• Members of the previous forum can retrieve their temporary password here, (login and check your PM).

STOP INTERNET CENSORSHIP

Migrated topic.
a1pha

a1pha

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Donator
Moderator
Dear Internet Users:

Our friends over in the House and Senate are working very hard to write Internet censorship into Law. While explicitly targeting pirates, the language could be applied to sites like the DMT-Nexus. These bills aim to stop websites “dedicated to infringing activities.” Please take a moment to consider the following proposed legislation and act if you feel appropriate. Thank you.

-a1pha

the_worst_thing_about_censorship-4ea871c-intro.jpg

-----
US SENATE
PROTECT-IP

Revised 'Net censorship bill requires search engines to block sites, too
Surprise! After months in the oven, the soon-to-be-released new version of a major US Internet censorship bill didn't shrink in scope—it got much broader. Under the new proposal, search engines, Internet providers, credit card companies, and ad networks would all have cut off access to foreign "rogue sites"—and such court orders would not be limited to the government. Private rightsholders could go to court and target foreign domains, too.

As for sites which simply change their domain name slightly after being targeted, the new bill will let the government and private parties bring quick action against each new variation.

Get ready for the "PROTECT IP Act."
Click to expand...

The "PROTECT IP" Act: COICA Redux
This means that IP owners as well as the government can seek injunctions against websites "dedicated to infringing activities" in addition to court orders against third parties providing services to those sites.
Click to expand...

The More Things Change...: PROTECT IP Updates
The current amendment includes an especially unfortunate edit that the Senate Judiciary Committee failed to highlight in a summary of changes. PIPA enables both the Attorney General and private parties to bring cases against websites “dedicated to infringing activities.” Under the first version of the bill, if a plaintiff “through due diligence” couldn’t find someone within the United States to sue, the Attorney General but not a private litigant was allowed to pursue a claim directly against the domain name of the site. This kind of action is called in rem and refers to a court’s power to issue orders against property without involvement of the owner or other person related to the property. After yesterday's amendments, PIPA allows private litigants to sue in rem as well. As a general matter, the ability to get court orders against an entire website without the site owner’s prior knowledge, much less ability to protest, in and of itself raises concerns about due process. It also raises First Amendment concerns given that the actions target entire websites, including lawful speech on those sites. Extending this power to private parties increases the likelihood that it will be abused.
Click to expand...



-----
US HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
SOPA

Disastrous IP Legislation Is Back – And It’s Worse than Ever
As with its Senate-side evil sister, PROTECT-IP, SOPA would require service providers to “disappear” certain websites, endangering Internet security and sending a troubling message to the world: it’s okay to interfere with the Internet, even effectively blacklisting entire domains, as long as you do it in the name of IP enforcement. Of course blacklisting entire domains can mean turning off thousands of underlying websites that may have done nothing wrong. And in what has to be an ironic touch, the very first clause of SOPA states that it shall not be “construed to impose a prior restraint on free speech.” As if that little recitation could prevent the obvious constitutional problem in what the statute actually does.
Click to expand...

House takes Senate's bad Internet censorship bill, tries making it worse
It's the world envisioned by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) in today's introduction of the Stop Online Piracy Act in the US House of Representatives. This isn't some off-the-wall piece of legislation with no chance of passing, either; it's the House equivalent to the Senate's PROTECT IP Act, which would officially bring Internet censorship to the US as a matter of law.
Click to expand...

SOPA: US House of Reps copyright bill proposes national censorship, attacks on hosting services, Twitter, YouTube
PROTECT-IP is a US Senate bill that establishes a draconian censorship and surveillance regime in America in the name of protecting copyright. Its House version, SOPA, has just been introduced, and it's even worse than PROTECT-IP. Much, much worse:
Click to expand...



-----
What can I do?

The Internet Blacklist Legislation– known as PROTECT IP Act in the Senate and Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the House - is a threatening sequel to last year's COICA Internet censorship bill. Like its predecessor, this legislation invites Internet security risks, threatens online speech, and hampers Internet innovation. Urge your members of Congress to reject this Internet blacklist campaign in both its forms!
Click to expand...

 
Those american f''ks... Again they're at it, doing everything to prevent people from being free.

Again I'm saying it, the land of the free my ass...
 
