THE iDOLM@STER > THE iDOLM@STER 2
The Stop Piracy Online Act and im@s requests/recording.
JNiles:
I haven't read the text of the bill, so please bear with the vague generalizations I am going to make instead. Our (American) legislative branch is a select group of people who like being in charge, like to extend their authority by passing laws, and don't know/care about the consequences of their actions. They will try whatever they think they can get away with... the only limits are the fact that they get in each other's way, and perhaps the occasional fear of massive demonstrations/civil disobedience.
Personal anecdote: In 1995, when I was a graduate student, someone introduced a bill that would tax grad student tuition waivers; you get them by being a research assistant or teaching assistant. Grad students are by nature poor, so the net effect would be some of them would have to quit. The labor they save the faculty (research, office hours, grading papers) would be dumped in the faculty's lap. Now, why would anyone tax them specifically? It's untapped revenue, I guess.
Fortunately, the bill went nowhere, but bad bills are proposed all the time. They are supposed to die in committee, but if everyone follows their party leader, any bill can conceivably go through, including this one. Waiting for the Supreme Court to strike it down is the last line of defense- it shouldn't be counted on.
The usual tired response to this nonsense is "elect better representatives". But the cartels we call "political parties" are not interested in quality control, only loyalty, and are well-equipped to hammer down any independent candidates that pop up (I do not belong to a party myself). Nothing stops a candidate from lying about their intended goals, then selling off their influence once they get in office. We don't have a national-level recall mechanism, and 2 or 6 year terms are plenty of time to do some damage.
Of course, this is not a problem unique to us- but since this bill apparently relies on the muscle of the American government and the payment companies that are based in the US, it's worth mentioning. Other countries can pull the same stunt if the right people are put in place- I am in particular amazed that it's possible for an outside group of internationals to replace the prime minister of a European nation. So much for national sovereignty.
The TARP thing is a particular sore spot for me- the public seems to have a gigantic blind spot when it comes to financial matters and very large numbers. Support for TARP boils down to 2 things:
1. Trust us, we know what's best for you.
2. If we didn't do it, things would be much worse off than they are.
- neither of which is provable. Our state representatives largely opposed it at the beginning, then reversed course (at least enough to aid in its passage).
Back to the original post and the links referenced by it- I'm sorry to see that the sponsor is from Texas- as it's not my state/district, I don't get the pleasure of voting against this politician. I suppose contacting one's local representative is the next best option- it doesn't require demonstrating and it doesn't get one teargassed.
I do have one small hope - the public loves its entertainment, and messing with that entertainment is the surest way of annoying it (Look at the outcry over Netflix). Everyone knows what Youtube and blogs are- perhaps going beyond the occasional DMCA-video yanking will get their dander up. Can we at least have our bread and circuses?
Setsuna:
--- Quote from: JNiles on November 19, 2011, 04:03:10 pm ---I haven't read the text of the bill, so please bear with the vague generalizations I am going to make instead. Our (American) legislative branch is a select group of people who like being in charge, like to extend their authority by passing laws, and don't know/care about the consequences of their actions. They will try whatever they think they can get away with... the only limits are the fact that they get in each other's way, and perhaps the occasional fear of massive demonstrations/civil disobedience.
Personal anecdote: In 1995, when I was a graduate student, someone introduced a bill that would tax grad student tuition waivers; you get them by being a research assistant or teaching assistant. Grad students are by nature poor, so the net effect would be some of them would have to quit. The labor they save the faculty (research, office hours, grading papers) would be dumped in the faculty's lap. Now, why would anyone tax them specifically? It's untapped revenue, I guess.
Fortunately, the bill went nowhere, but bad bills are proposed all the time. They are supposed to die in committee, but if everyone follows their party leader, any bill can conceivably go through, including this one. Waiting for the Supreme Court to strike it down is the last line of defense- it shouldn't be counted on.
The usual tired response to this nonsense is "elect better representatives". But the cartels we call "political parties" are not interested in quality control, only loyalty, and are well-equipped to hammer down any independent candidates that pop up (I do not belong to a party myself). Nothing stops a candidate from lying about their intended goals, then selling off their influence once they get in office. We don't have a national-level recall mechanism, and 2 or 6 year terms are plenty of time to do some damage.
