The World's #1 Russian, Ukrainian & Eastern European Discussion & Information Forum - RUA!

This Is the Premier Discussion Forum on the Net for Information and Discussion about Russia, Ukraine, Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union. Discuss Culture, Politics, Travelling, Language, International Relationships and More. Chat with Travellers, Locals, Residents and Expats. Ask and Answer Questions about Travel, Culture, Relationships, Applying for Visas, Translators, Interpreters, and More. Give Advice, Read Trip Reports, Share Experiences and Make Friends.

Author Topic: "Protecting IP" act now TITLE I—COMBATING ONLINE PARASITES act!  (Read 10149 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline cufflinks

  • Supporting Member
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 9949
  • Country: us
  • Gender: Male
  • Trips: 1-5
Re: "Protecting IP" act now TITLE I—COMBATING ONLINE PARASITES act!
« Reply #25 on: January 17, 2012, 12:03:35 PM »
The Latest regarding SOPA PIPA - do your wikipedia searches today because tomorrow it will be blacked out:

http://www.webpronews.com/sopa-blackout-set-for-january-18th-heres-all-the-info-2012-01#more

Over the weekend, the Stop Online Piracy Act was dealt a major blow as the legislation was delayed until “outstanding concerns” have been addressed. SOPA will not move forward in the House as the official vote was been cancelled and the bill has been yanked from the floor. Representative and SOPA opponent Darrell Issa cheered this as a win for the internet community – but he warned that SOPA’s Senate cousin PIPA is still a major concern.

He’s right, and SOPA is still a concern as well. While it has been delayed, SOPA is not dead. It is entirely possible that SOPA could resurrect once a “consensus is reached.” SOPA must be destroyed while vulnerable.

And presumably, that’s why many sites will still participate in a scheduled blackout on Wednesday, January 18th to protest the legislation.

Offline cufflinks

  • Supporting Member
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 9949
  • Country: us
  • Gender: Male
  • Trips: 1-5
Re: "Protecting IP" act now TITLE I—COMBATING ONLINE PARASITES act!
« Reply #26 on: January 19, 2012, 12:57:02 PM »
The Internet is angry at SOPA and Anonymous is at, or at least near, the front of it all.

On Wednesday, the "official" Anonymous twitter feed linked to the group's list of demands. The document is titled, "Bright, and Clear: The Future of Free Speech." In it, the group details their list of demands for the future of the Internet that they believe SOPA and PIPA want to dismantle.

As we watch the web go dark today in protest against the SOPA/PIPA censorship bills, let's take a moment and reflect on why this fight is so important. We may have learned that free speech is what makes America great, or instinctively resist attempts at silencing our voices. But these are abstract principles, divorced from the real world and our daily lives.

We believe a healthy society doesn't allow its artists, musicians and other creators to starve. The copyright industry has been justly criticized for abusing the political process in a desperate attempt to maintain its role as a cultural gatekeeper, a business model made obsolete by a digital age of free copies. But the RIAA, MPAA & IFPI deserve our opprobrium for making enormous profits while often leaving the very artists it claims to represent *poorer* than they would be as independents. While the public may have greater access to the few artists deemed sufficiently marketable to gain mass media promotion, fewer and fewer of us are making art and music in our own lives.

Do you agree with Anonymous' claim of a digital age of free copies? Are the MPAA and RIAA's business models outdated? Let us know in the comments.

From there, the group lists their demands starting with the call for the WIPO to be disbanded. They also demand the elimination of the DMCA's registration requirement for qualification under the "safe harbor" provision.

They move onto more court-related topics with their expectation that courts apply penalties just as severe to rightsholders who issue abusive takedown notices as those applied to copyright violators. They also demand that any penalties for copyright infringement must be sane and reasonable and not to be based on "unsubstantiated, outlandish claims of harm."

They demand that the Department of Justice begin an anti-trust investigation into the copyright industry, with a specific focus on collusion between rightsholders and ISPs in monitoring Internet users.

They demand an end to sales of radio frequencies into private hands. They believe that the radio waves are a form of speech and should belong to the people.

A big one that most would not agree with is their demand that ISPs stop interfering with file sharing via BitTorrent or any other protocol.

They want recognition of total ownership, not merely licensing, of products purchased. They feel that they have a right to tinker and modify devices as they see fit. The Library of Congress should not be in charge of determining acceptable use.

They reject the principle of contributory infringement under the pretense that "while there may be bad uses, there is no bad code."

One that I think everybody can get behind is their expectation that legislators and judges make efforts to educate themselves about the technologies they oversee, and to call on and respect the opinions of technical experts when necessary.

