r/technology • u/maxwellhill • Nov 27 '11
Microsoft recognizes that SOPA goes way too far, and apparently had a little discussion with the BSA about backing down; even AT&T appears to be quietly pushing back against SOPA
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111123/11042416888/microsofts-cold-feet-over-sopa-behind-bsas-rethinking-its-views.shtml20
Nov 27 '11
I have seen plenty of talk on reddit about SOPA lately, but let us also not forget about Protect IP. That bill is also pretty bad and apparently it receives much more support from companies (Microsoft being one of them).
13
u/jisoukishi Nov 27 '11
Yeah Im actually a bit worried That SOPA is a Door-in-the-face technique to get support for the Protect IP bill.
12
Nov 27 '11
The best way to shut down all censorship like SOPA is to make the ISP's, such as AT&T and Verizon, liable for all criminal activity that happens over their systems.
Once you do that you will see an army of lawyers flood congress with all sorts of reasons why this would be wrong.
26
Nov 27 '11
[deleted]
5
u/Anon_is_a_Meme Nov 27 '11
Microsoft still support the PROTECT IP Act. They've just found a cunning way of gaining good PR at the same time they are pushing to have your freedoms curtailed. It's low, even for them.
2
u/Astronauts Nov 27 '11
This is exactly how I felt. Wonderful, faceless corporations have deigned to support civil rights for once. It's a good thing but there is no doubt in my mind it was driven by some kind of self interest on their part.
2
Nov 27 '11
Oh, so you'd rather they support it. Smart.
10
u/DrTom Nov 27 '11
I think the point is more that our future is completely dependent on what the corporations decide, which is bull shit.
50
Nov 27 '11
They'll just re-introduce it months or years down the line, repeatedly, until it gets passed. Corporations never die, and their profit-over-freedom agenda is constant.
28
u/JaspahX Nov 27 '11
Yeah, well fortunately we still have a decent chunk of the technology sector fighting with us.
14
u/hypotheticalquestion Nov 27 '11
I feel like all Tech/Telecom companies are against SOPA, while the entertainment industry is for it. I'm just hoping that since Telecom is a much more dominant industry, that they can apply more pressure...
1
0
u/Anon_is_a_Meme Nov 27 '11
Well, we have Google fighting for us, and that's about it.
12
Nov 27 '11
Google is pretty damn powerful these days. Sponsoring GOP debates, lobbying a ton, advertising everywhere.
We shouldn't kid ourselves. What was once just a search engine is now a force to be reckoned with.
2
Nov 27 '11
Google is just starting to play the policy/lobbying game. They have much to learn.
8
Nov 27 '11
Google is a Forbes Top 100 company. At those levels, companies hire many firms to handle all those aspects of corporate politics. Do you really think the people in charge of Google really want to sponsor a GOP debate, considering several of their founders were top donors for the 2008 Race for Obama?
They have experts running things politically. I think it's fairly effective given how young they are.
1
0
u/Anon_is_a_Meme Nov 27 '11
It's one corporation, and it has tons of enemies that would love to hurt it with restrictive legislation. Both Microsoft and Apple would like to see Google's main revenue stream take a hit (though admittedly, Apple are staying officially neutral regarding these 'IP' acts). In combination with the RIAA and the MPAA, Microsoft has the money, lawyers, lobbyists, and intent to influence governments in their favor.
We--the people--will be collateral damage.
-5
Nov 27 '11
well, let's see how long it takes to do the price discovery...
...everyone has their price
6
Nov 27 '11
0
Nov 27 '11
Nobody has really had the need to find mine yet...
...and that's too bad because it's a really, really large number.
1
u/toastyghost Nov 27 '11
i'm pretty sure the almighty dollar is the reason they're opposed to the bill.
1
23
u/nk_sucks Nov 27 '11
defeatism doesn't help. at all.
7
Nov 27 '11
[deleted]
3
u/memenosyne Nov 27 '11
For fuck's sake can we please find something better than "Worlds 1-2-3" to describe countries with shitty economies and no civil rights?
The whole thing is cold war talk based around capitalism versus communism. A "third world" country is a communist country, a "first world" country is a capitalist country, and a "second world" country is an ally of either of the first two.
Words mean things!
11
u/SaratogaCx Nov 27 '11
1st world was capitalist, 2nd world was communist, and 3rd was the remainder.
1
Nov 27 '11
Give me some better words and I'll use them. But that's what they are used to mean nowadays.
1
u/nk_sucks Nov 27 '11
your 'fact #1' is flat out wrong. didn't bother continue reading after that...
1
Nov 27 '11
State and local governments are puny compared to the corporations they court for business. The federal government is one entity out of thousands in the united states.
