Author Topic: Internet censorship in NL  (Read 10875 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline [FSR]Ush

  • Admin
  • Posts: 13,449
  • Aart
    • View Profile
Internet censorship in NL
« on: January 12, 2012, 08:12:16 pm »
2 internet providers have to block the ports to the Pirate bay within a few days... this is the message I get when entering their site.




Offline AnriB

  • Posts: 530
    • View Profile
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #1 on: January 12, 2012, 08:20:38 pm »
:(

Offline [AK47]M4lysz

  • Admin
  • Posts: 2,247
    • View Profile
    • [AK47]Forum
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #2 on: January 12, 2012, 08:24:44 pm »
Crap i hope its not too late to take that back.
Ppl should put more interests in what happening in senate/congress

Offline [MAF]Aj_Lajk_Bir

  • Admin
  • Posts: 5,031
    • View Profile
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #3 on: January 12, 2012, 09:03:31 pm »
OMG

Offline [MAF]Snoopy

  • Posts: 14,540
    • View Profile
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #4 on: January 12, 2012, 09:18:37 pm »
I say good job. I wish all torrent sites would be blocked. Although I am guilty of using them, mainly because they're there to use...

Offline [MAF]Jur1z

Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #5 on: January 12, 2012, 09:36:09 pm »
N██ ██████████ ████ ██ ████████ ████ ███ lol ███████████s

Offline [AK47]M4lysz

  • Admin
  • Posts: 2,247
    • View Profile
    • [AK47]Forum
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #6 on: January 12, 2012, 10:14:59 pm »
I say good job. I wish all torrent sites would be blocked. Although I am guilty of using them, mainly because they're there to use...

WTF PPL YOU DON`T KNOW WHAT`S GOING ON AROUND YOU!  :o

Fuck that man internet made world become united!!
Now they will block not only illegal staff, its not about illegal shit at all.
Its about global control!!

"Opinions on the topic of Internet censorship vary, with arguments being made both for and against censorship. Moreover, the extent of Internet censorship varies on a country-to-country basis. While some counties have little Internet censorship, other countries go as far as to limit the access of information such as news and suppress discussion among citizens."

You give them right`s to block the news.?

Opposition to the Stop Online Piracy Act, or SOPA, has reached a boiling point. Millions of activists, hundreds of startups, social media sites like Tumblr, Reddit and Twitter and even big companies like Google, Yahoo! and eBay have joined with Free Press and other Internet advocacy groups against it.   

This Web-censorship bill could destroy free speech on the Internet. Yet this bill — and the backlash against it — have received virtually no coverage from major television news outlets. According to a recent study by Media Matters for America, the blackout has been complete, with ABC, CBS, Fox News, MSNBC and NBC devoting zero time to the issue during their evening newscasts.

This is what happens when the interests of big business get in the way of the need to inform the public and protect free speech. As it turns out, the owners of ABC (Disney), CBS (CBS Corp.), Fox News (News Corp.), MSNBC (Comcast) and NBC (Comcast) are all supporters of the bill.

