Hey all

I might live in the UK but this situation with this SOPA plan is really not only worrying but completely unfair i thought the uk censorship system was bad.

But I am the only one that thinks if this goes through then the likes of poser rendering will drop in the fear that it could get renderosity taken down.

I havent read the full SOPA plan but why would an anti-piracy initiative have any affect on a site which requires the artist posting a pic to state he has copyright on the image ?

My life would be much easier if the Poser product sites that offer free downloads of hundreds of products could be turned off quickly.

my guess is that, since the american president came out against it, it can't become law.  poser sites would mostly be affected by blue laws, but as in the case of computer-generated kiddie porn (COPA), we've seen that these laws can be struck down, if enacted. IIRC this site (and possibly other poser sites) already have a rule that those posting images here do so under the condition that they allege or aver that they own copyright. I ain't a lawyer.

Read the bill very carefully.  It has some bombshell clauses and addenda to it.

Example.  Some one posts a Fan Art render of Superman.  Marvel or DC or whomever holds whatever license decides to file a claim that the site is pirating their property.

Immediately, the site is shut down for a minimum of six months while the claim is investigated.

If the claim has no merit, then the site will be allowed to resume.  If the claim is found to have merit, then the investigation proceeds and the site is down indefinitely.

This is a very simplistic example. 

Quote - my guess is that, since the american president came out against it, it can't become law.  poser sites would mostly be affected by blue laws, but as in the case of computer-generated kiddie porn (COPA), we've seen that these laws can be struck down, if enacted. IIRC this site (and possibly other poser sites) already have a rule that those posting images here do so under the condition that they allege or aver that they own copyright. I ain't a lawyer.

Just because he's against it doesn't mean a, he won't sign it into law if it reaches his desk and b, if the President vetoes the bill, it can still go back and be voted into law by the Congress.  It's much harder and takes a larger majority to do so but it has been done.

Even if it is signed into law, I know two major Constitutional Law think tanks who are already preparing their legal challenges.  From what they tell me, there are a least a half dozen First Amendment violations and a half dozen more violations scattered across the entire Bill of Rights.

I'm not an attorney either but I do have a number of friends who are.

I don't understand this SOPA thing at all.

First people whined and complained that so many don't respect copyright online.

Now that there is going to be something in place to protect copyright, people are complaining about that.

Quote - I don't understand this SOPA thing at all.

First people whined and complained that so many don't respect copyright online.

Now that there is going to be something in place to protect copyright, people are complaining about that.

 

the reason people are against it is, a user can bring a site down, and the site owner has no recourse. It's designed to protect the movie and music industry for the most part. But can also effect blogs that post content against the administration in power at the time.

Quote - Read the bill very carefully.  It has some bombshell clauses and addenda to it.

Example.  Some one posts a Fan Art render of Superman.  Marvel or DC or whomever holds whatever license decides to file a claim that the site is pirating their property.

Immediately, the site is shut down for a minimum of six months while the claim is investigated.

If the claim has no merit, then the site will be allowed to resume.  If the claim is found to have merit, then the investigation proceeds and the site is down indefinitely.

This is a very simplistic example. 

Wow. who would have thought Fan Art would be a target?

the reason people are against it is, a user can bring a site down, and the site owner has no recourse. It's designed to protect the movie and music industry for the most part. But can also effect blogs that post content against the administration in power at the time.

I used to shut down sites for copyright infringement in the past.  It's fairly easy to do provided that you have proof of what you are claiming.  To have a site shut down just from someone accusing you seems to violate some constitutional law and due process.

I know would be sue as many as I could, if my site was shut down because someone lied and no one verified the information or at the very least investigate.  For people who make money with their website being shut down can be really serious and the amount of money lost along with a damage reputation due to a lie.

The entire things sounds as if it was made by someone that doesn't understand the Internet:  IT'S NOT LOCAL, IT'S GLOBAL and trying to enforce a U.S. law to a hosting company in another country has as much chance as all of us winning the lotto next week on the same day.

Quote - my guess is that, since the american president came out against it, it can't become law.  poser sites would mostly be affected by blue laws, but as in the case of computer-generated kiddie porn (COPA), we've seen that these laws can be struck down, if enacted. IIRC this site (and possibly other poser sites) already have a rule that those posting images here do so under the condition that they allege or aver that they own copyright. I ain't a lawyer.

