PIPA and SOPA are bills that did not get passed
here is some information about them. :)
wikipedia would go dark for 24 hours in protest
to SOPA and PIPA
SOPA means stop online piracy act and PIPA mean
protect IP act
people were so mad because they get money for
pitting to other people or they buy stuff from piracies
The bills have pitted the entertainment against
the technology industry.
the bills would give the legislation the right
to go for gin websites and shut them down
they will cut off ties with service providers,
credit card companies, and online advertisers.
the motion picture association of America
(MPAA) argue that innovation and jobs in content-creating industries are
threatened by growing internet piracy.
foreign website operators currently outside
bonds of the U.S. law; SOPA and PIPA would help quell illegitimate internet
activity.
to protest against SOPA and PIPA the go through
a “blackout” to protect their corporate interests— and the entire burgeoning
internet- based economy
the legislation in question targets foreign
companies whose primary purpose is to sell stolen or counterfeit goods
they can shut down websites that are streaming
media illegally
The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) (originally
known as the E-PARASITE Act) and its Senate counterpart the PROTECT IP Act
(PIPA) (originally the Combating Online Infringement and Copyright Act (COICA))
were a series of bills promoted by Hollywood in the US Congress that would have
a created a "blacklist" of censored websites. These bills were
defeated by an enormous online campaign started by EFF and a handful of other organizations,
which culminated in the Internet Blackout on the January 18,
2012.
Although the bills were ostensibly aimed at
reaching foreign websites dedicated to providing illegal content, their
provisions would allow for removal of enormous amounts of non-infringing
content including political and other speech from the Web. The various bills
defined different techniques for blocking “blacklisted” sites. Each would
interfere with the Internet's domain name system (DNS), which translates names like
"www.eff.org" or "www.nytimes.com" into the IP addresses
that computers use to communicate. SOPA would also allow rightsholders to force
payment processors to cut off payments and advertising networks to cut ties
with a site simply by sending a notice.
These bills are targeted at "rogue"
websites that allow indiscriminate piracy, but use vague definitions that could
include hosting websites such as Dropbox, MediaFire, and Rapidshare; sites that
discuss piracy such as pirate-party.us, p2pnet, Torrent Freak, torproject.org,
and ZeroPaid; as well as a broad range of sites for user-generated content,
such as SoundCloud, Etsy, and Deviant Art. Had these bills been passed five or
ten years ago, even YouTube might not exist today — in other words, the
collateral damage from this legislation would be enormous.
There are already laws and procedures in place
for taking down sites that violate the law. These acts would allow the Attorney
General, and even individuals, to create a blacklist to censor sites when no
court has found that they have infringed copyright or any other law.
I got this information from
for more information
Media companies are always
looking for new ways to fight piracy. They've tried suing individual
users, getting Internet service providers to take action
against subscribers, and working with the U.S. government to shut down
domains based in the United States. But none of those actions can
stop overseas websites such as The Pirate Bay and MegaUpload from infringing
copyrights, or prevent Internet users from accessing those sites.
Enter SOPA, in the U.S.
House of Representatives, and PIPA, in the U.S. Senate. Both bills are aimed at
foreign websites that infringe copyrighted material. The bills are commonly
associated with media piracy, but may also apply
to counterfeit consumer goods and medication.
Originally, both bills
provided two methods for fighting copyright infringement on foreign websites.
In one method, the U.S. Department of Justice could seek court orders requiring
Internet service providers to block the domain names of infringing sites. For
example, Comcast could prevent its customers from accessing thepiratebay.org,
although the underlying IP address would still be reachable. This ISP-blocking
provision was a major concern among Internet security experts, and
both SOPA and PIPA have dropped it.
The other tool would allow
rights holders to seek court orders requiring payment providers, advertisers,
and search engines to stop doing business with an infringing site. In other
words, rights holders would be able to request that funding be cut off from an
infringing site, and that search links to that site be removed. The site in
question would have five days to appeal any action taken.
For more information like
this got to its website at
No comments:
Post a Comment