Have you heard of SOPA, or the Stop Online Piracy Act?Or the only marginally less loathsome Protect IP Act?
These are devious bipartisan creations of US legislation that could impose China- or Saudi Arabia-style censorship on millions of web site owners in the Land of the Free. Even including a single link to another site that didn't meet SOPA's stringent standards could result in the site that shared that link being taken down -- with no warning to the site's owner. The U.S. government would have the power to demand that the site be taken down, although the very well-funded supporters of the legislation -- namely the publishing, music, and film industries -- would actually be the watchdogs.
It seems to me that under SOPA, it could be relatively easy for anyone who was displeased by content on a Web site to get that site wiped off of the Web, provided that person had enough money and influence. Just think: my little blue Whirled could be toast. My fake robot pal Salty, whose trademark sign-off is "Bleep-Bloop," could be bleeped right off of the Internet. Your site(s) probably wouldn't be safe either.
There's still time to fight SOPA and Protect IP, though. Here are some helpful links:
http://americancensorship.org/posts/4299/uncensor
And now back to our regularly scheduled ███████ .
PS ~ Thanks to Cassandra Yorgey for sharing those last two links on Facebook.
That's pretty hot.
ReplyDeleteI see viral potential in that graphic.
ReplyDeleteThanks, HHH. And BTW, the censored bit under the larger rectangle is the slogan, "My inner child is a mean little f----r."
ReplyDeleteOf course I censored myself again when quoting the slogan.
ReplyDeleteAnd by wearing clothes.
ReplyDeleteI've always thought of that as a dubious cultural repression.
:-)
ReplyDeleteSo this SOPA thing, it means that if I post a link to a copyrighted work on a blog hosted on a server in Timbuktu, then the US ISP's will block access to it for Americans, because they can't get to the foreign server?
ReplyDeleteIn fact, they will send Lars Ulrich, the copyright Metallienforcer to personally drop from a helicopter and take out the perp.
I always thought that Metallica-going-after-napster thing was utter wank, because I read in a metallica biography that they used to listen to pirated tapes.
Can you find *ANY* musician or artist that *doesn't* have a stack of pirated stuff?
Really, though, it's hardly surprising that corporations are grabbing this sort of power - even a protest on a blog like this is used as an advertising platform for google.
ReplyDeleteIt's their turf and this has been coming for a long time.
maybe if people took to paying for ineternets services like blogging it would put power back in their hands but as long as so much is free then they will find hooks in their mouths.
What do you think?
So, seeing as terrorists sometimes use counterfeiting to finance operations, could those new detention without trial powers be used against someone on the basis of copyright violations?
ReplyDeleteSay you linked to a youtube vid, and a bad guy used that to make DVD's to sell to buy AK's, or the gov. even claimed that was what you did, or what the bad guy did?
Is it that bad?
.... and now I'm reading more, Huffpo tells me that NBC and New Corp are lobbiers for SOPA and protectIP....
ReplyDeletethe ability to whisper in a politicians ear and get a rival news site shut down? Delicious, how could they resist?
We've had some real fun with NewsCorp in the UK.
Well, more of a macabre spectacle, but if you are the sort of person who likes to swallow buckets full of live maggots then you may call it fun.
Hello Connie,
ReplyDeleteThis is pretty of topic, but I just noticed that the fotter of you blog contains a link to a payday loand company, probably courtesy of whoever created this theme.
Though you may appreciate knowing as it certinaly conflicts with the spirit of your blog, and you just *KNOW* that eventually some goofball is gonna notice it and, well do what goofballs do.
Hi, Jonathan, good to see ya here. Thank you for your comment. Yes, I'm aware of the mostly irrelevant-to-the-topic banner ads that appear on my blog.
ReplyDeleteThey're not a product of the creators of that old Blogger template (which I really need to change; it's soooo early 2000's). Rather, in a lame attempt to monetize this Whirled, I signed up for the path-of-least-resistance form of Google Ads a couple of years ago. The Googlebots, which are generally incredibly insensitive, search for keywords and slap those ads up on a random basis. Once in a while they almost get it right, as in a recent case when an ad about schizophrenia appeared on one of my Abraham-Hicks posts. But mostly they seem... well... unintentionally ironic. (One Kevin True-dough fan -- Anonymous, of course -- accused me of being hypocritical for trying to make a few bucks off of my endeavor, apparently glossing over the fact that I have never dissed money or moneymaking per se.)
In any case, so far I've only made about $102.00 with Google Ads so I probably need to look into that and come up with another plan.
Many good points and questions there, HHH. I don't think anyone truly knows all of the ramifications of SOPA or Protect IP. (BTW, I strongly dislike Rupert Murdoch, and have been following the NewsCorp Follies fairly closely.)
ReplyDeleteAnd excellent points about "free" not really being "free." As you said, the hooks are in all of our mouths.
$102 - ?
ReplyDeleteThat's not bad for doing nothing (except whoring your life to Big Brother of course)
We're all whores in one way or t'other, HHH.
ReplyDeleteLate to the party here, as usual.
ReplyDeleteThinking quite a lot about free speech lately, never really having considered that I had any before.
But the prospect of loss does focus the brain a bit.
I like the censorship tool idea, very basic but effective at making a point. I and my mean little f**r of an inner child are going to try it out a bit ourselves.
Mr HHH here again, I can see I'm going to have to hit the books again to keep up with the repartee, him being a nob and me being a non-poet 'n all.
No more Justin Beiber links all over facebook from you, disillusioned, or they shut down the web and send you to Gitmo without telling your mum.
ReplyDeletehere you are, this will get the whole South West shut down
ReplyDeletehttp://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=31759120&postID=152324671270501880
and this will get you a drone strike
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHsTienoV68&feature=related
But, I see that the SOPA thing isn't a done deal yet and the geeks are fighting it.
ReplyDeleteSays here at the MIT tech review,
http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/mimssbits/27421/?p1=blogs
Did the DHS really hire the ex STASI chief to help them build their organisation?
ReplyDeleteYou know, that's too much me. I'll get my own blog if I want to rant.
ReplyDeleteThat second link was abysmal, Mr HHH, even for my corrupted tastes.
ReplyDeleteI had no idea though that Justin Bieber was such a powerfully motivating force in society, hmmmm--who knew??
As for me dear old mum (gawd rest her soul) she could have taught those Gitmo guys a trick or two--before breakfast.
Apologies, Connie, if I have lowered the tone of your excellent blog once again. I will endeavour to keep it civil in future.
It's worse than that, Bieber is a tool of the Zionist Occupational Government!
ReplyDeleteAccording to the world's most reliable open intelligence source...
"While searching for videos of a different singer, Scooter Braun, a former marketing executive of So So Def, clicked on one of Bieber's 2007 videos by accident. Impressed, Braun tracked down the theater Bieber was performing in, located Bieber's school, and finally contacted Mallette. Mallette was reluctant because of Braun's Jewish religion; she remembered praying, "God, I gave him to you. You could send me a Christian man, a Christian label! ... you don’t want this Jewish kid to be Justin’s man, do you?" However, after praying with her church elders and receiving their encouragement, she permitted Braun to fly Bieber, then 13, to Atlanta, Georgia, to record demo tapes."
That's right, the Jews are out to corrupt our Christian ears with sugary musical baby food!
Bloody hell, I went to check on the Ministry video and it says,
ReplyDelete""Ministry - N.W.O [New Wo..."
This video is no longer available because the YouTube account associated with this video has been terminated due to multiple third-party notifications of copyright infringement from claimants, including:
Viacom International Inc
SME
Viacom International Inc
Sorry about that."
Now, is that fucking ironic or what!?
Now, looking at Al Jurgensen in all his leather finery raises a question that has nagged at my mind which is - in a hot place like Texas, how does one be a goth metaller, wouldn't all the leather gear make you sweat unbearably?
ReplyDeleteLook, Connie, did you know that naughty people in your congress are asking for a spanking by Aunty SOPA?
ReplyDeleteIP addressess from congressman's offices have been hoovering up pirated material, says here -
http://www.dailytech.com/Congress+Plugs+AntiPiracy+Legislation+By+Day+Pirates+Porn+by+Night+/article23625.htm
Gangland Cream Pie 21 to relieve the stress of political life?
Hey, HHH and Disillusioned: I didn't mean to ignore your latest round of comments -- just got preoccupied with subsequent posts. I appreciate the witty repartee. And this issue is far from dead, unfortunately. Our pal Salty said his piece about SOPA today, in fact.
ReplyDeleteCouldn't figure out what that droid guy had against Assange, really, it being free speech issue and all. Must be about the oil.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, did you see this?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-16544335
The long arm of the empire, or what?
I just started investigating SOPA and PIPA more deeply. I found one post by Amanda Peyton particularly interesting. She called Chuck Schumer's office (Schumer is a co-sponsor) where the staffer readily admitted PIPA was about censoring the Internet. (!!)
ReplyDeleteJ, I'm kind of ambivalent about Assange myself. On the one hand, he's about transparency and free speech. On the other, his brand of forced transparency (stealing and sharing private correspondence) presents an ethical minefield at best and a threat to national security/safety at worst. I recognize that my opinion could also be colored by the fact that he's egotistical, not all that likeable, and apparently has the morals of a sewer rat, although I also acknowledge that his likeability and morals (or lack thereof) are pretty much irrelevant to the larger issues.
ReplyDeleteThat story you linked to is truly disturbing. Jeez.
Hi, Ryan, and thanks for stopping in. Good golly, when even the minions of the legislation's sponsors admit that it's all about Web censorship...
ReplyDeleteThen again, it's possible that the staffer's candor resulted in a reprimand or termination.
Speaking of Imperial activity, Connie, what should we get the queen for her diamond jubilee?
ReplyDeleteGuardian readers have some excellent suggestions-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/shortcuts/2012/jan/16/what-can-we-get-the-queen
No that's too much cussin, I'm sorry Connie, you just clean it up and get rid of it, it's ungentlemanly.
ReplyDelete