"black out the English-language Wikipedia for 24 hours, worldwide"

I thought I read a headline that our overlords were backpedaling away from this stuff. Guess not. :(

Well, I'm definately on Wikipedia's side, if they're facing an existential (as they say nowadays) danger from all of this.

But as Sonnyboo for one, I think, has said: the internet has been a wild wild West. It's only a matter of time before they put the kabosh on it.

It certainly has been said that the internet has been an unprecedented vehicle and medium for the flowering of egalitarianism, freedom of speech, freedom of expression, the freeflow of information and knowledge.

I'm not a pessimist by nature, but definately a cynic. I agree that it is only a matter of time before the Plutocracy puts the squeeze on the internet.

Weyland-Yutani Corp. Welcome to the future. The future is Weyland-Yutani Corp.
 
Last edited:
The issue seems to have a primary holdup with the methodology and process of "addressing" accused offenders rather than the principle of piracy itself.

An NPR contributor likened it this morning to making all cars illegal because some cares are used in bank robberies. And that this was a Hollywood problem they are trying to make an internet problem.


I'm all for shutting down piracy of any form, but I don't want to have anyone's site shut down solely on accusation alone.

I'm of the opinion that if studios want to protect their content they need to bear the financial responsibility of protecting it rather than foisting that expense onto the entire public, consumers and non-consumers alike.

Content providers have the right to protect themselves.
They do not have the right to make non-consumers pay for it.

There needs to be a better encryption service developed that cannot be video converted, the studio system needs to pay for and license it, and indie producers are also going to have to pay for licensing encryption protection or watch their unprotected content get stolen.

Wells Fargo/Brinks for film!
Pay to play.
 
I like that wikipedia is doing this. I love the fact that they try to stay out of political affairs, but this is one case where a demonstration (in the most literal sense) is applicable. I love that they are just shutting down the english site...let people in the US get a sense of what it's like living in a country with more restrictive speech and internet access.

I like this because it is not PROTESTING any particular bit of legislation. It is DEMONSTRATING what this sort of legislation has the potential to become.

Piracy should be stopped. However, power is a dangerous thing and shouldn't be granted without careful consideration.

Of course, because I laugh at everything, a wikipedia outage makes me think of the following exchange:
"You'll have a philosopher's strike on your hands!"
"And who will that inconvenience?"
"Never you mind, buster, it'll hurt..."
 
Piracy should be stopped. However, power is a dangerous thing and shouldn't be granted without careful consideration.

With great power comes huge electricity bill.
chinese-bow-005.gif
 
I think Kid Rock said it the best... "Fuck... I've made millions of dollars off my fans.... steal my music, I don't care..."

Having said that; I don't believe in stealing and/or using copyrighted material and I most certainly dislike torrent sites, but SOPA needs to disappear.
 
An attack on one is an attack on all.

The same cry babies crying about piracy should spend a few more dollars on getting their digital content better encrypted.

Also, they need better security with their own employees and employees of companies their postproductions are contracted out to who leak out distributor copies, retail DVDs before release, and rough cuts. I'd be interested if someone could find data on the percentage of leaks of big budget productions are inside jobs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZD6bQ3DQSLA

Not to get anyone in trouble, all that I'll say is I was visiting a very large production company with ties to cable TV networks the night a Will Smith movie opened in theaters to see people there replicating copies of the DVD version of that movie like crazy. And, I'll leave it at that.
 
Last edited:
There needs to be a better encryption service developed that cannot be video converted, the studio system needs to pay for and license it, and indie producers are also going to have to pay for licensing encryption protection or watch their unprotected content get stolen.

This is the real problem though - there is no such thing. There will be no such thing. There cannot be any such thing - it simply is not possible, end of story.

The studios know this now but they aren't yet ready to accept the realities of the emerging new marketplace, so they are attempting to use legislation to achieve what technology cannot. Their goal with this legislation is to put the burden of proof entirely on the accused, which means they would have free reign to shut down just about anyone they want simply because they have far more resources than those they would accuse.

This is not, ultimately, about 'piracy'. It's about propping up entrenched business models a little bit longer before their inevitable collapse in the face of a changing market and hundreds or thousands of upstart competitors.
 
An NPR contributor likened it this morning to making all cars illegal because some cares are used in bank robberies.
That argument doesn't hold up when we're talking about the most blatant of sites. Otherwise if 1% of PirateBay is legally shared material does that give them a free pass? Just sprinkle in a little bit of legal material and that makes you untouchable?
No one is saying that piracy is ok when being against SOPA.
Actually there are a lot of people out there who want to keep the "looting party" going. And they feel very "entitled". They have this disillusion idea that the movie and record industry are making money hand over fist and therefore they have a right to download illegal torrents, and that illegal torrents are "promotion" that are a net GAIN for the industry. These people are like 911 conspiracy theorists. There's no getting through to them.
 
Last edited:
I'm kind of disappointed that NPR is stating Wikipedia is protesting anti-piracy legislation, which isn't accurate.

They are protesting the way in which SOPA and PIPA are constructed, not anti-piracy itself.
 
Some interesting commentary from the MPAA:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13772_3-57360499-52/mpaa-blasts-dangerous-anti-sopa-blackouts-as-stunts/
MPAA chairman and CEO--and former U.S. Senator--Chris Dodd railed against the blackouts, calling them "an irresponsible response and a disservice to people who rely on [the sites] for information and [who] use their services."
So then, organization that is against people feeling they deserve free access to their property...complains when someone temporarily revokes free access to their property. Ah, hypocracy! But really, what else can they do to spin it?

The article links to a blog talking about using Google's cache to circumvent the wikipedia blackout. You can also still get to the mobile site: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/ It is important to note that these workarounds do NOT invalidate the demonstration. It is a direct demonstration of steps that people actually go through to access information in a more restricted net environment. And hopefully, points out the absurdity of information being restricted by people who do not understand how information is accessed and distributed.

Of course, I'm sure there will be lots of "LOL wiki FAIL" comments, but I think people saying that might be missing the point of the demonstration in the first place.

Urgh, rayw, NPR are usually better than that. I mean, that is the spin mass media is trying to put on this, and I'm sure exactly how Fox News, etc, are reporting it. One does like to think NPR is a LITTLE better than that. I share your disappointment.
 
Last edited:
As I mentioned in the "Stand Against Online Censorship" thread, the big issue is that the way the bill(s) are worded everything is based upon accusations - all it takes is an accusation to shut down a website; and there is no appeal. That's akin to your neighbor accusing you of robbing a bank, so the police just throw you into jail with no investigation, no arrest warrant, no judicial hearing, no legal representation, no bail, and you rot in a cell until they finally get around to your case.

To me this is the crux of the whole issue, it flies in the face of the Constitution. There are many other aspects of the bill(s) that are exceedingly troubling, like the "Kill Switch" provision which allows the government to shut down the internet whenever it wishes; this is an obvious abrogation of Free Speech rights.

I'll leave the issue there. As the cliché says - "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions."
 
Some interesting commentary from the MPAA:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13772_3-57360499-52/mpaa-blasts-dangerous-anti-sopa-blackouts-as-stunts/
[quoteMPAA chairman and CEO--and former U.S. Senator--Chris Dodd railed against the blackouts, calling them "an irresponsible response and a disservice to people who rely on [the sites] for information and [who] use their services."
[/QUOTE]

Um, yeah. That's the whole point of a protest. To cause a disruption. lol

Plus I find it ironic that Chris Dodd is implying that he uses such reliably-factual sources as Wikipedia. Yeah right.
 
Back
Top