Discussion: Online Piracy, Net Neutrality, Killswitch, and Other Internet Issues

[The Squirrel]

Wow, my guy actually voted no. Way to go.

 

[craigdbfan]

As did mine.

But is this bill really all that bad? I mean Google doesn't seem to have a problem with this bill and they absolutely dreaded SOPA & PIPA. Clearly there's a difference between CISPA and those two if Wikipedia, Google and the like aren't upset with this bill...

 

[wiegeabo]

Microsoft just pulled it's support for CISPA citing privacy concerns.

And this little bit is quite interesting:

What makes CISPA so controversial is a section saying that, "notwithstanding any other provision of law," companies may share information with Homeland Security, the IRS, the NSA, or other agencies. By including the word "notwithstanding," CISPA's drafters intended to make their legislation trump all existing federal and state laws, including ones dealing with wiretaps, educational records, medical privacy, and more.'"

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

As did mine.

But is this bill really all that bad? I mean Google doesn't seem to have a problem with this bill and they absolutely dreaded SOPA & PIPA. Clearly there's a difference between CISPA and those two if Wikipedia, Google and the like aren't upset with this bill...

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2012/04/27/472990/need-to-know-cispa/

 

[craigdbfan]

I don't like getting my information from bullet points. I'd suggest actually taking a look at the bill itself.

I'm mostly interested in the reasons Silicon Valley hasn't said anything about this bill. Well I found my information and just as I thought when comparing CISPA to the security portions of SOPA it isn't anywhere near as threatening as the formerly proposed bills.

We put in calls about the vote to some of our Silicon Valley sources and the response has been nothing but crickets. Silence from Google. Ditto from Facebook. Ditto from Apple (although tight-lipped Apple would probably respond with a “no comment” to news of a meteor hitting Cupertino).

So what gives? Why are these companies ducking the fight? Well, for starters, the two laws are very different: among other things, SOPA would have turned them into copyright cops, while CISPA simply gives them the option to pass on data if they choose.

Secondly, cyber-attacks are serious stuff for such companies. For just one example, read Stephen Levy’s In the Plex description of how the Chinese government broke into Google’s computers and stole not only code, but the Gmail messages of political dissidents. China is plundering US tech secrets on a regular basis and it’s understandable that the firms would welcome new tools to help them fight back.

Either way the White House threatened to veto this bill and the senate majority are Democrats so this thing isn't going to get passed.

Just compare the reaction from Silicon Valley when SOPA and PIPA were proposed as opposed to this. There's literally been no outcry. That to me shows this bill is hardly anything to worry about.

 

[wiegeabo]

Go ahead and check out the bullet points. Each one has a link to an article as a source.

 

[craigdbfan]

No, thanks man. I'd rather take a look at the bill in question myself and from what I've read it doesn't seem anywhere near as bad as SOPA. If it were you can bet Silicon Valley would be far more perturbed by this bill.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.R.3523:

Either way it's doubtful this will make it beyond the senate.

 

[Darthphere]

Well honestly, why would Silicon Valley be worried about this. SOPA and PIPA was a threat to them, CISPA by all accounts is a threat to OUR privacy if and when it would be abused. All they have to do is hand over information. Unlike with PIPA and SOPA, they would be taking the hit if their sites were shut down.

Of course I can be misreading things and this is the best thing since sliced bread.

 

[Donut]

The Pirate Bay must be blocked by UK ISPs, court rules

The Swedish website hosts links to download mostly pirated free music and video.

Sky, Everything Everywhere, TalkTalk, O2 and Virgin Media must all prevent their users from accessing the site.

"Sites like The Pirate Bay destroy jobs in the UK and undermine investment in new British artists," the British Phonographic Industry (BPI) said.

A sixth ISP, BT, requested "a few more weeks" to consider their position on blocking the site.

BPI's chief executive Geoff Taylor said: "The High Court has confirmed that The Pirate Bay infringes copyright on a massive scale.

"Its operators line their pockets by commercially exploiting music and other creative works without paying a penny to the people who created them.

"This is wrong - musicians, sound engineers and video editors deserve to be paid for their work just like everyone else."
'Compelling alternatives'

In November 2011, the BPI asked the group of ISPs to voluntarily block access to the site.

The request followed a court order to block Newzbin 2, a site also offering links to download pirated material.

The ISPs said they would not block the site unless a court order was made, as is now the case.

Virgin Media told the BBC it will now comply with the request, but warned such measures are, in the long term, only part of the solution.

"As a responsible ISP, Virgin Media complies with court orders addressed to the company but strongly believes that changing consumer behaviour to tackle copyright infringement also needs compelling legal alternatives, such as our agreement with Spotify, to give consumers access to great content at the right price."

The Pirate Bay was launched in 2003 by a group of friends from Sweden and rapidly became one of the most famous file-sharing sites on the web.