Please take action today and demand that the news directors of ABC, CBS, Fox News, MSNBC and NBC end the SOPA blackout.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Threat to online freedom of speech
According to the EFF, proxy servers, such as those used during the Arab Spring, can also be used to thwart copyright enforcement and therefore may be made illegal by the act.[23]
On TIME's Techland blog, Jerry Brito wrote, "Imagine if the U.K. created a blacklist of American newspapers that its courts found violated celebrities' privacy? Or what if France blocked American sites it believed contained hate speech?"[24] Similarly, the Center for Democracy and Technology warned, "If SOPA and PIPA are enacted, the US government must be prepared for other governments to follow suit, in service to whatever social policies they believe are important—whether restricting hate speech, insults to public officials, or political dissent."[25]
Laurence H. Tribe, a Harvard University professor of constitutional law, released an open letter on the web stating that SOPA would “undermine the openness and free exchange of information at the heart of the Internet. And it would violate the First Amendment.”[6][26]
The AFL-CIO's Paul Almeida, arguing in favor of SOPA, has stated that free speech was not a relevant consideration, because "The First Amendment does not protect stealing goods off trucks."[27]
Negative impact on websites that host user content
Journalist Rebecca MacKinnon argued in an op-ed that making companies liable for users' actions could have a chilling effect on user-generated sites like YouTube. "The intention is not the same as China’s Great Firewall, a nationwide system of Web censorship, but the practical effect could be similar", she says.[28]
The EFF has warned that Etsy, Flickr and Vimeo all seem likely to shut down if the bill becomes law.[29] According to critics[who?], the bill would ban linking to sites deemed offending, even in search results[30] and on services such as Twitter.[31]
Christian Dawson, COO of Virginia-based hosting company ServInt, predicted that the legislation would lead to many cloud computing and Web hosting services moving out of the US to avoid lawsuits.[32]
Conversely, Michael O'Leary of the MPAA argued at the November 16 Judiciary Committee hearing that the act's effect on business would be more minimal, noting that at least 16 countries block websites, and the internet still functions in those countries.[33] Denmark, Finland, Ireland and Italy blocked The Pirate Bay after courts ruled in favor of music and film industry litigation, and a coalition of film and record companies has threatened to sue British Telecom if it does not follow suit.[34] Maria Pallante of the US Copyright Office said that Congress has updated the Copyright Act before and should again, or "the U.S. copyright system will ultimately fail." Asked for clarification, she said that the US currently lacks jurisdiction over websites in other countries.[33]
Weakening of "safe harbor" protections for websites
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), passed in 1998, includes a provision, known as the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act, that provides a "safe harbor" for websites that host content. Under that provision, copyright owners who feel that a website is hosting content that infringes on their copyright are required to submit a notice to that website to ask for the infringing material to be removed, and the website is then given a certain amount of time to remove such material.[35][36][37] SOPA would override this "safe harbor" provision, by allowing judges to immediately block access to any website found guilty of hosting copyrighted material.[38]
According to critics of the bill such as the Center for Democracy and Technology and the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the bill's wording is vague enough that a single complaint about even a major website could be enough to cause the site to be blocked, with the burden of proof then resting on the website to get itself un-blocked. The focus of much of the criticism is on a statement in the bill, that any website would be blocked that "is taking, or has taken deliberate actions to avoid confirming a high probability of the use of the U.S.-directed site to carry out acts that constitute a violation." Critics have read this to mean that a website that does not actively monitor its content for copyright violations, but instead waits for others to notify it of such violations, could be guilty under the law.[39][29]
Law professor Jason Mazzone wrote, "Damages are also not available to the site owner unless a claimant 'knowingly materially' misrepresented that the law covers the targeted site, a difficult legal test to meet. The owner of the site can issue a counter-notice to restore payment processing and advertising but services need not comply with the counter-notice".[40]
Goodlatte stated, "We're open to working with them on language to narrow [the bill's provisions], but I think it is unrealistic to think we're going to continue to rely on the DMCA notice-and-takedown provision. Anybody who is involved in providing services on the Internet would be expected to do some things. But we are very open to tweaking the language to ensure we don't impose extraordinary burdens on legitimate companies as long as they aren't the primary purveyors [of pirated content]".[41][42]
The MPAA's O'Leary submitted written testimony in favor of the bill that expressed guarded support of current DMCA provisions. "Where these sites are legitimate and make good faith efforts to respond to our requests, this model works with varying degrees of effectiveness," O'Leary wrote. "It does not, however, always work quickly, and it is not perfect, but it works."[17]
General threat to web-related businesses
A news analysis in the information technology magazine eWeek stated, "The language of SOPA is so broad, the rules so unconnected to the reality of Internet technology and the penalties so disconnected from the alleged crimes that this bill could effectively kill e-commerce or even normal Internet use. The bill also has grave implications for existing U.S., foreign and international laws and is sure to spend decades in court challenges."[43]
Art Bordsky of advocacy group Public Knowledge similarly stated that "The definitions written in the bill are so broad that any US consumer who uses a website overseas immediately gives the US jurisdiction the power to potentially take action against it."[44]
On October 28, 2011, the EFF called the bill a "massive piece of job-killing Internet regulation," and said, "This bill cannot be fixed; it must be killed."[45]