All research receiving any public funding must be placed in the public domain upon publication. Likewise, the US Patent and Trade Office must immediately cease issuing software and business patents, and declare all such existing patents null and void. They also call on the rejection of any patents on mathematical formulas and genes or other naturally-occurring substances.

They demand that copyright and patent terms be reduced to reasonable lengths (two and five years from the time of creation, respectively). Works should only be eligible for the length of protection when created.

They recognize a broad right of "fair use" that would allow anybody to remix, sample, mash up, translate, perform or make parodies of any work as they see fit.

Their final demand is that courts give bloggers the same freedoms that journalists enjoy.

"The right to a free press originally meant a literal, physical printing press - not membership in some government sanctioned elite. Blogs are the modern day digital equivalent."

They end their list of demands with a final call to action to their fellow "Internauts." They end their message with "either stand with us or get out of the way."

Anonymous is not new to protesting human rights violations or making demands of certain groups that they don't agree with. This is the first time, however, that they have laid out reasonable (to some people) changes to Federal and International law that most people could get behind. It's fascinating to see a group that only a few years ago was attacking Web sites for the "lulz" has transformed into an activist group that more people can support.

It's important to remember, however, that this only represents a portion of Anonymous. As these movements grow, there will be counter Anonymous movements that will want to respond to threats like SOPA and PIPA with more targeted, direct physical action like Operation Blackout.

Offline Muzh_1

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6317
  • Country: tz
Re: "Protecting IP" act now TITLE I—COMBATING ONLINE PARASITES act!
« Reply #27 on: January 19, 2012, 01:05:18 PM »
The two senators from NY are re-thinking their position on PIPA and my local congressmen are totally opposed to SOPA. So I have hopes it will not go through.


Offline cufflinks

  • Supporting Member
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 9949
  • Country: us
  • Gender: Male
  • Trips: 1-5
Re: "Protecting IP" act now TITLE I—COMBATING ONLINE PARASITES act!
« Reply #28 on: January 19, 2012, 01:06:11 PM »
I personally like our trademark and copyrights laws the way they are - the creator/author and their heirs/estate enjoys the profits on their original works for their lifetime and 75 years after they pass on. 

I agree that the abuses of the MPAA and RIAA and frivolous design and business process patents are designed to limit competition and should be limited in time and scope - but people need to know they will profit on their original works and that people in the 3rd world as well as NA and EU can't just steal and copy and resell their original works with no penalties.

Online AvHdB

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 14933
  • Country: nl
  • Gender: Male
  • Spouses Country: Ukraine, Kiev
  • Status: Married
  • Trips: 20+
Re: "Protecting IP" act now TITLE I—COMBATING ONLINE PARASITES act!
« Reply #29 on: January 19, 2012, 03:08:26 PM »
Cuffy, I also support the freedom of the internet and made it clear to a congressman that I know as a friend my feelings. He was not sure anymore where he stood in the beginning of this year.

What I feel and correct me if I am wrong, this is very much a battle between old technology and new? Yes some of the rhetoric that masks itself in free speech is more we are discussing who earns what from how? AvHdB
“If you aren't in over your head, how do you know how tall you are?” T.S. Eliot

Offline Manny

  • Moderator
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 19719
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
  • Spouses Country: Russia
  • Status: Married
  • Trips: 20+
Re: "Protecting IP" act now TITLE I—COMBATING ONLINE PARASITES act!
« Reply #30 on: January 19, 2012, 03:23:00 PM »
As advertised, many big sites like Wikipedia and a lot of forums - Warrior Forum was one - was inaccessible yesterday in support of the protest against this bill. It was strange to see Wikipedia as a black page.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Really, if you do a lot of stuff on the net as I do, you don't realise until it happens what a pain it would be if sites like those (and this one come to that) wasn't there!  :snivel:  I hit about a half dozen blacked out sites yesterday on my internet travels.

This does need to be stopped. You guys in the US have the strongest voice over this because this is a US bill and US law affects the whole internet. This would change the internet as we know it.

More here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-16628143

Quote
Elsewhere, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg deemed the occasion worthy enough to post his first tweet in almost three years.

"Tell your congressmen you want them to be pro-internet," he wrote, linking to a longer statement on Facebook.

He continued: "We can't let poorly thought out laws get in the way of the internet's development.

"Facebook opposes Sopa and Pipa, and we will continue to oppose any laws that will hurt the internet."

Here is the Wiki article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act

Read a trip report from North Korea >>here<< - Read a trip report from South Korea, China and Hong Kong >>here<<

Look what the American media makes some people believe:
Putin often threatens to strike US with nuclear weapons.

