-
Wed 18th Jan 2012 11:16 #1 / 20
As I'm sure many of you noticed, a number of sites have "blacked out" today in protest of the proposed SOPA and PIPA legislation before the US Congress. I've read a number of analyses of the potential impact of these bills as written (e.g., reddit), but am still not entirely clear on all the implications.
So I thought I'd bring it down to earth with a concrete example and ask, would (or could) either bill affect WarGear? If so, how?
-
Wed 18th Jan 2012 11:20 #2 / 20
I reckon that if either passed, and a mapmaker were so much as falsely accused of using copyrighted materials, the entire Wargear domain could be taken down for hosting them.
Also, if I posted a link here in the forums to a 'pirated' video hosted elsewhere, then Wargear would be responsible for the link and the entire domain taken down.
At least, that's my IANAL interpretation based on other explanations I've seen around the web.
So to answer your question, yeah.
Edited Wed 18th Jan 11:21 [history]
-
Wed 18th Jan 2012 17:17 #3 / 20
I've seen this on more forums. Can anyone quickly explain what these bills mean?
-
Wed 18th Jan 2012 17:23 #4 / 20
BTW - I am NOT complaining. I am just trying to make the world a better place with more awesome suggestions.
Something as simple as your avatar/icon is a copyrighted image. If you tried to use it anywhere they could shut down the site where you uploaded it to and then come after you and that site for monetary damages that they make up in their insane little minds.
-
Wed 18th Jan 2012 17:54 #5 / 20
"If an incompetent chieftain is removed, seldom do we appoint his highest-ranking subordinate to his place" - Attila the Hun
Aren't the Wargear servers located outside the US? I would think the bills wouldn't have jurisdiction.
-
Wed 18th Jan 2012 17:55 #6 / 20
Yes, but they would redirect DNS so that people in the US could not access those servers. (That's might understanding anyway, I'm not following it all that closely).
-
Wed 18th Jan 2012 18:04 #7 / 20
Who are the ones introducing/co-sponsoring the legislation?
Nevermind...should have known it was a couple of pubs:
http://popwatch.ew.com/2012/01/18/internet-blackout-sopa-pipa/
Edited Wed 18th Jan 18:06 [history]
-
Wed 18th Jan 2012 18:33 #8 / 20
Meh. It's both parties supporting it:
The Stop Online Piracy Act was introduced by Representative Lamar Smith (R-TX) and was initially co-sponsored by Howard Berman (D-CA), Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), Mary Bono Mack (R-CA), Steve Chabot (R-OH), John Conyers (D-MI), Ted Deutch (D-FL), Elton Gallegly (R-CA), Bob Goodlatte (R-VA), Timothy Griffin (R-AR), Dennis A. Ross (R-FL), Adam Schiff (D-CA) and Lee Terry (R-NE).
The PROTECT IP Act has received bipartisan support in the Senate, with introduction sponsorship by Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT),
I would be surprised if the whole thing doesn't come back in a few months with a slightly watered down version. I'm giving some money to the EFF tonight (https://www.eff.org/). They seem like the most effective organization that fights for a free internet.
Edited Wed 18th Jan 18:34 [history]
-
Wed 18th Jan 2012 18:43 #9 / 20
Join the Cult of RiskyBack...it's fun and the Kool Aid is YUMMY!
AttilaTheHun wrote:
Aren't the Wargear servers located outside the US? I would think the bills wouldn't have jurisdiction.
Actually this is one of the things that they are actually proclaiming about the bills, that they will protect US copyrights from evil doers outside the borders of the Greatest Nation on Earth. It's the typical "USA...USA...USA" reasoning that works so often with the US Congress. tom will be declared a terrorist using the Internet to promote his World Domination Agenda.
In reality the main thing that is frightening about this legislation is that they are a foot in the door for Internet control. It is claimed that they will protect copyrights, jobs and our freedom and how can people be against that, but really, we only need to look to the Senator from Naboo for our Answer:
"So this is how Liberty dies...with thunderous applause"
P.S. the word "applause" looks eerily like the word "Applesauce" and I don't think that is just by chance.
-
Wed 18th Jan 2012 18:47 #10 / 20
"If an incompetent chieftain is removed, seldom do we appoint his highest-ranking subordinate to his place" - Attila the Hun
RiskyBack wrote:
AttilaTheHun wrote:
Aren't the Wargear servers located outside the US? I would think the bills wouldn't have jurisdiction.
...
P.S. the word "applause" looks eerily like the word "Applesauce" and I don't think that is just by chance.
If you're implying that applesauce looks like billions of tiny yellow people applauding...I couldn't agree more.
