Nothing To Do With Fish But.....

[SlyPolak]

COICA

In the United States, a new law proposal called The Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA) was introduced last week, and there will be a hearing in front of the Judiciary Committee this Thursday.

If passed, this law will allow the government, under the command of the media copanies, to censor the internet as they see fit, like China and Iran do, with the difference that the sites they decide to censor will be completely removed form the internet and not just in the US.

THAT MEANS NO MORE FREE MUSIC, MOVIES, ETC..... (NO RIGHTS)

Please see the following article from the Huffington Post for more information.
http/www.huffingtonpost.com/david-segal/stop-the-internet-blackli_b_739836.html

And if you are a US citizen, please take the time sign this petition
http/demandprogress.org/blacklist/


Even though MOST of the members of this AWESOME forum are not in the great USA.... what do you guys/gals think of americas gonads of taking the WORLDS law into their own hands?

EDIT*** had to add another pic...

 

[Tolak]

Moved to General Chat as this has nothing to do with tropical fish.

 

[SlyPolak]

so no one cares about this??



bumpitty

 

[Ace Of Spades]

Meh, Internet is full of crap anyway. Needs some pruning...

 

[SlyPolak]

pruning huh???

so you would like to see youtube get shut down because the media companies think its sitting on the brink of copyright infringement??

From the Huffington Post :::

-- any domain name where counterfeit goods or copyrighted material are "central to the activity of the Internet site" could be blocked... Copyright holders like Viacom often argue copyrighted material is central to the activity of YouTube, but under current US law, YouTube is perfectly legal as long as they take down copyrighted material when they're informed about it --
But if COICA passes, Viacom wouldn't even need to prove YouTube is doing anything illegal to get it shut down -- as long as they can persuade the courts that enough other people are using it for copyright infringement, the whole site could be censored.
Even if Viacom couldn't get a court to compel censorship of a YouTube or a similar site, the DOJ could put it on the second blacklist and encourage ISPs to block it even without a court order. (ISPs have ample reason to abide the will of the powerful DOJ, even if the law doesn't formally require them to do so.)


First step to being #71###ed in the #16#####..........

 

[Tom499]

Its all quite insane, I'm amazed its got as far as it has..

 

[Ace Of Spades]

pruning huh???

so you would like to see youtube get shut down because the media companies think its sitting on the brink of copyright infringement??

From the Huffington Post :::

-- any domain name where counterfeit goods or copyrighted material are "central to the activity of the Internet site" could be blocked... Copyright holders like Viacom often argue copyrighted material is central to the activity of YouTube, but under current US law, YouTube is perfectly legal as long as they take down copyrighted material when they're informed about it --
But if COICA passes, Viacom wouldn't even need to prove YouTube is doing anything illegal to get it shut down -- as long as they can persuade the courts that enough other people are using it for copyright infringement, the whole site could be censored.
Even if Viacom couldn't get a court to compel censorship of a YouTube or a similar site, the DOJ could put it on the second blacklist and encourage ISPs to block it even without a court order. (ISPs have ample reason to abide the will of the powerful DOJ, even if the law doesn't formally require them to do so.)


First step to being #71###ed in the #16#####..........

Well maybe Youtube should actually monitor its own website and remove those in violation of uploading such videos, your argument is that you wont be able to watch illegal (copyrighted) videos, therefore I think the law will work perfectly.

 

[SlyPolak]

WRONG!!!!!!


I actually doubt that this will pass.... even if It does It doesnt really bother me that much....

If this is all this new "censorship" law does, block torrent/misc pirate sites then I really don't have a problem with it. However, I feel it's a slippery slope. First it's the torrent sites, next it's forums, before you know it, it's independent news sites that get shut down as well as private blogs disagreeing with something some government says. (Like China.)
True that I would rather download something for free if possible -- and many things like that, I would not have gotten if I had to pay, and would've missed discovering something I like. I've bought CD's after being turned on to someone from a free download. Same thing with software.
I just dont like the gonads the gov. is getting.........

 

[chrisbassist]

Actually I think this is disgraceful.

I'm in the uk. And should the Americans think YouTube needs shutting down then I don't get YouTube no more?

So what I, as a British citizen, can view online, is now being controlled by the US?!?! Or maybe not yet, but ...

This isn't even an issue for the US to vote on. Everyone who will be affected by this deserves a vote.

 

[AstonN24vantage]

so no one cares about this??



bumpitty

if you had a swear dictionary you would hear every word in there coming out of my mouth.

obama and the liberals are turning america into garbage.

the whole point of the internet is freedom. they can't do that.

 

[Paradise3]

If youtube get's shut down where will i listen to my music or watch funny cats videos!!!

Alessa x.

 

[rdp50734]

Its much more than what you can and cant view online. It is about dictatorship, telling someone 'I do not agree with that therefore you cant either'. Its despicable, they obviously want us all to be robots and do as commanded!

What's happened to choice? Even if I wanted to download illegally it should be my choice to take that chance!

It is an issue of human rights and no way should it be voted in!

 

[Ace Of Spades]

Its much more than what you can and cant view online. It is about dictatorship, telling someone 'I do not agree with that therefore you cant either'. Its despicable, they obviously want us all to be robots and do as commanded!

Dictatorships are not always that bad, most people don't know what they want anyway.

 

[rdp50734]

Dictatorships are not always that bad, most people don't know what they want anyway.

But what if you do know and then you are prevented from doing it because someone else does not agree with it? What if one of these people in a position of power are found to like indecent images of children, rape, drugs or any illegal activity? Does it then become socially acceptable? Where do you draw the line on what a society can and can not do?

 

[Ace Of Spades]

Dictatorships are not always that bad, most people don't know what they want anyway.

What if one of these people in a position of power are found to like indecent images of children, rape, drugs or any illegal activity?

Isn't that already a problem?