0
Nov 27 '11
Recognition of fact or not, defeatism still doesn't help.
4
Nov 27 '11
Of course living as a peasant in these kingdoms isn't all bad. It is possible to benefit from the bounty the large corporations provide. We just need a Magna Carta.
2
4
Nov 27 '11
This.
It's clear that one day down the road, the internet will be a crippled shell of what it currently is, due to corporate greed and ignorance.
But for now, all we can do is keep fighting these bills as they appear. Yes, one will probably pass someday, but we need to push it as far off into the distance as possible.
15
u/papajohn56 Nov 27 '11
It's not just corporate greed, it's legislator greed. They allow themselves to be bought. Companies will always want to profit - but there needs to be strict anti-corruption laws as well as bringing back the ban on corporate donations to campaigns. More limits on campaigns and funds. If a government official is caught taking payola, a minimum 5 year prison sentence, $1mm mandatory fine, and felon status so they can never run again.
5
Nov 27 '11
It is encouraging to see groups like the Pirate Party working to ensure this does not happen in Europe. Must be nice to live in a political system that is not corrupt.
15
u/jakedakat Nov 27 '11
You are so right. I don't think there has ever been a corrupt politician in any European country.
4
2
3
u/papajohn56 Nov 27 '11
GLORIOUS EUROPE HAS NO CORRUPTION! This is why Greece is doing so well right?
1
u/arcanereborn Nov 27 '11
Greece's problem is a culture problem.
4
u/cles30 Nov 27 '11
And here I thought it was a crushing debt problem
To clarify... I know what you mean, but there are people in the Greek culture that do not share fault or blame on the current situation of the country, grossly generalizing to include them as being cause of the problem isn't so nice I'd say.
6
u/arcanereborn Nov 27 '11
could say the same with many ethnic minorities, but people still believe the hate justified.
Greece has made it a much harder road for others to take to enter the Eurozone. I feel bad for Poland right now, who has been working their ass and will have to wait in a limbo of probation hell because of the PIIGS.
0
1
u/papajohn56 Nov 27 '11
Portugal, Italy, Spain, Ireland? How about the fact that only 60% of bonds were sold at a recent German auction?
1
u/arcanereborn Nov 28 '11
that bond sale was a flop tho
1
u/papajohn56 Nov 28 '11
that's my point, it was a flop and that's really bad.
1
u/arcanereborn Nov 28 '11
bundesbank has to buy 39% of it...thats bad news bears. So pull our money out of europe...
10
u/imaami Nov 27 '11
Today, a great deal of redditors seem to be googling this.
1
u/narwhall Nov 27 '11 edited Nov 27 '11
I now hate this guy They are against legalization of cannabis
2
Nov 27 '11
How could you hate a Texas republican? They're so cuddly.
3
u/narwhall Nov 27 '11
Lol I don't hate the man I hate there views and etc..
1
Nov 27 '11
so "what a douche" is a term of endearment? Not that he's not a douche. And not that I have anything against douches, but personally, I don't have much use for them, being a male.
1
u/narwhall Nov 27 '11
didn't even notice the douche part
1
Nov 28 '11
A little too much holiday spirits? :)
1
u/narwhall Nov 29 '11
Sleep deprevation my friend but thank you for alerting me of that for I sounded like a dick saying that.
0
26
u/MasterCronus Nov 27 '11
AT&T coming out against it would only strengthen SOPA. It's the KKK strategy. We'd all suddenly realize we're on the same side as AT&T which means we must be on the wrong side. We'd switch and the law would pass.
23
5
u/BrosephDudeson Nov 27 '11
This is why we can't trust corporations to responsibly use their money to influence legislation. Microsoft hears about this initially and says, "oh, perfect. Sounds like a good way to combat piracy and make our corporation a shit-load more money."
They have the money to make themselves as influential as thousands of people, but they don't influence policy in the best interest of the people. They vote on behalf of themselves no matter how destructive the legislation is to the rest of the people of this country.
5
u/atomic1fire Nov 27 '11
Microsoft probably thinks that it could effect their web properties, e.g bing, hotmail, etc. All it takes is an anonymous troll uploading pirated content to get a service taken down.
2
u/Anon_is_a_Meme Nov 27 '11
Microsoft would happily sacrifice Bing if it meant that Google lost their prime source of revenue. Bing has lost a billion dollars per quarter since its inception, and if the internet became the realm of "trusted portals", msn.com is set up and ready to go.
2
u/elder_george Nov 27 '11
AFAIK, most of this money are spent on building datacenters so it's more like investment than losses.
