• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Bad people in a position to do bad things will do bad things because they are bad people. End of story.

Stop using mental illness to avoid talking about armed white supremacy.

We are builders in a constant struggle with destroyers. keep building.

Sadly, there is no cure for stupid.

A thin legal pretext to veneer over their personal religious and political desires.

This really is a full service blog.

You come for women, you’re gonna get your ass kicked.

Sadly, media malpractice has become standard practice.

Second rate reporter says what?

Rupert, come get your orange boy, you petrified old dinosaur turd.

Quote tweet friends, screenshot enemies.

If you can’t control your emotions, someone else will.

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Just because you believe it, that does not make it true.

Fear or fury? The choice is ours.

“When somebody takes the time to draw up a playbook, they’re gonna use it.”

Republican speaker of the house Mike Johnson is the bland and smiling face of evil.

People are weird.

Consistently wrong since 2002

Shallow, uninformed, and lacking identity

Dear elected officials: Trump is temporary, dishonor is forever.

Republicans: “Abortion is murder but you can take a bus to get one.” Easy peasy.

Since when do we limit our critiques to things we could do better ourselves?

They were going to turn on one another at some point. It was inevitable.

Mobile Menu

  • 4 Directions VA 2025 Raffle
  • 2025 Activism
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • 2025 Activism
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • Targeted Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Science & Technology / The Worst Congress Ever Tries To Outdo Itself

The Worst Congress Ever Tries To Outdo Itself

by John Cole|  November 28, 20117:00 pm| 101 Comments

This post is in: Science & Technology, Our Failed Political Establishment

FacebookTweetEmail

Via DKOS:

PROTECT IP Act Breaks The Internet from Fight for the Future on Vimeo.

Big Pharma and the recording and movie industries are on the verge of passing a bill that could very well destroy the social web, including Daily Kos.

This is no hyperbole. Watch the video above. It is literally an existentialist threat for Daily Kos and any other site with user-generated content, from Facebook, to Reddit, to tumblr, Sound Cloud or YouTube.

This is the holy grail of the entertainment industry—to destroy the internet, and thus, destroy the biggest danger to their business.

While the entertainment industry already has outsized tools to fight piracy, they don’t want to deal with the hassle of having to send takedown notices to individual infringing sites. It’s hard work, going after YouTubes of dancing babies and stuff! And, of course, they don’t have jurisdiction over many foreign-based sites. So, if they can’t stomp out all piracy, plan B is to destroy the internet.

Not content fiddling while America burns, they’ve now decided to ruin the internet.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « It’s time
Next Post: Thin-Skinned Bullies »

Reader Interactions

101Comments

  1. 1.

    arguingwithsignposts

    November 28, 2011 at 7:03 pm

    Is there really a chance that this gets signed? I’m not sure. I know it’s shitty law, but what are the odds it gets into the books?

  2. 2.

    MikeJ

    November 28, 2011 at 7:10 pm

    I never read articles on legislation that don’t include bill numbers.

  3. 3.

    David Koch

    November 28, 2011 at 7:11 pm

    This is too funny, GOS already destroyed itself years ago.

  4. 4.

    Bullsmith

    November 28, 2011 at 7:14 pm

    The thing is there are all these little guys out there USING the internet while at the same time America’s biggest political doners are NOT PROFITING FROM IT. Simple math means the internet must be hit with a hammer an shaken until enough money falls out to cover the vig.

    Once cable companies and News International control all information delivery, America will be free once more.

  5. 5.

    David Koch

    November 28, 2011 at 7:16 pm

    Gotta love how GOS embraces piracy. They love to squawk about the rule of law until it applies to them.

  6. 6.

    El Tiburon

    November 28, 2011 at 7:17 pm

    Word on the street Al Franken is a sponsor of this.

    I will be interested to get his side of the story.

  7. 7.

    Janus Daniels

    November 28, 2011 at 7:19 pm

    petition:
    https://wfc2.wiredforchange.com/o/9042/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=8173

  8. 8.

    NR

    November 28, 2011 at 7:32 pm

    @El Tiburon: Al Franken is a perfect example of what happens to a good Democrat when he gets elected to the Senate.

    The Democratic party isn’t going to stand up to the corporate overlords that run the government. It will take a new party to do that.

  9. 9.

    BBA

    November 28, 2011 at 7:32 pm

    @arguingwithsignposts: It’ll get signed. Much like the war on drugs, strengthening intellectual property is the serious bipartisan position, no matter how counterproductive or destructive it gets. Only unserious hippies and Ron Paul oppose it.

  10. 10.

    John Weiss

    November 28, 2011 at 7:35 pm

    @Janus Daniels: Hey Janus. I live in Oregon, where both Senators and Rep. DiFasio are doing the right thing. I signed the petition anyhow ’cause they can use the encouragement.

  11. 11.

    Steve M.

    November 28, 2011 at 7:36 pm

    How does this possibly pass if it fucks over Facebook and Google? They’re not exactly the corporate 99%.

  12. 12.

    elftx

    November 28, 2011 at 7:37 pm

    http://stopcensorship.org/

    sign the petition by Senator Wyden who is threatening a REAL filibuster on this bill.

  13. 13.

    NR

    November 28, 2011 at 7:38 pm

    @El Tiburon: As per Open Secrets, Al Franken’s top two campaign contributors are Time Warner and General Electric (the parent company of NBC).