Offline cufflinks

  • Supporting Member
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 9949
  • Country: us
  • Gender: Male
  • Trips: 1-5
Re: "Protecting IP" act now TITLE I—COMBATING ONLINE PARASITES act!
« Reply #31 on: January 19, 2012, 07:14:47 PM »
Cuffy, I also support the freedom of the internet and made it clear to a congressman that I know as a friend my feelings. He was not sure anymore where he stood in the beginning of this year.

What I feel and correct me if I am wrong, this is very much a battle between old technology and new? Yes some of the rhetoric that masks itself in free speech is more we are discussing who earns what from how? AvHdB

As the old French proverb goes "follow le monet!"

As it goes in the USA Money Talks and BIG money Talks really BIG. The RIAA and MPAA are all about the money.  Did you know that any restaurant in the USA that plays mood music of any kind must pay the RIAA royalties and the RIAA then divides it among the artists (after their generous General and Administrative Costs of course).

I am in favor of our copyrights laws - I am not in favor of the RIAA and MPAA using our copyrights laws and system as their own private internet shakedown rackets to further enrich their government chartered Monopolies in support of their  censorship army of internet NAZIs!!!!

Artists, Authors and creatives should be free to market their original works across the global internet directly to their fans without the MPAA, RIAA and their international ilks wrapping their money grubbing tentacles around the net with the not so hidden agenda to eliminate independent artists and eradicate a free and open internet while consolidating their strangle hold on profits via their pervasive royalties system as in the Restaurant example above. 

Getty bloody damned images has been quietly buying up photographers "stock images libraries" and then sending out onerous legally threatening letters and huge bills to web site owners who thought we had open source clip art - WRONG.  We received a bill for one photo that our web dev swore was from a free clip art gallery - for over $600.00 - I immediately removed the photos and promptly sent a letter posting this onerous and legally questionable shakedown racket to our state's attorney general and they replied they are basically keeping a hairy eyeball out now for Getty Bloody Grubbing Images.

Think about this - it is if the MPAA and RIAA suddenly decided to send bills to every Auto and Truck owner with a radio for $500 a year for the privilege of listening to music in your vehicles - shhhh - second thought don't need to give the corrupt monopolistic buggers any more ideas.

Fortunately the backlash has been severe and the one industry we kick financial arse with is the internet - the Facebook IPO alone will result in billions of capital gains taxes for the Federal government and that is at the preferred Romney Rate of only 15% - so calmer heads are prevailing in DC and the MPAA and RIAA's attempt to cram SOPA and PIPA through under the cover of darkness has seemed to have blown up in their voracious swine royalty gorging faces.

Offline cufflinks

  • Supporting Member
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 9949
  • Country: us
  • Gender: Male
  • Trips: 1-5
Re: "Protecting IP" act now TITLE I—COMBATING ONLINE PARASITES act!
« Reply #32 on: January 21, 2012, 02:03:20 PM »
The long arm of US Law Enforcement:

http://techland.time.com/2012/01/20/u-s-internet-piracy-case-brings-new-zealand-arrests/

U.S. Internet Piracy Case Brings New Zealand Arrests

WELLINGTON, New Zealand (AP) — With 150 million registered users, about 50 million hits daily and endorsements from music superstars, Megaupload.com was among the world’s biggest file-sharing sites. Big enough, according to a U.S. indictment, that it earned founder Kim Dotcom $42 million last year alone.

The movie industry howled that the site was making money off pirated material. Though the company is based in Hong Kong and Dotcom was living in New Zealand, some of the alleged pirated content was hosted on leased servers in Virginia, and that was enough for U.S. prosecutors to act.

(MORE: Feds Shut Down Megaupload.com File-Sharing Website)

The site was shut down Thursday, and Dotcom and three Megaupload employees were arrested in New Zealand on U.S. accusations that they facilitated millions of illegal downloads of films, music and other content, costing copyright holders at least $500 million in lost revenue.

New Zealand Police also seized guns, artwork, more than $8 million in cash and luxury cars valued at nearly $5 million after serving 10 search warrants at several businesses and homes around the city of Auckland.

News of the shutdown seemed to bring retaliation from hackers who claimed credit for attacking the Justice Department’s website. Federal officials confirmed it was down for hours Thursday evening and that the disruption was being “treated as a malicious act.”

A loose affiliation of hackers known as “Anonymous” claimed credit for the attack. Also hacked was the site for the Motion Picture Association of America.

