Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 16

Thread: Internet Censorship (rather urgent)

  1. #1

    Exclamation Internet Censorship (rather urgent)



    Stop the Internet Blacklist Legislation

    The Internet Blacklist Legislation - known as PROTECT IP Act in the Senate and Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the House - is a threatening sequel to last year's COICA Internet censorship bill. Like its predecessor, this legislation invites Internet security risks, threatens online speech, and hampers Internet innovation. Urge your members of Congress to reject this Internet blacklist campaign in both its forms!

    Big media and its allies in Congress are billing the Internet Blacklist Legislation as a new way to prevent online infringement. But innovation and free speech advocates know that this initiative is nothing more than a dangerous wish list that will compromise Internet security while doing little or nothing to encourage creative expression.

    As drafted, the legislation would grant the government and private parties unprecedented power to interfere with the Internet's domain name system (DNS). The government would be able to force ISPs and search engines to redirect or dump users' attempts to reach certain websites' URLs. In response, third parties will woo average users to alternative servers that offer access to the entire Internet (not just the newly censored U.S. version), which will create new computer security vulnerabilities as the reliability and universality of the DNS evaporates.

    It gets worse: Under SOPA's provisions, service providers (including hosting services) would be under new pressure to monitor and police their users’ activities. While PROTECT-IP targeted sites “dedicated to infringing activities,” SOPA targets websites that simply don’t do enough to track and police infringement (and it is not at all clear what would be enough). And it creates new powers to shut down folks who provide tools to help users get access to the Internet the rest of the world sees (not just the “U.S. authorized version”).

    Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) has placed a hold on the Senate version of the bill, taking a principled stand against a very dangerous bill. But every Senator and Representative should be opposing the PROTECT IP Act and SOPA. Contact your members of Congress today to speak out!
    Source: https://wfc2.wiredforchange.com/o/90...ction_KEY=8173

    And the easy site to take care of it: American Censorship Day November 16 - Join the fight to stop SOPA

  2. #2

    Default

    For the first time ever, the UK is ahead on sense with the internet.
    This is ridiculous, and impossible to enforce. This goes through and we can all say bye bye to freedom on the web.

  3. #3
    Cherub

    Default

    It gets worse: Under SOPA's provisions, service providers (including hosting services) would be under new pressure to monitor and police their users’ activities. While PROTECT-IP targeted sites “dedicated to infringing activities,” SOPA targets websites that simply don’t do enough to track and police infringement (and it is not at all clear what would be enough). And it creates new powers to shut down folks who provide tools to help users get access to the Internet the rest of the world sees (not just the “U.S. authorized version”).

    Does this sound like the beginning of a socialist government to anyone else? The government trying to CONTROL what you can and can not access? Hello anyone home????

  4. #4

    Default

    Calling it "censorship" is a bit of stretch. As usual, people who don't like government proposals are distorting the truth to cast the bill in a bad light. Here's the actual bill for anyone who cares to read it: Stop Online Piracy Act

    The bill is basically a stricter form of copyright enforcement on the web. The gist of it it is that, if the bill passes, the Attorney General will now be able to pass injunctions on foreign websites that are violation of US copyrights on intellectual property. Injunction =/= censorship. Censorship is the removal of material on the basis of its content; and injunction is the refusal to allow a company that is in violation of some law to continue operating. In their own words:



    Under existing authority, law enforcement is unable to seek injunctive relief against notorious foreign websites trafficking in counterfeit goods and services, though they can pursue action against comparable domestic sites. This provision creates a 4-track process to better protect American intellectual property online. It expands existing authority for law enforcement and provides a mechanism for rights holders to protect their IP rights.
    Two objections might be: first, that the enforcement of intellectual property copyrights, on its current trajectory, is a violation of the rights of the consumer to do what he or she wishes with a legally purchased product. Certainly, this is a valid objection, but it does not imply that SOPA is an act of censorship. A second camp might argue that SOPA will open up the door to future censorship, or that it might serve as a pretext for censoring unfavorable material. That's also a valid objection, but again, it doesn't mean that SOPA as such is proposing censorship.