    If you’re wondering why he supports this bill, look no further than that.

  14. 14.

    Dee Loralei

    November 28, 2011 at 7:38 pm

    Does anyone know about self-publishing? A friend and I are thinking of doing a cookbook. I’ve looked at a few sites, anyone know anything about Blurb or Lulu? I want hardback about 250 pages text and maybe 150 pages photos. I don’t want a binder thing, saw bunches of publishers for those. Any ideas?

    Any artist types wanna design cover? We can’t pay, yet, but there’s a cookbook in it.

    Ideas and suggestions wanted.

  15. 15.

    JPL

    November 28, 2011 at 7:39 pm

    I have no idea but if it would get rid of Red Street and Erick town person from Macon would this be a bad thing..
    I just found out about Cain and his long term affair and haven’t had time to read about that… I’m shocked, just shocked…

  16. 16.

    NR

    November 28, 2011 at 7:39 pm

    @Steve M.:

    How does this possibly pass if it fucks over Facebook and Google?

    Because the Democrats and the Republicans got more money from the RIAA and the MPAA. Simple.

  17. 17.

    JPL

    November 28, 2011 at 7:41 pm

    @NR: OMG… no..and how much did time warner give the other person…
    You do realize that your comment did not inform me of anything.. .

  18. 18.

    burnspbesq

    November 28, 2011 at 7:41 pm

    Bad, unnecessary legislation, but I doubt that Kos’ hysterical reaction is going to help defeat it.

  19. 19.

    arguingwithsignposts

    November 28, 2011 at 7:45 pm

    @Dee Loralei: from what i’ve heard, blurb and lulu are both good, although you’ll have to explore the profit split. I’d be happy to do a cover, just to stretch my graphic design muscles. e-mail me at arguingwithsignposts -at – gmail.com if you’re interested.

  20. 20.

    NR

    November 28, 2011 at 7:46 pm

    @JPL: Then you didn’t want to be informed.

    The corporations own both major parties. It’s as simple as that.

  21. 21.

    wengler

    November 28, 2011 at 7:49 pm

    This bill basically gives the MPAA and RIAA prior restraint ability for every single site registered on the internet. The clampdown on the internet has been coming for some time. It is something that the 1 percent can’t control therefore they attempt to find ways to suppress it. This is about Act III in the destruction of the internet as we know it.

    However, this legislation is made and enforced by people that haven’t the foggiest clue on how the internet works. The trade-off will be having to use possible rogue DNS servers in order to look up the censored addresses. The people that this will really hurt are start ups who will have to pay protection money to the MPAA/RIAA so that they don’t go after them. Of course this could also start a major shit war between rival oligarchs.

    Stay tuned. If this is passed the next step will probably be clampdown through the physical control of internet hardware.

    We just must remember that destruction of the internet as a means of political repression is evil(in other countries), but destroying the internet because of phantom loss profits is as American as apple pie.

  22. 22.

    David Koch

    November 28, 2011 at 7:52 pm

    @NR:
    The statistics are misleading.

    Anyone who works for Saturday Night Live or NBC, such as Chevy Chase and Tina Fey, are listed at GE contributions because they’re GE employees.

    GE and Time (the corporations) did not make any contributions to Franken.

    For example, Newscorp is listed as Franken’s 15th largest contributor. But that’s similarly misleading. Neither Rupert Murdoch nor his corporate entity made contributions to Franken, but anyone who works for FoxTv such as Harry Shearer and Seth MacFarlane are collated as Newscorp contributions.

  23. 23.

    Bubblegum Tate

    November 28, 2011 at 7:53 pm

    It is literally an existentialist threat

    What does Sartre have to do with this?

  24. 24.

    Joseph Nobles

    November 28, 2011 at 7:57 pm

    Darrell Issa is against SOPA. Of course, he says he has his own version in the works, but at least he understands that this would have nuked YouTube, Twitter, and Facebook as startups.

  25. 25.

    magurakurin

    November 28, 2011 at 7:58 pm

    @NR:

    Then you didn’t want to be informed.The corporations own both major parties.It’s as simple as that.

    yeah that’s great, but can you provide a link to where Franken is a sponsor. Because I just spent the last 20 minutes and couldn’t find anything. Apparently there are 39 sponsors, but I can’t find any names other than Leahy and Grassely. I would be curious and surprised if Franken is one of the 39. Not saying he is or isn’t because, I don’t know for a fact. I am, however, wondering if you do.

    Oh and to BBA, if by Ron Paul you mean Ron Wyden, then your post would be…correct? Ron Paul is in the House, but thanks for the deep insight anyway.

  26. 26.

    Walker

    November 28, 2011 at 7:58 pm

    As Wengler implies (but does not go that far), if this passes, expect a total breakdown in the DNS system. You will have Wikileaks style alternatives to DNS that go around the censorship, and plugins to support it for every major browser.

    And when that happens, screw ICANN. US control over site naming will be gone.

  27. 27.

    Maude

    November 28, 2011 at 8:01 pm

    @Dee Loralei:
    Create Space. Look it up. It is very well liked by indie writers. Lulu, not so much. One writer said the quality wasn’t good and the paper was very thin.
    You can do print on demand.
    Good luck.
    Edit, brain death for a second.

  28. 28.