-
Wed 18th Jan 2012 18:54 #11 / 20
Ad Extremum Omnia Sunt Limosus
I don't understand all the fuss...I love sopapipas...especially with honey.
-
Wed 18th Jan 2012 18:58 #12 / 20
Join the Cult of RiskyBack...it's fun and the Kool Aid is YUMMY!
Dude, Sev just made that same joke on my Facebook wall!
-
Wed 18th Jan 2012 19:01 #13 / 20
BTW - I am NOT complaining. I am just trying to make the world a better place with more awesome suggestions.
Sopapilla! I love those things! LoL!
-
Wed 18th Jan 2012 21:27 #14 / 20
Good point Ozy...I had just glanced at the co-sponsors, but you are correct.
-
Wed 18th Jan 2012 21:57 #15 / 20
It is actually really interesting what this bill can do... I have to say that the best explanation came from the head of reddit. He basically points out that the bill is aimed at non american sites but that the definition is so loose to include anybody without an american style extension.... .com .org .us or anyone who hosts their content on servers outside the us. The domain name can be permanently blocked by all search engines, all DNS servers, and all ISPs and that these people will be responsible for making sure your website links are never posted on their site again. Also advertisers would be forbidden from placing ads on your site and people like paypal would not be able to process payments for your site.
It is scary in the poorly defined and broad nature of the bill. A few things like DNS blocking will likely be dropped from the bill because the idea of wiping the fact that a site like Wargear ever existed from the internet is scary to conservative groups and liberal groups alike.
The idea of keeping copyrighted material or links to copyrighted material off a site like reddit, or youtube is simply a ridiculous idea based on the volume of links and videos and images on sites like these. Imagine Tom had to delete any link ever posted in a comment in any game public or private that led to an image that is under copyright. He would not only have to check if it was copyrighted but delete the link if it was, and insure that it was never posted again.
As far as Wargear, Tom would have two choices, close the site or.... physically leave the country to avoid criminal prosecution and the government would still close the site. There isn't a page on Wargear that doesn't contain a copyright infringement and this law makes it Tom's job to insure that we own the image instead of requiring the copyright owner to request it be removed as it is now.
Scary! I know that we have talked about this before but the law is very clear about the images we use in our avatars and boards. An image that you don't have explicit permission to use can't be used for any reason* without getting permission regardless if you get monetary gain or not.
*There is the fair use clause but that is soo limited and requires that the use be limited to a tiny fraction of the item (think 4 words of a song, not an entire verse) and only when clearly attributed to the owner of the item and results in no financial gain for anyone.... Like say premium membership.
This is intended for sampling, or say a review of a product, book, movie, or song. Even a little middle school chorus is required to pay royalties if they want to sing a copyrighted song at a concert and if it is a private school then there is even financial gain because the school charges for your kids to be in that chorus.
Ok... way too long a post but sum it up this way. Right now if someone complains and can prove they own an image that is on this site Tom has to take it down immediately. Simple and easy and that is it. This law passes and all bets are off, I wouldn't want to be on the other end of the court order.
To give you an idea, this case is without Sopa and Pipa being passed
Remember this gent had no content actually on his server, just links. Imagine what they would do with a stricter law. Take a minute to read information from somebody who is much more qualified than me and I would recommend making some phone calls or sending some emails to your Reps.
Whew, I'm out of breath.
-
Wed 18th Jan 2012 22:29 #16 / 20
If you would just put the baby down while you type, you'd probably have a lot more stamina Adam.
-
Wed 18th Jan 2012 22:33 #17 / 20
-
Wed 18th Jan 2012 23:48 #18 / 20
AttilaTheHun wrote:
Aren't the Wargear servers located outside the US? I would think the bills wouldn't have jurisdiction.
At one point I thought WarGear servers were actually located in the U.S. on the East Coast, but that could be old (or just plain wrong).
-
Thu 19th Jan 2012 05:02 #19 / 20
Yep they are on the East Coast!
We'll just have to play WarGear without board images, no big deal. You'll just have to type in 'Attack 2 units D4 to E5'. It'll be just like the good old days of Battleship.
-
Thu 19th Jan 2012 06:27 #20 / 20
It should be possible to play WG boards in real-time ..without the wait, regardless of how many are playing.
tom wrote:
Yep they are on the East Coast!
We'll just have to play WarGear without board images, no big deal. You'll just have to type in 'Attack 2 units D4 to E5'. It'll be just like the good old days of Battleship.
..or every member could draw their own map over the coordinates. See, ..it's not so bad.
https://sites.google.com/site/m57sengine/home