I just sent them my letter. I say we try and nudge the teaparty's attention in the direction of this issue, and hope they get all riled up and start writing, phoning and making our senator's lives an even bigger hell. If they can be lead to interpret it as a sort of danger to their online communication, then maybe they'll just take off and run with this thing.
 
thank you very much for posting this her alpha. heard about this earlier in the news today, and this is absolutely disgusting. this is how these laws start, and then gradually grow until all our rights are slowly taken away from us. fuck em *signed*
 
smokerx said:
I understand this is only for US citizens or residents right ? Or can it be signed from outside US as well ?
Click to expand...
Anyone can write a congressman/senator. The link above simply locates who you need to contact and auto-generates a message on your behalf.

However, most will listen to someone in their district while dismissing the non-voters abroad.
 
Pandora said:
As I understand it Traveler (of course) saw this coming a couple/few months ago and that's why Nexus is now .me rather than .com.
Click to expand...
eff said:
As for sites which simply change their domain name slightly after being targeted, the new bill will let the government and private parties bring quick action against each new variation.
Click to expand...
Maybe I'm reading it wrong?
 
a1pha said:
Pandora said:
As I understand it Traveler (of course) saw this coming a couple/few months ago and that's why Nexus is now .me rather than .com.
Click to expand...
eff said:
As for sites which simply change their domain name slightly after being targeted, the new bill will let the government and private parties bring quick action against each new variation.
Click to expand...
Maybe I'm reading it wrong?
Click to expand...

I think what the sites they were referring to were sites that once the law was in place, had they been black listed or prosecuted or whatever it is they do, that if the site then changed their domain name, they would have efficient means of dealing with them, but I don't think they were referring to sites that may have had the foresight to fix things up before hand. Why is it though that changing it to .me from .com protects the nexus from the law?
 
Global said:
If they can be lead to interpret it as a sort of danger to their online communication, then maybe they'll just take off and run with this thing.
Click to expand...

True, those corrupt and messed up politicians definately wouldn't want that to happen.
 
Signed and shared. I gave my own personal subject and message instead of using the defaults.

Soon they will realize that We The People have more power than they've given us credit for.
 
And a suggestion for the title, if I may, a1pha...

Internet Freedom at risk - learn more here

I try to stay on top of this kinda stuff and I had no idea what sopa and all that stuff was.
 
So, does this mean, in practice, that when you tried to go to a blacklisted site, you'd get a "404" page? Would the site owner have to cease-and-desist, or would there just be no pointers to the site? (the equivalent of an unlisted phone number.)

Perhaps we can consider whether there might be a way to make the site private (i.e., you can't look at anything but the front page withouty a password) to decrease the possibility of repressive-types running across something here in passing or through casual googling which offends them -- while still protecting access for members. I can't quite figure out a good way to do that second part, but there's so many brilliant people here ..

I understand that the optimal angle of approach is to prevent the legislation from passing in the first place, but it's always good to have a contingency plan.
 
Global said:
Why is it though that changing it to .me from .com protects the nexus from the law?
Click to expand...
The .com Top Level Domain (TLD) is USA property. So the USA thinks that if you are using one of their TLD's for 'copyright infringement' they can prosecute you all over the world.

The .me TLD is not USA property so they could not follow that road to prosecute you.


Kind regards,

The Traveler
 
Tea Party wouldn't care cause they support these infringements of our rights. Cause if your not doing something they like, then it and you must be wrong. As in why would you not grant the policeman a look in your vehicle, you must be hiding something. Well po-po man you remember that constitution thing?? PO-PO: yeah it sounds familiar, but it was way to long and the words way to small, and besides readin's for faggots. Now bend over and spread 'em.:twisted:
 
COMMENCEMENT OF AN ACTION.—
The Attorney General may commence an in personam action against— (A) a registrant of a nondomestic domain name used by an Internet site dedicated to in-fringing activities; or (B) an owner or operator of an Internet site dedicated to infringing activities accessed through a nondomestic domain name.
Click to expand...


Really? exactly how does our government expect to prosecute a nondomestic domain name if said person is a non US resident not living in this country?

You know what. Let them pass it. It's not like it's going to work any way. I mean seriously it will just force people to build underground web browsers an dIP caches.

The web as we know it is not going any where unless the powers that be turn of the root servers. This isn't going to happen.

Our government doesn't have the resources to police the streets much less the entire internet.

Point blank. the Term Intellectual property doesn't even make sense. Information in this day and age will be free. You can keep a secret, but if you share it with others it is no longer yours. I don't care what law's man tries to erect to make it so. Once you tell me a piece of information to another person they then also 'possess' that piece of information.

Use that information to produce something tangible and I'll grant someone the fact that they then possess a piece of property and should have some rights to it. An idea? A process? A procedure? No. Those are ideas and belong to anyone that learns of them.
 
Back
Top Bottom