U.S. Congress - H.R.3261 Stop Online Piracy Act
H.R.3261 - Stop Online Piracy Act
To promote prosperity, creativity, entrepreneurship, and innovation by combating the theft of U.S. property, and for other purposes. view all titles (6)
All Bill Titles
- Popular: Stop Online Piracy Act as introduced.
- Short: Stop Online Piracy Act as introduced.
- Official: To promote prosperity, creativity, entrepreneurship, and innovation by combating the theft of U.S. property, and for other purposes. as introduced.
- Popular: Enforcing and Protecting American Rights Against Sites Intent on Theft and Exploitation Act as introduced.
- Popular: E-PARASITE Act as introduced.
- Popular: SOPA.
This Bill currently has no wiki content. If you would like to create a wiki entry for this bill, please Login, and then select the wiki tab to create it.
Vote on This Bill
-
Share This Bill
More Share via Email
Sort By
Comments Feed
Displaying 1-30 of 488 total comments.
This was a featured story on the front page. What happened?
I believe the vote was the yesterday.
Spam Comment
The bill was heard in Congress yesterday. Discussion, amendment, and voting are still to come.
This is my first opportunity to visit this website. I found some interesting things and I will apply to the development of my blog. Thanks for sharing useful information.
Logo Design | Stationery Design | Web Design
I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don’t know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.
Animated Logo
Spam Comment
Spam Comment
I don’t know whats going on or what, but I’m hearing that the government is wanting to track our every move on the internet?! Isn’t that invasion of privacy? I don’t understand what the fuss is about being able to download songs for personal use you can get cd’s at the library for free are they going to go after them too? we are able to record off the radio also are the going to take away our radio also? Where will it end? I think this bill is just wrong and unfair and I don’t see the point if we are using it for pursonal use only and not selling it.
according to this bill, if the holder of the copyright wants it removed then yes, it will be removed.
You’ve been told lies by the bloggers.
If you read the text you’ll know what’s true and what’s not. You’re the one telling lies now.
You make some excellent points in your argument, but there are some logical holes.
1. The government can (and is) already tracking our every move. Not to mention Facebook, Google, our mobile phone providers, internet service providers, hackers, and others.
2. CDs at the library. Good point.
3. Radio Recording. Good point, but do people still do that? What do they use to record the music?
The question is do we believe in protecting intellectual property, and how do we do it? I am pretty sure that if you had an invention or idea, and someone else used that idea to make money off of it you would sue them. In our modern day it is very difficult to protect intellectual property because our technological advances coupled with our access to the technology (ie. computers). If people use/steal your idea and share it with others you will not be compensated. Potentially millions of people could benefit from your idea, and you wouldn’t receive a penny from it. Now THAT is wrong and unfair.
kdizzle. you can record the internet for instance..
www.waaf.com
Listen now.
Open sound recorder.
Set recording device to “What You Hear”
Hit record.
save mp3
This is my first opportunity to visit this website. I found some interesting things and I will apply to the development of my blog. Thanks for sharing useful information.
Business Logo Design | Logo Design Service | Professional Logo Design
This bill sounds regulatory but is another lawyer game and only protects those who purchase “copyrites” as required in §411
What a NOT funny f’ing joke.
Copyrite is a backwards American law that I have called unconstitutional in United States Courts for over three years. The appeal is pending to be dismissed in order to allow search engines to continue to traffic in my nude art to anonymous people who could be minors. I also demand the FCC to regulate wire communications as required by law since 1934.
Appellant Brief PDF
Recording from an FM station will be made much more difficult when the system is “upgraded” to digital and analog stations are “phased out”. It might be legal to record from the radio, but it will be darn near impossible to do so in the near future.
actually, every signal intended for human ears eventually becomes an analog signal. after it leaves the device into a wire leading to a speaker or headphones it becomes as recordable as any old school radio signal.
Spam Comment
The “natural rights” rational v “utilitarian rights” rational are mutually exclusive rationals for IP that is very obvious but apparently was over N. Stephan Kinsella’s logical abilities? This may have came from the incorrect claim on page fifteen.
“Only A has the right to copy the book (hence, ‘copyright’”
N. Stephan Kinsella therein reveals a fundamental logical error. There are no “natural rights” involved whatsoever in United States copy[]right or IP laws. The rite of printing a book was initially called a “right” when Queen Anne allowed one printer to control all printing unless another party was given permission to print. The first copyrite statute in about 1710 or Statute of Anne. I agree with the claim that a personal right can not last longer than a person lives.
Appellant Brief PDF
Spam Comment
We will never be ready for Internet censorship. This bill is overly broad, and therefore it is too ridiculous. It is very important that you should oppose this bill and save the Internet!
Spam Comment
Reading that brief it sounds like NameMedia Inc acted poorly in response to your copyright assertion. A more involved FCC could penalize companies that disregard legitimate claims. However, extending that to cleaning up the internet moves into outright censorship which is misguided and a very slippery slope. If you are concerned you should seek better parental controls and filtering at the user level (school/personal firewalls, browser blocks, better google search filtration in safe mode) not censorship at the content level.
Spam Comment
Censorship of US TV and Radio is also unconstitutional. The concept that this would balance our budget is laughable. Our budget is, in all honesty, completely fraudulent, balanced by a $2 trillion influx of drug money (thank you, drug addicts), and even if the budget was solved every year, until the end of time, it fails to address the serious debt restructure we need to endure on every level of government.
You know that proposed bill will never work. It talks about censoring what you do on your own devices, that you bought and paid for. It is an invasion of privacy and there would still be ways to get around it.
Let this be a lesson to you:
You can not censor the Internet entirely; there will always be new technologies designed to defeat any censorship system and there will always be hacker groups ready to destroy such systems once put into place.
Porn will also never go away. What a person does on their computer is not anyone else’s business if they are not breaking the law. Free porn is not unlawful, so the whole argument is invalid.
You think OWS is bad, you ain’t seen nothing yet if SOPA and PIPA go into law. Anonymous and other hacker collectives will be over everyone that supported each like flies on the arse of a dead horse.
“Thinker-politicians like Jefferson, Adams and Madison were just as
familiar as we are with the metaphor that likens created work to
physical property, especially to a landed estate. But they thought of
that landed estate in a new way – as the basis of a republic. An
American’s land was his own – he owed allegiance to no sovereign – but
his ownership imposed on him an almost sacred moral requirement to
contribute to the public good. According to Hyde, this ethic of “civic
republicanism” was the ideological engine that drove the founders’
conception of intellectual property, and to his mind, it undercuts the
ethic of “commercial republicanism” that dominates our current
conception of it. Our right to property is not absolute; our possessions
are held in trust, as it were. Seen through the prism of early civic
Republicanism, Hyde asks, what might the creative self look like? Do we
imagine that self as “solitary and self-made”? Or as “collective, common
and interdependent”?
Amen brother!
Can anyone explain the difference between burning books and taking down websites>? Want a huge government have intellectual property law_ Something that is not scarce cannot be owned, a song/movie/media can be recreated by anyone with a tape recorder or computer, this does not mean you can take credit for creating a song you did not write, but what is shouldn’t mean is that the writer has a team of armed goons ready to stick guns in people’s faces demanding payment for singing their songs at karaoke_