are on the board of directors too.
No, I think it’s infinitely more likely that Brian Frederick – who is the executive director – wrote this himself.
Re: Re: Re:
I’d also like you to provide any evidence whatsoever that Sohn “wrote this.”
You’re such a naive dolt. It’s Edgar Bergan and Charlie McCarthy.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
And the attacks on others rather than their positions continues…
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
And the attacks on others rather than their positions continues…
Some people have no cogent point and beg to be bitch-slapped. Christ, you should know better than anyone.
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
Anyone know when troll hunting season starts? I need a few more heads to decorate my wall…
Re: Re: Re:4 Re:
Another full week to go here. Right after deer season, when we know our rifles are sighted in.
Wear orange, because we shoot everything that is troll-yellow, a very unique colour.
Re: Re: Re:4 Re:
There’s a *season*. Crap, I’d better stop, I’ve been doing this all year!
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
no u
Re: Re:
Looking back at some of the mountain of anti-SOPA articles, it’s evident that Masnick has turned Techdirt into PK’s press room. As apparently no one reads Gigi’s own blog.
What amuses me most about your insane conspiracy theories is how incredibly off-base you are. It shows you have no idea what you’re up against. That’s amusing to me.
As I stated elsewhere, I haven’t spoken to Gigi or anyone at PK in over a year at least. I can’t even remember the last time I spoke to anyone there.
What’s funny is that only a DC-insider would be so clueless to think that actual concern from folks involved in the industry could only come from some DC interest group.
I’ll fall into the trap,
Pirate mike once again failing to justify cracking down on Rouge Sites. Getting people who dont understand the act and scream the sky is falling on there heads.
Also Godwin’s law Comment 11.
Re: Re:
Also Godwin’s law Comment 11.
But he started it…
Re: Re:
Those damn rouge sites, so red. Almost pink. You know what else is pink? Communists! Yer not a filthy pinko commie, are ya?!
/rogue
It's obvious how this will end.
Want to know how this business will finally end? Just look at the drug enforcement situation and you got it! From the time Nixon decided we would go to war against ourselves, we Americans have lived under nonsense laws and been pushed around by corrupt cops while wasting billions of dollars that could have be used to reduce our debt or left in the hands of the citizens. Whole generations have lived under a mandate which has taken on semi-religious overtones. We have been ordered to accept, on faith, the baseless teachings of the DEA including the oft-parodied “just say no” approach.
A lot more Americans use the internet than use drugs. When our beloved leaders release the runaway train that is internet censorship there will be no stopping it. Whether its SOPA or the “draw and quarter anybody we don’t like act” doesn’t matter. They will keep at it until they pass something and it will make prohibition look petty. Face it folks: the days of an open, useful, fun internet are about over. Ten years from now it will be only for paying your bills, buying stuff and reading the news and maybe even that last item won’t be free. Email will be totally monitored, every site you visit will be logged and police will search houses for illegal content just like they search cars for illegal substances today. Damn shame. This is why computers just aren’t fun anymore.
Re: It's obvious how this will end.
Billions of dollars left in the hands of the citizens? Madness! Blasphemy! FREETARDO!
Re: It's obvious how this will end.
I present to you……MMO’s! Pick one…there’s a bunch out there. Cut the cord. Give Big Content/Media/Music/Sports the finger. Stay connected with people across the world! Find out things you never knew, and be entertained at the same time.
These are the people that have already grown frustrated with the Big C/M/M/S, and know how to find independent artists that operate away from the madness of greed the entertainment industries have become.
The legislation lets the Attorney General get court orders sent to DNS server operators from resolving the domain names of sites in question to their corresponding Internet protocol addresses (DNS filtering).
Boy this law is really effective….
Assuming you don’t just have the IP address, then it’s a pointless waste of time and resources.
In the end, this will only server to push them further underground.
I mean; prostitution is also illegal – too bad you can’t get it anywhere…
Correction to above: *In the end, this will only serve to push them further underground.*
See what happens when you post in an under-caffeinated state???
Cynicism aside.
For all of you who have decided that us Kool-aid drinking freetards who suckle at Mikes apologist bosom. I have this to say.