If enacted, your avatar is the first to go. :p

All of the celebrity look-a-like morphs that are being sold can be categorized as infringement of copyright material (hello Tomb Raider character and outfit), all of the sci-fi sets that look like the Enterprise bridge or space stations, not to mention the amount of money in damages and liablility this and other sites will face by selling that stuff.

SOPA and PIPA are monstrous and terrible things that should never see the light of day.

Anyone who doesn't fully understand what SOPA and PIPA are actually purposing, please for the sake of anyone who has ever used the internet, read up and send a message to your state representative.

Just heard on the news that SOPA and PIPA are losing it's political supporters and it appears as if the voices have been heard, or at least until another crazy plan to control the Internet is born (which is being worked on now).

I guess this is another battle won by Internet Users.

Hopefully it would get scrapped.  Since Wikipedia is blacked out (which is a silly move if you ask me), I'll have to wait 'til midnight.

It was a bad move on their part if you ask me.

celebrity look alike morphs are a "right of publicity"  issue normally.  

The aim of the legislation as I understood it was to allow a US agency to make unavailable a site that is alleged to be violating US copyrights to US users.

It would give the vendors here a better income of some of these pirate sites could be forced down.

If a vague law can be applied badly, it will, sooner or later, regardless of the intent of those who wrote or enacted it.  I inherently distrust this legislation.  But then I also tend toward mild paranoia and "slippery slope" logical fallacies.  :lol:  :unsure:

Quote - It would give the vendors here a better income of some of these pirate sites could be forced down.

I don't know about that. Vendor's revenue is probably tied to disposable income of consumers more than anything else.  For me I used to buy at least 5 models every month but now I don't have the disposable income anymore, so now I purchase a model every 6 months or so. 

The assumptions that are made are

#1:  That they can actually find enough pirate sites including their sister sites

#2:  That peer-to-peer software falls under the same category as "website."

#3:  That they will even have access to a pirate site.  Even today there are pirate sites that require membership and passwords in order to access stuff.  Fileshare sites have the ability to have passwords as well. 

#4:  That all pirate sites will be in english? A person could make a in another language and it wouldn't even show up in the U.S. search engine.

#5:  That non-IT, non-Technology congressmen and congress women have the necessary knowledge to even address such an issue.  I wonder how many IT professionals did they consult with?

They came up with this idea based on the assumption that they actually know and understand the how the Internet works.  They probably don't know anything beyond the search engine.

Quote - celebrity look alike morphs are a "right of publicity"  issue normally.  

The aim of the legislation as I understood it was to allow a US agency to make unavailable a site that is alleged to be violating US copyrights to US users.

It would give the vendors here a better income of some of these pirate sites could be forced down.

I don't know.... An actor could possibly claim copyright on his/her likeness if they could prove a 3D actor is affecting their income potential by taking their place in films. 

Sir Lawrence Olivier was in Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow only as a 3D version of himself, though he did get the voice credits of the appearance. What happens when we can not only make 3D Likenesses but voice likenesses as well? One wonders if Mister Olivier's estate was paid for the use of archive footage post mortem in the making of this film.

The real reason behind SOPA and PIPA has nothing to do with copyright.

There is a site on which people write things that you don't like (the you I am referring to wears a top hat and has a white beard). You infiltrate an agent provocateur which, one way or the other, uploads copyrighted content or links to copyrighted content. After a while, the copyright owner "discovers" the copyright violation and has the site taken down.

Censeroning ideas is a no-no (only "dictatorships" do it) but upholding the copyright is a perfectly decent proposition for a "democracy", isn't it?

1)- SOPA/PIPA will give power to trolls and enemies. If you hate some site is just enough to upload a copyrighted material and then make the denounce of your own upload. The site will be blacklisted and turned down and you can say "mission complete" 2)- SOPA/PIPA has no effect on pirates. Links with copyrighted material have a very short life. Pirates upload copyrighted materials in a lot of sites, once it is dicovered the by the owners of the site it is removed and the pirates upload it again at other site. In the past the preferred sites for uploading were just those that most enforced the copyright laws. The application of PIPA/SOPA will leave a trail of blocked and blacklisted sites and pirates will continue to upload at new sites. Pirates can use hacked sites for uploading illegal material, if your site was hacked it will be your site that will be blacklisted and then the pirates will hack another site and the story will repeat itself. Also this can backfire for Hollywood, some can hijack Disney site, upload illegal material and the Disney itself will be blacklisted. SOPA/PIPA Have no effect on P2P, illegal material are hosted in personal computers. Also they can hack your computer and use it as P2P server or mail spammers. The strict application of PIPA/SOPA will have the result of whole ISP providers to be blacklisted and millions and more millions of users left without internet. Machiavello would be very proud of SOPA/PIPA