    Splitting Image

    November 28, 2011 at 8:03 pm

    I’m curious to know what the proposed law would do to the practice of web advertising. Currently a website owner has less than complete control over which advertisements appear in banner ads because companies like Google stream in ads based on the presumed interests of whoever is viewing the page.

    If this legislation passes, and a website owner is deemed responsible for third-party content, then logically the same owner is equally responsible for third-party advertising. That could completely kill Google’s business model.

    Mind you, I suppose the Republican response is that corporations are people, but not the sort of people who should be subject to this kind of law.

  29. 29.

    magurakurin

    November 28, 2011 at 8:04 pm

    @El Tiburon: Franken is a sponsor. link Seriously though, I wish people would do a little leg work before they post up this sort of information.

    I, too, would like to hear Franken’s side of the story.

  30. 30.

    wengler

    November 28, 2011 at 8:10 pm

    This will be a malware and phishing paradise. A couple years back there was a large scale attempt to attack the DNS system that if successful would’ve led people to fake amazons and other fake websites where their machines would’ve been infected and all of their personal information stolen.

    This bill will throw the addressing system to the wolves.

  31. 31.

    Moonbatman

    November 28, 2011 at 8:13 pm

    But the evil wingnut Congressman Darrell Issa who is swiftboating Eric Holder with his Witchhunt over the ill conceived Fast and Furious program “gone horribly wrong … providing political fodder for a Washington game of “gotcha” that underscores everything wrong with our political system.” opposes SOPA.

    Free social justice warrior Stephen Hayes.
    So it must be good.

  32. 32.

    Moonbatman

    November 28, 2011 at 8:15 pm

    But the evil wingnut Congressman Darrell Issa who is swiftboating Eric Holder with his Witchhunt over the ill conceived Fast and Furious program “gone horribly wrong … providing political fodder for a Washington game of “gotcha” that underscores everything wrong with our political system.” opposes SOPA.
    So it must be good.

    Free social justice warrior Stephen Hayes.

  33. 33.

    EIGRP

    November 28, 2011 at 8:17 pm

    I lost interest in the video after about 20 seconds.

    “The internet is one of the United States’ most robust and growing industries.” Something about that statement bothers me.

    Then, he said “Firstly”.

    Eric

  34. 34.

    harlana

    November 28, 2011 at 8:17 pm

    @Joseph Nobles: it’s sorta creepy feeling, being on the same side as Darrell Issa O.o

  35. 35.

    Lojasmo

    November 28, 2011 at 8:22 pm

    The AFL-CIO supports this, and the TEAtards oppose it.

    Frankly, I fail to see why I should be alarmed by this.

  36. 36.

    FlipYrWhig

    November 28, 2011 at 8:24 pm

    @Lojasmo: If you’re not alarmed to the maximum possible degree by all potential threats, you’re, like, a patsy to The Man. Also, DHS coordinated it.

  37. 37.

    Murakami

    November 28, 2011 at 8:30 pm

    There’s some small part of me that wants this stuff to pass to see what the net (at least in the US) will be like as it moves towards open rebellion. Tor and Freenet become mainstream? Reddit’s Meshnet plans work out? VPN’s to free nations are common? I definitely read too much cyberpunk in my impressionable youth.

    On a serious note: I wonder how the rank & file Republican politicians feel about this bill?

    In the previous decade, the only useful thing the Republican Congress accompished was swatting away ridiculous bills written by the RIAA/MPAA, since the Republicans had a basic hatred for anything involving that industry. Orrin Hatch was an exception, not the rule.

    Maybe the Republican House can do the same thing again.

  38. 38.

    Lojasmo

    November 28, 2011 at 8:32 pm

    @FlipYrWhig:

    Shit. Panic-mode engaged!

  39. 39.

    Corner Store Operator

    November 28, 2011 at 8:47 pm

    Franken is so good on net neutrality, so I’m pretty surprised. He sponsored back in May before this became “an issue.” Let’s see what he has to say about it in the coming days.

  40. 40.

    Belafon (formerly anonevent)

    November 28, 2011 at 8:48 pm

    The hottest item on the internet will once again be hosts files. We’ll eventually have a service entirely devoted to copying host files to everyones computers.

  41. 41.

    BBA

    November 28, 2011 at 8:57 pm

    @magurakurin: The Senate bill is S. 968. The equivalent House bill is H.R. 3261. Sponsor lists are on thomas.gov, which is link-unfriendly.

    My point is that this is not a partisan issue, it’s an establishment-versus-fringe issue. Both parties’ establishments support strong intellectual property law, because “intellectual property is the driver of American innovation”, etc. The campaign contributions from media companies are just a coincidence I’m sure.

    Any opposition to these draconian measures comes from the fringes, left (Wyden) and right (Paul), and is easily dismissed as “pro-piracy”.

    Finally, let me reiterate that even if he is on the right side on occasion, Ron Paul is still a disgusting human being.

    @Murakami: The DMCA passed both Republican-controlled houses by voice vote in 1998. Voice vote! Of course, the pro-Hollywood Clinton was in the White House then.

  42. 42.

    El Tiburon

    November 28, 2011 at 8:58 pm

    @magurakurin:
    I heard Franken was a sponsor on Sam Seders show, so maybe he was wrong.

  43. 43.

    magurakurin

    November 28, 2011 at 9:03 pm

    @El Tiburon: No, he’s on the list. It is surprising since he has been a big supporter of net neutrality.

  44. 44.

