• Hey Trainers! Be sure to check out Corsola Beach, our newest section on the forums, in partnership with our friends at Corsola Cove! At the Beach, you can discuss the competitive side of the games, post your favorite Pokemon memes, and connect with other Pokemon creators!
  • Due to the recent changes with Twitter's API, it is no longer possible for Bulbagarden forum users to login via their Twitter account. If you signed up to Bulbagarden via Twitter and do not have another way to login, please contact us here with your Twitter username so that we can get you sorted.

US Congress's Internet Censorship Bill

Laterose said:
In response to Mijz's comic, while it's clever, I respectfully disagree with the first panel. There is always a reason to fear government censorship, regardless or whether you're guilty or not.
Click to expand...

I believe that the point of the comic was this:

The government tells people that they have no reason to fear government censorship if they are doing nothing wrong.
The people in turn tell the government that they should not fear freedom of speech (no government censorship) if THEY are doing nothing wrong.

As a person who regularly videotapes concerts with the permission of the bands, or the permission of the people who set the show up, I am totally against a bill such as this. I regularly put up videos that I have taped with permission on YouTube, and I could be branded as a criminal if a record label decides to disagree with the permission that I was granted by the musicians who actually did the work.
 
Laterose said:
Notice that in the bill it says that "foreign infringing sites" directed at US users can be shut down in the same way.
Click to expand...

Thought I'd pop in and say this: The bill acknowledges that the US has no legal power to actually shut down what they call foreign infringing sites. They will always have to depend on international laws for that.

While Section 102 does provide for actions taken against foreign infringing sites, none of these actions can actually be taken in personam (against the registrant or operator of the website; for example, a fine or imprisonment) unless the registrant or operator is already under the jurisdiction of the US (102(b)(2)).

Instead, all of them are in rem (against the website itself). They would have the power to cut off, or force ISPs to cut off, all American access to said sites (Sections 102(c)(2)(A) and 102(c)(2)(B)), and prevent American services from providing support, financial or otherwise (102(c)(2)(C) and (D)), to said sites, effectively "shutting them down" in the United States.

[Don't take my word completely for this; get professional legal advice if you really want to know how things will go down.]

And like SC said, this means no potentially no more game walkthroughs, no more music, and maybe even no more machinima, which would make me a sad panda.
Click to expand...

At least not in the US. ;-)

But, if this bill doesn't end up going through because of its absolutely astronomical opposition, at least a few more people will be educated in copyright law. XD
Click to expand...

For sure. I definitely read more on the actual laws that are in effect. Also, why "at least"? That connotation implies that the bill not going through is a bad thing.

If you want to know more about my citations, here is the copy of the bill that I'm reading from: Bill Text - 112th Congress (2011-2012) - THOMAS (Library of Congress)
 
@Smuglord - the issue on an international stage is that all of those things that SC pointed out would be gone from the internet as a whole for some period of time. As I stated earlier, consider the fact that the websites you see those videos / music on (Youtube, Google Video, Megavideo etc.) are all American. Meaning they have to comply with US law, which in this case prevents them from hosting LPs, walkthroughs, non-copyrighted music, machinima etc.

Now it is correct that they won't be able to shut down international sites because that would be a violation of international law. The issue is that all of the big sites aren't international. They're American based.

The biggest issue is that search engines won't be allowed to list blacklisted sites. And what's the biggest search engine by far in the world? Google. And we all know that Google is a US company. So you wouldn't be able to find your replacements for Youtube even if they do exist because they won't be listed on google. And the other search engines? Bing, Yahoo, AOL search, whatever. All American.

The point being that if America's internet gets censored, the entire world's internet gets censored. At least until the global market place can support a fraction of the infrastructure that's currently located in Silicon Valley, California.
 
Hide in Plain Sight said:
@Smuglord - the issue on an international stage is that all of those things that SC pointed out would be gone from the internet as a whole for some period of time. As I stated earlier, consider the fact that the websites you see those videos / music on (Youtube, Google Video, Megavideo etc.) are all American. Meaning they have to comply with US law, which in this case prevents them from hosting LPs, walkthroughs, non-copyrighted music, machinima etc.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I know that those sites are all American. But there are plenty of non-American sites to take their place. Once those start getting more recognition, the sudden influx of users will force (and entice) them to expand their services, making the gated American sites less desirable. They may not have as much capital, but Google wasn't built in a day.

Now it is correct that they won't be able to shut down international sites because that would be a violation of international law. The issue is that all of the big sites aren't international. They're American based.
Click to expand...

That is true. I suppose, then, that the other countries will start rapidly expanding their infrastructure as a result, to try to move away from America. (Oh sure, they may try to prop America back up for a little while, but it's a hopeless venture, and they'll realize it eventually.) If not, I know what my project is going to be during the 4.8 years I have left at university.

The biggest issue is that search engines won't be allowed to list blacklisted sites. And what's the biggest search engine by far in the world? Google. And we all know that Google is a US company. So you wouldn't be able to find your replacements for Youtube even if they do exist because they won't be listed on google. And the other search engines? Bing, Yahoo, AOL search, whatever. All American.
Click to expand...

You obviously haven't heard of Baidu. Although that has other censorship issues (it's in China, after all), it doesn't get restricted by American policies. Too bad it's in Chinese, I suppose.

Before this act hypothetically passes, do a Google search (ironic, I know) for "international search engines". Stock up on a few of those, because unless the US blocks those as well, they will still give results that you want to know.

The point being that if America's internet gets censored, the entire world's internet gets censored. At least until the global market place can support a fraction of the infrastructure that's currently located in Silicon Valley, California.
Click to expand...