speaking as a limey,isnt all this going a bit far? why cant common sense be applied to these circumstances? lets take the problem of sites being taken down? why does the entire SITE have to be taken down? and dont most sites have admin and moderators etc isnt it their job to monitor and police sections of a site that can be posted to by users? so surely it must make more sense to raise a complaint directly with site owner/admin and let them sort it, say if a certain site gets lots of complaints THEN close it and let them go over it with fine tooth comb? i know this doesnt apply to the rest of the world so wont US sites simply migrate over to foreign servers just to sidestep this issue anyway?

I.e., the whole SOPA thing could be easily misused by anyone with revenge on their minds, and since there is no due process it will get misused.

Then, those "the vendors here" you're hoping will get "a better income if some of these pirate sites could be forced down" will instead have no income at all. Baby with the bathwater. Have a read of this proposal: it's frightening.

What's more frightening is this. Congress waits for the hoo-ha to die down, administrations to change, and quietly enact it anyway, under a new name. You don't think the movie/music industry are going to take this lying down, do you? :glare:

This goes a lot farther than a celebrity likeness issue. I heard a while back of car companies going after modelers for making 3d replicas of their cars and violating copyrights. You don't even have to have an image. How many times have you quoted a line in a movie or book? Did you cite credit? Was it full proper credit? Did you cite the author and publisher, (or creator/producer/movie company/character/actor) or did you just mention the title or character? Any site that allows users to post in a forum, or bulletin board or write a review whether or not they allow pictures would be at risk. Considering how many sites have a user based help boards this could get ugly. Norton could get MacAfee shut down. Micro soft could go after Apple. Disney could go after Touchstone (if they don’t own them already)(please note I’m not trying to pick on any of these companies they are only examples of competition). If you think this wouldn’t happen, think back to the days of phone slamming. (If you’re not familiar with this, back in the 80s or 90s when AT&T was broke up many other phone companies popped up and would call you to get you to switch. If they called and someone answered they would assume you wanted to switch phone companies, even if you hung up on them, and suddenly you had a new phone company and charges you didn’t want and shouldn’t have.) If small to medium (or even large companies that are hurting financially) are spending all their income on litigation how long will they stay in business?

There is also one part of this that a lot of people are missing. It's not just sites hosting copywrited material that can be taken down. It is also sites with links to material that may infringe on a copywrite. For instance if you post links to friends artwork sites from your artwork site you may be targeted because you do not hold the copywrite to the sites/work that you provide links to. This is one place where real danger lies and one place that most posting to the front page or even this thread don't seem to realise. These bills affect everyone not just pirates.

I have a gardening site with blog. Every word is my own. There are less than half a dozen links that go offsite and those that do point to govt. agencies in Canada, the US and the UK. There is some video. If these laws pass in the US I will be forced to remove the links as I do not hold copywrite on the govt. pages I link to. Will I be blacklisted because of those links? I doubt it but I won't take chances either. My site gets me work and thus money. Does yours? This is one way that these pieces of legeslation will stifle the internet.

Currently there are sites and blogs worldwide that link to my video feed. They draw traffic to my site. How many of the US sites that link to my videos will stop linking because they don't own the video they link to? How will that affect my web traffic? There are those of you that do similar things. Are you ready to take the hit to your traffic?

There is a lot more to this than meets the eye.

Yep.. basically anything posted anywhere can be challenged, and any site could be immediately shut down with no notice or recourse.

For instance, let's say one of my Daz products was used in a gallery render here.

And Rendo pissed me off for some reason.. maybe too many Antonia threads.

So I decide I'll get them, and report them under SOPA. Techincally I am the copyright holder, and even though a gallery post would be fair use, because I complained and provided proof of copyright, Rendo would be shut down, AND unsearchable in search engines.

Yes, they could lobby for reinstatement, but imagine all the trolls worldwide with beefs at thousands of websites, doing the same thing.

How long might it take for Rendo to be reinstated, with thousands of sites asking to have thier cases heard? One person being a jerk could shut down an entire community with an invalid complaint.

