Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 42 of 42

Thread: Net regulation

  1. #1
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,594
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Net regulation

    Wikipedia and many others are protesting bills under consideration before the US Congress.

    Right now, Wikipedia blackened out their pages with this:

    Imagine a World
    Without Free Knowledge

    For over a decade, we have spent millions of hours building the largest encyclopedia in human history. Right now, the U.S. Congress is considering legislation that could fatally damage the free and open Internet. For 24 hours, to raise awareness, we are blacking out Wikipedia.
    These bills if they become the law in the US would have serious implications to the modern communication everywhere in general and would have a big impact on the photo sharing sites.

  2. #2
    Senior Member Amin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Posts
    1,809
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Net regulation

    I agree. Honestly, this kind of legislation could lead to the elimination of sites like GetDPI.
    Last edited by Amin; 18th January 2012 at 08:37.

  3. #3
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: Net regulation

    Actually, a lot of the yelling about this is related to the degree one trusts the government. I have severe doubts that it might actually affect this website after looking at the proposed legislation.

    I am fundamentally opposed to this as well as all of the regulations that have or are being proposed for the net including all the "net neutrality" stuff. The Obama administration has exerted unprecedented control over the web without acts of Congress. They just do it exerting some theory about executive or regularity power.
    As a W3C member and member of its advisory board I would point out that the net's vitality depends on unfettered use and experimentation.
    All of this government stuff just needs to stop.

    The issue these bills are trying to solve with these blunt axes relate to the sheer scale of digital media piracy which can happen is just moments by the net. I agree that this is a problem, one of moral bankruptcy of the individuals who do it, but the bad actors are people and not sites. Why they expec the government to be enforcers is unreasonable to me.

    I am especially opposed to government interference with the dns system.

    If digital media holders wish to pursue their complaints, there is the court system which ought to be utilized. Of course, the digital media copyright owners will say that this is too expensive and impractical. Of course it is. There are alternatives for original media such as digital rights management, but users find that unfriendly, which is true, but which may be necessary. Once the digital genie has been let out of the bottle, you can't put it back.

    These bills are only the tip of the iceberg and because they are in congress, they are visible.
    They are bad, bad precedents, and not the role of the government of a free people, that is if we remember what that was supposed to be.
    So to the whole shooting match and all branches of governments anywhere "KEEP YOUR HANDS OFF OUR WEB"
    -bob

  4. #4
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,925
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Net regulation

    I've blacked out photos on my flickr stream in support of the anti-legislation bill.

    Freedom, liberty, it's always a fight. The true price of liberty has always been blood. Without the willingness to shed blood for it, it is already lost.

  5. #5
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Net regulation

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob View Post
    Actually, a lot of the yelling about this is related to the degree one trusts the government. I have severe doubts that it might actually affect this website after looking at the proposed legislation.

    I am fundamentally opposed to this as well as all of the regulations that have or are being proposed for the net including all the "net neutrality" stuff. The Obama administration has exerted unprecedented control over the web without acts of Congress. They just do it exerting some theory about executive or regularity power.
    As a W3C member and member of its advisory board I would point out that the net's vitality depends on unfettered use and experimentation.
    All of this government stuff just needs to stop.

    The issue these bills are trying to solve with these blunt axes relate to the sheer scale of digital media piracy which can happen is just moments by the net. I agree that this is a problem, one of moral bankruptcy of the individuals who do it, but the bad actors are people and not sites. Why they expec the government to be enforcers is unreasonable to me.

    I am especially opposed to government interference with the dns system.

    If digital media holders wish to pursue their complaints, there is the court system which ought to be utilized. Of course, the digital media copyright owners will say that this is too expensive and impractical. Of course it is. There are alternatives for original media such as digital rights management, but users find that unfriendly, which is true, but which may be necessary. Once the digital genie has been let out of the bottle, you can't put it back.

    These bills are only the tip of the iceberg and because they are in congress, they are visible.
    They are bad, bad precedents, and not the role of the government of a free people, that is if we remember what that was supposed to be.
    So to the whole shooting match and all branches of governments anywhere "KEEP YOUR HANDS OFF OUR WEB"
    -bob
    Well said.