Gary Shapiro, CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association, spoke out strongly against the bill, stating that "The bill attempts a radical restructuring of the laws governing the Internet," and that "It would undo the legal safe harbors that have allowed a world-leading Internet industry to flourish over the last decade. It would expose legitimate American businesses and innovators to broad and open-ended liability. The result will be more lawsuits, decreased venture capital investment, and fewer new jobs."[27]
Lukas Biewald, founder of CrowdFlower, stated that "It'll have a stifling effect on venture capital... No one would invest because of the legal liability."[46]
Booz & Company on November 16 released a study, funded by Google, finding that almost all of the 200 venture capitalists and angel investors interviewed would stop funding digital media intermediaries if the House bill becomes law. More than 80 percent said they would rather invest in a risky, weak economy with the current laws than a strong economy with the proposed law in effect. If legal ambiguities were removed and good faith provisions in place, investing would increase by nearly 115 percent.[47]
As reported by David Carr of the New York Times in an article critical of SOPA and PIPA, Google, Facebook, Twitter and other companies sent a joint letter to Congress, stating "We support the bills’ stated goals — providing additional enforcement tools to combat foreign ‘rogue’ Web sites that are dedicated to copyright infringement or counterfeiting. However, the bills as drafted would expose law-abiding U.S. Internet and technology companies to new uncertain liabilities, private rights of action and technology mandates that would require monitoring of Web sites.”[26][48] In response to Carr's article, bill sponsor and Committee Chairman Lamar Smith said the article "unfairly criticizes the Stop Online Piracy Act", and, "does not point to any language in the bill to back up the claims. SOPA targets only foreign Web sites that are primarily dedicated to illegal and infringing activity. Domestic Web sites, like blogs, are not covered by this legislation." Lamar also said that Carr incorrectly framed the debate as between the entertainment industry and high-tech companies, noting support by more than "120 groups and associations across diverse industries, including the United States Chamber of Commerce".[49]
Threat to users uploading content
Lateef Mtima, director of the Institute for Intellectual Property and Social Justice at Howard University School of Law, expressed concern that users who upload copyrighted content to sites such as YouTube could potentially be held criminally liable themselves, saying, "Perhaps the most dangerous aspect of the bill is that the conduct it would criminalize is so poorly defined. While on its face the bill seems to attempt to distinguish between commercial and non-commercial conduct, purportedly criminalizing the former and permitting the latter, in actuality the bill not only fails to accomplish this but, because of its lack of concrete definitions, it potentially criminalizes conduct that is currently permitted under the law."[50]
An aide to bill sponsor Lamar Smith has said, "This bill does not make it a felony for a person to post a video on YouTube of their children singing to a copyrighted song. The bill specifically targets websites dedicated to illegal or infringing activity. Sites that host user content—like YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter—have nothing to be concerned about under this legislation".[50]
Threat to internal networks
A paper by the Center for Democracy and Technology says that the bill "targets an entire website even if only a small portion hosts or links to some infringing content."[36]
According to A. M. Reilly of Industry Leaders Magazine, under SOPA, culpability for distributing copyright material is extended to those who aid the initial poster of said material. For companies that use virtual private networks to create a network that appears to be internal but is spread across various offices and employees' homes, any of these offsite locations that initiate sharing of copyright material can put the entire VPN and hosting company at risk of violation.[51]
Answering similar criticism in a CNET editorial, RIAA head Cary Sherman wrote: "Actually, it's quite the opposite. By focusing on specific sites rather than entire domains, action can be targeted against only the illegal subdomain or Internet protocol address rather than taking action against the entire domain."[52]
Threat to free and open source software
The Electronic Frontier Foundation expressed concern that free and open source software (FLOSS) projects found to be aiding online piracy may experience serious problems under SOPA.[53] Of special concern is the web browser Firefox, made by Open-Source advocate Mozilla,[23] which has a plug-in, MAFIAAFire Redirector, that redirects users to the new location for domains that were seized by the U.S. government.[54] In May 2011, Mozilla refused a request by the Department of Homeland Security to pull MAFIAAFire from its website, asking "Have any courts determined that the Mafiaafire add-on is unlawful or illegal in any way?"[55][56]
Ineffectual against piracy
Edward J. Black, president and CEO of the Computer & Communication Industry Association, wrote in the Huffington Post that "Ironically, it would do little to stop actual pirate websites, which could simply reappear hours later under a different name, if their numeric web addresses aren't public even sooner. Anyone who knows or has that web address would still be able to reach the offending website."[57]
An editorial in the San Jose Mercury-News stated, "Imagine the resources required to parse through the millions of Google and Facebook offerings every day looking for pirates who, if found, can just toss up another site in no time."[58]
Deep-packet inspection and invasion of privacy
According to Markham Erickson, head of NetCoalition, which opposes SOPA, the section of the bill that would allow judges to order internet service providers to block access to infringing websites to customers located in the United States would also allow the checking of those customers' IP address, a method known as IP blocking. Erickson has expressed concerns that such an order might require those providers to engage in "deep packet inspection", which involves analyzing all of the content being transmitted to and from the user, and may raise new privacy concerns.[59][60]