    BonnyAnne

    November 28, 2011 at 9:05 pm

    @Dee Loralei:

    I doubt this particular self-publishing format is quite what you’re looking for, because it only publishes in black and white, but I am a fan of the Espresso Book Machine, if there’s one near you. (I live in Seattle, Land of Riches, and so of course I have two within walking distance.)

    http://www.ondemandbooks.com/

    I recently made a few copies of some things I had written and compiled, so I could have them out in a wave of egotism to my family. (Far less useful than a cookbook!) Cost was $50 set-up fees + $12/book, and that includes a full-color cover. Seeing your own words in print is an amazing thing.

  45. 45.

    magurakurin

    November 28, 2011 at 9:08 pm

    Just so I am clear, here’s my deal. Presumably people post things here for a reason, m-c excluded. So, unless the reason is that you hope to be a web-based Jesus, “give a man a link inform him for a day, teach a man to google…” then the initial posts really should be a little deeper than a one line quip about how the empire is finally crashing or a blip of some rumor.

    Either the information the poster heard wasn’t checked out by the poster in which case they are merely repeating hearsay (which may well be true) but despite the claim of super importance they couldn’t have been bothered to check it out. Or they did check it out, but for some reason decided not to include the source (Internet Jesus??)

    It seems to me that if one wants to be heard and feels their opinion is important, something to back up the claim would give even greater value and importance to it.

  46. 46.

    Lojasmo

    November 28, 2011 at 9:10 pm

    Franken is one of the smartest fellas in the senate (and a member of four unions.) Until I figure otherwise, i’m trusting his judgment on this.

  47. 47.

    Murakami

    November 28, 2011 at 9:15 pm

    @BBA:

    Wish I could remember the bill or bills from around 2003-2005 but the Republicans stood up against something which wasn’t as bad as the current bills but was worse than the DMCA. I’m sure someone here will have a better memory than I do.

    One of the odd things about that bill was it caused RedState and the GOS to form an unholy alliance. Considering RedState’s opposition to the current bills, I’m thinking that will happen again.

  48. 48.

    Joseph Nobles

    November 28, 2011 at 9:18 pm

    @harlana: I know, right? Franken’s an original co-sponsor, Issa’s against it… it sounds horrific to me. I would also like to hear Franken’s case for this, but I don’t see why the existing laws aren’t enough.

  49. 49.

    James Gary

    November 28, 2011 at 9:41 pm

    Franken is one of the smartest fellas in the senate (and a member of four unions.) Until I figure otherwise, i’m trusting his judgment on this.

    It’s a good thing that only hardcore Republican wingnuts are in the habit of blindly trusting authority figures, rather than making an attempt to find the facts out on their own. Otherwise this country might be in real trouble.

  50. 50.

    goddinpotty

    November 28, 2011 at 9:42 pm

    Existentialist threat? What, is Jean-Paul Sartre going to bring down the internet?

    But change it to existential threat, then yeah. Scary.

  51. 51.

    wvblueguy

    November 28, 2011 at 9:43 pm

    Take a peak at this link on open congress.org. All you have to do is follow the money to understand why this piece of shit bill stands a very high chance of passing regardless of what we or the rest of the people of the USA think.

    Why SOPA and ProtectIP are so Hard to Kill.

  52. 52.

    Murakami

    November 28, 2011 at 9:48 pm

    @Lojasmo:

    Franken is a smart guy and one of the few in the Senate who seems reasonable.

    That being said, he’s supporting a very bad bill which essentially will provide the first steps towards creating a US government mandated and controlled firewall. How can he be for both net neutrality and a bill which would allow sites to be blocked on government orders? It’s quite insane to me.

    Perhaps he thinks the Senate bill is reasonable since it only targets foreign registered sites and has some safeguards to only target sites which “violate copyright”, whatever that will end up meaning.

    But, having watched the increasing abuses from the Right over the past 30-40 years, Franken should clearly understand the concept of slippery slope by now and should know the RIAA/MPAA will demand something even more draconian in the future. And they’ll probably get what they ask for once this precedent is set.

    I used to think he was one of the good guys, but apparently he can be bought as easily as the rest. Or maybe it’s his old Hollywood connections. I’ve known plenty of reasonable people in that industry, insanely liberal on most issues, but they become strangely authoritarian when it comes to locking down copyrighted content.

    If Issa is against it, then that’s proof that a broken, insanely evil clock can be right at least once in a lifetime. Here’s to hoping traditional Republican antipathy towards Hollywood will help kill this bill.

  53. 53.

    Dee Loralei

    November 28, 2011 at 9:50 pm

    @Maude: Thanks, I’ll look into it!

    @BonnyAnne: Now that sounds great for another project LOL.

    Arguingwsp, you have mail!

  54. 54.

    WereBear (itouch)

    November 28, 2011 at 9:51 pm

    @wvblueguy: That’s the sick part: used to be the challenge was getting people stirred up enough to know a threat and say they didn’t like it. Now, our legislatures DON’T CARE.

  55. 55.

    Keith G

    November 28, 2011 at 9:53 pm

    Well its a good thing that there is a dedicated progressive sitting in the White House getting ready to sign his name to a veto statement.

    President Obama has democracy’s back. right?

  56. 56.

    The prophet Nostradumbass

    November 28, 2011 at 10:02 pm

    There is quite a bit of opposition to this in the House, and happily my rep, Eshoo (CA-14) is In the leadership of it

  57. 57.