    Not pleased that the sponsor of SOPA is from my area.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Amin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Posts
    1,809
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Net regulation

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob View Post
    Actually, a lot of the yelling about this is related to the degree one trusts the government. I have severe doubts that it might actually affect this website after looking at the proposed legislation.
    It is unlikely to affect this particular website, but it could. This legislation would hold site owners responsible for all content. Say that Jack decided to host this site on a UK server (many photo forums use Global Gold) and someone registers here and posts a photo that belongs to Getty. Getty could then request that access to the server for GetDPI be blocked, and bam: No one in the US can access GetDPI.

    I've decided to black out my two most-viewed sites for the day.

  7. #7
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: Net regulation

    There is a lot of mis-information circulating about these bills.
    What they basically attempt to do is to extend the same powers that are already exerted by US Regulators within American borders to those web sites that are "off-shore". They would achieve this extra-jurisdictional power through filtering at the border.
    If you remember there have been over the last two years unprecedented seizures of web domain names by the US government of those sites within its borders that the government believed violated the copyright laws. This was done by the Obama administration before trial and before judgement.
    It is disturbing to me that the government sees its role as the protectors of only selected forms of private property. I don't support it on-shore, and not off-shore either.
    Protestors are mis-guided in their narrow focus on these bills. The bigger issue is that the net ought to be beyond the unilateral control of the executive branch of the government or the congress. THAT is the problem and is aggravated by FCC actions via regulation of those things that the administration could not get congress to support.
    -bob

  8. #8
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Net regulation

    Yes, this would pretty much shut down most forums. And the wording of this bill is outrageous...there is no due process. Welcome to the People's Republic...

  9. #9
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: Net regulation

    Quote Originally Posted by Amin View Post
    It is unlikely to affect this particular website, but it could. This legislation would hold site owners responsible for all content. Say that Jack decided to host this site on a UK server (many photo forums use Global Gold) and someone registers here and posts a photo that belongs to Getty. Getty could then request that access to the server for GetDPI be blocked, and bam: No one in the US can access GetDPI.

    I've decided to black out my two most-viewed sites for the day.
    The US government already have control of this site via FCC regulation. These bills only apply to off-shore sites.

    Both are wrong, but we are already screwed on this forum unless we change the presidency in the upcoming election.
    -bob

  10. #10
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: Net regulation

    Quote Originally Posted by monza View Post
    Yes, this would pretty much shut down most forums. And the wording of this bill is outrageous...there is no due process. Welcome to the People's Republic...
    No, the bills apply to off-shore forums only.
    We are, as I said, already screwed these bills or not.
    -bob

  11. #11
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: Net regulation

    I ought to change the name of this thread from Net Regulation, which the Executive branch does on its own, to Net Legislation, which is an action of Congress.

    We already have the regulation these bills attempt to extend those to off-shore sites.
    -bob

  12. #12
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Net regulation

    Bob, do you know where these FCC regs are posted?

  13. #13
    Senior Member stephengilbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Santa Monica, CA
    Posts
    2,272
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: Net regulation

    "Both are wrong, but we are already screwed on this forum unless we change the presidency in the upcoming election."

    Right. I'm rooting for Rick Santorum, a man committed to freedom of thought and expression.

  14. #14
    Senior Member Amin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Posts
    1,809
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Net regulation

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob View Post
    No, the bills apply to off-shore forums only.
    We are, as I said, already screwed these bills or not.
    -bob
    We also serve as an example for many other countries. If other nations pass their versions of SOPA, then they could cut of access to our sites in the US on a country by country basis. It's a huge mess.

  15. #15
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: Net regulation

    Quote Originally Posted by monza View Post
    Bob, do you know where these FCC regs are posted?
    This is how it works in the US.
    1) media owners complain
    2) FCC monitors and collects data, determines locale of domain and site
    3) List goes to the Dept of Justice who obtains a court order to seize domain names.
    domain registrars are presented with the order
    -done-
    Oh, and after a year or two, if you are very lucky, you can get those domain names back.
    The issue with this behavior is that there is no specific adjudication of any violation until AFTER the seizure. So in November of 2011, 130 domain names were seized in a wholesale sweep. Only a few have gone through the process to clear their names all the while being out of business.

    There is also the net neutrality regulation that is a wolf in sheep's clothing as it for the first time gives the FCC control over the flow of information on the net. Yes it is neutral, but neutral in the eyes of the government. This was the camel's nose under the tent. The FCC chose to regulate the net without an act of congress which had no chance of passing. The Senate at the time had no belly to stop it.