For those of you who remember, think what could have happened if SOPA and PIPA had been in force when we had the TamelaJ/Victorias mess.

One of the big Constitutional issues (this from friends who specialize in Constitutional Law) is that it violates the innocent until proven guilty, trial by a jury of your peers, and right to face your accuser clauses.

Someone making a claim doesn't have to have hard evidence.  They just need a "reasonable suspicion".  The site is immediately blocked for a period of six months while the claim is investigated.  If the investigation finds violations, the feds procede with the case but the original claimant does not have to appear to testify as to how or why they came to make the claim.

"For those of you who remember, think what could have happened if SOPA and PIPA had been in force when we had the TamelaJ/Victorias mess."

god. that would have killed most of the poser sites at the time.. she was targeting everyone.....

Quote - my guess is that, since the american president came out against it, it can't become law.  poser sites would mostly be affected by blue laws, but as in the case of computer-generated kiddie porn (COPA), we've seen that these laws can be struck down, if enacted. IIRC this site (and possibly other poser sites) already have a rule that those posting images here do so under the condition that they allege or aver that they own copyright. I ain't a lawyer.

As with all things in american politics, you know what is in the details.

1.  If enough members of congress support these bills, they could override any veto. 

2.  Big Hollywood (which is liberal and has lobbying power) is for it.  So Obama could either do a mea culpa or a stealth signing.  Likewise the bribes... I mean campaign donations from lobbists, will sway congress a lot more than emails.

3.  This isn't the first time a law like this has been tried.  So it or something like it will get through eventually.

4.  When congress failed to create a bill to regulate CO2 emissions, for better or worse it's not the issue, the EPA decided they'll go ahead and regulate it on their own...  and SCOTUS agreed with them.  So the FBI or FCC or someone could quietly say, we've got a precedent here, and enact these regulations anyways. 

Quote - Me:

 

4.  When congress failed to create a bill to regulate CO2 emissions, for better or worse it's not the issue, the EPA decided they'll go ahead and regulate it on their own...  and SCOTUS agreed with them.  So the FBI or FCC or someone could quietly say, we've got a precedent here, and enact these regulations anyways.

I can't even go 7 hours without being proven right.

Quote - > Quote - Me: 4.  When congress failed to create a bill to regulate CO2 emissions, for better or worse it's not the issue, the EPA decided they'll go ahead and regulate it on their own...  and SCOTUS agreed with them.  So the FBI or FCC or someone could quietly say, we've got a precedent here, and enact these regulations anyways.

I can't even go 7 hours without being proven right.

So, if the US gov't can do this now, refresh my memory why we need SOPA, again? :glare: Rendo? :blink:

I don't think it will have an effect on sites like Poser and your own renders.

Well this topic has become a intresting one i have been watching all day.

I have now decided to move my website out of the us and onto a home country host its not going to be hit by sopa law and at present the uk is pretty safe ground as far as internet censorship well there is ceop and IWF but they are aimed at protecting children.

Quote - Well this topic has become a intresting one i have been watching all day.

I have now decided to move my website out of the us and onto a home country host its not going to be hit by sopa law and at present the uk is pretty safe ground as far as internet censorship well there is ceop and IWF but they are aimed at protecting children.

The problem with stupid SOPA and PIPA is that they can make your overseas sites blacklisted for US customers, so even though sites overseas are still running, any money made from US advertisement and item purchses will cease which may or may not hurt said sites.

Anon basically went on a rampage and shut down the RIAA, MPAA and another site. I don't usually cheer on anon, but this time I am.

"Arrests were made at a number of homes in Auckland, New Zealand, on warrants issued by US authorities. ...... If found guilty of the charges, the accused Megaupload executives could face 50 years behind bars."

As NZ don't imprison anyone for 50 years, I suppose that would mean extradition to the US. I doubt that copyright infringement would be an extraditable offence anyway, but there's always extraordinary rendition.

The jail cells in the US are gonna fill up pretty quick then.

Going to? I thought they were already packed to the rafters... with real criminals... :lol:

Not that piracy isn't a crime... not saying that at all. I'm a vendor and so have been personally affected. It's gut-wrenching.

But loss of personal freedoms is infinitely more so.

I am not surprised about Megaupload. EVERY time I googled for a movie title (to read the synopsis or check for the filming locations) EVERY time in the first page of the results there were links to Megaupload for the movie itself. I am surprised that the thing went so long without action.

