ilovefuzz.com

Freedom of Information is not the same as Information for Free.


SOPA and PIPA are massively flawed and definitely shouldn't make it to law, but I'm not sure I dig the fact that much of the kickback seems to be rooted in entitlement.

D.o.S. wrote:Freedom of Information is not the same as Information for Free.


SOPA and PIPA are massively flawed and definitely shouldn't make it to law, but I'm not sure I dig the fact that much of the kickback seems to be rooted in entitlement.

I can't speak for the rest of the Internet, but it's not the "stopping piracy" thing that I don't like, it's the "let copyright owners shut down entire websites just based on their say-so, and burden of proof is on the shut-down site to prove they weren't infringing just to get back up" that I don't like.

bigchiefbc wrote:

D.o.S. wrote:Freedom of Information is not the same as Information for Free.


SOPA and PIPA are massively flawed and definitely shouldn't make it to law, but I'm not sure I dig the fact that much of the kickback seems to be rooted in entitlement.

I can't speak for the rest of the Internet, but it's not the "stopping piracy" thing that I don't like, it's the "let copyright owners shut down entire websites just based on their say-so, and burden of proof is on the shut-down site to prove they weren't infringing just to get back up" that I don't like.

AND where "they" could [read will] use it as a loophole against sites/people they don't like/agree with.

Agreed with both points. I'm just more worried about things like SERDP soliciting "green" explosives:
http://www.serdp.org/Funding-Opportunit ... -Core-SONs

... what the hell does that have to with SOPA?

I never got the attitude that we shouldn't worry about certain things because other things might be scarier.

And, I mean... if you gotta kill people, you may as well try to make the weapons environmentally friendly.

McSpunckle wrote:... what the hell does that have to with SOPA?

I never got the attitude that we shouldn't worry about certain things because other things might be scarier.

And, I mean... if you gotta kill people, you may as well try to make the weapons environmentally friendly.

McSpunckle wrote:... what the hell does that have to with SOPA?

I never got the attitude that we shouldn't worry about certain things because other things might be scarier.

And, I mean... if you gotta kill people, you may as well try to make the weapons environmentally friendly.

It's called reading comprehension. More worried doesn't mean not worried.

D.o.S. wrote:Freedom of Information is not the same as Information for Free.

SOPA and PIPA are massively flawed and definitely shouldn't make it to law, but I'm not sure I dig the fact that much of the kickback seems to be rooted in entitlement.

Lets say two parties have the same piece of information. The second party may have gotten the information from the first party; if they did, then maybe they paid for it, or maybe they acquired it through the first party's inability to adequately protect the information. The first party will give me the information for a price. The second party will give me the information for free. If I'm legally restrained from getting the information from the second party, that is not freedom of information.

A sense of entitlement isn't always wrong. The Bill of Rights is a list of entitlements.

Am I the only one thinking "door in the face" tactic?

i just want to say that "PIPA SOPA" sounds like a delicious South American dessert. that is all.

dubkitty wrote:i just want to say that "PIPA SOPA" sounds like a delicious South American dessert. that is all.

Dammit kitteh, now I'm incredibly hungry.

A sense of entitlement isn't always wrong. The Bill of Rights is a list of entitlements.

Meeeeeeeeerrrrr, I'm gonna argue with that one for the most part. Entitlements are something provided to you whereas liberties are the freedom from intrusion. That said, most of the amendments would fall under the category of liberties. Parts of the sixth and seventh could be considered entitlements because they require infrastructure and funds, however you could consider a fair, speedy trial by a jury of your peers, etc. to be part of a freedom from an unfair justice system.

Unless you want to argue "entitlements" in the broadest sense, that is, you are entitled to have gov't NOT act in a way that would infringe upon your civil liberties. Now I'm just running around in semantic circles.

I too find it hard to argue against SOPA/PIPA on an argument of principle. However, the impracticality of the bill and the potential chilling effect it would have on free speech is enough for me to oppose it. Political principles/theory really don't have any place in a debate.

The piracy thing is a classic and very convenient bait n switch.
If you don't think governments and their corporate owners are interested in restraining the Internet in the wake of the Arab Spring and Occupy then you're just not paying attention...

Except that these kinds of bills have been popping up before, during, and after all those movements.

Not to pee on your Guy Fawkes mask or anything.

devnulljp wrote:The piracy thing is a classic and very convenient bait n switch.
If you don't think governments and their corporate owners are interested in restraining the Internet in the wake of the Arab Spring and Occupy then you're just not paying attention...

Except that the Internet is the best way to reach youth, the biggest demographic of Democratic supporters. Leverage, not control.

Corporations however do want to protect their profits, that's what's expected of them, not some conspiracy.

And how is it a bait and switch? That would be if they had a website where you could sign up for a free puppy, but really made you sign away your firstborn.

The bait has to be appealing, which SOPA/PIPA was not, and nobody thinks it's done for now. So...I'ma double D.o.s.'s last sentiment.

Bee tee dubs, snipzy's totally on the money when it comes to liberties and entitlements.