On Friday, New Zealand’s Fairfax Media reported that the four defendants stood together in an Auckland courtroom in the first step of extradition proceedings that could last a year or more.

Dotcom’s lawyer raised objections to a media request to take photographs and video, but then Dotcom spoke out from the dock, saying he didn’t mind photos or video “because we have nothing to hide.” The judge granted the media access, and ruled that the four would remain in custody until a second hearing Monday.

Dotcom, Megaupload’s former CEO and current chief innovation officer, is a resident of Hong Kong and New Zealand and a dual citizen of Finland and Germany who had his name legally changed. The 37-year-old was previously known as Kim Schmitz and Kim Tim Jim Vestor.

Two other German citizens and one Dutch citizen also were arrested and three other defendants – another German, a Slovakian and an Estonian – remain at large.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation, which defends free speech and digital rights online, said in a statement that the arrests set “a terrifying precedent. If the United States can seize a Dutch citizen in New Zealand over a copyright claim, what is next?”

Read more: http://techland.time.com/2012/01/20/u-s-internet-piracy-case-brings-new-zealand-arrests/#ixzz1k83PiGm5


Offline cufflinks

  • Supporting Member
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 9949
  • Country: us
  • Gender: Male
  • Trips: 1-5
Re: "Protecting IP" act now TITLE I—COMBATING ONLINE PARASITES act!
« Reply #33 on: February 06, 2012, 05:53:06 PM »
Looks like RIAA and MPAA not about to give up:

Is TPP Worse Than SOPA, PIPA & ACTA?
If secrecy and limited information is an indicator of worse, then yes it is

First there was SOPA, then there was PIPA. The Internet beat those back. Then along came ACTA inciting protests around the world. Up next is something far worse and far more secret – the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement.

For those that don’t know about TPP, which is probably a large majority of the population, it’s a treaty being devised by the U.S. with eight other countries in the Pacific including Peru, Chile, New Zealand, Australia, Singapore, Malaysia, Brunei Darussalem and Vietnam.

Full Article: http://www.webpronews.com/exclusive-sean-flynn-ip-2012-02


Online AvHdB

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 14933
  • Country: nl
  • Gender: Male
  • Spouses Country: Ukraine, Kiev
  • Status: Married
  • Trips: 20+
Re: "Protecting IP" act now TITLE I—COMBATING ONLINE PARASITES act!
« Reply #34 on: December 28, 2012, 06:49:53 PM »
Was trying to read an article in French, about a new meeting of the countries that are active and it seemed that Russia and China, two countries that have the most to fear from an open internet are trying to change the future of the how we communicate and how we pay for using the internet.

Any one have further information about this meeting. (I think it was in China a week ago)

“If you aren't in over your head, how do you know how tall you are?” T.S. Eliot

Offline cufflinks

  • Supporting Member
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 9949
  • Country: us
  • Gender: Male
  • Trips: 1-5
Re: "Protecting IP" act now TITLE I—COMBATING ONLINE PARASITES act!
« Reply #35 on: December 29, 2012, 11:40:10 AM »
Was trying to read an article in French, about a new meeting of the countries that are active and it seemed that Russia and China, two countries that have the most to fear from an open internet are trying to change the future of the how we communicate and how we pay for using the internet.

Any one have further information about this meeting. (I think it was in China a week ago)

Interesting Update from WebProNews:
 
Thursday, Dec 27, 2012

2012 was a dangerous year for the free Internet. Lawmakers and global stakeholders all took a shot at policing and regulating the Internet over the past year to no avail. That doesn't mean they've given up, and 2013 could prove disastrous if certain parties have their way.

To that end, it would be advantageous to look back on all the bills, treaties, etc that threatened the Internet in 2012. As they say, those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Internet freedom fighters will have to learn from tactics employed this year to recognize threats to a free Internet before they even emerge.

Were you concerned for the free Internet in 2012? Do you think next year will be worse or better? Let us know in the comments.

The first battle over the free Internet came in January as the much debated SOPA and PIPA came up for vote in Congress. The bills were designed to combat copyright infringement online, but the powers granted to the government to do so were sweeping and overly broad. SOPA in particular gave government the power to censor Web sites on the DNS level thereby removing them from general access to most users. Potential for abuse was high and many feared that the bill would be used to destroy innovation and protect legacy businesses that have yet to adapt to how the Internet does business.

Worryingly enough, it looked like both bills would actually see smooth sailing through both the Senate and the House. Then the Internet banded together and launched a blackout campaign that saw many popular sites like Wikipedia going dark to show people what a world with SOPA could potentially look like. The tactic worked as thousands of concerned citizens called their representatives telling them to vote no on SOPA and PIPA. The bills were finally taken off the table for good in October.