Offline ǝǝǝoſ[sXɐ]

  • Admin
  • Posts: 2,112
    • View Profile
  • In-game name: Joeee
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #7 on: January 12, 2012, 10:18:27 pm »
As bad as pirating is, SOPA is out to block sites like Youtube too... fuck Obama.

Offline [FSR]Ush

  • Admin
  • Posts: 13,449
  • Aart
    • View Profile
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #8 on: January 12, 2012, 10:21:19 pm »
They're all part of the bilderberg group!

Offline [MAF]Snoopy

  • Posts: 14,540
    • View Profile
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #9 on: January 12, 2012, 10:26:27 pm »
maybe I shouldn't say my opinion if it offends m4 so much...

Offline [AK47]M4lysz

  • Admin
  • Posts: 2,247
    • View Profile
    • [AK47]Forum
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #10 on: January 12, 2012, 10:29:48 pm »
Fuck Lamar Smith and SOPA




Ron Paul FTW










« Last Edit: January 12, 2012, 10:35:06 pm by [AK47]M4lysz »

Offline [AK47]M4lysz

  • Admin
  • Posts: 2,247
    • View Profile
    • [AK47]Forum
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #11 on: January 12, 2012, 10:33:39 pm »
Don't tell me you let them do all that because you dont like ppl watching movies and playing games they cannot buy.


CONGRESS SAYS FUCK THE CONSTITUTION,
WE CREATE ANOTHER SUPER CONGRESS ABOVE IT
« Last Edit: January 12, 2012, 10:35:19 pm by [AK47]M4lysz »

Offline [MAF]Snoopy

  • Posts: 14,540
    • View Profile
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #12 on: January 12, 2012, 10:38:20 pm »
that's what earning money is for.

Offline [AK47]M4lysz

  • Admin
  • Posts: 2,247
    • View Profile
    • [AK47]Forum
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #13 on: January 12, 2012, 10:48:11 pm »
Man the freedom of speech, the constitution, the global rights.
They taking it away and make it look like its about some piracy.


SOPA will not block piracy!

