Comments on: SOPA: So much to hate, so little time to stop it Where media and technology meet Wed, 16 Nov 2016 08:48:25 +0000 hourly 1 By: Mandy123 Mon, 26 Dec 2011 13:11:57 +0000 Isn’t it strange that with all the problems the US has, the Congress finds time and money to work on protecting Hollywood. Hollywood people are the first whiners when they think their pot of gold is being tampered with but they just love to help Congress give away other people’s money. Hollywood whines and Congress jumps. Perhaps if Hollywood was putting out something decent instead of re-makes of old crap, they wouldn’t be losing money.

By: txgadfly Sun, 18 Dec 2011 22:06:00 +0000 Let us be perfectly clear:

Yes “There are crummy people out there who steal the creative work of others and peddle them as their own” but almost none of the “owners” of this “creative work” did any of the creating. And that is the problem, and a huge one.

Somehow the creative people who actually *DO* something creative are not being protected by US copyright and patent law. They transfer their “rights” to financial third parties and it is those financial types who get all the money. So why do we make such a big deal out of which layer of derivative functionaries gets what money?? Because they kick part of that money back to our elected “representatives” through bribes we quaintly call “campaign contributions”. This is the Hollywood establishment.

What we need to do is to require legally that artists and inventors retain rights to their works or donate them to the Public Domain. Only a minority of those rights should be for sale. And they should be of shorter duration than the creator’s rights. And not renewable.

Fix copyright law, do not mess up the internet!!!

By: bobSmith Fri, 16 Dec 2011 13:55:34 +0000 Nice article.

By: OneOfTheSheep Fri, 16 Dec 2011 01:51:06 +0000 I agree that the proposed cure is a bigger threat to the freedom of our internet as we know it than the “problem” it is supposed to address. SOPS absolutely is a BAD idea, and should NOT become the “law of the land”.

By: SomethingElse Thu, 15 Dec 2011 23:30:25 +0000 When there is plenty of “free copyrighted movies” to download, why would you pay for anything?

The problem with claiming that no loss occurs is that BECAUSE of piracy, people place lower value on “Digital Content” and aren’t as willing to pay for it.

And as the MPAA are the ONLY ones claiming that Pirated Movies are inferior to Bought movies… there really is nothing compelling a pirate to actually BUY what is stolen.

By: Zarrakan Thu, 15 Dec 2011 21:00:20 +0000 is an example of what damage internet censorship can do.

Around 2000 various commercial music companies pressured into selling because they couldn’t stand the idea of people buying music directly from independents.

Their cover story was that they believed was allowing the posting of copyrighted material. Despite this being a blatant lie, eventually crumpled because they did not have as much legal support as the major music companies did.

Once was bought by the same major music companies that sued them, they expelled the independents, and replaced their music with commercial albums. It failed miserably due to the fact that people came to to hear the independents that they had exiled.

They would eventually allow independents back 5 years later, but the damage had already been done. At that point in internet history there did not exist real alternatives to what used to be, and mostly still do not exist. had been a beacon of independent musical expression but had been ruined by greedy rich people who did not want to compete with it.

Without an outlet to post their music to, most former independents had given up with very few surviving the change to move their music to a different service like ITunes.

Internet censorship in all it’s forms destroys the internet.

Vote NO on SOPA.

By: matthew633 Thu, 15 Dec 2011 19:15:12 +0000 Oh boy, is our “Big Daddy” Gov’t at work unconstitutionally again????