Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Dave Morgan

Wikipedia blackout

Recommended Posts

Oh God, how am I going to do my homework tomorrow?!?!? :(
lol
Obama won't sign the bill. I guess there is one thing he did good in 4 years.
...and lol again...

Share this post


Link to post

Looks like they give you just enough time grab a screenshot of the page before it blacks out..


Rob Prest

 

Share this post


Link to post
Looks like they give you just enough time grab a screenshot of the page before it blacks out..
Googe's cache service lets you look at the blanked wiki page (so far).

Share this post


Link to post
Then where's the problem? Wikipedia can provide links to pirate sites and the ISPs can block access. Site acces is via ISPs not Wikipedia - as you say it's not an ISP.
The problem is that the legislation is written so that the content-providers in the middle are the ones being held responsible. If the legislation said something like "We will give every ISP a machine readable list of sites to block every month" then the onus goes back to the government, and not too many people will be upset. Of course, that option essentially provides for government censorship, too, as they could easily interpret their own law to say that Wikileaks is a "pirate" site for publishing unauthorized information.

Share this post


Link to post
The problem is that the legislation is written so that the content-providers in the middle are the ones being held responsible. If the legislation said something like "We will give every ISP a machine readable list of sites to block every month" then the onus goes back to the government, and not too many people will be upset. Of course, that option essentially provides for government censorship, too, as they could easily interpret their own law to say that Wikileaks is a "pirate" site for publishing unauthorized information.
This is correct. I personally think wikipedia is being a bit alarmist about this, but their point is still valid. Even if a website like wikipedia links to another website that has links to copyrightable material, then it could be shut down. I imagine that this would probably be an unlikely scenario, as there would be a huge public outcry at shutting down wikipedia. Still, that appears to be how the law is written.Keep in mind that this doesn't just cover "pirate" sites - there are many "normal" websites out there that infringe on copyrights. Sometimes this is by accident. Sometimes it is on purpose, but without nefarious intentions. Should Youtube be shut down? I'm pretty sure that there's copyright infringing material there. If I link to Youtube in this post, should Avsim then be shutdown? That is what SOPA "could" make happen, and that is why some people are upset.What about the Avsim library? I am here to tell you that there is copyright infringing material in the Avsim file library. I know this because it is my material which has been modified (or sometimes not) and re-uploaded by others, which was against my wishes. So, I guess Avsim could be shut down too, to protect my intellectual property. Truthfully, I personally don't care, so I wouldn't take action, but I could change my mind, I suppose. Also, I acknowledge that the library managers work very hard to ensure compliance with copyrights, and I am sure that if I complained they would remove the offending material. But this is the point - under SOPA, the onus will be upon the library managers to ensure copyright compliance, not upon me to complain about it. This seems like a heavy burden to place upon Avsims library managers (all volunteeers, I'm sure).Anyway, I'm not against copyright enforcement, but this legislation seems a bit too broad to be enforced. Edited by Shaka

Share this post


Link to post
...........What about the Avsim library? I am here to tell you that there is copyright infringing material in the Avsim file library. I know this because it is my material which has been modified (or sometimes not) and re-uploaded by others, which was against my wishes. So, I guess Avsim could be shut down too, to protect my intellectual property. Truthfully, I personally don't care, so I wouldn't take action, but I could change my mind, I suppose. Also, I acknowledge that the library managers work very hard to ensure compliance with copyrights, and I am sure that if I complained they would remove the offending material. But this is the point - under SOPA, the onus will be upon the library managers to ensure copyright compliance, not upon me to complain about it. This seems like a heavy burden to place upon Avsims library managers (all volunteeers, I'm sure).Anyway, I'm not against copyright enforcement, but this legislation seems a bit too broad to be enforced.
Yes, we are all volunteers here.Feel free to send us an e-mail and let us know which files infringe your copyright, and we'll look into it.

Share this post


Link to post
Even if a website like wikipedia links to another website that has links to copyrightable material, then it could be shut down.
Could it?
(B) INTERNET SEARCH ENGINES.—A provider of an Internet search engine shall take technically feasible and reasonable measures, as expeditiously as possible, but in any case within 5 days after being served with a copy of the order, or within such time as the court may order, designed to prevent the foreign infringing site that is subject to the order, or a portion of such site specified in the order, from being served as a direct hypertext link.
http://www.gpo.gov/f...112hr3261ih.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Yes.
Then can you direct me to the clauses(s) that actually state that?

Share this post


Link to post
Then can you direct me to the clauses(s) that actually state that?
It's in the link you provided. You chose to quote a portion of one paragraph from a 78 page document. The quote you chose defines an internet search engine, which wikipedia, youtube and avsim are not. These are "Internet sites", and the legislation only mentions "links" not "direct links" in reference to these sites.

Share this post


Link to post
Then can you direct me to the clauses(s) that actually state that?
This is from a CNN Money article on the subject:But SOPA goes further than DMCA and potentially puts site operators -- even those based in the U.S. -- on the hook for content that their users upload. The proposed bill's text says that a site could be deemed a SOPA scofflaw if it "facilitates" copyright infringement.The full article: http://money.cnn.com/2012/01/17/technology/sopa_explained/index.htm?hpt=hp_bn6Words like "facilitates" are what scare honest content providers, and delight lawyers. They are ill-defined, so it's very hard to protect against all possible interpretations. Unfortunately, our government representatives seem to delight in writing ambiguous laws, which must be endlessly litigated at great expense to most of us and at great profit to the legal community that provides so much of their "campaign contribution" dollars.

Share this post


Link to post
Feel free to send us an e-mail and let us know which files infringe your copyright, and we'll look into it.
The truth is, I don't care enough to complain. I was merely pointing out an example here at Avsim.

Share this post


Link to post
This is from a CNN Money article on the subject:
I dodn't know CNN was the law. Can you quote the relevant clause(s) in SOPA?

Share this post


Link to post

I don't see this going through, If it does the rest of the world will just move on.New Zealand has many domestic web services now like Trade Me, local news, weather so we don't frequent US Based web companies that much other then the big ones like Google/YouTube, Facebook etc.A law like this will allow other countries to just start our own versions of things like YouTube or Wikipedia. Perhaps the Next Wikipedia will be a UK Based company to get around USA Restrictions.Australia, Canada, Europe and most of Asia is not regulated and will most likely gain from USA restrictions.


Matthew Kane

 

Share this post


Link to post
Obama won't sign the bill. I guess there is one thing he did good in 4 years.http://www.forbes.co...cy-legislation/
:(
I don't see this going through, If it does the rest of the world will just move on.New Zealand has many domestic web services now like Trade Me, local news, weather so we don't frequent US Based web companies that much other then the big ones like Google/YouTube, Facebook etc.A law like this will allow other countries to just start our own versions of things like YouTube or Wikipedia. Perhaps the Next Wikipedia will be a UK Based company to get around USA Restrictions.Australia, Canada, Europe and most of Asia is not regulated and will most likely gain from USA restrictions.
So true... Unfortunate that we have such a pathetic and corrupt political system now that has turned around to stomp on our rights and liberties.--They just slowly slide away from us day by day. Edited by benorg

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...