    Odie Hugh Manatee

    November 28, 2011 at 10:03 pm

    @Murakami:

    I think Franken is looking out for Franken and the ‘goods’ he has created over his career.

    This issue favors his materials and control of them. I wrote Ron Wyden to tell him that if he’s reading names that are against the bill in a filibuster, to add my wife’s and my name to it.

  58. 58.

    El Tiburon

    November 28, 2011 at 10:10 pm

    @Murakami:
    I too think Frankennis one of the good guys.

    Before we convict him maybe we should wait to hear what he says. I think he is beyond being bought and paid for, so I will reserve judgment.

  59. 59.

    arguingwithsignposts

    November 28, 2011 at 10:12 pm

    @Dee Loralei: check your email. sounds awesome!

  60. 60.

    Mnemosyne

    November 28, 2011 at 10:16 pm

    @Odie Hugh Manatee:

    I think Franken is looking out for Franken and the ‘goods’ he has created over his career.

    Okay, I can’t say I have a strong opinion about the bill itself, but, really, the people who write books and films shouldn’t be allowed to make a living from them? If Al Franken spends a couple of years writing a book, I should be allowed to copy it and distribute it to hundreds of people because, hey, it’s not like writing is work, amirite?

  61. 61.

    wengler

    November 28, 2011 at 10:24 pm

    This legislation doesn’t have the ability to stop that. It has the ability to give over the web addressing system over to anyone that claims to have their copyright infringed.

    Also one of these bills makes copyright infringement a criminal felony.

    If you think stopping digital piracy is a paramount priority, you need to start calling for the physical destruction of the internet, since all it is is one big resource sharing machine.

  62. 62.

    Amanda in the South Bay

    November 28, 2011 at 10:25 pm

    @Mnemosyne:
    And if those hundreds of people weren’t going to buy the book anyways, how does it hurt Franken’s pocketbook? Or: how is torrenting Franken’s book different than stealing hundreds of copies from a bookstore or library to give to friends?

  63. 63.

    Steve M.

    November 28, 2011 at 10:28 pm

    @NR: Google and Facebook have stopped being part of the group of corporations that control America? Since when?

  64. 64.

    James Gary

    November 28, 2011 at 10:29 pm

    Okay, I can’t say I have a strong opinion about the bill itself, but, really, the people who write books and films shouldn’t be allowed to make a living from them? If Al Franken spends a couple of years writing a book, I should be allowed to copy it and distribute it to hundreds of people because, hey, it’s not like writing is work, amirite?

    Copyrights need to be protected. But this bill basically enables any lawyer working for the entertainment industry to shut down any website they want, at will. It is as draconian as a law saying, “Well, shoplifting is bad–so we’ll allow all store owners to search anyone on their premises and confiscate any property said owners might deem “suspicious.”” And yes, the terms of the bill really are that extreme. Read it if you doubt me.

  65. 65.

    Odie Hugh Manatee

    November 28, 2011 at 10:47 pm

    @Mnemosyne:

    Ummm, did I say that he didn’t have that right? I was only making an observation as to why he would possibly be for this bill, that’s all.

    I think he has that right but I also think that this bill is not the way to do it.

  66. 66.

    Jc

    November 28, 2011 at 10:51 pm

    It’s strange – everything about this bill seems stupid, but there is definitely a bit of sky is falling about it. Also, Franken.

    What does our new front pager, sooner grunt, have to say?

    Isn’t this his bag?

  67. 67.

    sukabi

    November 28, 2011 at 11:01 pm

    John, for this post I propose a new category… Censorship — Content Fiddling & Suppression

  68. 68.

    Jc

    November 28, 2011 at 11:05 pm

    Also, that video puts me to sleep.

    I read the alarmist text, “omg, china-style DNS suppression is going to kill the internet!!”, so I play the video with concern thinking I will send out the link to friends, and the first three minutes, I’m given the supporters arguments, and then some droning about DNS, and I’m asleep…really bad propaganda.

  69. 69.

    Jc

    November 28, 2011 at 11:09 pm

    Lastly, MSft, yahoo, google, fb, apple, they are all on record against this, right?

    Couldn’t these guys simply BUY the content companies? MSft and apple alone have the spare cash.

    Seriously let’s put these guys out of their misery.

    Maybe then we get innovative streaming solution and not this piecemeal strangling of content, as each content tries to increase the vig each year.

  70. 70.

    Corner Stone

    November 28, 2011 at 11:14 pm

    @Jc:

    What does our new front pager, sooner grunt, have to say?
    __
    Isn’t this his bag?

    Seems he’s all for the ability to censor or shut down IP addresses. That is his bag, baby.
    Didn’t we already know this?

  71. 71.

    RSA

    November 28, 2011 at 11:17 pm

    @Jc:

    Also, that video puts me to sleep.

    I really dislike the Fahrenheit 451 trend on the Web. I have to use an application at work for which the tutorial is a set of about twenty videos. Not searchable, not copy-and-pastable… Ugh.

  72. 72.

    carpeduum

    November 28, 2011 at 11:24 pm

    Yawn, what you fail to realize (big surprise) Wrong Way Cole is the post comes from none other than Drama Queen Mr. PUMA himself Markos. The statement right off the top saying it’s not hyperbole is basically just a projection of …….you guessed it….hyperbole.