"Edward J. Black, president and CEO of the Computer & Communication Industry Association, wrote in the Huffington Post that "Ironically, it would do little to stop actual pirate websites, which could simply reappear hours later under a different name, if their numeric web addresses aren't public even sooner. Anyone who knows or has that web address would still be able to reach the offending website."[57]
An editorial in the San Jose Mercury-News stated, "Imagine the resources required to parse through the millions of Google and Facebook offerings every day looking for pirates who, if found, can just toss up another site in no time."[58]"

Offline [MAF]Snoopy

  • Posts: 14,540
    • View Profile
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #14 on: January 12, 2012, 10:50:40 pm »
obviously i don't agree with sites like youtube being shut down... just torrent sites because wheather you agree with it or, it's illegal to steal things.

before anybody says...

Although I am guilty of using them, mainly because they're there to use...

still doesn't mean i agree with it because i have done it in the past
« Last Edit: January 12, 2012, 10:52:52 pm by [MAF]Snoops »

Offline [MAF]mooman

  • Leader
  • Posts: 6,299
    • View Profile
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #15 on: January 13, 2012, 05:27:59 am »
will read and answer your forum PMs when I'm less busy!

Offline [MAF]PyroFox

  • Leader
  • Posts: 1,426
  • ¯\(°_o)/¯
    • View Profile
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #16 on: January 13, 2012, 10:48:07 am »
The Pirate Bay has already been blocked for me for the last year, maybe more. Only one ISP in Ireland (Eircom) has done it so far though, Eircom used to be the dominant ISP, they aren't anymore. I see this when I visit TPB:



I bet they lost a lot of customers when they did this, I should have switched but I don't pay for the internet :L

Anyway, enabling governments the ability to do this is NOT good. It also won't stop piracy at all. People should realise that any kind of censorship will just get worse, just look at SOPA and PIPA. I know this is an American thing but the EU and countries within it always tend to follow America's footsteps and introduce similar bills. If we allow the governments to pass laws like this, then even more severe bills like SOPA and PIPA will make their way over to us.

Offline [MAF]Epoxi

Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #17 on: January 13, 2012, 12:04:38 pm »
As bad as pirating is, SOPA is out to block sites like Youtube too.

That will never happen, seeing as Google is one of the largest and wealthiest internet organisations: they will fight pretty hard to lobby against legislation that destroys their $30 billion+ investment.
« Last Edit: January 13, 2012, 12:10:24 pm by [MAF]ChepiChups »

Offline Gavish_gooch

  • Admin
  • Posts: 31
    • View Profile
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #18 on: January 13, 2012, 12:50:07 pm »



Except if you want to play some pirated games online, you need to use a stolen CD key, thereby removing a legitimate copy from the system. Hence, stealing.

I find it ironic how people are being defensive over pirate bay, when pirate bay is one of the MAIN reasons this SOPA thing has come around. the pirate bay made copyright infringement easily accessible to everyone and forced a dramatic response from governments all over the world. If you want to blame anyone for the imminent censorship of the internet, blame the Pirate Bay, and the selfish people who used it to score free shit. They are the cause of the destruction of the internet as a place of freedom.

Offline TheSource[MA]

  • Posts: 80
    • View Profile
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #19 on: January 13, 2012, 01:00:23 pm »
Fuck the SOPA, they will never do that in morocco, and even if they do ill keep changing my proxy and ip, they will never get me and ill have access to everything

Offline Gavish_gooch

  • Admin
  • Posts: 31
    • View Profile
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #20 on: January 13, 2012, 01:11:07 pm »
Fuck the SOPA, they will never do that in morocco, and even if they do ill keep changing my proxy and ip, they will never get me and ill have access to everything

You are missing the point. SOPA isn't the problem, it is the proposed SOLUTION to the piracy problem. You really want to do your part against SOPA and PIPA? Stop pirating shit.

Offline TheSource[MA]

  • Posts: 80
    • View Profile
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #21 on: January 13, 2012, 07:24:49 pm »
Well thats what i ment, ill get downloading free stuff, and pirated stuff, because internet was free the first day and anyone can say and do anything!!