If this law passes it should not take long before you begin to see the unintended consequences of such a terrible piece of legislation. Perhaps then you will see what we have all be trying to warn you about all this time. As your ISP bills rise do to passing down the added costs of doing business. You favorite blog or website being blocked because somewhere someone posted a link to a torrent on a thread you have never seen before. Before you know it the only place your troll loving self will have to hang out is here at Techdirt where we will welcome your lack logic and understanding with acidic sarcasm and contempt for what you helped turn the internet into.
Re: Cynicism aside.
For all of you who have decided that us Kool-aid drinking freetards who suckle at Mikes apologist bosom. I have this to say.
Don’t you think it rather impolite to mention his man-boobs?
Re: Re: Cynicism aside.
Ah yes, that is what I wanted people to take from that. Thanks for clarifying.
Re: Re: Cynicism aside.
Are you kidding me? It’s impolite not to mention them. Mikes moobs are fantastic!
Ah yes, another set of under-served customers. Don’t try to give them what they want at a reasonable price — assume they’re just unlimited cash sources and try to force them into the channels you have direct control over. Obviously anybody who tries to do it another way is just a dirty stinking pirate who doesn’t want to pay for content. Ignore the fact that the only choices you give them are “don’t consume” and “pay far too much”. Obviously anybody who isn’t willing to “pay far too much” is just being greedy — it can’t POSSIBLY be that they’re simply choosing to feed their kids over paying for your yacht.
Re: Re:
You know no one buys into this idiot meme, right?
There are plenty of legal ways to obtain content here in the US, yet practically everyone on this blog still rips it off without paying.
Re: Re: Re:
You male one major mistake in that assertion: that everyone who posts here is American.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
That is a disdainful comment and inflammatory.
I suggest you take a GOOD business class THEN decide who is the one making problems WORSE.
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
Well, it’s true: I’m not American and I post here. Therefore the ACs assertions is false, that everyone here has legal access to US products, such as The Colbert Report or The Daily Show catchups on the Comedy central website, for example.
And yes, the current markets are moderately globalised, export-wise: programs such as South Park and CSI are exported from the US to the UK, Europe and the rest of the world, where there are very few legal services that allow access to most things.
This is nothing more than legislating a business-model issue, which is why I feel that the system needs to be completely obliterated in order for society to adapt to the cultural revolution cause by the Internet.
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
This is nothing more than legislating a business-model issue, which is why I feel that the system needs to be completely obliterated in order for society to adapt to the cultural revolution cause by the Internet.
Why not try stealing your own culture, such as it is.
Re: Re: Re:4 Re:
Culture belongs to the public, at least when you assholes aren’t stealing from the public domain to make a profit.
Re: Re: Re:
There are plenty of legal ways to obtain content here in the US—
And SOPA is looking to criminalize every single one of them.
yet practically everyone on this blog still rips it off without paying.
How would you know? You’re going through everyone’s computer and checking their files? Next time, if you’re going to troll, the least you could do is stop saying such outlandish claims such as this.
Re: Re: Re:
The funny part is not just here, everywhere and since the golden age of music which begs the question why piracy is such a Bogeyman today but it wasn’t in those past times?
I do remember vividly people pirating everything, it didn’t kill the “industry” in those times and surely it won’t kill it now.
Everyone can remember “Home tapping is killing music” or “Don’t Copy That Floppy“
My favorite of the bunch of nonsense that came out of you guys was the “You can click but you can’t hide“, apparently no political will, judge or law enforcement in the world can stop piracy, millions are doing it right now and they will continue to do so.
The biggest opponents of copyrights are being educated right now and they will grow up to hate it.
Judge William Adams beats daughter for using the internet
Re: Re: Re:
I grew up on a different set of rules, when I was growing up, civil liberties were very important, ecocrap was starting(I love being green), violence was everywhere, even Sylvester Stallone had reach the end of his rope.
Quote:
Source: http://deepexistence.com/2011/07/only-people-who-stop-trying-get-somewhere-in-life/
I didn’t know he sold his dog for $25 dollars and bought it again for $15K after, I didn’t know he rejected $350K because he wanted to be a star on the film he wrote and instead took the $35K they gave him.
Those people did everything wrong and still managed to be successful, maybe it was faith, maybe this is what the industry should do, it should let it go, there are things people should learn to let it go and try it differently.
For every legal way to get something, there are a thousand that are illegal and equally rewarding so why choose your way and not others?
