COICA: proof U.S. has the best Senate money can buy

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Chupa Chupa, Nov 19, 2010.

  1. Chupa Chupa macrumors G5

    Chupa Chupa

    Jul 16, 2002
    Republican, Democrat, hard right, hard left, plum center. Whatever your political predilection, there was a U.S. Senator of that spectrum that voted today in committee in favor of the brutish COICA bill. Bipartisanship FTW!? Can you say what a bloat of hippocritters -- gobbling up all that hollywood cashola. (Much tastier you know than that musty old Constitution).

    If you haven't heard about it it essentially gives the AG the right to immediately take down any web site (yes, the entire site) if he/she can convince a friendly court the sites primary (user) activity is for copyright infringement. So sites like Drop Box could potentially go poof. It's anti-Free Speech and kills entrepreneurship. EFF makes the point that if this law existed a few years ago there would be no YouTube or Flickr or any other site where people share their art and ideas -- but sometimes others too.

    Current law states web sites must take down infringing individual files. This new law would take down the entire site and more. Overkill much? And why? Big money -- MPAA, RIAA, publishing. See while all these senators talk a good game to their constituents (be they on the left or right) they know their real bosses live in zip code 900xx.

    EFF has a good article here. Funny that while Senators are acting in a bipartisan way to help their h'wood benefactors, the left and right blogosphere have come together to oppose this pile of legislation.

    Call up your senators today and ask where they stand -- I bet it's not for your rights regardless of the letter in parentheses behind their name. Stand by for some "uncommitted" or other weasel words.
  2. mcrain macrumors 68000


    Feb 8, 2002
    Last time I checked, youtube and others, don't have as their primary purpose the infringement of copyrights. Therefore, they would be safe.

    Any site that allowed users to post their materials also would likewise be safe.

    Only sites that had as their primary purpose the violation of copyrights (pirating) would be in danger of being shut down. I'm not sure what the problem is. This shouldn't affect anyone's free speech, only their ability to break the law.
  3. Chupa Chupa thread starter macrumors G5

    Chupa Chupa

    Jul 16, 2002
    I don't think you really have a grasp of the power this legislation will give the gov't.

    1) YouTube was never set up to infringe copyrights. But that is what many users did -- they posted whole episodes of TV shows, large clips of movies that didn't fall into the fair use, comment and criticism exception, etc. Under the existing DMCA "safe harbor" sites like YouTube have to take down those files, which it did. EFF's point is that had the proposed legislation existed when YouTube was in it's infancy the AG could just shut it down after a Court OK rather than have the offending files removed. YouTube has since matured into a lab of creativity. But this legislation wouldn't have given it that chance.

    2) The law doesn't just target sites that set up w/ the intent to steal -- it goes after legit sites where the USERS post unauthorized files. It may no longer be enough if a site simply takes down the offending IP. The AG can just turn off the site even if the site has a legit purpose.

    3) I heartily suggest you do some more reading on the issue. The EFF article is a good place to start. Wired also has a good article.
  4. SolRayz, Nov 19, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2010

    SolRayz macrumors 6502a


    Jul 5, 2007
    Ft. Lauderdale
    Aaahh yes, our civil liberties being trampled on once again by this runaway government, which, has clearly stopped working on behalf of the people. Our freedoms disappear in favor of corporate interests and in the meantime rampant file sharing goes on and on and on...

    The minute the first website is removed from the internet Amendment 1 of our Constitution is violated.

    Amendment 1

    The EFF is a great place to start. Except the part where you contact your representatives. They could give a rats ass. Boycott the RIAA and the MPAA. Stop buying their crap!

    Obama must speak out against COICA, otherwise I'm done with him. And the RIAA and MPAA can really go to hell...I hope to see bankruptcy in their future...
  5. Chupa Chupa thread starter macrumors G5

    Chupa Chupa

    Jul 16, 2002
    Yeah I saw similar on Arstechnica this AM. Gives hope that maybe there are some Senators not bought and paid for by Mickey Mouse and pals.

    Honestly, this is probably DOA with so many new House members next session but the idea that the Sen. Judiciary Comte. felt it was important enough to whiz though unanimously in a lame duck session (probably had K St. fundraisers afterwards) is quite ominous. H'wood will never quit until the currency says "In Mouse We Trust." We'll win this battle, not sure about the war though.

Share This Page