Offline [MAF]Cromiell

Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #22 on: January 13, 2012, 07:35:10 pm »
Well... I don't give a shit about torrent sites. Not like I don't use them but it's pointless to block freedom of internet. They can't stop pirating, and it's not any good way since it will make it even more complicated.

Offline [MAF]mooman

  • Leader
  • Posts: 6,299
    • View Profile
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #23 on: January 14, 2012, 07:12:54 am »



Except if you want to play some pirated games online, you need to use a stolen CD key, thereby removing a legitimate copy from the system. Hence, stealing.
i think it's an accepted fact for most people that if they pirate a game with cd keys (in other words every game these days) they're going to have to go without online OR play on hacked servers with a bunch of hackers. it's not like people can use the pirate bay to break into people's PCs and steal their cd keys.
will read and answer your forum PMs when I'm less busy!

Offline [MAF]Karlis

Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #24 on: January 14, 2012, 08:29:42 am »
and even if the keys are stolen, they're stolen from publishers, not from someone that bought the game.

Offline [LSR]Jarol

Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #25 on: January 14, 2012, 09:53:20 am »
i get the same Ush:




Well i really do agree with Firefox about this.

Offline [MAF]Snoopy

  • Posts: 14,540
    • View Profile
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #26 on: January 14, 2012, 11:51:44 am »
and even if the keys are stolen, they're stolen from publishers, not from someone that bought the game.

that doesn't mean it's ok

Offline AnriB

  • Posts: 530
    • View Profile
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #27 on: January 15, 2012, 10:08:50 am »
nl guys , can u use kat.ph ????

Offline [FSR]Ush

  • Admin
  • Posts: 13,449
  • Aart
    • View Profile
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #28 on: January 15, 2012, 01:04:03 pm »
yes I can, it's a good site?

Offline AnriB

  • Posts: 530
    • View Profile
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #29 on: January 15, 2012, 04:06:07 pm »
yes I can, it's a good site?

it has more seeders then piratebay

Offline [AK47]M4lysz

  • Admin
  • Posts: 2,247
    • View Profile
    • [AK47]Forum
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #30 on: January 18, 2012, 11:50:34 am »
FUCK EVERYONE WHO SUPPORTED SOPA!!!




Having trouble using Wikipedia today? That's because the popular crowd-sourced online encyclopedia is participating in an "Internet blackout" in protest of two controversial anti-piracy bills: The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and its Senate companion, the Protect IP Act (PIPA).

The bills are intended to strengthen protections against copyright infringement and intellectual property theft, but Internet advocates say they would stifle expression the World Wide Web. In essence, the legislation has pitted content providers -- like the music and film industries -- against Silicon Valley.

"It's not a battle of left versus right," said progressive activist Adam Green, whose organization Progressive Change Campaign Committee on Tuesday hosted a press conference with opponents of the bills. "Frankly, it's a battle of old versus new."

Here's a basic look at the actions taking place today and the legislation causing all the fuss.

What's going on today?

The popular link-sharing site Reddit got the ball rolling for today's 24-hour Internet blackout. In addition to Reddit and Wikipedia, other sites participating include BoingBoing, Mozilla, WordPress, TwitPic, MoveOn.org and the ICanHasCheezBurger network. Search giant Google is showing its solidarity with a protest doodle and message: "Tell Congress: Please don't censor the web," but the site planned no complete blackout.

Other sites -- like Facebook and Twitter -- oppose the legislation in question but aren't participating in today's blackout.

In addition to the Internet-based protests, some opponents are physically protesting on Wednesday outside of their congressional representatives' offices. Reddit co-founder Alexis Ohanian said in Tuesday's press conference it will "probably be the geekiest, most rational protest ever."

What does the legislation do?

There are already laws that protect copyrighted material, including the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). But while the DMCA focuses on removing specific, unauthorized content from the Internet, SOPA and PIPA instead target the platform -- that is, the site hosting the unauthorized content.