After the threat of SOPA and PIPA subsided, a new threat emerged. It had free Internet proponents even more concerned as it was as international treaty that sought to rewrite international law in favor of large corporate interests. The treaty was called the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, or ACTA for short, and it contained a number of worrying implications. The most concerning part of the treaty was that it would require ISPs around the world to "monitor and censor online communications." It was not only a threat to free speech on the Internet, but a major threat to online privacy as well.

After many parts of the treaty were leaked, citizens in countries across Europe took to the streets to protest. The protests worked as many countries refused to ratify the treaty and it was finally dealt a death blow in July as the European Parliament voted against it. The treaty was officially shelved, at least in Europe, earlier in December.

All the previous treaties and bills only sought to remove copyright infringing material from the Internet. It's bad, but it could be worse. Our friends in Washington took on that challenge when lawmakers introduced CISPA and CSA - two bills that aimed to tackle cybersecurity, but threatened to violate any privacy that U.S. citizens may have online. CISPA was definitely more worrisome as it had the support of those who opposed SOPA just a few months prior. The new bill garnered support because it made it easier for companies to share information with government bodies without having to worry about lawsuits from those whose information was shared without consent.

Like the previous bills thus far, both were killed before getting very far. CISPA was able to pass the House, but its Senate counterpart, CSA, was killed time and time again. The latest attempt for passage happened in mid-November with the bill being officially killed for the last time.

The biggest threat by far, however, happened earlier in December when delegates around the world met to discuss an update to a decades old telecommunications treaty. The ITU, or International Telecommunications Union, was met with skepticism as some felt less than scrupulous members of the global community would use the meeting as an opportunity to seize control of the Internet. They did not disappoint as China, Saudia Arabia and others introduced a last minute change to the treaty that would have given them more power over the Internet. The treaty was rejected by the U.S. and much of Europe though, and it was unceremoniously killed.

Do you think these were legitimate threats to the free Internet? Were Internet freedom proponents blowing the potential threat of these bills and treaties out of proportion? Let us know in the comments.

As the above illustrates, 2012 was one hell of a year for Internet censorship and regulations. All of it was defeated, however, and tired Internet freedom fighters can rest easy knowing that the Internet is no longer under attack, right? Wrong. 2013 is shaping up to be an even worse year for proposed Internet regulation as various treaties and bills from 2012 are sticking around into the new year while new treaties and bills will obviously be proposed in due time.

Speaking of relics from 2012, TPP is a prime example of a trade agreement that refuses to die. The Trans-Pacific Partnership is much like ACTA, but it seeks to establish better trade relations between the U.S. and Southeast Asia. It's similarities to ACTA don't end there, however, as the treaty is negotiated in complete secrecy without any input from the public or Congress. In fact, many members of Congress are lobbying to have the USTR make negotiations more transparent since they have the constitutional right of approving treaties.

So, where does TPP stand in 2013? It could go either way to be honest. We keep hearing tales of how the treaty is constantly on its last legs as Southeast Asian countries are starting to realize it's not good for their economy, but the secrecy in which it's being negotiated makes it hard to tell just how close it is to either death or ratification.

Another worrisome trade agreement to look out for in 2013 is CETA - the Canada-European Union Trade Agreement. It doesn't directly affect the U.S., but the treaty's passage could spell trouble for the free Internet around the world as the treaty contains much of the same language that made ACTA so horrible. If ratified, the treaty could be seen as proof that ACTA wasn't so bad and new attempts to ratify similar treaties could take hold around the world.

The last relic left over from 2012 is Clean IT - an European Commission project that seeks to censor the Internet in the name of protecting citizens from terrorism. The concern is that the project does little to actually stop terrorism and does everything in its power to use the Internet to monitor citizens in everything that they do. What's worse is that the project turns people into Internet vigilantes where they can submit content that they feel is terroristic or otherwise "bad" to have it removed and those who fail to report any "bad" material would be punished.

As you can see, 2013 is already looking pretty grim and these are just the leftovers from 2012. There's bound to be more laws, treaties and projects introduced in 2013 that will make SOPA, ACTA and others look like bastions of Internet freedom in comparison.

The free Internet has been a major force of change in the world, and some clearly don't like that whether they be a legacy business that refuses to adapt or a world power that wants to subjugate its citizens even in the digital world. Either way, the Internet has proven to be resilient to any threats against it thus far and 2013 may prove to be its biggest test yet. It will be fascinating to see how the Internet and those who use it respond.


 

 

Registration