    That orange site has become quite the joke. If people aren’t irrationally talking conspiracy theories (from both sides of
    the isle) they are on there literally asking for money. In fact I think there is someone on there today asking for money for their sick grandmother or whatever…..lol.

    That whole site has become quite the embarassment to those of us on the left who are still sane. I always thought we were better than that.

  73. 73.

    opie jeanne

    November 28, 2011 at 11:31 pm

    I’m sorry to jump OT but I have friends who are freaking out over a post on the ACLU site regarding Senate Bill 1867, “drafted in secret by Senators Carl Levin and John McCain….”

    You can read the hysteria here: http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/senators-demand-military-lock-american-citizens-battlefield-they-define-being/

    I’ve told them that I’m sorry but I can’t handle one more story about how the sky is falling yet again, and pointed them to this post on Reddit which seems to take a much more sane look at the thing:
    http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/mrge8/did_anyone_even_bother_to_read_s_1867_subsections/

    I have to tell you that what made me pretty sure the sky was in fact not falling, yet again, was that I hadn’t read it here first. Maybe that doesn’t mean what I think it means, but I find comfort in believing that our Front Pagers would have picked up on this much earlier if it was as bad as my friends want to believe. So thank you for this gift, even if it means that no one noticed it and we really are all doomed.

    Doomed, I say.

  74. 74.

    Roy G.

    November 28, 2011 at 11:33 pm

    @The prophet Nostradumbass:
    Good on Ms. Eshoo for taking the smart side. It’s a pretty compelling tale, coming from Silicon Valley, that this will definitely have a negative effect on startups, especially since SV is one of the few bright spots economically.

  75. 75.

    David Koch

    November 28, 2011 at 11:37 pm

    This proves Al Franken is just another Hitler.

  76. 76.

    Arm The Homeless

    November 28, 2011 at 11:47 pm

    @David Koch: Hitler never tried to destroy YouTube. It’s like Mecha-Hitler with a neutron-bomb mustache.

  77. 77.

    Murakami

    November 29, 2011 at 12:02 am

    Of course, disparaging or disagreeing with anything Franken does, especially when he gives his support to a narrow industry which just happens to give him and the rest of the Democrats a lot of money, means that we think he’s equivalent to Hitler.

  78. 78.

    Arm The Homeless

    November 29, 2011 at 12:05 am

    @Murakami: I think your snark-o-meter needs a tune-up. I can’t speak for Koch, but I assumed that comment was pretty tongue-in-cheek.

  79. 79.

    Murakami

    November 29, 2011 at 12:14 am

    Back when Bush was running rampant, I’d ask my sometimes sensible conservative friends if they would be so unconcerned about torture, Patriot Act, eavesdropping etc., if these policies were initiated by a President Hillary Clinton.

    These days, I guess I have to ask my supposed allies on the Left the same sort of silly question. If the Republican leadership was gung ho for these bills, if Boehner was daily weeping about how the Internet is so unregulated, and the usual righties were the primary force pushing it through, would so many of you be unconcerned about it or would there be the usual pitchforks and torches yelling “off with their fucking fascist heads!”

    Some days I think too many Democrats are as pointlessly tribal as the other side.

    The GOS might be a bit hysterical on this issue but there’s a pretty broad coalition against this bill, ranging from the DFH’s & Occupiers to RedState to almost every collaborative web site to the various companies in the Valley from the little guys to the corporate giants. Either there’s something terribly wrong with the proposed law or all these hundreds of thousands of people in widely varying roles and with widely varying politics are just hysterical ninnies (granted, that’s a given with RedState).

  80. 80.

    Murakami

    November 29, 2011 at 12:17 am

    @Arm The Homeless:

    Probably true. I’m just easily pissy lately due to the surprisingly large number of Democrats I’ve seen defend this bill or be utterly unconcerned about it.

  81. 81.

    David Koch

    November 29, 2011 at 12:22 am

    @Murakami:

    he gives his support to a narrow industry which just happens to give him and the rest of the Democrats a lot of money


    Cameron Diaz
    is probably the biggest threat facing the country.

  82. 82.

    karen marie

    November 29, 2011 at 12:26 am

    @Lojasmo: I didn’t realize Franken had been made god.

  83. 83.

    Arm The Homeless

    November 29, 2011 at 12:30 am

    @Murakami: I think I can sympathize. And you’re right, if this bill is indeed as odious as so many corners of the interwebs claim it to be, then we need to break out the pitchforks.

    I will spend some time to do a little more research on the finer points of the bill. I may find that I am on the same side as my recalcitrant House member, which would surprise the hell outta me!

  84. 84.

    karen marie

    November 29, 2011 at 12:34 am

    @Murakami:

    a US government mandated and controlled firewall

    That’s not the problem that came to mind when I listened to the video. It sounds like it will be a corporate mandated and controlled firewall. The corporations are the ones who have the power to just turn stuff off that they want gone and then they get to sue the crap out of whoever. Winning lawsuits is not even necessary for corporations. They’ve got deep enough pockets they can keep a suit going until you’ve exhausted all your resources or your will to live. It sounds as though this bill will give corporations many options to further control the flow of information.

    I sure wish BJ had a preview button.

    @Mnemosyne: I don’t think anyone could reasonably disagree with that, but this bill would go further. There is already law to protect copyright. This would turn over enforcement (which Republicans refuse to fund) to the corporations themselves.

