Protect IP Act May Be Amended 179
angry tapir writes "The controversial U.S. copyright enforcement bill called The Protect IP Act may be amended on the Senate floor later this month in response to ongoing concerns about its provisions affecting Internet service providers and the domain-name system, according to the bill's chief sponsor, Senator Patrick Leahy, a Vermont Democrat."
Sorry, but fuck you. (Score:5, Informative)
We still don't want it even with an amendments.
Someone help me out here - business question (Score:5, Informative)
I'm thinking the same thing goes on in government. They do something that has people breaking out their guillotines so they can do juuuuuuust slightly less than that.
To elaborate on the summary... (Score:5, Informative)
This isn't so much an amendment, as a plan to think about amending it. From the article [techworld.com.au]:
"...plans to offer an amendment that would require a study of the impact of the ISP provisions in the bill before they are implemented. If the study found negative impacts, it's likely the ISP provision would be killed."
The above is pretty much all of the article which is not political filibustering, back patting or stating things which won't change (the payment freezing, and search engine stuff).
TL;DR version: they're thinking about maybe possibly backing down on one point.
Re:Someone help me out here - business question (Score:5, Informative)
Next time? they are already crafting SOPA-II
It's called the OPEN act. and they are in the initial stages. It's exactly as you describe. but nobody is paying attention to it, exactly as they have it planned.
http://youtu.be/9TpZJA9EIPY [youtu.be] -- On how we got here, and how this fight is not over with. The scumbags in congress have no intention in stopping this behavior.
Re:Sorry, but fuck you. (Score:5, Informative)
The problem is that when you vote somebody out, all their garbage laws stay behind.
Re:Someone help me out here - business question (Score:5, Informative)
Where's that Heinlein quote...oh, yes, here it is:
"There has grown in the minds of certain groups in this country the idea
that just because a man or corporation has made a profit out of the
public for a number of years, the government and the courts are charged
with guaranteeing such a profit in the future, even in the face of changing
circumstances and contrary to public interest. This strange doctrine is
supported by neither statute or common law. Neither corporations or
individuals have the right to come into court and ask that the clock
of history be stopped, or turned back."
- Heinlein, Life Line, 1939
Re:Sorry, but fuck you. (Score:4, Informative)
This gives them that control.
I agree. Taking away advertisement money to sites that post nagative oppionons about candidates because they linked to an article, or snipped some of a "copyrighted" article into theirs, is about an inch down the slope PIPA will take us.
Re:Sorry, but fuck you. (Score:5, Informative)
are you a fucking moron ? excuse me, but really, are you a fucking idiot ?
record labels do NOTHING other than keeping bands perpetually in debt to them, and give just cents over dozens of dollars of album sales, forcing them to go on tours worldwide not to make money, but to be able to pay the 'loans' they got from the record label in the initial contracts.
http://www.negativland.com/albini.html [negativland.com]
http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=10/07/13/1737224 [slashdot.org]
THEY DONT EVEN PAY ARTISTS !
http://gizmodo.com/5417318/my-6247-royalty-statement-how-major-labels-cook-the-books-with-digital-downloads [gizmodo.com]
http://www.demonbaby.com/blog/2007/10/when-pigs-fly-death-of-oink-birth-of.html [demonbaby.com]
you dont know shit about this, yet you are making grandstand statements like 'When you're making a living based on how well your art is received, then let's talk'.
LETS talk then. lets talk about how record labels are not paying musicians, keeping them in perpetual debt, dodging taxes and royalties, and gulping 90% of the revenue generated by content sales.
or alternatively, you can just shut the fuck up, and educate yourself before you make another grandstanding statement for next time. i think that's the better option.
Re:Sorry, but fuck you. (Score:4, Informative)
The key is not voting for a Democrat instead of a Republican or vice versa. By the time of the general election it's too late.
The primaries are what matter. In most cases, the reason you only have a choice between an imbecile and a turd sandwich is because the Republican primary chose an imbecile and the Democratic primary chose a turd sandwich. You can pretty well bet that there were candidates running in those primaries that would do you better -- certainly you have a better chance of that with six candidates running in a primary than with two running in the general election. On top of that, because fewer people vote in primaries, your vote counts for more when you do.
See, the problem here is (Score:5, Informative)
http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html [ucsc.edu]
of course, that is an optimistic statistic. since, the bulk of the wealth at the top is undetectable in offshore banks, swiss banks, various fund schemes etc. if you count this unaccounted for wealth in, it really goes towards 1% owning near 90% or more. (the total wealth in swiss banks is assumed to be 7 times or so the value of everything - goods, services, land, everything - in the world, so go figure.).
now, see, the 1% people on the top, want to keep taking such 70-90% of everything. and the whole story behind laws like this, is that. that is a bigger share of the economy than biggest dukes had in medieval times.
so life, is 90% more expensive because this 1% segment gets 90% out of the economy and everyone has to work to generate that extra 90%, and give it to them through the system. imagine how life would be, if everything was 90% cheaper
so, instead of thinking this like 'some law bought by lobby interests', think it as like 'feudal lords trying to keep their hold on peasantry' -> for this is exactly what it is.
doing this, would break various mental conditionings that were built into your brain through the education and media systems and through conditioning of society at large. and, you would be free to seek any alternatives. the least benefit would be that you would be able to analyze the situation objectively, instead of instinctively skipping by the fact that someone in this society is taking 90% of every effort you spare, away from you through the economy - not even taxes. taxes are calculated after that 90% is taken away from you.
( for the naive out there - NO, if you are running your own business, this does not change - you are still spending on a lot of costs to run your business or your life, and ANY cost you spend out of your pocket - or opportunity costs - has that 90% drain on them - for, you cant exist outside economy while being in it, even if you work for yourself )