Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Piracy United States Politics Your Rights Online

Draft Alternative To SOPA Released 170

angry tapir writes "Senator Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat, and Representative Darrell Issa, a California Republican, have released a draft version of the Online Protection and Enforcement of Digital Trade (OPEN) Act and posted a copy at KeeptheWebOpen.com. The act is intended to be an alternative to the Stop Online Piracy Act."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Draft Alternative To SOPA Released

Comments Filter:
  • Don't want (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Dyinobal ( 1427207 ) on Thursday December 08, 2011 @09:00PM (#38310476)
    I don't want an alternative, to SOPA, or ProtectIP. I don't want any new legislation and regulations and useless laws to keep an outmoded business model alive.
  • by ZorinLynx ( 31751 ) on Thursday December 08, 2011 @09:15PM (#38310598) Homepage

    Funny how the media industry has been raking in record profits, but they still feel they need this sort of legislation.

    Search for clips from "The Simpsons" and other popular TV shows on Youtube. Notice you will find little to nothing. The DMCA works, and works well. There's no need for this crap.

  • Re:Don't want (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 08, 2011 @09:20PM (#38310632)

    I don't want a bill that goes off the concept of being extreme, then "compromise" on a "reasonable" bill. Our existing copyright, patent, and other IP laws have worked well for centuries before the DMCA and other rubbish.

    What worked for the framers of the Constitution should work for us now. End of story.

  • Re:Don't want (Score:5, Insightful)

    by The Raven ( 30575 ) on Thursday December 08, 2011 @09:29PM (#38310712) Homepage

    While I personally disagree with most of the changes to IP that have happened over the past couple decades, this is a shortsighted view. The constitution is good, but imperfect; we cannot hold it as some holy document, unchanging, the word of our holy fathers who art in heaven, blah blah.

    Most people, when they say 'Damnit, we should stop adding to the constitution!' really mean 'Damn, our government is huge and unwieldy, and I think it should be a lot smaller.' They just use 'follow the constitution' as a rallying cry to head toward what they really want (typically tighter fiscal policy and less government intrusion... ie, libertarianism). Please don't be 'most people'. The framers of the Constitution of the United States were unable to appreciate all the changes that progress has brought us, and there will be many changes that existing laws, even ones properly based on a constitutionally sound underpinning, do not handle well.

    'Follow the Constition' is not the end of the story; it was the beginning.

  • Re:Don't want (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Fned ( 43219 ) on Thursday December 08, 2011 @09:31PM (#38310736) Journal

    Our existing copyright, patent, and other IP laws have worked well for centuries before the DMCA and other rubbish.

    What worked for the framers of the Constitution should work for us now. End of story.

    To be fair, there's been a fundamental change in information technology of a sort never before seen in all of history since then.

    The old laws aren't good enough anymore. Copyright, in particular, is in need of a serious overhaul.

    What the authors of SOPA don't get, though, is that no law can make things go back to the way they were, unless that law breaks all the computers. New laws will have to accept the inarguable truth that, for many mediums, copies aren't worth anything anymore, that some other measure of worth is needed in order to encourage creative business models.

  • Re:Don't want (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Runaway1956 ( 1322357 ) on Thursday December 08, 2011 @09:38PM (#38310776) Homepage Journal

    Then, I hope that you've been writing to the White House, as well as the house and senate. I have been, for years now. Both George Bush and Barack Obama have heard from me, repeatedly on the subject of internet freedom. All of my representatives, as well as a number of representatives that aren't my own.

    This, and all similar acts, treaties, regulations, or whatever name it might go by, need to be shot down. I'm steaming over ACTA - a piece of shit born in secrecy, and jammed up all our orifices, despite any and all objections.

  • Bait & Switch (Score:5, Insightful)

    by uutf ( 2432816 ) on Thursday December 08, 2011 @09:41PM (#38310798)
    Propose something terrible that'll never go through. If it succeeds LOL. If it fails, then propose something not quite as bad to try to get people to say "well, it's not as bad as what they proposed earlier.." Rinse and repeat until you get what you want - eventually you'll sneak one past the people fighting against it.
  • Overton (Score:5, Insightful)

    by woodsbury ( 1581559 ) on Thursday December 08, 2011 @09:42PM (#38310804)

    This springs to mind: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window [wikipedia.org]

    Do something everyone hates, then "compromise" with something slightly more attractive so that people think they're getting a good deal.

