Quantcast
Community Discussion: Blog by taterchimp | Thoughts on SOPADestructoid
LIGHTS:  ON | OFF
surf dtoid with arrow keys

HOT GAMES
REVIEWS VIDEOS COMMUNITY FORUM SHOP

pc PS4 PS3 NEXT XBOX XBOX 360 WII U 3DS PS vita ANDROID APPLE

REMOVE ALL ADS?
Guaranteed contest entry?
A new video show?
Something else?

Vote in our membership poll

About
My Belmont Run for Dark Souls can be seen

HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
AND HERE

I also did a blind run of the DLC, which you can view

Here
Here
And here

I also covered the progress of building my own gaming PC. I had no experience, and overall, it wasn't all bad! If you are on the fence about it, I suggest you read about my efforts

Here
And here

The series never had a part 3, because I was having waaaaay too much fun playing it. Suffice to say that it does alright these days.

Thanks for stopping by my blawg!
Player Profile
Xbox LIVE:taterchimp
Steam ID:taterchimp
Follow me:
taterchimp's sites
Badges
Following (11)  

taterchimp
9:26 PM on 01.05.2012

I've been hearing about this SOPA thing, and wanted to throw in my two cents. I started by trying to read the bill itself, but cannot pull myself through the legal jargon. So I decided to do what any former college student would do, and looked up Wikipdia articles, and other such things to educate myself. After all that I have read, I cannot say that I support the bill, but I can see where corporations and legislators might.

The bill seems to have a few definitions, depending on who you ask or when, so I am basing this of what I read most recently. I had some thoughts on what I was reading, why there might be support for it, and why it isn't the end of the world.

1. Stopping Online Piracy is Good


This kind of piracy is totally OK though. Just sayin'.

This bill is being introduced in DC. It should come as no surprise, then, that this is grounded in politics. From the point of view of stakeholders, stockholders, and politicians, the intent of this bill is right up there with the motion that puppies are adorable. But if you do not support the bill, someone is going to use the contrapositive argument: If you are against this bill, you are against stopping piracy. So now imagine you are the CEO of a company. Do you side with the people providing you capital and support on Wall Street, or do you side with the end consumer? In my opinion, both moves have their merit. Taking a public stand for or against SOPA is a ballsy move that will upset one of these crowds, but there is one larger problem in the form of the ESA. These companies belong to this Association, which provides them benefits like E3, stats and figures, and are (from what I can tell) a liaison between the game company and the government. By standing against them, you may be risking those benefits, which will no doubt have a negative impact on your business. If the bill actually does stop piracy, there may be increased revenue (which is difficult to qualify, as it is somewhere between 0 and several million dollars...they won't lose money if the bill stops piracy is what I am driving at here.)

2. The Red Tape

Paraphrasing what I read while researching, the bill allows the copyright holders of an intellectual property or the Department of Justice to go to court to see if they can remove the offending material from the website. Just typing that sentence was work. Because of the time and money this is going to require trivial infringements will be impractical to go after. In addition, there is a threshold of times the site has to offend in order to be brought to court, so this will only target large case copyright infringement. Finally, the result of this is that the website has to remove the infringing material within a reasonable time frame, and until then only that material will be blocked from search engines and other sites. How often do you want to bet the site will voluntarily resolve the conflict out of court? My guess is the very high ninety percent range.

3. Free advertising



One of the largest complaints is that companies (Read: EA/Activision) can stop user generated content, such as streams of their games and YouTube. My question to that is why would they want to? If you can get a large audience, for free, to watch someone play and enjoy your game, that is called advertising. That will lead to people buying your games(/music/watching your sitcom whatever) which leads to money. There is no reason why a company would go through the hassle of courts to take away a free revenue stream. In addition, sicking the dogs on someone who is posting user generated content will create a PR nightmare which could stop future revenue streams, which again is BAD.

4. The Internet Isn't Free

But dammit, Taterchimp, the internet is a bastion of freedom and hope! It doesn't belong to the government, and we aren't commie dogs like China! Oh wait, we are, never mind. I don't know where this idea that the internet has no right to be regulated comes from. Case in point: upload some child pornography, and see how free the internet is then. Or you know, look at it, and tell me you don't think you are going to get a phone call. The internet has to have certain regulations on it (and if you don't think so, you are a pedophile....see point #1 )

5. Censorship is already happening

So wait, companies are going to have the ability to remove content from a website if they have a copyright to that material? Then the corporations have power (don't get me started on why corporations are sooooo evil lolololidk my bff Jill). This has been happening for years on YouTube, specifically with Viacom, and generally with the entire music industry. All of them have the ability to remove user generated content from the site (often creating the worst audio/video match ever). But this is different, because LOGIC! Yet I haven't seen this trend with video game streams or let's play videos. Maybe video game companies don't care enough to pursue it, so it wouldn't be an issue if the bill passed anyway....


Better judgement said: don't Google image search pedophilia.