Of course, this is not a problem unique to us- but since this bill apparently relies on the muscle of the American government and the payment companies that are based in the US, it's worth mentioning. Other countries can pull the same stunt if the right people are put in place- I am in particular amazed that it's possible for an outside group of internationals to replace the prime minister of a European nation. So much for national sovereignty.
The TARP thing is a particular sore spot for me- the public seems to have a gigantic blind spot when it comes to financial matters and very large numbers. Support for TARP boils down to 2 things:
1. Trust us, we know what's best for you.
2. If we didn't do it, things would be much worse off than they are.
- neither of which is provable. Our state representatives largely opposed it at the beginning, then reversed course (at least enough to aid in its passage).
Back to the original post and the links referenced by it- I'm sorry to see that the sponsor is from Texas- as it's not my state/district, I don't get the pleasure of voting against this politician. I suppose contacting one's local representative is the next best option- it doesn't require demonstrating and it doesn't get one teargassed.
I do have one small hope - the public loves its entertainment, and messing with that entertainment is the surest way of annoying it (Look at the outcry over Netflix). Everyone knows what Youtube and blogs are- perhaps going beyond the occasional DMCA-video yanking will get their dander up. Can we at least have our bread and circuses?
--- End quote ---
I'd note that there's another 21 sponsors, but that doesn't change my perspective from an outsider. Basically there's a lot of people to aim at if you want to make things move.
I've been following the progress of the RIAA and the MPAA for years - the actions they've taken have been rather curious, some of them more successful than others. I guess I just reveal myself to be someone older than anyone has much business being, at least in my line of work.
My concern is the fact that the SPOA isn't actually anything particularly new - it's from my count about the seventh bill to show up in the last five years. You had other bills including a bill that had 5 streams having you liable for six months jail in a couple of states (Alabama I think?) which were supposed to be just about 'offending people' but when you dug a little deeper... copyright infringement was one of the listed triggers. I'm not ENTIRELY sure the status of that bill though, I think it sort of got stalled and sent to inertia hell, but I may be wrong.
The only thing dramatic about it is the fact that they've made it an end run, and this time around, a quite dramatic end run, by not attacking only internally (which they have rights to attempt although I question if a republic is served by people being permitted to throw lots of cash at elected politicans) but by using the US by what amounts to economic warfare in the first instance. (Generally it's better to try diplomacy before you direct violent action.)
It would, in effect, have civil actions actioned by government, and consequently, it's a huge danger. That and it would sound stupid at first glance, but it wouldn't surprise me if a war sparked over it.
It would be funny to find out WW3 started over Mickey Mouse though... Well, if it wasn't for the fact there's a non zero chance of turning a few countries into glass parking lots anyway.
I guess I've been on the trail for a long time, and if nothing else, I've seen a lot from them. It all doesn't work (otherwise I don't think we'd even be having this discussion at all since this site would more or less would not exist and I'd probably be taking up a career in scamming at a major bank instead) but some of it certainly does.
All I ask is that action is taken that this particular piece of stupid is sent back where it belongs (Unless you believe that corporations should be permitted to use government to enforce their will), and suggest that any future acts of stupid are dealt with so we don't have to worry about it later.
Unfortunately, as more famous and smarter people have pointed out - the price of freedom is eternal viligance. It really does suck when everyone forgets that one.
Setsuna:
Thought I'd drop an update.
http://www.stopcensorship.org/
I will quote from the website:
There's a good chance this legislation will pass – but Senator Ron Wyden is a steadfast opponent, and he says he'll try to block it by filibustering if it comes up for a vote.
So much for the unlikely folks. I'd pay attention.
Nii-san:
Thanks for bringing this to everyone's attention. I'm really upset that something like this could be law soon. I've spread the word to all of my friends, a lot of whom are streamers and self-content creators, which is why I was interested in getting started with the whole process. Needless to say, my friends are as angry about this as I am. I hope that all of the people who are voicing their displeasure with this potential law will be enough to KILL IT. >:(
RoninatorMarx:
Well, I brought this to another site, one that would be hit more than us. It seems bills like these have tried to get passed as a law and keeps rejected every time. Besides, even if the majority would approve of it, the President can say "no" to it and it won't pass. That move is called a veto. And since Obama doesn't approve of this, well yeah.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version