That's a good point. Guess we'll just have to take up that challenge, won't we?

If the US gets cut off, it'll force the remaining Internet users to actually learn a bit more about the networks that they're using, and operate on a more decentralized network. The end result is that many people will be more educated on networks, and such a thing will not be able to happen again (or at least will not be as devastating if it does).

And for the people who don't want to learn, they're probably just consumers anyway. This bill does not affect them in the slightest (cf. SmearglePaints) unless they're consumption pirates, which is what the bill is said to target. The flaw in Congress' reasoning is that they (perhaps in lieu of the RIAA/MPAA) believe every Internet user (that's not a business) should be a pure consumer. (This is the reason why residential Internet access usually has download speeds 5, 10, or even 25 times faster than upload speeds.) As we've seen, that's simply not the case (which is why Verizon FiOS now offers symmetric Internet connections).
 
Last edited:
So much for Made in America....Trillons of dollars lost to this Act...Popular web sites like google and Facebook to be shutdown...Heck...I dont blame the Occupy Wall Street for getting all upset...I guess I better back up everything I have on here just in case that Act becomes law...At least this web site is "Made in America" right?...Im just wondering....

Im going the send a letter to the President of the United States to see what he thinks about this and ask him about if Congress is crazy or not...Hmmmm...I have a idea,ill tell him to suport the act so people around the world will be pissed at the US and those Hollewood[spelled that wrong on perpous]people...A.K.A.Rich people....This act is just taking Copyright Infriengment wayyyy to far!!!!
http://americancensorship.org/
 
I wasn't going to say much, as I felt it would anything I would have to say would just be a retread of existing opinions, but I still feel like speaking up.
That this is being overseen by the same congress that was convinced to officially rule pizza to be a vegetable is a sad, sad sign.
The two biggest proponents of this bill are the same companies that attempted to ban nearly every major technological advancement in the storage of information under the pretense of it being a threat to their business. They have repeatedly set out to cause economic and industrial stagnation for the sake of an economy in which they can benefit. This differs only in its magnitude--it would dismantle about twenty years of technological innovation and reconstruct it in such a way that the only companies who can turn a profit are the ones who have been all along. The ones who aren't fighting this bill tooth and nail, that is.
Perhaps the MAFIAA are not satisfied with simply believing they have complete control and have set out to make it so they are? That's all I can get from this. And simply put? God help us all if they do.
If this grotesque coalescence of stupidity and corruption ever does get the green light, I'm considering expatriation, or at least the mother of all proxies.
 
Last edited:
I already contacted by Congressmen, but just incase, I was sure to download a IP Blocking program and a proxy internet add-on attached to the program so that they cant block me, stop me, or trace me. I suggest many people do the same. I also have a secret fear this may be the beginning of 2012.
 
i don't think that this bill will be passed. it goes way against the constitution. where's the judicial branch when you need it? honestly. however, if it is passed, i may as well pack my bags and move to canada.

and whoa, wait, congress voted that pizza is a vegetable? that's just sad. i feel like this is proof that america itself is falling apart. where has intellect gone?
 
I, for one, oppose this bill. The implications are just too severe if not dealt with properly. The Internet is a great place. I find it fascinating that it's affected society and changed it (for better and for worse) as much as it has. Giving this much power to corporations... just plain wouldn't be good.
 
Copyright revenues don't go to the small artists we all want to support, by the way. They go to the corporations that represent them.

So if your issue with internet freedom is the poor abused artist, don't support bills like this.

Instead, encourage your artist friends to become independent, to receive their revenue for their talents straight into their own pockets. There are many sites that help publish music or books or art or even videogames on your own, and we should all use that kind of services more often.

Hide in Plain Sight said:
The point being that if America's internet gets censored, the entire world's internet gets censored.
Click to expand...

Theoretically untrue; that's why we have geographic site filtering. In practice, however...
 
Kayi-chan said:
Copyright revenues don't go to the small artists we all want to support, by the way. They go to the corporations that represent them.

So if your issue with internet freedom is the poor abused artist, don't support bills like this.

Instead, encourage your artist friends to become independent, to receive their revenue for their talents straight into their own pockets. There are many sites that help publish music or books or art or even videogames on your own, and we should all use that kind of services more often.
Click to expand...

Here is something interesting to read on the topic of how artists get screwed by the major labels, written by Steve Albini, a musician and a recorder/producer who has known many people in the alternative rock business from the 80's through today.
http://www.negativland.com/albini.html

Warning: Contains some profanity.
 
Kayi-chan said:
Copyright revenues don't go to the small artists we all want to support, by the way. They go to the corporations that represent them.

So if your issue with internet freedom is the poor abused artist, don't support bills like this.

Instead, encourage your artist friends to become independent, to receive their revenue for their talents straight into their own pockets. There are many sites that help publish music or books or art or even videogames on your own, and we should all use that kind of services more often.
Click to expand...

Here is something interesting to read on the topic of how artists get screwed by the major labels, written by Steve Albini, a musician and a recorder/producer who has known many people in the alternative rock business from the 80's through today. If you want to skip the reading (I suggest reading it all though), you can scroll down toward the bottom and read the numbers and see where the money goes.
The Problem With Music

Warning: Contains some profanity.
 
Last edited:
I like how everybody's chalking this up to be stupidity and general lobbyist greed—although with how extreme things have gotten, I have to admit that it's losing its entertainment value. Woe.
 
Please note: The thread is from 12 years ago.
Please take the age of this thread into consideration in writing your reply. Depending on what exactly you wanted to say, you may want to consider if it would be better to post a new thread instead.
Back
Top Bottom