  • Bait and switch! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by theexaptation ( 1948750 ) on Thursday December 08, 2011 @09:43PM (#38310816)

    Oh this tactic again.

    Declare something misguided and extreme, see if anyone notices, if so compromise to something slightly less deplorable.

    How about D none of the above?

    I am sick of our government being purchased with campaign *cough*bribes*cough* contributions.

  • Re:Don't want (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Runaway1956 ( 1322357 ) on Thursday December 08, 2011 @09:47PM (#38310850) Homepage Journal

    "have worked well for centuries before the DMCA and other rubbish."

    The beginnings of the current crisis predates the DMCA by about - ohhhh - 30 years, I'd say. Things started going out of kilter when the copyright laws started to be extended. And, let's blame Walt Disney and his company for much of that. In fact, I'll go further back, and say that things started to become unbalanced around 1950.

    Since you point to the DMCA specifically, I would say that things started to accelerate downhill around the time that Microsoft stated that "This software is licensed, not sold." Without googling, it seems that at one point in time, one could actually "buy" a copy of MS Windows. Then with the next update to Windows, you could no longer "buy" it, you could only rent it, so long as you agreed to that stupid EULA, and understood that Microsoft owns everything on your PC - if not the physical PC itself.

  • Re:Issa Bad (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Archangel Michael ( 180766 ) on Thursday December 08, 2011 @09:59PM (#38310924) Journal

    So, your assertion of being "criminal" is a vague allegation of arson, and no suspect for that allegation named? Do you hold the Democrats to the same standards of contempt for their criminality? I doubt it.

  • Doublespeak (Score:4, Insightful)

    by organgtool ( 966989 ) on Thursday December 08, 2011 @10:00PM (#38310926)
    Typical use of doublespeak. The first version of the proposed legislation was so abominable that the Business Software Alliance couldn't even get behind it, so now they're re-introducing the law with a name that will be harder for people to oppose. If this version doesn't go through, expect another version of the same legislation under the guise of going after kiddie porn. You politicians are so damn predictable.
  • Re:Don't want (Score:5, Insightful)

    by wanzeo ( 1800058 ) on Thursday December 08, 2011 @10:06PM (#38310962)

    I have met scores of Music Business majors at my university. That's a four year bachelors degree which will run you around 50k. Thats a huge investment to make in an "outmoded business model".

    Now I completely agree with your point, but it is important to keep in mind how powerful the lobbying of an entire industry on the verge of losing their careers can be. It's analogous to the entire health insurance industry drying up if a public option were introduced (And as we saw, it was defeated). So I guess what I'm saying is that if we don't have the robust safety nets in place to handle whole industries becoming obsolete, then we are going to constantly be fighting a bitter fight in congress as they each try to legislate themselves back into business. It's completely predictable, and frankly, understandable human behavior.

  • Re:Don't want (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 08, 2011 @10:21PM (#38311024)

    The authors of SOPA do very much get that. This is why their law is a first step towards breaking all the computers.

  • Re:Don't want (Score:4, Insightful)

    by AK Marc ( 707885 ) on Thursday December 08, 2011 @10:44PM (#38311148)
    Without the DMCA, there'd be no need for the safe harbor provisions. So yes, I *do* want it abolished (as well as abolishing the idea that "contrbutory" infringement exists, and statutory damages). Let them sue everyone for everything, and make them prove in open court what their actual damages are.
  • by bzipitidoo ( 647217 ) <bzipitidoo@yahoo.com> on Thursday December 08, 2011 @11:01PM (#38311250) Journal

    What?! Innocent until proven guilty!

    You shouldn't have to send a counter notice, ever. That's one of the things that's so awful about the DMCA and related ilk. Takedown provisions circumvent due process in the eagerness to harass anyone accused of circumventing copyright. They are routinely abused to harass the innocent. They can be kept too busy defending themselves from accusation spam to do anything else like provide services to customers.

    I didn't think OPEN was going to be any good. After skimming it, I know it's no good.

  • Re:Don't want (Score:4, Insightful)

    by bell.colin ( 1720616 ) on Friday December 09, 2011 @12:23AM (#38311746)

    These "Bills" do not amend/modify the constitution, they circumvent it.

    Amending the constitution is fine, but there is right way to do it (constitutional convention,voting, state ratification, etc...), and there is the wrong way (adding legislation by re-defining common terms and trying to work around it because you know there is no way you can successfully modify it when you don't have the votes or issuing executive orders).

Kleeneness is next to Godelness.

Working...