  85. 85.

    Mnemosyne

    November 29, 2011 at 12:42 am

    @Odie Hugh Manatee:

    Okay, sorry. But generally when these things come up, someone referring to a writer or musician’s creative work as “intellectual property” is usually a signal that they mean all content should be free.

    The bill is stupid and draconian, but let’s not bleed over into, “Aw, it’s just a bunch of thoughts that someone wrote down, so it’s not like it has any actual value.”

    Or, as John Cheese said on Cracked.com:

    I’m saying that we’ve trained you to expect created works to be free, and that will have the effect of killing off a lot of the coolest stuff. You can snicker and say, “Oh, I REALLY feel bad that the guy who made Transformers 3 won’t be able to buy his sixth summer home” but that’s the point — a blockbuster can afford that loss. A cool, risky indie film can’t.
    __
    See, when piracy hit Hollywood, they didn’t stop funding blockbusters — they stopped funding edgy, creative movies. They’re going with safer and safer bets.
    __
    Piracy did that. We got that ball rolling, and there is no going back. Instead of Reservoir Dogs, we get Jack & Jill … and you have no idea how deeply sorry I am for that.

  86. 86.

    smintheus

    November 29, 2011 at 12:43 am

    @opie jeanne: Doesn’t look like hysteria so much as the ACLU blog is reporting just how bad S. 1867 is. Presumably Obama will veto it if it passes both chambers as formulated, but as Lindsay Graham describes it, it’s clearly unconstitutional.

  87. 87.

    karen marie

    November 29, 2011 at 12:50 am

    @Mnemosyne: @Mnemosyne:

    See, when piracy hit Hollywood, they didn’t stop funding blockbusters—they stopped funding edgy, creative movies. They’re going with safer and safer bets. Piracy did that.

    That’s ridiculous. Piracy is not what makes Hollywood go with safer and safer bets.

  88. 88.

    mclaren

    November 29, 2011 at 12:55 am

    @Arm The Homeless:

    It’s like Mecha-Hitler with a neutron-bomb mustache.

    Three upvotes for making us laugh while the world turns into shit. I guess if total disaster is imminent and America’s supersonic powerdive into collapse hits the afterburners, at least we can still joke about it, and that’s better than nothing.

    As Voltaire said, “One must either laugh or hang oneself.”

  89. 89.

    mclaren

    November 29, 2011 at 1:03 am

    @karen marie:

    That’s ridiculous. Piracy is not what makes Hollywood go with safer and safer bets.

    Sorry, but in this case you’re dead wrong, and Mnemosyne is exactly right.

    As digital technology (let’s not call it “piracy” because what we’re talking about here is Mark Cuban’s simultaneous-HDTV video releases and Netflix’s DVD rental by mail business model and the sheer size of today’s hard drives and the sheer speed of today’s broadband connections) eats into more and more secondary revenue streams for the movie studios, they’ve been forced to back off from financing many small projects and instead funnel most of their cash into huge guaranteed-winner tentpole blockbuster films.

    The reason is simple. The huge tentpole blockbuster films have such a vast number of secondary revenue streams, and those streams are now so huge, that they offset the losses from digital technology.

    Did you know that most Hollywood blockbuster movies now make a profit only on the income from their overseas releases?

    Did you know that most Hollywood films now only turn a profit once they go into DVD release and the DVD rental fees come in?

    Did you know that the gap during which a movie only plays in theater, and the time when it gets released on DVD, has been relentlessly decreasing over the last 13 years, to the point where this ever-narrowing gap is now threatening the basic business model of Hollywood?

    Did you know that syndication money for most TV series has now largely dried up?

    And did you know that most TV series are now so expensive that they only roll over into profit as a result of syndication deals and the income from DVD rentals?

    Digital technology is eating Hollywood and the Network TV industry alive. The solution obviously isn’t an insane law like SOPA, but there is a real issue here. You can’t just wave it away with the empty mantra “that’s ridiculous.”

  90. 90.

    Mnemosyne

    November 29, 2011 at 1:10 am

    @mclaren:

    Clearly the devil is hosting a snowball fight in Hell right about now.

  91. 91.

    mclaren

    November 29, 2011 at 1:13 am

    @Mnemosyne:

    Always delighted to confound and nonplus you with unexpected facts and logic, kiddo.

  92. 92.

    opie jeanne

    November 29, 2011 at 1:33 am

    @smintheus: That’s why I think it’s hysteria. Yes, it’s a bad bill but I don’t believe it will pass, and I do believe that Obama will veto it if it does, and if all of that is not enough, that this thing would not survive a trip to the Supreme Court if it came to that.

  93. 93.

    sherifffruitfly

    November 29, 2011 at 3:00 am

    It’s ok. dkos firebaggers tell us that Democrats are just like republicans.

    (shrug)

  94. 94.

    wengler

    November 29, 2011 at 3:13 am

    @mclaren: Do you get paid 10 cents apiece for these posts? Your comment reads like a call sheet of industry PR.

    I mean you reference how tv series only turn a profit when they hit syndication and then the next line is how syndication money has dried up. I believe those are on the “examples of arguments to use”. You aren’t supposed to copy/paste all of them .

  95. 95.

    wengler

    November 29, 2011 at 3:25 am

    @Mnemosyne: It’d be awesome if you posted a list of those edgy, creative films that supposedly defined the ’90s.

