Do we care about SOPA and PIPA?

[Dave2002]

See - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-16596577

Try accessing almost anything on Wikipedia today (18th January), and see what happens. - e.g Klemperer

On the other hand SOPA and PIPA are not blocked.

[Dave2002]

Also see http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology...cy-legislation

I guess if Rupert Murdoch is challenging Obama on this these have to be bad things!

[subcontrabass]

See - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-16596577

Try accessing almost anything on Wikipedia today (18th January), and see what happens. - e.g Klemperer

On the other hand SOPA and PIPA are not blocked.

Turn off Javascript in your browser and Wikipedia is still accessible.

[Bryn]

What amazes me about the Wikipedia action today is its hamfisted nature. Simply disabling Javascript in your browser's setting enabled access to all Wikipedia pages.

[Frances_iom]

As many have pointed out the US legislative process was acquired by big business some years ago - with the acquisition came military power to use on their behalf and a nation of sheeple who pay for it (their circus is cheap oil) - the media industry having pushed copyright to an effective 100+yrs from conception and in USA having made copyright infringement a crimimal offence with draconian penalties (those uploading via file sharing have been stung to over 1M$ tho the usual racket to to take a few thousand dollars off them to avoid court proceedings - if a dodgy case lands up in court the industry closes the case leaving the defendent to pick up the very substantial US lawyers fees) - however this hasn't stopped piracy - reducing the price and allowing iTunes etc operations have shown that they are the way to go - however now the industry requires that they can walk into a court state (not prove!) that a site is helping infringement (eg by hosting a copyright tune such as happy birthday) then get permission to alter the mechanism controlling network address (unfortuneately hosted in USA) to 'remove' the site from the internet - parties outside of the US please make your own way to the US court then try to get it overturned - remembering that industry in US owns government. Now apply the same thing to other content (eg use of newspaper articles - copyright - take down political opponents with ease if then even use a passage) etc - just like the stop and search laws in UK were passed with a good intent but landed up as a mechanism to control a minority.

[Dave2002]

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/

[Old Grumpy]

See - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-16596577

Try accessing almost anything on Wikipedia today (18th January), and see what happens. - e.g Klemperer

On the other hand SOPA and PIPA are not blocked.

Do we care about Wikipedia?

[makropulos]

Do we care about Wikipedia?

In terms of its place in the broader scheme of things (and certainly with reference to the SPOA/PIPA issue), yes. For its best articles, yes. For its scope, yes. Wikipedia is vastly improved and expanded since it first acquired its reputation. Of course it's still easy to find less good entries - but it's also easy to improve and correct those if you are so inclined.

I'm very happy to see that the White House has come out so firmly against the proposed legislation. With any luck that should mean that we can say farewell to SOPA and PIPA.

[Budapest]

The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the PROTECT IP Act (PIPA) do indeed matter. I won't go into a long diatribe about it. Instead I will refer those interested to a recent post on this forum that I made about it, which can be found here.

Today's blacking-out of Wikipedia (no great loss to humanity) and many other sites is now being touted as making Congress change its mind about these bills. In my opinion this is total rubbish. America is now a police state, in law. The first thing a police state does is to take control of the media. All this stuff bandied around in the last few days about Hollywood and the entertainment industry putting undue pressure on Congress is not quite accurate.The totally corrupt politicians on Capitol Hill are using it as an excuse to take control of the internet, as all repressive governments do (see here). I'd lay even money that SOPA et al will be pushed through quietly when all the furore has died down, just like they did with the National Defense Authorization Act on New Year's Eve, which officially made America a police state.

There's been one authoritarian law after the other passed in America since 2001, and now Americans no longer have any rights left (it's a police state). I must confess that I'm completely baffled why I have to keep pointing this out. The facts are all there on the table. I'm even more baffled as to why people outside of America don't seem to think that it will effect them???

[Budapest]

ps. I see that Clay-whatsisname has also been banging on about it in todays Guardian. Worth a read if you want some idea of what this is all about...

Sopa and Pipa would create a consumption-only internet

[Lateralthinking1]

America is not a police state.

I am against these proposals. They do sound draconian. Nothing this unpopular will be passed in an election year.

Something more does need to be done about piracy. There is a motivational difference between posting short clips and renting out illegally truck loads of whole movies and cds. It should be possible to have legal distinctions. I don't see why we should have the option to access free music and films unless people generally believe in slavery.

Conceptually Wikipedia is head and shoulders above anything else ever invented on the internet. Fact.

That said, any freedom that has been provided by the internet since its inception is additional freedom to what we had previously. Highly retrograde steps, while disappointing and financially unwise, would not be a move towards the darkest night. Many steps of that kind are being made but in different areas.

We do need an "airspace design" of the internet to protect our own national laws. Regional boundaries but not thickly drawn.

Funnily enough, in the western world, the internet has provided no additional political freedom whatsoever. The idea that it has done so is a complete myth.

[amateur51]

Funnily enough, in the western world, the internet has provided no additional political freedom whatsoever. The idea that it has done so is a complete myth.

I think MPs in receipt of thousands of emails about, for example, NHS reforms from their constituents as organised by 38 degrees might disagree with you, Lats

[David Underdown]

What amazes me about the Wikipedia action today is its hamfisted nature. Simply disabling Javascript in your browser's setting enabled access to all Wikipedia pages.

That was part of the point. There is always a way around measures such as those proposed in SOPA - but you need ascertain level of technical knowledge to use them

[french frank]

That was part of the point. There is always a way around measures such as those proposed in SOPA - but you need ascertain level of technical knowledge to use them

In fact, if you'd clicked on the 'More information' link on the blacked out page, it not only laid out the arguments against the legislation, it also said that the aim of the black-out was not to prevent people accessing the Wikipedia information but to draw attention to the dangers of the legislation and explain what people could do. It reported the results of the black-out in terms of how many people had contacted their representatives, how many people had read the information &c.

It also told you there that if you turned off Javascript you could access the information.

[Dave2002]

That was part of the point. There is always a way around measures such as those proposed in SOPA - but you need ascertain level of technical knowledge to use them

Yes, but you might also have to fight a battle. I read http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...-only-internet - Clay Shirkey, and my first thought was - "doesn't really matter if the US doesn't want to associate domain names with IP numbers." We can, after all, compile a list and maybe even publish it on the internet. Trouble with that as a first cut approach is that this would then be a target for the "bad guys" in the US to target. Next thing we could even be extradited for having committed a crime (in the US, without being a US citizen, or even living there!)!!

OK - you could do a bit better maybe by going for peer to peer network "solutions" - but it'd be a pain, and if those "bad guys" in the US then wanted a target, they'd not only do you for having provided the information, but also "obviously doing so in a way to make it difficult to track down .... etc.".

Much better not to have such laws in the first place. The internet is based on technology, which is supposedly neutral to content.

Incidentally, in case anyone misreads this post - not all people in the US are bad, not all politicians in the US are bad. Where I refer to "bad guys" I mean people and organisations whose only interest seems to be financial, and restricting practices, and making things worse for the rest of us.

If the US wants to do something useful, they could track down the spammers and other fraudsters and hackers who trash web sites and deal with them (severely). Apparently a number (seemingly less than a 1000) are known, and many of them have connections with the US.