Anon basically went on a rampage? they can deface a site for a few hours, the opposition throws you in a cell where you are raped by your cell mates. No contest. We are fast entering an epoch in which the only thing that will matter will be pure, unchecked, physical violence. Yet another reason for being happy that my hair are graying; I won't have to put up will all this for long.

P.S.: now let's see whether anything bad happens to YouTube. I foresee that Google will go on as usual without significant troubles. Why? why should the US government harm an entity that knows pretty much everything that exists on the internet, that monitors nearly every search in the world and basically has the whole internet backed up on their servers?

Attached Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhwuXNv8fJM

It really is disturbing that this is even being considered.  We already have laws against such violations we don't need some unelected bureaucracy becoming armchair vigilantes who can (and will) be bought.  

Here's an update on SOPA

Interesting.  You could read that as just putting it off until the public calms down or is distracted.  The thing isn't necessarily dead.  It's just there, waiting.  :unsure:

Quote - ... This has NOTHING to do with copy right laws.  Please keep in mind that this has everything to do with Censorship.  China has this law in place.  We are doomed if this passes.

Spot on. Nothing frightens governments more than the people knowing "too much". They may well start with film and music industry copyrights (which are ingrained into politics), but if it passes they will soon move on to censoring other types of content that bring to light the lies and misdirection so common in the media and official propaganda. Control the knowledge and control the people.

Prosecution for distributing an image resembling Superman is just a smoke screen for censoring knowledge deemed contrary to the state and contrary to commerce. Big business, media, and government are all tied together with the single purpose of controlling what the public knows, what they believe, what they spend, and where they spend it.

Though I am against piracy (my sales reciepts for this site and a few others will back that up), I am even more against censorship. We are all free (sort of) to choose our path in life and I don't want my government censoring what I see based on the assumption that I "MAY" steal it or know when I am being lied to.

Don't even get me started on Bono :-D

< steps down from soap box and resumes rendering naked bums >

if SOPA is DOA, I reckon my icon (and the millions of fan-art images everywhere) is safe for now.  it doesn't even look like superman - it's the wrong shape and there's no trademarked insignia on it. :lol:

Don't worry, it's not so tragic. The world that the governments want would be a nightmare, but thanks God the members of the goverment are ignorants living in a fantasy world surrounded by idiots and so, in practice nothing of their dreams works. Computers are unable to do what they think that can do and the technologes that they believe that they have only exist in movies.

They went after Napster and shut down when Napster was obsolote, nobody used it and was a malware site (spies). They jailed AlCapone, another great "victory" while Luciano took over all the maffia, expanded maffia to drug traffic and to politics. Created Guantanamo and lost the wars. No matter how marvelous and expensive is the Wonder Woman's invisible plane in practice it is always shot down. And satellites are unable to see what you are doing inside your house, no matter how many Hollywood movies they watched.

Nothing works, maybe it makes a little more difficult citizen's life, but people always find a way to workout the problems.

Quote - So I decide I'll get them, and report them under SOPA. Techincally I am the copyright holder, and even though a gallery post would be fair use, because I complained and provided proof of copyright, Rendo would be shut down, AND unsearchable in search engines.

Yes, they could lobby for reinstatement, but imagine all the trolls worldwide with beefs at thousands of websites, doing the same thing.

And here's the thing: the money Rendo (and vendors) lost would be unrecoverable, even if the takedown was done due to someone maliciously setting up the website, because the two versions of the law provide the ISP with complete immunity. You can't sue them to recover lost income even with 100% concrete proof that it was clearly a troll acting in a malicious manner.

So, imagine an ISP facing the situation where (a) they're potentially breaking the law if they don't stop access to a website that might have copyrighted material and (b) there is absolutely zero consequence to them for pulling the trigger, even if it's blatantly obvious there's no justification for the complaint or it's an obvious setup; what do you think happens?

Apparently they're busy re-writing this. Wonder how the balance will swing for and against with the new version: this page speaks volumes to me.

And people wonder why I have absolutely no faith in politicians of any stripe?

In short, anyone who wants to hold power isn't fit to do so. 

Quote - And people wonder why I have absolutely no faith in politicians of any stripe?

In short, anyone who wants to hold power isn't fit to do so. 

Be informed, the world famous Burlington Liars Club has as it's one rule, politicians are banned from competing.  The rest of us are amateurs.