A bill giving the government the power to shut down Web sites that host materials that infringe copyright is making its way quietly through the lame-duck session of Congress, raising the ire of free-speech groups and prompting a group of academics to lobby against the effort.
The Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA) was introduced in Congress this fall by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT). It would grant the federal government the power to block access to any Web domain that is found to host copyrighted material without permission.
Critics say the bill is both a giveaway to the movie and recording industries and a step towards widespread and unaccountable censorship of the Internet.
Opponents note that the powers given the government under the bill are very broad. Because the bill targets domain names and not specific materials, an entire Web site can be shut down. So for example, if the US determines that there are copyright-infringing materials on YouTube, it could theoretically block access to all of YouTube, whether or not particular material being accessed infringes copyright.
If this passes (and give me a good reason why it won’t), then you know what’s next — China-style censorship for content the government doesn’t like.
There’s a lot of crazy bills in Congress at any given time. By this I mean daily. For instance, there might be a bill there from me to ban craziest nutballs like some here from continuing to persuade even crazier nutballs like me from owing a gun.
That and a bill to Ban Boobs, Pedro and myself from DU
If websites are outlawed, then only outlaws will have websites. I don’t think the DNS filter will work, a DNS can be anything anywhere and can certainly be outside the jurisdiction of the US. If kiddie pr0n, bomb instructions, or nekkid pictures aren’t enough to justify Big Brotherfication of the internet then there’s always Mickey’s Law (copyright).
We should shut the entire net down to protect the children.
I agree this is very bad.
Unfortunately, Congress is now campaigning for 2012 so it may pass esp if attached to some defense contractor pork called the “support our troops bill”.
I expect Pres. Obama to veto it.
Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT). Remember this name, he is stealing your culture. Notice that he is a Democrat.
Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah). Remember this name, he is stealing your culture. Notice that he is a republican.
President Barack Obama (D). Remember this name, he is stealing your culture. Notice that he is a Democrat.
The list goes on … just like Sally, just like Sue, there aint no difference between the two
Remember downloading something IS NOT ILLEGAL(yet)! No matter how much “they” tell you it is, it isn’t (yet). Providing copyrighted material you don’t own is illegal, however extended copyrights, 95/120 years or life plus 70 years, is theft of your culture!
Copyright is an agreement between society and creators granting a temporary protected monopoly for the benefit of the creators, and then after a reasonable period of time reverts to public domain allowing society to benefit as a whole for providing this protection.
This isn’t happening.
Corrupt politicians have perverted the intent of the copyright law. Every time copyrights are set to expire they change the rules (every time – look it up). Special interests are not society.
Your culture is being stolen.
#25, Under current U.S. law it is not illegal to download, but it is illegal to “copy and distribute copyrighted music. Criminal penalties for first-time offenders can be as high as five years in prison and $250,000 in fines, even if you didn’t copy and distribute for financial or commercial gain.”
So by downloading someone else’s copy you are indeed ‘copying’ the item.
So you say your culture is being stolen? What about small bands that are on an indie label? What about their livelihood being stolen? What about small software companies that release shareware and then it’s cracked and distributed for free online? What is that programmer supposed to do, work for free?
The internet is like the wild west right now. Everyone does what they want with little to no consequences. I think there needs to be a worldwide online enforcement system, sort of like the FBI. Sure you would lose privacy, but if you have no morals and feel the need to download everything for free then why should your government have any morals? An eye for an eye. If piracy wasn’t so rampant then the government wouldn’t be bothering with stuff like this.
So using an image you found via Google Images on your blog would also be in violation of this. That’s a pretty big swath.
The Fed Gov and and sold out law makers are the most what is wrong with this nation.
Of course we elected them and keep re-electing them.
@SimonSez
Saying the mantra over and over impresses me not. Nor are you completely accurate.
The what about and what if questions impress me not. Confusing the argument is childish at best.
I never said no copyrights exist or shouldn’t exist. What I said was “… extended copyrights, 95/120 years or life plus 70 years, is theft of your culture!”.
14 years, one renewal, 28 years total. This is fair and as intended. Don’t assume by the nom de plume that you are wizened to what I think, you fail in this regard.
“Sure you would lose privacy, but if you have no morals and feel the need to download everything for free then why should your government have any morals?”, your argument fails here also. Serving the public in a government position means (or is supposed to mean) that you serve the public, not the corporate interests, period.
It was once “legal” to kill Jews in a certain country because of a law, the being Jewish law. Just because these “laws” (uh-huh) were passed by politicians didn’t make it right, period.
In your own argument you fail to separate the corporations and the people. Most of these musicians are the public. So by enforcing the copyright law on the internet you are serving the public, because you are protecting the rights of the musicians who worked hard to make the music and to record it and promote it. Only a small number of artists make it to a major corporate label.
Simonsez.
/Yawn.
You are confused with the real issue. Get back to me after ya figure it out.
The intellectual property police, ie, corporate police, will be the undoing of this society.
… in the same way the last nail holds a coffin shut.
You can also bet that Rep. Mary Bono, and Scientology, had something to do with crafting this bill. Because she’s been on the “copyrights” committee, ever since Sonny died, and she took over his slot in Congress. Killing websites that “give away” the “church”s valuable copyright course materials (mainly to warn people not to waste money on it), is top of their To-Do list. The internet has been the Church’s greatest enemy. Especially with so many former members ratting them out. This bill would help kill most criticisms of their methods and practices.
Basically killing freedom of speech, on the internet, of just about anything with deep enough pockets to raise a stink, and fill a “copyright violation” claim. The offending websites would come down, until the court clears them. And most won’t have the time or money to fight it in court. The bill probably won’t have any protection against such frivolous claims. And there will be a huge backlog of cases. of just those who do have the money and will to fight back. So effectively, they’ll be silenced just the same.
I hope the US Congressmen and Senators are pigsh*t happy about f*cking over the Bill of Rights.