The article says that "Kristof and others may have good intentions." I think Kristof's intent is to cause controversy, generate headlines, induce clicks, and promote himself. I don't think that is "good intent," but may be "bad intent," given that it harms those he purports to help.
Regards.
"Second, of course, is the fact that not all TPB content is infringing. Yes, an awful lot of it is almost certainly infringing."
ThePirateBay.se does not actually host any content, just links (magnet links) to content. So MSN is actually blocking links to links of content. Where does it stop?
And don't forget they keep the DVD, so you don't have that anymore.
The US government doesn't care if it wins or loses the criminal case. They just want to win the extradition case. That way, they put fear in every foreign web master's mind whether they win the criminal case or not.
The lobbyists who want to keep tech companies as clients will simply move to tech friendly lobbying firms or split off and start their own tech friendly lobbying firms. This is a great opportunity for hungry lobbyists who want to strike off on their own. The better lobbyists will do so and the tech companies will wind up with the better lobbyists.
I heard a tweet, from someone who knows more than I, that the question posed to the Court is actually very narrow - one of human rights, etc. The Court could have been asked a broader question than the one actually asked.
Inadmissible evidence. I'm afraid that evidence of Vevo's crime cannot be used to exculpate O'Dwyer. And generally, "but everybody does it" is not an excuse either. Good luck getting that considered by a judge much less into evidence.
I disagree with Mike on this one. The Border provision of ACTA states: "1. A party may exclude from the application of this Section small quantities of goods of a non-commercial nature contained in travellers' [sic] personal luggage." The BIG qualifier here is "non-commercial." This means that the border agent must FIRST determine if an air traveler's goods are personal or commercial. Only then can he exclude goods that are non-commercial from a copyright check. There are still border checks on everyone all the time required by ACTA.
If you are traveling on business, I assume that everything on your laptop is commercial. Or, if personal travel, if you plan to sell the music stored on your iPod, then that is commercial. In other words, this still requires checking of all passengers for copyrighted goods, but only after there is a determination of commercial or non-commercial.
Or suppose you have a lot of music on your iPod? That does not qualify as a "small" quantity of goods. Perhaps a terabyte of music? When is it no longer "small"?
This is still problematic.
I'm pretty sure Google is behind these protests. If Google and the MPAA/RIAA would just meet at the White House, I'm sure they could come to a reasonable compromise. Instead, Google insists on continuing to abuse its users.
It is also important to save this old software because it forms part of the the "prior art" to those seeking patents. The lack of an extensive library of prior-art software is one thing that lead to so many bad patents (i.e., not novel or obvious patents) between 1995 and 2005.
Regards.
This is how the pro-SOPA folks see the world:
http://www.copyhype.com/cdtsopalist/index.html
or just a graphic:
http://www.copyhype.com/cdtsopalist/sopa_opponents.png
Another reason they want to "negotiate with Google" is that they do the analysis like this:
http://www.copyhype.com/cdtsopalist/index.html
Look at the effort they put into their lobbying, they have the whole anti-SOPA world mapped out:
http://www.copyhype.com/cdtsopalist/index.html
Now you know one reason why they keep saying "Google" - Google is the biggest block on the map.
We should print/cut out masks and send them to our politicians in the US. Maybe our politicians would wear them too. Then again, DHS would probably intercept the mail, track you down, arrest, and jail you indefinitely.
BR.
Here is another internet bill from Lamar Smith that requires ISPs to keep records for 18 months for their users:
http://live.drjays.com/index.php/2012/01/20/sopa-is-defeated-but-new-internet-bill-gains-critics/
They hide the provision in a child pornography bill. This is so that they can go after the Biebers of the world.
MPAA.org down. RIAA.org down. Following this https://twitter.com/#!/LulzSecITALY
Glad they did not do this yesterday. Would have looked bad for anti-sopa measures.
In an interesting twist, Anonymous takes down justice.gov and UniversalMusic.com. This gets stranger by the minute.
One thing missing from most analysis is that the definition of "search engine" ensnares just about any site, including Wikipedia and Reddit. When search results are censored on Google, these censored links will appear on Reddit, for example, as well as other sites. The Attorney General will be insulted, and he will order Reddit to remove those links as well (given Reddit is a search engine). Then, when censored, Reddit users will revolt and post the censored links all over the place on the site (just like what happened to Digg with the Blueray 09f9 key). Reddit will find it very difficult and expensive to keep up with the censorship.
In a way, I wish Google would stay out of the mix for Blackout Wednesday. Because Google will be protesting, the PIPA/SOPA supporters will cast the telephone calls to legislators as Google-driven, rather than grass-roots or community driven. We know how much the MAFIAA hate Google and think that only Google is behind the protests. For those not connected to the internet (most legislators) that is what they will hear and believe.
Re: Re:
All the items listed were developed independently of the "world-wide web," most of them before the www even existed. Granted, you could have some web-based clients for some of these items. So, from the list it seemed to me that social sites developed on the web would be excluded.