6. The Bill Could Assassinate the President

Almost every article I have read has mentioned things that SOPA could do, and very few mention what it will do. SOPA could disable the next YouTube, MySpace, FaceBook, it could prevent people from streaming, it could slap my mother and piss on my great grandfather's grave. Many of these claims come off as fairly baseless. I can't say that these won't happen, but you can't tell me that they absolutely will, so until it is set in stone that this bill is going to take away your first born, let's take a stop back, alright?

7. Pirates Will Find Another Way

Oh they will? The fuck it, let's not even waste our time trying to stop them. Expanding that to the nth degree, we shouldn't stop murderers, rapists, and dictators, because they will just keep doing it anyway. What I am trying to say is that because they may (read: will) find another way, that doesn't mean we shouldn't stop what they are doing now.


Again, I am not sure that this bill is the best course of action. I honestly do not have the background and the patience to understand every single implications that this bill has. That being said, I can see it having some merit, and I get the feeling it has been a tad bit sensationalized. If any of my facts are incorrect, I did not do so intentionally, and I am genuinely interested in why I was wrong (with supporting evidence pleeeease). At the end of the day, I cannot see myself boycotting a company if they do support this bill, and on the other side of the coin, a company that stands against it hasn't really won me over.
Photo Photo Photo



Is this blog awesome? Vote it up!





Did you know? You can now get daily or weekly email notifications when humans reply to your comments.

Legacy Comments (will be imported soon)


Try reading this: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/12/internet-inventors-warn-against-sopa-and-pipa

By the way, DMCA ALREADY gives them the right to request removal of content from a website, and everyone in the US is required to comply. Youtube and other sites already remove stuff for copyright violations under DMCA.

What they are wanting to do is hijack the domain name system, which is a neutral international system that was placed under US trust but isn't actually owned by anyone. This would let them, for example, shut down domain wepiratemovies.com that points to a server in some country that doesn't have laws like DMCA.

There is no "remove content". It's literally an entire shutdown of the domain, legitimate and illegitimate content together. DHS already has support to do similar things, and they have shut down perfectly legal domains "by mistake".

This is censorship and the USG trying to take advantage of the fact that the world entrusted the domain name system in the US. Once the USG can no longer be trusted, it will start being held in multiple places and "fracture" which will mean some people won't be able to reach websites. The USG is "trying" to control the entire Internet, and there is a chance in hell that all the other countries in the world will say, "Yes, USG. Please censor and control our Internet."

Keep in mind, the reason the DNS system is under any jurisdiction at all is because it's a central repository tree system. The architects have tried to consider other possibilities, but it's a little hard to change how things are done. It's even been hard to implement security for DNS (to keep people from forging fake responses and sending you to a hacker's server instead of the real website).

If you didn't understand some of this, trust in the people who wrote the letter I linked. They are the people that work to develop and secure our infrastructure via a myriad of protocols.
From what I have read SOPA does allow for blocking individual pages, but requires reading packets in order to do so (which is controversial apparently). Also, from what I have read, Iran and China are using the DNS blocking method, so it isn't so much a structural integrity of the whole internet as it is a reduction of security (which I will concede, sounds bad, but if it is already being done elsewhere should have a predictable impact). To me it doesn't seem like it is US trying to police the world, just keep copyright laws intact, even if on a global level. I would like to believe that if this has a global effect, that the bill will receive global attention, which should kill it. But again, I am not an expert, it just seems like there are enough checks and balances for all of this. Also, thanks for replying!
Yes, Iran and China do use the DNS blocking methods. They mostly have to develop it in-house as the standards bodies disagree with the practice. Also, they generally don't care when they have collateral damage on free speech (which is what they are usually blocking). The results from observing them are predictable, which is that SOPA will block free speech, not just piracy.

DMCA already handles any US cases. What they are attempting to do is extend their reach to effect foreign websites on the Internet. Packet inspection can't be done at a global level. China can pull it off due to limited number of ISPs. It's the great firewall of China. The US has a ton of ISP interconnections going out internationally. There is no single choke point or entity. To packet inspect would require coordination with many companies to accomplish. This is why they are looking at the DNS system. It is an easy target due to it's tree architecture, but if we block destructoid.jp for having copyright material, we'll also be blocking their legitimate material. In addition, the law seems to think it can "make" the standards bodies ensure that future stuff supports SOPA, when in fact, the exact opposite will occur. The signatories that were not on the letter are all the International contributors.
"To me it doesn't seem like it is US trying to police the world, just keep copyright laws intact, even if on a global level."

... I really don't know what to say to that. Moving on...

There is no "stopping" online piracy. The internet is an incredibly cheap means of distributing data to anyone, anywhere. There are countries that do not have copyright laws. Therefore, piracy will always exist.

Permitting anyone, corporate, government, or other to deconstruct a central interconnect system of the internet in a futile attempt to fight piracy is unbelievably stupid.

Back to Top
DLC   |   BEST Games of 2012   |   Best PC Games   |   Best PS3 Games   |   Best Xbox 360 Games   |   Best Wii U Games   |   Best 3DS Games




All content is yours to recycle through our Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing requiring attribution. Our communities are obsessed with videoGames, movies, anime, and toys.

Living the dream since March 16, 2006

Advertising on destructoid is available: Please contact them to learn more