Wikipedia protest shutdown

Discussion in 'World Events' started by arfa brane, Jan 17, 2012.

  1. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    I don't know if anyone else has seen the announcement on Wikipedia, but the decision has been made to shut down the site for 24 hours, to protest against the SOPA and PIPA bills before Congress.

    The notion that a few extremely rich companies will somehow be afforded protection from copyright infringement, without any "side-effects", is laughable. It just demonstrates that US Congressman must think it's still 1960-something. The world, and the notion of intellectual property, has moved on. Can't these idiots see that?

    It's like burning your house down to get rid of termites.
  2. adoucette Caca Occurs Valued Senior Member

    Poor Wikipedia, what will we ever do without them?

  3. Kittamaru Staff Member

    Google has threatened a similar blackout for 24 hours... that could be interesting 0o'
  4. adoucette Caca Occurs Valued Senior Member

  5. Trooper Secular Sanity Valued Senior Member

  6. Aqueous Id flat Earth skeptic Valued Senior Member

    Hey - tomorrow you can sell that list!

    Run, guys, download everything as fast as you can!
  7. adoucette Caca Occurs Valued Senior Member

    No need encyclopedia&qs=AS&sk=&pq=online%20en&sp=1&sc=8-9&form=QBLH encyclopedia&fr=altavista&fr2=sa-gp encyclopedias encyclopedias



    What Wiki and Google is doing is not going to help them.
    Millions upon millions of people are going to find out about alternatives they didn't know existed.

    MS's Bing in particular will be enjoying the Google shut down.
  8. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    It's a 24 hour shutdown, people.

    p.s. poor adoucette, what will Congress ever do without blindly accepting morons to listen to their misguided ideas?
  9. adoucette Caca Occurs Valued Senior Member

    Maybe by listening to people who understand the ACTUAL problem and help craft legislation that will help prevent it.

    There is an actual problem.

    The solution is not simple.

    Indeed, as I suggested in the thread on SOPA:

    And indeed that is exactly what has been happening in the legislative process.

    A proposal is made, then they hear from the parties and lobbiests and debated and the legislation is tweaked as needed to prevent unintended consequences (one of the trickier parts of any legislation dealing with technology)

    The DNS blocking for instance, which was a big issue has been removed, which shows that the legislators are listening to the internet service providers.
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2012
  10. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

  11. adoucette Caca Occurs Valued Senior Member

    Yes, but they
    Which means they will likely end up with some legislation to deal with the real problem.
  12. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Fortunately I can stumble my way through Spanish well enough to read that version of Wikipedia.
  13. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    "Digital piracy is a real problem".

    So was analog piracy back when magnetic tape players/recorders arrived, before which the record companies had complete control over the production of vinyl recordings, because you needed expensive machinery to produce vinyl records.

    So, did the media companies shoot themselves in the foot by selling magnetic tape recordings, which could be reproduced on inexpensive store-purchased equipment? Did they and the producers of tape players/recorders, foresee that they were enabling piracy of copyrighted products? When VHS arrived, did the media companies reflect on the new opportunities for pirates, which had been handed to them?

    Did Congress consider a bill outlawing the sale of magnetic tape recorders? Why not? Why wasn't there a bill allowing the prosecution of stores who sold equipment that was used in illegal copying, such that stores which enabled piracy could be shut down and put out of business? Why not?
  14. adoucette Caca Occurs Valued Senior Member

    Because of volume limitations.
    Which don't exist in the digital piracy world.

    BUT, there IS copy protection built into Video tapes and VCRs.

    The signal coming from the original video tape contains data that the TV set doesn't notice but a VCR cannot handle. This extra signal confuses the automatic gain control circuit in the VCR and causes the recorded signal to be garbled.

    Try making a copy of a Disney Video and you will see that it doesn't work.

    Of course tape machines weren't illegal. They have perfectly valid reasons even if they can be used for breaking the law.

    The laws they are trying to come up are not intended to stop LEGAL use of the internet or content, but to stop illegal piracy.

    So the question is simple, are you in favor of allowing piracy?
  15. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    Well, hmmm. . .

    But the question is. Here's another simple question: are you in favor of allowing technology to exist that enables the piracy of copyrighted material?

    If no: then why are you even using the Internet?
    If yes: then why do you agree there's a problem?

    Sure there's a problem. Your example of copy protection in VHS tapes was defeated by "pirates" long ago. Most copy-protection schemes are defeated eventually. The problem appears to be that the legal concept of "ownership" has become redundant, or at least is seriously out of date. This process began when technology arrived that made copying easy and inexpensive.

    "Volume limitation" is a crock. Any serious pirate would just purchase extra copiers.
    But that's all history. It's much easier these days to reproduce multiple copies of digital media, copyrighted or not. It makes copyright look like an afterthought.
  16. adoucette Caca Occurs Valued Senior Member


    Doesn't mean that we shouldn't try to come up with ways to stop piracy.
    On the other hand, I'm not willing to cripple the internet to stop it.
    But if a reasonable way to prevent piracy can be found then, yes, I'm for it.

    No, ownership is easily determined.
    So is piracy.
    Stopping piracy is a bit trickier, but still worthwhile so that artists get paid for their work.

    So because it's easy to steal we should allow it?
    Is that your position?
  17. gmilam Valued Senior Member

    It really is. I'm a musician/songwriter, as are many of my friends. Do you think a person should work hard on recording their songs and then just give that work away? If you enjoy the work an artist does, support them by paying for their work. (Buy directly from them if possible.) It's really that simple.

    I'd rather not see it controlled by ineffiecient technologies that will hamper internet traffic.

    What do you suggest be done?

    Arthur's right, just because it's easy to steal doesn't mean it's OK.
  18. adoucette Caca Occurs Valued Senior Member

    Wiki is very wrong to do this sort of advocacy BS.

    One of it's stated objectives is to always be NEUTRAL.

    Taking sides on this issue is clearly not being neutral.

    If they similarly take a stance on "save the whales", can you then trust that their entries about whaling will be neutral?
  19. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    And if Congress can find this "reasonable way" you would support that too? Or, you would support anything Congress does because, well, that's what Americans do? This despite tech-savvy companies claiming that Congress just doesn't have the technical expertise to find this "reasonable way"?

    Really? So if you buy a copy of a movie, who owns it? Do you? Does the store? Does the movie producer?
  20. Gustav Banned Banned


Share This Page