    Here are some recent events
    http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/n...g-facebook.ars
    and
    http://torrentfreak.com/feds-seize-1...ckdown-111125/
    All it took was "support" from the FCC and the Justice department and a sympathetic judge.

    What is needed is actually a Congressional bill that reads something like.
    No branch of government may take any action with regard to pre-emptive satisfaction of complaints of copyright holders unless those complaints have been brought to trial and a judgement rendered.

    but it cuts both ways.

    The digital copyright act includes the concept of take-down notice which even some of us have used against offenders when our personal material was mis-appropriated. These ought to be the primary method that media owners use against violations and if no action is taken, then take the suspects to court, but by the copyright owner, not the government.

    If the site is off-shore, then the one thing I think may be appropriate is to permit requests for extradition for trial. At least we don't need to invent anything new with potential unanticipated consequences.
    -bob

  16. #16
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,594
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Net regulation

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob View Post
    I ought to change the name of this thread from Net Regulation, which the Executive branch does on its own, to Net Legislation, which is an action of Congress.

    We already have the regulation these bills attempt to extend those to off-shore sites.
    -bob
    Sounds better, Bob.

    Me being a non US citizen is only concerned about how it affects the global traffic.

    Yes, even with my limited knowledge of the US laws, I understand the actual powers and the accrued ones are far reaching.

  17. #17
    richard.L
    Guest

    Re: Net regulation

    "House Judiciary Committee Chair and Texas Republican Lamar Smith, along with 12 co-sponsors, introduced the Stop Online Piracy Act on October 26th of last year.
    "

    where the bill: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.R.3261:


    eff's page: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/0...ng-free-speech


    ANd I'm Gone...

  18. #18
    Senior Member Amin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Posts
    1,809
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Net regulation

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob View Post
    No, the bills apply to off-shore forums only.
    I don't think you have this right, Bob. Lots of people studying this legislation say otherwise. Here's Sal Khan's explanation: http://www.khanacademy.org/video/sop...merican+Civics

  19. #19
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,594
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Net regulation

    Amin, I am glad that you posted Sal Khan's link. That initiative (Khan's academy) is the one I had in mind the foremost as an example of net freedom. I am hoping to volunteer for them when I get a chance.

    Regulations/legislations such as this from a certain perspectives (ie., money and profit) take the measures to the extreme and chip away the basic rights of any human being.

  20. #20
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: Net regulation

    Quote Originally Posted by Amin View Post
    I don't think you have this right, Bob. Lots of people studying this legislation say otherwise. Here's Sal Khan's explanation: http://www.khanacademy.org/video/sop...merican+Civics
    No, the professor and I agree entirely, however I think, as do our attorneys, that his interpretation is overly broad and a bit alarmist. Some of what he now claims as an extension to powers is not much really (concerning the bits about inhibiting investigation of potentially illegal activity) is what exists today and is called "obstruction of justice".

    The biggest gripe I have is that the law attempts to legitimize the current behavior of the current US government. Currently it is doing exactly this by seizing domain names and demanding that search engines remove sites. This has been done through court order which are not that hard to obtain What the bill does is provide immunity to the claimants which is an extension to that which exists today but not when the claimant is the government itself.

    In November 130 domain names were seized without explicit support of legislation. They are already doing it, hell, this administration does not seem to think it needs laws.

    Much of the hand-wringing concerning US sites IMO is over milk spilt long ago by both regulation and legislation and backed up by the courts. "Injunctive relief" is often sought if claimants feel that there is a continuing act that damages them and unless the claim is fraudulent, there is no recourse.

    The bill is unnecessary, unfortunately apparently, within the US Borders since the acts describes are ALREADY routinely done.

    What is needed instead perhaps, if folks want to take this piracy stuff seriously, is to extend the copyright treaties that currently exist. Currently copyright enforcement practices vary greatly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. What this bill does really is mainly extend US powers to those actors who lie beyond US jurisdiction.

    So I will restate once again "These bills need to be defeated" and even more important than that, the US needs to be restrained from its current practices some way.