The bills would give the Justice Department the power to go after foreign websites willfully committing or facilitating intellectual property theft -- "rogue" sites like The Pirate Bay. The government would be able to force U.S.-based companies, like Internet service providers, credit card companies and online advertisers, to cut off ties with those sites.

Why content providers want SOPA and PIPA

Content groups like the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), and business representatives like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, argue that innovation and jobs in content-creating industries are threatened by growing Internet piracy. Overseas websites, they argue, are a safe haven for Internet pirates profiting off their content.

According to the Global Intellectual Property Center, which is part of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, intellectual property-intensive sectors employ more than 19 million people in the U.S. and create $7.7 trillion in gross output. Foreign website operators currently outside the bounds of U.S. law; SOPA and PIPA would help quell illegitimate Internet activity.

In a statement, former Sen. Chris Dodd, who is now chairman and CEO of the MPAA, called the blackout day a "gimmick."

"It's a dangerous and troubling development when the platforms that serve as gateways to information intentionally skew the facts to incite their users in order to further their corporate interests," Dodd said.

CBS Corporation, which owns CBSNews.com, is a member of the Copyright Alliance -- an industry group representing content producers that supports SOPA and PIPA.

Why Internet companies oppose SOPA and PIPA

Internet companies and their investors would readily say that they're holding the "blackout" to protect their corporate interests -- and the entire burgeoning Internet-based economy.

"The success of Reddit... is one of the smaller examples of the success that has happened in our industry -- and will continue to unless bills like SOPA or PIPA become law," Ohanian said Tuesday.

Under the rules SOPA or PIPA would impose, Ohanian and others argue, start ups wouldn't be able to handle the costs that come with defending their sites against possible violations. Such sites would not be able to pay the large teams of lawyers that established sites like Google or Facebook can afford.

The legislation in question targets foreign companies whose primary purpose is to sell stolen or counterfeit goods -- but opponents say domestic companies could still be held liable for linking to their content. While sites like Reddit wouldn't have a legal duty to monitor their sites all the time, "you might have your pants sued off of you" if you don't, said Jayme White, staff director for the Senate Finance Subcommittee on international trade.

Brad Burnham, managing partner at the venture capital fund Union Square Ventures, said his company has avoided investing in companies related to the music industry because of the copyright risks -- but under the proposed legislation, that risk would hit just about any Internet company. SOPA and PIPA, he said, "takes the risk of frivolous litigation... to the entire Internet."

That should be a concern, Burnham said, when the Internet accounts for 21 percent of economic growth among developed nations, according to one study.

The impacts could go beyond the economy, some argue. Rebecca MacKinnon, a senior fellow at the nonpartisan New America Foundation, argues that if blogging platforms are motivated to monitor their content, that could have "a tremendous chilling effect on people tyring to conduct political discourse and trying to use content in a fair use context."

Where does the legislation stand?

Opponents of SOPA and PIPA celebrated when, earlier this month, authors of both bills decided to set aside the most controversial aspect of them -- language that would have let the Justice Department force Internet Service Providers to block the domains of suspected foreign "rogue" sites. Also, over the weekend, the White House suggested it wants to see modifications to the legislation.

The Senate is scheduled to hold a procedural vote on PIPA on January 24.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith, R-Texas, who sponsored SOPA, said Tuesday he expects the committee to continue work on the House bill in February.

Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., meanwhile, is opposed to the legislation and will today officially introduce an alternative -- the Online Protection and Enforcement of Digital Trade (OPEN) Act. Issa said Tuesday he expects his bill to have more co-sponsors than SOPA has in the House and that "once members of Congress see a viable alternative... I think we can get to a consensus."

The OPEN Act would make the International Trade Commission, rather than the Justice Department, responsible for policing U.S. connections to foreign rogue sites. Placing that responsibility in the hands of one entity, rather than the whole court system, would make the process more transparent, Issa argues.

Offline [AK47]M4lysz

  • Admin
  • Posts: 2,247
    • View Profile
    • [AK47]Forum
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #31 on: January 19, 2012, 08:25:54 pm »
Approaching Monday's crucial Senate vote there are now 35 Senators publicly opposing PIPA.  Last week there were 5.   And it just takes just 41 solid "no" votes to permanently stall PIPA (and SOPA) in the Senate.  What seemed like miles away a few weeks ago is now within reach.

But don't trust predictions.  The forces behind SOPA & PIPA (mostly movie companies) can make small changes to these bills until they know they have the votes to pass.  Members of Congress know SOPA & PIPA are unpopular, but they don't understand why--so they're easily duped by superficial changes.  The Senate returns next week, and the next few days are critical.

Offline TheSource[MA]

  • Posts: 80
    • View Profile
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #32 on: January 19, 2012, 08:28:55 pm »
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1w6GtwOvnWM[/youtube]

Offline Scorpion.

Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #33 on: January 19, 2012, 08:39:44 pm »
MEGAUPLOAD CLOSED BY FBI



Megaupload is accused of copyright infringement and anti-piracy, causing a loss of over 500 million

fuck!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :blank: :blank: :blank:
« Last Edit: January 19, 2012, 08:42:22 pm by [LSR]Scorpion »

Offline [MAF]Aj_Lajk_Bir

  • Admin
  • Posts: 5,031
    • View Profile
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #34 on: January 19, 2012, 08:56:02 pm »
fuck! one of best hosting  >:(

Offline [MAF]Snoopy

  • Posts: 14,540
    • View Profile
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #35 on: January 19, 2012, 09:01:19 pm »
And so it begins.

Offline Scorpion.

Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #36 on: January 19, 2012, 09:01:30 pm »
Fuck the world

W Piracy fuck SOPA !!!!!!!1

Offline Scorpion.

Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #37 on: January 19, 2012, 09:02:09 pm »
And so it begins.

Sofa blocked you on Facebook lol , i can't see you on FB

Offline [MAF]Aj_Lajk_Bir

  • Admin
  • Posts: 5,031
    • View Profile
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #38 on: January 19, 2012, 09:03:01 pm »
Fuck the world

W Piracy fuck SOPA !!!!!!!1
not the world, only fat americans

Offline Scorpion.

Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #39 on: January 19, 2012, 09:04:40 pm »
no, fuck the world becouse is sick about MONEY POWER and its ruins all ppls!!! fuck

Offline [MAF]Snoopy

  • Posts: 14,540
    • View Profile
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #40 on: January 19, 2012, 09:14:41 pm »

Offline [MAF]Jur1z

Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #41 on: January 19, 2012, 09:23:25 pm »

Offline [MAF]Cromiell

Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #42 on: January 20, 2012, 09:04:54 am »
That's really bad to hear. It's not only piracy. They started to stop freedom over the internet. Today hosting site and tomorrow we will read that Hitler was good father of Europe and the hero.

Also I'm half blocking entrance to my own site with information about SOPA and PIPA with the protest over them.

Prepare for huge attacks from Anonymous over important websites and services. They will for sure not leave it like it is.
« Last Edit: January 20, 2012, 09:10:18 am by [MAF]Cromiell »

Offline Scorpion.

Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #43 on: January 20, 2012, 12:55:47 pm »
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0Wvn-9BXVc&feature=player_embedded#![/youtube]

:(

Offline [MAF]Jur1z

Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #44 on: January 20, 2012, 01:28:01 pm »
[youtube]SmXHIoP7Rbo[/youtube]

Offline [MAF]Snoopy

  • Posts: 14,540
    • View Profile
Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #45 on: January 20, 2012, 01:33:37 pm »
soap opera

Offline [MAF]Jur1z

Re: Internet censorship in NL
« Reply #46 on: December 14, 2013, 12:26:37 pm »