The failure to answer that simple question is what will bring every major label down eventually, and probably every big Hollywood studio.
Why did Sylvester Stallone didn’t accept the $350K and went with the $35K instead, he had nothing, he was contemplating robbing other people so he could eat, he sold his dog so WTF did he chose $35K over $350K?
People have feelings, ignore those feelings all you want, it will be your funeral not theirs.
Re: Re: Re:
There are perfect ways to do business without snorting coke all the time, shoplifting from stores or promoting dog fights are musicians going to stop that when?
Re: Re: Re:
The drug cartels just killed another dozens down in Mexico do the musicians that finance them care?
Re: Re: Re:
Another child was beaten by her father somewhere do artists care?
Judge William Adams beats daughter for using the internet
Re: Re: Re:
Another musician lost his gig playing at a bar do those musicians care?
Re: Re: Re:
(citation needed)
Also, get your head out of your ass and realise that “plenty of legal ways to obtain content here in the US” does NOT equal “everybody reading this has plenty of legal ways to obtain content”.
Re: Re:
Ah yes, another set of under-served customers. Don’t try to give them what they want at a reasonable price — assume they’re just unlimited cash sources and try to force them into the channels you have direct control over. Obviously anybody who tries to do it another way is just a dirty stinking pirate who doesn’t want to pay for content. Ignore the fact that the only choices you give them are “don’t consume” and “pay far too much”. Obviously anybody who isn’t willing to “pay far too much” is just being greedy — it can’t POSSIBLY be that they’re simply choosing to feed their kids over paying for your yacht.
You act as though entertainment is some sort of necessity. It’s not. You won’t die without it. You may even be better off without it. I like lobster. But it’s too expensive. So I buy shrimp when it’s on sale. Try checking a book out of the library, or even a DVD. Watch what’s on TV. That content is overpriced or not convenient isn’t an excuse to simply take it without compensating the rights holder. Entitled much?
Re: Re: Re:
Bred and circuses are all that stand between society and anarchy. And before you say anything, anarchy is a lack of ORDERS, not a lack of ORDER.
“SOPA will target websites distributing pirated material and illegal online streaming by allowing copyright owners to shut down payments and ads to alleged infringers.”
“Go ahead, make my day,” says Ben Milne.
“This 28-Year-Old’s Startup Is Moving $350 Million And Wants To Completely Kill Credit Cards”
http://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/This-28YearOlds-Startup-Is-siliconalley-2539075670.html?x=0
The house version will stop sports streams, and all streams. While the Senate version of the felony streaming law does not, contrary to the FUD going around, make viewing the streams illegal, the House version does. The house version does not have any requirement that streaming be for commercial purposes or private financial gain.
Unlimited liability for false accusation
Why mot address the overreaching aspects by imposing a penalty for doing so.
I propose including a provision in the law specifying the following
1. By filing any claim under the act, the claimant must submit to the jurisdiction of the coutts either (a) the location of the service provider to which the claim is provided, (b) the location of the domain name registrant, or (b) location of the domain name registrar.
2. If a claim is proven to be false, the clammy must pay all actual legal fees of any person with legal standing who contests the claim (whether by defense, counterclaim or separate action.
3. Claimant’s liability for false claims shall be unlimited subject only to proof and the prohibition against damages that are entirely speculative.
4 Notwithstanding the immediately foregoing sentence, claimant shall be liable for damages in an amount no event less that the minimum damage asserted by the claimant. If no such damages have been asserted by claimant then the minimum amounts authorized as awardable to a plaintiff under the Copyright act in light of the copyright violations asserted by such claimant. The minimum damage award described in this paragraph 4 shall not apply if claimant can establish beyond reasonable doubt that it had complied with the provisions of the DMCA by issuing valid notice prior to undertaking any actions permitted under this act and such notice was ignored or the defendant failed to reasonably comply there with.
5. In determining whether a claim is false the courts shall apply a strict liability standard and shall not consider the intention or good faith of claimant.
In other words address the overreaching aspects by imposing a penalty for doing so.
The act must also make claimants liable for the acts of goverenment agencies if such actions were undertaken directly or indirectly at the request or suggestion of claimant.
Everything good gets taken away! Great article. Thanks!
Great article. Thanks