It allows users to search for and access copyrighted content including movies, games and TV shows.

No 'extra pennies'

In April 2009, the Swedish courts found the four founders of the site guilty of helping people circumvent copyright controls.

The ruling was upheld after an appeal in 2010, but the site continues to function.

The Pirate Party UK, a spin-off from the political movement started in Sweden that backs copyright reform, said this latest move will "not put any extra pennies into the pockets of artists".

"Unfortunately, the move to order blocking on The Pirate Bay comes as no surprise," party leader Loz Kaye told the BBC.

"The truth is that we are on a slippery slope towards internet censorship here in the United Kingdom."

'Pointless and dangerous'

Critics of site-blocking argue that such measures are ineffective as they can be circumvented using proxy servers and other techniques.

However, one analyst told the BBC that it was still worthwhile to take court action as it underlines the illegal nature of sites such as The Pirate Bay.

"I know it's fashionable to say 'oh, it just won't work', but we should keep trying," said Mark Little, principal analyst at Ovum.

"We should keep blocking them - they are stealing music illegally.

"The biggest culprits of this, really, are the younger demographic who just haven't been convinced that doing this is somehow morally uncomfortable.

"The principle that downloading music illegally is a bad thing to do has not been reinforced by schools or parents."

But Jim Killock, executive director of the Open Rights Group, called the move "pointless and dangerous".

"It will fuel calls for further, wider and even more drastic calls for internet censorship of many kinds, from pornography to extremism," he said.

"Internet censorship is growing in scope and becoming easier. Yet it never has the effect desired. It simply turns criminals into heroes."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17894176

I wonder if this will have any effects in the U.S. ?

 

[wiegeabo]

Mozilla has come out against CISPA, becoming the first major tech company to do so (Google hasn't sided one way or the other).

http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygre...ilicon-valleys-silence-on-cybersecurity-bill/

 

[8wid]

SOPA like legislation is eventually going to be passed by the US Federal government, one might as well accept that the true freedom of the Internet just simply isn't going to last more than a decade or two. The powerful elite are too interested in expanding control for it to be any other way.

 

[Hawkingbird]

Could someone please explain SOPA to me? I haven't seen it effect anything yet..

 

[enterthemadness]

Could someone please explain SOPA to me? I haven't seen it effect anything yet..

That's because SOPA and PIPA died. Now there's CISPA. Silly Congress...

 

[Thundercrack85]

Could someone please explain SOPA to me? I haven't seen it effect anything yet..

Basically it was designed to destroy the internet as we know it. Wikipedia told people what it was, and the bill lost almost all its support overnight due to the largest public outcry in recent legislative history. In other words, it didn't work out.

Surprised you missed it.

 

[Hawkingbird]

I knew about it but not accurately.

 

[dnno1]

Pirate Bay Down After DDoS Attack

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/16/pirate-bay-down-ddos-attack_n_1521828.html


The speculation from sites like Torrent Freak and ZDNe is that Anonymous shut them down after TPB dissed them for taking down Virgin Media's website.

 

[dnno1]

Comcast Fee: Internet Service Provider To Start Charging Heavy Downloaders Extra

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/17/comcast-fee-download_n_1524838.html

 

[chamber-music]

Looks like Oron is the next file hosting to bite the dust.

 

[chamber-music]

Acta: Controversial anti-piracy agreement rejected by EU

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18704192

Yes!

 

[wiegeabo]

Anti-piracy Group Fined For Using Song Without Permission

"Oh, the irony. A musicians' rights group in the Netherlands was fined this week for stealing music from a client , using it without his permission and failing to pay royalties. Music royalty collection agency Buma/Stemra approached Dutch musician Melchior Rietveldt in 2006 and asked him to create a composition that would be used in an anti-piracy advertisement, which the group said would be shown exclusively at a local film festival. One year later, Rietveldt purchased a Harry Potter DVD only to find that his piece was being used on DVDs around the world without his permission ..."

Who watches the Watchmen?

 

[wiegeabo]

RIAA Admits SOPA Wouldn't Have Stopped Piracy

"One of the arguments against the now-dormant SOPA legislation was that, in addition to eroding Internet freedom, it would also be ineffective in stopping music piracy. Well, according to a leaked report, the RIAA agrees with the latter argument . The proposed laws would 'not likely to have been an effective tool for music,' according to the report. Another interesting revelation is that, despite the buzz and outrage over P2P sharing, most digital music piracy takes place via sneakernet, with music moving among young people on hard drives and ripped CDs."

 

[enterthemadness]

http://www.freedomworks.org/blog/jborowski/obama-to-issue-disastrouscybersecurity-executive-o


NO, NO, NO.