    The reality is that, if SOPA passes, Pirate Bay, bit torrent, and similar sites might be blocked. But that block would be an act of injunction, not an act of censorship; the sites would be blocked because they are illegal, not because they're merely unfavorable.

    At any rate, I'm not decided on whether SOPA is or isn't a good idea. It really comes down to how one feels about copyrighted material on the internet in general, and I'm pretty ambivalent about that.

  5. #5

    Default

    The geek in my wonders how they will make this work with secure DNS (the answer of course being they probably won't). As we are trying to implement standards to prevent one entity tampering with DNS records, this is precisely the method that is being proposed here.

    On a more general note, while I agree this is being a bit over-hyped.. it is yet another stumble down that slippery slope people have been talking about for years. The USA (and others) are becoming more china-like .. and it's happening so gradually that enough people won't notice until it gets really bad (and is too late).

  6. #6
    Cherub

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by BoundCoder View Post
    it is yet another stumble down that slippery slope people have been talking about for years. The USA (and others) are becoming more china-like .. and it's happening so gradually that enough people won't notice until it gets really bad (and is too late).
    That is a better way to word it. Sort of like the frog in a pot of boiling water analogy. Toss it in a boiling pot of water and it will jump right out. Turn the heat up gradually enough and the frog will stay put and eventually boil to death.

  7. #7

    Default

    Yea, I noticed this when I logged on Tumblr today... it was rather hard not to notice it in fact they set up this whole thing where you put your phone number and zip code so they call the local politicians or something like that. To me this sounds something like China's censorship laws on the internet and I really don't know what to say to this, the American government even thinking of this goes against everything that we've ever stood for and if it passes I... I give up and am moving somewhere else don't know where tho, Canada seems nice...

  8. #8
    bjm904

    Default

    I saw this today and I am terrified. I know its for the better good of copyrighted stuff but I live in america not China (Where internet is extremely restricted) and I expect freedom.

  9. #9

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by Yarfiggle View Post
    Canada seems nice...
    For now.

    Our recent win against the CRTC's usage based billing aside (and even that is a mixed blessing as the rates have been adjusted in a fairly bad way) .. things are heading down a bad road here as well. Pressure from the US (especially the US media industry) is leading to the same kind of insane laws.

    In other words, don't pack just yet ;p
    Last edited by BoundCoder; 17-Nov-2011 at 04:22. Reason: Removed double post

  10. #10

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by slim View Post
    Calling it "censorship" is a bit of stretch. As usual, people who don't like government proposals are distorting the truth to cast the bill in a bad light. Here's the actual bill for anyone who cares to read it: Stop Online Piracy Act
    I read the full text of the bill earlier. You're right, an injunction is not quite censorship. However my read is that it encourages ISPs to block access to sites that MIGHT contain infringing material on the grounds that both hosts and providers are liable for violations that they enable (e.g., I post pirated movies on Youtube, Youtube can be charged with copyright violations as can Verizon as my ISP). Not to mention the financial aspects of it: I could write PayPal, tell them I think eBay is hosting materials that violate a copyright (doesn't need to be mine, I don't have to provide any proof or standing) and PayPal is now required to stop processing payments from or to eBay for anything. The onus would now be on eBay to prove they didn't host media that violated a copyright.

Similar Threads

  1. Internet censorship
    By Hex in forum Mature Topics
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 12-Apr-2009, 05:38
  2. Australian Internet Censorship: Going too far?
    By Kraiden in forum Off-topic
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 28-Mar-2009, 04:06

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
ADISC.org - the Adult Baby / Diaper Lover / Incontinence Support Community.
ADISC.org is designed to be viewed in Firefox, with a resolution of at least 1280 x 1024.