    Even if I were to take the bait, isn’t studio consolidation and the death of the smaller film studios much more to blame? I mean network television ate all of its independent production studios long before internet piracy existed. It’s almost as if we keep coming back to the same problem of the greater amount of money and power going to fewer and fewer people.

  96. 96.

    stinkdaddy

    November 29, 2011 at 3:40 am

    @wengler: Seems to be a trend. Also says it’s “exactly right” to blame piracy right before saying piracy isn’t the cause and that we’re actually talking about digital delivery, Netflix and etc.

  97. 97.

    Odie Hugh Manatee

    November 29, 2011 at 5:01 am

    @Mnemosyne:

    No prob. The bill is draconian and I believe that it will sow chaos online. When there is chaos there will be people who get run over by the ‘mob’ (whatever ‘it’ is), and there will be unethical people poised to profit from that chaos.

    Usually at the expense of the ‘little people’. The ‘big people’ have the guns to handle it, everyone else doesn’t. This law is a sledgehammer when all that is needed is a good hammer to nail the problem.

    The RIAA likes sledgehammers, so do crook lawyers.

  98. 98.

    OzoneR

    November 29, 2011 at 10:38 am

    @NR:

    The Democratic party isn’t going to stand up to the corporate overlords that run the government. It will take a new party to do that.

    Yeah, cause a new party won’t get corrupted either. Not at all

  99. 99.

    Holden Pattern

    November 29, 2011 at 11:02 am

    @wengler: I have to say that I do enjoy the “Piracy made the content cartels do [bad thing]” post hoc rationalization madlibs.

  100. 100.

    daniel thomas macinnes

    November 29, 2011 at 4:48 pm

    I find it hard to believe that Google and Facebook will allow the MPAA to shut down their businesses. That’s just absurd. If they’re worth anything, they already have a team of well-paid lawyers with legal injunctions in hand. If this bad bill passes, it will be tied up in the courts.

    Under this scenario, the day this bill passes, Youtube would be shut down, followed quickly by Facebook, Myspace, Twitter, Reddit, etc etc so on and so forth. And consider how easy it would be to sabotage any website (a few quick posts with “pirate links”), regardless of politics. How quickly would it take for the entire internet to become ensnared in the legal system?

    This is a collosal FUBAR machine. Heck, every 12-year-old on this planet will have the power to kill websites. How could they not run with this? Indeed, I would deliberately bust all the major websites immediately, just to pick a fight. Let Google and Microsoft’s lawyers win this one for us.

  101. 101.

    salvador dalai llama

    November 29, 2011 at 11:51 pm

    I think the DNS concern is perhaps a major one–I don’t know enough about that aspect of things to evaluate that claim intelligently.

    One of the key issues with this bill is the definition of “internet site dedicated to infringing activities.” Here’s what the bill says:

    (7) the term ‘‘Internet site dedicated to infring
    9ing activities’’ means an Internet site that—
    10 (A) has no significant use other than engag
    11 ing in, enabling, or facilitating the—
    12 (i) reproduction, distribution, or public
    13 performance of copyrighted works, in com
    14 plete or substantially complete form, in a
    15 manner that constitutes copyright infringe
    16 ment under section 501 of title 17, United
    17 States Code;
    18 (ii) violation of section 1201 of title
    19 17, United States Code; or
    20 (iii) sale, distribution, or promotion of
    21 goods, services, or materials bearing a coun
    22 terfeit mark, as that term is defined in sec
    23 tion 34(d) of the Lanham Act; or
    24 (B) is designed, operated, or marketed by its
    25 operator or persons operating in concert with the
    1 operator, and facts or circumstances suggest is
    2 used, primarily as a means for engaging in, ena
    3 bling, or facilitating the activities described
    4 under clauses (i), (ii), or (iii) of subparagraph
    5 (A);

    So people who speak legalese better than I do–is there a legitimate way that this bill, given this definition, can be used to target YouTube, Facebook, etc? Is that definition loose enough that it can, as the video suggests, be used to target startups? Corporations are capable of all sorts of malfeasance under cover of law. Will this law actually provide them the kind of cover that will kill dkos or YouTube? (And if you read the provisions about blocking access, removing funding streams, and blocking advertising–does anyone else think of Wikileaks?)

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

On The Road - twbrandt - Belle Isle, Detroit, Michigan 3
Image by twbrandt (7/20/25)
Donate

Recent Comments

  • Fair Economist on Squirrel! (Open Thread) (Jul 20, 2025 @ 12:29pm)
  • Torrey on Sunday Morning Garden Chat: Cacti (Jul 20, 2025 @ 12:28pm)
  • WTFGhost on Squirrel! (Open Thread) (Jul 20, 2025 @ 12:28pm)
  • The Audacity of Krope on Squirrel! (Open Thread) (Jul 20, 2025 @ 12:27pm)
  • The Audacity of Krope on Squirrel! (Open Thread) (Jul 20, 2025 @ 12:27pm)

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
No Kings Protests June 14 2025

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)
Fix Nyms with Apostrophes

Social Media

Balloon Juice
WaterGirl
TaMara
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
DougJ NYT Pitchbot
mistermix

Keeping Track

Legal Challenges (Lawfare)
Republicans Fleeing Town Halls (TPM)
21 Letters (to Borrow or Steal)
Search Donations from a Brand

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2025 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!