 

[The Squirrel]

ISPs to Begin Monitoring Illicit File Sharing

The nation’s major internet service providers by year’s end will institute a so-called six-strikes plan, the “Copyright Alert System” initiative backed by the Obama administration and pushed by Hollywood and the major record labels to disrupt and possibly terminate internet access for online copyright scofflaws.

 

[dnno1]

The White House response to a petition to veto the SOPA:

Official White House Response to Stop the E-PARASITE Act. and 1 other petition
Combating Online Piracy while Protecting an Open and Innovative Internet

By Victoria Espinel, Aneesh Chopra, and Howard Schmidt
Thanks for taking the time to sign this petition. Both your words and actions illustrate the importance of maintaining an open and democratic Internet.
Right now, Congress is debating a few pieces of legislation concerning the very real issue of online piracy, including the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), the PROTECT IP Act and the Online Protection and Digital ENforcement Act (OPEN). We want to take this opportunity to tell you what the Administration will support—and what we will not support. Any effective legislation should reflect a wide range of stakeholders, including everyone from content creators to the engineers that build and maintain the infrastructure of the Internet.
While we believe that online piracy by foreign websites is a serious problem that requires a serious legislative response, we will not support legislation that reduces freedom of expression, increases cybersecurity risk, or undermines the dynamic, innovative global Internet.
Any effort to combat online piracy must guard against the risk of online censorship of lawful activity and must not inhibit innovation by our dynamic businesses large and small. Across the globe, the openness of the Internet is increasingly central to innovation in business, government, and society and it must be protected. To minimize this risk, new legislation must be narrowly targeted only at sites beyond the reach of current U.S. law, cover activity clearly prohibited under existing U.S. laws, and be effectively tailored, with strong due process and focused on criminal activity. Any provision covering Internet intermediaries such as online advertising networks, payment processors, or search engines must be transparent and designed to prevent overly broad private rights of action that could encourage unjustified litigation that could discourage startup businesses and innovative firms from growing.
We must avoid creating new cybersecurity risks or disrupting the underlying architecture of the Internet. Proposed laws must not tamper with the technical architecture of the Internet through manipulation of the Domain Name System (DNS), a foundation of Internet security. Our analysis of the DNS filtering provisions in some proposed legislation suggests that they pose a real risk to cybersecurity and yet leave contraband goods and services accessible online. We must avoid legislation that drives users to dangerous, unreliable DNS servers and puts next-generation security policies, such as the deployment of DNSSEC, at risk.
Let us be clear—online piracy is a real problem that harms the American economy, and threatens jobs for significant numbers of middle class workers and hurts some of our nation's most creative and innovative companies and entrepreneurs. It harms everyone from struggling artists to production crews, and from startup social media companies to large movie studios. While we are strongly committed to the vigorous enforcement of intellectual property rights, existing tools are not strong enough to root out the worst online pirates beyond our borders. That is why the Administration calls on all sides to work together to pass sound legislation this year that provides prosecutors and rights holders new legal tools to combat online piracy originating beyond U.S. borders while staying true to the principles outlined above in this response. We should never let criminals hide behind a hollow embrace of legitimate American values.
This is not just a matter for legislation. We expect and encourage all private parties, including both content creators and Internet platform providers working together, to adopt voluntary measures and best practices to reduce online piracy.
So, rather than just look at how legislation can be stopped, ask yourself: Where do we go from here? Don’t limit your opinion to what’s the wrong thing to do, ask yourself what’s right. Already, many of members of Congress are asking for public input around the issue. We are paying close attention to those opportunities, as well as to public input to the Administration. The organizer of this petition and a random sample of the signers will be invited to a conference call to discuss this issue further with Administration officials and soon after that, we will host an online event to get more input and answer your questions. Details on that will follow in the coming days.
Washington needs to hear your best ideas about how to clamp down on rogue websites and other criminals who make money off the creative efforts of American artists and rights holders. We should all be committed to working with all interested constituencies to develop new legal tools to protect global intellectual property rights without jeopardizing the openness of the Internet. Our hope is that you will bring enthusiasm and know-how to this important challenge.
Moving forward, we will continue to work with Congress on a bipartisan basis on legislation that provides new tools needed in the global fight against piracy and counterfeiting, while vigorously defending an open Internet based on the values of free expression, privacy, security and innovation. Again, thank you for taking the time to participate in this important process. We hope you’ll continue to be part of it.

----------------------------------------
Victoria Espinel is Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator at Office of Management and Budget
Aneesh Chopra is the U.S. Chief Technology Officer and Assistant to the President and Associate Director for Technology at the Office of Science and Technology Policy
Howard Schmidt is Special Assistant to the President and Cybersecurity Coordinator for National Security Staff

 

[Destructus86]

ISPs to Begin Monitoring Illicit File Sharing

hmm, I don't know...I don't see that as so bad...