    If rights owners feel that they are damaged in some way, they ought to seek relief in the courts of the appropriate jurisdiction.
    -bob

  21. #21
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Net regulation

    If piracy is indeed what this is about, the ultimate irony is that neither of these bills will stop it.

  22. #22
    Senior Member Amin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Posts
    1,809
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Net regulation

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob View Post
    No, the professor and I agree entirely...
    It's clear from his video and the text he cites directly from the legislation that US-based forums could be heavily affected.

    Vivek, as an educator I have the utmost respect and admiration for Sal Khan.

  23. #23

  24. #24
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: Net regulation

    Quote Originally Posted by Amin View Post
    It's clear from his video and the text he cites directly from the legislation that US-based forums could be heavily affected.

    Vivek, as an educator I have the utmost respect and admiration for Sal Khan.
    I don't think that they need anything new to do that, see my post immediately above. They already have their hands around our throats.
    Please read the legislation which is completely clear (and BAD LOL) but please also see what the government already does.
    -bob

  25. #25
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Net regulation

    A good read here giving perspective. Makes me not want to go see Mission Impossible 3 this weekend, which I was planning to do.

    http://aol.it/ydO2fx

    And a report re: campaign funding. It will be interesting to see if this pressure makes for a 'change.'

  26. #26
    Senior Member Amin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Posts
    1,809
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Net regulation

    Bob, I am familiar with the current law and these bills. I agree we have problems already. SOPA and PIPA would worsen those problems and could certainly affect sites like GetDPI.

  27. #27
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: Net regulation

    Quote Originally Posted by Amin View Post
    Bob, I am familiar with the current law and these bills. I agree we have problems already. SOPA and PIPA would worsen those problems and could certainly affect sites like GetDPI.
    Existing practice could (do) as well.

    anyway, copyright cuts both ways.
    Here is an interesting ruling http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/201...ight-decision/
    So here, what we used to think had entered the public domain in the US may get yanked back.

    -bob

  28. #28
    Senior Member Amin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Posts
    1,809
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Net regulation

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob View Post
    Existing practice could (do) as well.
    Definitely. Last thing we need is to make it worse with additional legislation.

  29. #29
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: Net regulation


  30. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,338
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    52

    Re: Net regulation

    Bob - thanks for the background information regarding this issue.

    As for Obama - the evidence is on the table regarding his political, economic and social agenda. I agree with your summary analysis, the US is in very big trouble if he is re-elected. A very interventionist administration.

  31. #31
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Net regulation

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/78786408/Mega-Indictment#

    Probably not a good idea to have an AMG Merc with plates "GUILTY"

  32. #32
    Senior Member Lars's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Sunnyvale, California
    Posts
    1,811
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    19

    Re: Net regulation

    I found this analysis of the SOPA bill interesting.

    http://mashable.com/2012/01/17/sopa-dangerous-opinion/
    Monochrome: http://mochro.com

  33. #33
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

  34. #34
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,594
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Net regulation

    PIPA delayed and SOPA is still on:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16655272

  35. #35
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: Net regulation


  36. #36
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Net regulation

    Unfortunately Obama appears to be on both sides of this issue as evidenced by what Bob already pointed out:

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob View Post
    The Obama administration has exerted unprecedented control over the web without acts of Congress. They just do it exerting some theory about executive or regularity power.
    This enables him to state he doesn't support SOPA, while at the same time appeasing his Hollywood funding base.

  37. #37
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: Net regulation

    Well it looks like from this, that this administration doesn't need a law
    Obama Signs Global Internet Treaty Worse Than SOPA Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!
    -bob

  38. #38
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

  39. #39
    Senior Member Lars's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Sunnyvale, California
    Posts
    1,811
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    19

    Re: Net regulation

    While ACTA stinks, its history goes back to efforts by USA and Japan in 2006 so tying it to the current US administration is a bit misleading. Not defending any politician here but it doesn't seem to matter who's the groundskeeper in the White House - your government works for your corporate interests.

    The perception in Sweden seems to be that ACTA is something that the US has coerced other governments into behind closed doors over the last five years. Whether that is close to the truth I don't know but to me it sounds plausible.
    Monochrome: http://mochro.com

  40. #40
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

  41. #41
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

  42. #42
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Somerset - UK
    Posts
    92
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Net regulation

    Hi Monza,
    Thanks for the latest link

    Best wishes,

    Ray

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •