what happens if SOPA passes?

contenderizer that is pure handwaving

i don't think it is. if MU had been more aggressive about creating an inhospitable space for illegal filesharing, then i suspect they wouldn't have been targeted for prosecution. then again, if they'd done this, they wouldn't have been the biggest fish in the pond. this suggests that this industry is financially dependent on its ability to enable piracy, which in turn justifies prosecution.

i don't doubt that one could create a useful filesharing site that would be relatively inhospitable to pirates. i only doubt that one could make much money doing so.

register all users. block access to users who upload illegal content. delete all content uploaded by users who upload any illegal content. work with organizations like the RIAA and national governments to develop reasonable strategies for identifying illegally uploaded content (if they'll cooperate). etc.

― Little GTFO (contenderizer), Friday, 20 January 2012 08:51 (37 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

This is all fine until someone has to produce a cheque book. Content industry bodies demand ISPs police the internet but refuse to fund the policing. Same everywhere.

the issue comes down to proving that content is actually owned by the folks who are telling you to take it down. having worked at a company that was constantly trying to get content removed from websites, i can tell you it's a real hassle for both sides. and megaupload probably has had millions of albums uploaded both legally and illegally and i'm sure they complied when they were able, perhaps? it might just be a matter of being unable to keep up with the content and therefore folks were keen to just take down the whole operation.

otm. One of the biggest problems now is that current systems of managing copyrights, issuance of rights etc. were not prepared with the internet in mind and are failing to keep up.

not having used megaupload, did they have a content expiry policy? making that more aggressive (say, 48 hours) would probably have helped protect them

e.g. if you want to release a TV show on DVD and there's a four-second clip of a song in the background, sometimes it's so clunky to organise the rights and royalties for the snippet of audio that it's easier to just digitally paste it out xp

Content industry bodies demand ISPs police the internet but refuse to fund the policing. Same everywhere.

Well, that's a familiar model, right? Regulatory bodes set the rules by which the the banking and finance industries must behave, but do not typically provide funding to help those companies identify and prevent violations. The US government doesn't give gun sellers money to run background checks, but it nonetheless demands that such checks be run.

it comes down to megaupload saying "ok we'll take it down but we need to know that it belongs to you" and that shit takes time. i'm sure there are riaa drones who have the most miserable business and legal practices jobs who scour the internet for lady gaga uploads and have to draft takedown notices all day long.

exactly, the literal "right to copy" starts to break down when the ability to copy becomes so trivial and low-cost. that's basically the whole deal we're trying to talk about.

(i've hesitated to write something like this for days now cos it seems so pedantic)

ct: I agree completely, but the content industries are such tight-arses that they insist ISPs voluntarily censor sites and foot the bill. Here in Aus this has been going around in circles for 3–4 years, and it never touches down because the ISPs (rightly imo) refuse to fund someone else's grievances.

my job for awhile involved doing just that sort of thing with uploaded videos and film and i always felt it was a complete waste of time, b/c for every youtube or metacafe there are many others out there, and it doesn't matter. what we ended up doing was youtube's monetizing system had a built-in ID, so instead of the user who uploaded potentially making any revenue on views, the revenue went right to us and the video was left up.

it comes down to megaupload saying "ok we'll take it down but we need to know that it belongs to you" and that shit takes time.

Yep. Wish I knew where I saw it now, but just a couple of weeks ago I read something about a new push to streamline this whole process with a new central right database, so that all content and IP ownership (worldwide?) can be identified quickly.

central rights database

my guess is the future of the industry might come down to the riaa teaming up with sites like that and making money on hits. you know, fractions of pennies for each listen or w/e but better than nothing. can't beat em, join em.

what we ended up doing was youtube's monetizing system had a built-in ID, so instead of the user who uploaded potentially making any revenue on views, the revenue went right to us and the video was left up.

oh wow

it IDed on either video or audio, only way users could fuck w/it was to alter the video somehow. if you ever see a youtube video that is slowed down a little bit, it might be because they're trying to dodge that system.

my guess is the future of the industry might come down to the riaa teaming up with sites like that and making money on hits. you know, fractions of pennies for each listen or w/e but better than nothing. can't beat em, join em.

In a sensible world, yes, but the RIAA and all int'l equivalents are far too greedy and old-fashioned to make it work. They're playing an all-or-nothing game by a very old set of rules.

it's actually really popular that. YouTube's categorisation is in the realms of spooky -- we had a demo of it once, and it will catch snippets of things even if you try and deliberately obscure them by fucking w/the video.

Then they give you, Mr Rights Holder, this giant interface that shows all the stuff on YouTube that they reckon infringes your copyright, and you can either click through one by one taking them down, or whack a button that says "put ads on these and send me the income" xp

the literal "right to copy" starts to break down when the ability to copy becomes so trivial and low-cost. that's basically the whole deal we're trying to talk about.

(i've hesitated to write something like this for days now cos it seems so pedantic)

not pedantic at all, imo. that's the crux, it doesn't get talked about much in such plain terms, and it's very hard to resolve. to what extend does (or can) the "right to copy" break down?

in the end, even that system had its faults and wasn't 100% but we caught most of them i believe.

xp i feel like the riaa will get to a point where they have to do it. barring a complete shutdown of the internet, there's no way to stop it.

otm, and I'm sure this is not news to anyone here but http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect

Justice.gov is down, whitehouse.gov under fire too by Anonymous in retaliation

copyright.gov, RIAA, UniversalMusic, MPAA, all under attack right now

http://gizmodo.com/5877679

Anon says fbi.gov is next

holy shit

nice work but I fail to see how it's going to help anyone ever

True, but the amount of fire-power is amazing

Anonymous Anonymous @YourAnonNews

Incoming Database Dump. Get Ready #OpMegaupload

Amazing firepower, absolutely, but it just gives the RIAA &c. an excuse to label everyone who's anti-SOPA a terrorist.

and then we've bugger-all hope of stopping the legislation.

lol shots fired

hadopi.fr went down

http://i.imgur.com/VIvQq.gif

Amazing firepower, absolutely, but it just gives the RIAA &c. an excuse to label everyone who's anti-SOPA a terrorist ... and then we've bugger-all hope of stopping the legislation.

― Autumn Almanac (Schlafsack), Thursday, January 19, 2012 3:04 PM (45 seconds ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

OTFM. turning this into a war isn't going to result in increased internet freedom for anyone.

at least not in the short run

that did say "raging vagina tractors" rite xxp

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k82kAfNlZf0

OTFM. turning this into a war isn't going to result in increased internet freedom for anyone.

― Little GTFO (contenderizer), vrijdag 20 januari 2012 0:07 (16 seconds ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

But today's extreme raid on Megaupload will?

Anonymous didn't start any war, the war has been going on for years already.

ct: yeah, it will just encourage govts to clamp down harder to stamp out the terrorists (and take us all down with them).

my this thread has gotten exciting

We are getting a taste of what happens if SOPA passes imo

yup. There's no way the MPAA can hire -all- of these 'hackers' in time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4hQnI7gMnc&feature=related

well I was reading this as 'SOPA obviously not gonna pass at this point, megaupload / prob some other big busts are the consolation prize'

Yesterday I was thinking how short-sighted it was of the RIAA to belittle Wikipedia, given the sheer number of people who learn about the artists and albums they purchase by going straight to the Wikipedia pages. It's so daft. It's like if Sega were to write off EB Games as a waste of space.

referring to this (thanks to Ned who put me onto it)

http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/4/2012/01/xlarge_2f76ed225a8572989bb77300a2bc8e98.jpg

Okay, if we can focus SOPA so that it specifically targets The Oatmeal and nothing else, I would encourage my rep/senator to vote for it

Really tired of the convential wisdom that Wikipedia is a terrible resource plagued by constant errors and made up "facts". Yes, of course any student or anyone that uses it as a sole source for any sort of professional research is an idiot and deserves what they get, but its a great resource to begin with and branch off from there.