More attempts at U.S. Internetz censorship

[Bandit1]

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/11/14/internet-censorship-pushed-congress/

They are trying to push this through,quietly,once again.The RIAA slinging mud with their heavy handed lobbying $$ in coherts with U.S.Gov.This shit gets old,and it's easy to see how it can be abused in a traditional Chinese fashion.:thumbsdown:

 

[Schadenfroh]

Funny how censorship in America is targeted at preventing intellectual property theft, but you are free to bash the government. Whereas in China they do not give a shit about IP, but the censorship's goal is to prevent you from seeing people bash the government and look at porn.

 

[Matt1970]

The bill was from November 2010 - Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act

"Status: This bill never became law. This bill was proposed in a previous session of Congress. Sessions of Congress last two years, and at the end of each session all proposed bills and resolutions that haven't passed are cleared from the books. Members often reintroduce bills that did not come up for debate under a new number in the next session."

 

[Bandit1]

Oops,that link is the earlier attempt to pass the same bill.Here you go.http://act.demandprogress.org/act/petition_blacklist

We are free to bash the government,for NOW,and rightly so.Can you not see government twisting this law to it's own agenda as australia is seeing happen?

I see nothing good coming from this highly undetailed law.It IS a censorship law which will put RIAA complaints in the fastlane with little to no justification or appeal thereof.You can't see how this will be abused and manipulated?We should trust gov to keep it on the level,right?

 

[Londo_Jowo]

I see people who steal IP, music, and movies throwing a fit that they will be held accountable. Great law!!!

 

[piasabird]

I think the song rights people are a little crazy. For instance when I purchased music 20 years ago they did not provide me with a license agreement. So for whatever, songs I purchased, I should have the right to download it for free. I already paid for the song once.

 

[bfdd]

Funny how censorship in America is targeted at preventing intellectual property theft, but you are free to bash the government. Whereas in China they do not give a shit about IP, but rather seek to remove / block pornography, anti-government / anti-communist speech, etc. from the web.

lol

 

[Londo_Jowo]

I guess you should have done more to protect your investment. I've got the physical CD for every mp3 I have in my collection. I have backups of my collection on a harddrive as well.

 

[BoberFett]

I see people who steal IP, music, and movies throwing a fit that they will be held accountable. Great law!!!

Which people that steal IP? Disney, who made a fortune stealing old IP and making it their own? Exactly how much did they pay the descendants of all of those authors they stole those centuries old stories from? Because you know damn well that 200 years from now, Mickey Mouse will still be under copyright.

 

[BoberFett]

I guess you should have done more to protect your investment. I've got the physical CD for every mp3 I have in my collection. I have backups of my collection on a harddrive as well.

You do realize, of course, that in the eyes of the law and the RIAA you are a thief for having those backups.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Ask those people who illegally download software.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

You do realize, of course, that in the eyes of the law and the RIAA you are a thief for having those backups.

As long as I don't share nor give the mp3 to anyone they will never know. Unlike people who steal and scam the system I pay my way.

BTW you still sucking on the government tit?

 

[BoberFett]

As long as I don't share nor give the mp3 to anyone they will never know. Unlike people who steal and scam the system I pay my way.

So being a pirate and a thief is OK as long as you do it quietly. People like you are hilarious.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

So how is making a personal backup of purchased goods piracy?

 

[TheInternet1980]

So how is making a personal backup of purchased goods piracy?

It's not. That was the point of his post. re: the RIAA is retarded

 

[airdata]

Anybody voting for something like this should fully understand what it's about. If they are too old to understand the finer points of the internet, they shouldn't be able to vote.

 

[BoberFett]

So how is making a personal backup of purchased goods piracy?

You're not great with comprehension, are you? Any form of unauthorized copying is piracy.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

It's not. That was the point of his post. re: the RIAA is retarded

Please show me where the "Fair Use" law has been changed and made making personal copies of CD's illegal.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

You're not great with comprehension, are you? Any form of unauthorized copying is piracy.

See above ^

 

[BoberFett]

Please show me where the "Fair Use" law has been changed and made making personal copies of CD's illegal.

You're woefully ignorant, fair use is a defense which may be ignored if the court so chooses. There is no codified right to "fair use."

 

[drebo]

While it is technically within the federal government's right to regulate the Internet (interstate commerce, etc), it is not within their write to censor the Internet in any way, shape, or form. That is a violation of the First Amendment. There is no exclusion for "Internet speach" in the Bill of Rights.

That said, there already exist laws against public screenings of materials not meant to be shown in public, making copies of these things, etc. The Judicial system exists so that offended parties may seek recourse against the offenders...however, it is up to the offended party to prove the offense in a civil matter, not the Federal government.

Also, it is not in the government's interest to go meddling with the Internet.

 

[Paladin3]

You're woefully ignorant, fair use is a defense which may be ignored if the court so chooses. There is no codified right to "fair use."

The US courts have ruled that you can make a backup copy of your media, but the backup copy cannot be used unless the original copy is damaged beyond use. The user cannot gain any additional functionality by having the backup copy, such as being able to use two separate copies in different locations.

This doesn't really have much to do with "fair use", which basically covers citing a portion of the copyrighted work for educational, research, news reporting, commentary, library archiving or similar purposes.

And copyright law, just like any other law, is always subject to the court's legal interpretation.

 

[BoberFett]

The US courts have ruled that you can make a backup copy of your media, but the backup copy cannot be used unless the original copy is damaged beyond use. The user cannot gain any additional functionality by having the backup copy, such as being able to use two separate copies in different locations.

Really? Do you have a citation? I'm not familiar with any ruling of the sort.

 

[werepossum]

I have a problem with people stealing IP, but I also have a problem with the RIAA's stance that WAV and MP3 files are separate from songs on CD. If I own the physical media, I should be able to freely copy and distribute its contents. If I own a license to use the IP on the media, I should be able to change it into the form that makes it most convenient and pleasurable for me to enjoy. I don't think it's reasonable to expect one to purchase a CD and then also purchase the same songs in MP3 format for an iPod rather than ripping them from the CD. (Not an issue for me personally as I have no music players, but seems like a basic inequity.)