Internet Censorship
In case you don’t go somewhere today that is protesting the upcoming censorship legislation, I’d like to point you to some trusted sources who can explain it to you:
google.com/landing/takeaction/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page
mozilla.org/sopa/?WT.mc_id=strike
If you go to Google.com today you’ll see a big black square over their logo. Wikipedia is closed for the day. A few other sites I haven’t mentioned here are also closed for the day.
The copyright issues these bills are trying to fix are real, and there does need to be a solution to them. I see my own book being pirated and there is nothing I can do about it. I can usually write the site owner and have it taken down, but it’s back up within a day or two. I decided to not give it any energy, as I don’t want to focus on the negative, so it’s out there and can be downloaded for free and I just have to ignore that and be thankful there are honest people who are paying for it. I’ll probably make around fifteen hundred dollars on it over a two year period — if the people pirating it would pay for it I would likely make a lot more. With that being said, these bills are not the solution. I know we steer clear of politics here unless it directly relates to adoption, but these censor bills could easily change the way I have to handle the forum, and might force me to have to close it. If either of these bills are made into law, and then someone were to post something on there that they didn’t own the copyright to, I would be held responsible. There is no way that I, or even a large team of moderators, can possibly view every post to be sure it isn’t violating some obscure copyright somewhere. This isn’t the only thing wrong with the bills, but it’s the reason I’m posting about it here.
So if you have time today, please take the time to follow the links at one of these sites and make your voice heard to congress.
January 18th, 2012 at 12:40 pm
Interesting point RQ. The implication would be that anyone who owns a domain name, runs a blog, maintains some kind of specifically located internet presence would be responsible for the acts of any and everyone on the site. That makes no sense to me.
I am not really a political person, period. This is a prime example why. In theory, I get the need to be vocal. However, good issues and needed changes get so either a.) convoluted b.) watered down or c.) extreme in one direction that the basic need is rarely accomplished. Should there be some changes made? I think so. But this punishes (potentially) the people who don’t need to be punished. Not really right. Just my two cents.
January 18th, 2012 at 1:09 pm
In my letters to Congress I requested they vote NO to these bills, and that they ask for input from Google, Wikipedia, Mozilla, etc. when they draft new bills to try to curb the copyright problems.
They are trying to shut down the pirating sites with this bill, I get that… but it’s like they asked the FBI and CIA to write the bills for them. They both go way too far, allowing government spying in ways the government has no right to spy, and just… well, if it goes through then the censorship and Big Brother stuff in China will look lenient compared to what we’ll have here. But the part that is relevant to this site is the fact that site owners trying to run a forum are going to have major problems. Wikipedia is in the same boat — since their content is added by users, how can they possibly monitor everything that gets added? That’s why they completely shut the site down for the day, so you can’t look anything up at all, to show people what will happen if either of these bills manage to become law.
January 18th, 2012 at 4:02 pm
Hi RQ,
I wrote all three of my representatives asking them to say No to the bills. I also added to Senator Rubio that he should remember what censorship leads to because of what his family went through in Cuba. Censorship is a very slippery slope that should err on the side of liberty and not caution.
For the record, WIKI isn’t completely dead. You can research the terms SOPA and PIPA. :) Just thought I would throw that in cause I checked. WIKI makes it very easy to contact your reps. They give you links to help you out so you don’t have to do too much research to find out who they are and how to get a hold of them. (Or was it google that did that?) I forget so check each site.
January 18th, 2012 at 4:18 pm
The senate site wasn’t working this morning the first time I tried. I tried again about fifteen minutes later and it was fine, but I’m guessing they are being overloaded today. It sounds like a few politicians are backing away from it – including one of the original sponsors.
Apparently, the mobile version of Wikipedia is still up, so if you’ve got a smartphone you can still do your research.
January 18th, 2012 at 4:36 pm
That wordpress video is impressive and informative. Thanks for posting the link and the rest of this RQ. My letters to my representatives have been sent.
January 18th, 2012 at 4:48 pm
I just found this article
http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/01/18/two-sopa-co-sponsors-remove-support-for-the-legislation/
January 18th, 2012 at 7:00 pm
LOL – http://www.fark.com/ took me off guard at first, but then I read it and laughed. The video is only about three seconds long – short and to the point.
http://theoatmeal.com/comics wrote a special cartoon for the occasion. No sound, but it is NOT WORK SAFE. Not really something you should view with kiddos watching over your shoulder, either.
The last I heard, our lawmakers started the day with a more than two thirds majority in favor of it. It will be interesting to see how tomorrow starts.
January 19th, 2012 at 3:54 am
Hey RQ, did you ever tell us that you got a book published? I must have missed it if you did. Well I just wanted to congratulate you on your acvomplishmemt! Atta girl!