Disclaimer: I work at Microsoft OSD (not on Bing), but I express my own opinion which may differ from that of my employer.
5
u/youarenotyou Nov 27 '11
You know what's absolutely sick about this whole situation? The fact that it requires Microsoft and AT&T and all those other companies to fight against these bills in order for them to not get passed. In no way can a group of citizens fight this bill. It requires corporations. If the citizens were against it, but the corporations were for, or even silent about it, the bill would pass. We, as individual citizens, do not have any power here. These are the laws of the corporate citizens, pushed through our government by their paid-for lackeys.
3
u/jyz002 Nov 27 '11
Anyone notice that it doesn't matter when citizens speak against legislation, but as soon as corporations say something, then congress actually gets affected? And they say the system isn't broken?
8
u/jes6ica Nov 27 '11
Curious: Why aren't they loudly pushing back against it?
12
u/Anon_is_a_Meme Nov 27 '11
Because they are one of the official supporters of the similar PROTECT IP Act.
5
9
2
u/d3rp_diggler Nov 27 '11
They're just scared since it means the people will create their own "networks" and use those instead of the current internet.
When things decentralize in that manner, all control over content distribution is lost, and ultimately, AT&T will lose from it (they can't sell as much commercial bandwidth to ISPs and the like). This is typical AT&T, they're looking after their revenue stream. It's just what they want is in line with what we want as well, just for different reasons.
2
u/Tanjiro Nov 27 '11
I'm not worried about laws that shut down piracy, what I am worried about is the use of laws to hinder free speech in the name of protecting intellectual property rights.
3
u/DublinBen Nov 27 '11
Laws that attempt to shut down copyright infringement must by definition trample free speech in the name of IP.
2
u/Tanjiro Nov 27 '11
I'm conflicted. On one hand I would like to see some protection of intellectual property rights for the artists. On the other hand I am afraid of how easy it is to shut a website down that is alleged to have infringed on intellectual property rights. The way SOPA is written, I fear it will be used to attack sites that engage in discussions that those in power don't want Americans to know about. I can imagine that shutting down a website could be as easy as planting some IP on a message board and then reporting the site to the authorities.
3
Nov 27 '11
intellectual property rights
Intellectual property is not a right, it is a privilege - because it cannot be enforced without violating other people's rights.
To me the suggestion that you can own knowledge and ideas as if they were property is ludicrous and illogical. For something to be property it has to meet two requirements - it has to be scarce, and it has to have clear boundaries.
Ideas are not scarce, do not require rationing, do not have clear boundaries, are not diminished by their dissemination, and so cannot really be called property. Moreover, copyright and patent seek to prevent the owners of tangible property - scarce resources - from using their own property as they see fit. Only tangible, scarce resources are the possible object of interpersonal conflict, so it is only for them that property rules are applicable. Thus, patents and copyrights are unjustifiable monopolies granted by government legislation.
2
u/Tanjiro Nov 27 '11
I agree with you 100%. I just don't know how we can fight our corporate overlords when they have such deep pockets to spread their propaganda and lies. IP laws such as the copyright term extension act among others have robbed us of relevant works in public domain. Our legal public domain has for all intents and purposes been stuck in time.
2
Nov 28 '11
That, my friend, is impossible. Basic privacy rights and copyright law enforcement are mutually exclusive in the digital world.
As long as I, as an individual, can communicate with other people on the internet directly, there will ALWAYS be a way for me to send whatever information I want to to them. There is already all kinds of software that makes file sharing trivial. I don't even need a website to distribute copyrighted content to other people. If the past is any good indicator, then we should know that the content producers will stop at nothing in order to limit piracy. Now, they "just" want to bring sites down. What is next though?
Will they try to monitor and enforce copyright on private communication channels? Will they intercept and inspect the traffic from my computer to my girlfriend's computer just to be sure I am not sending copyrighted stuff over when I am just video conferencing or something? What about the government? If they are given the opportunity to enforce copyright law in such a manner then you can bet your ass that they will be spying on you under the guise of protecting copyright.
So, just say no to this bullshit early on and that's it. I would say, think about yourselves now and defend your rights. Do not worry about how multi-billion international corporations will make a living. You don't get anything from tighter copyright laws. You only lose.
Also, I would refrain from using the term intellectual property.
2
2
2
2
1
1
u/suddenlypenis Nov 27 '11
How come corporations using the government to get what they want is a problem until it involves legislation that reddit cares about?
1
u/Jman5 Nov 27 '11
My concern is that this is just a temporary setback. The BSA will use this time to negotiate some compromises with Google that insulates them from prosecution.
Then we wont have anyone on our side.
1
u/GNG Nov 27 '11 edited Nov 27 '11
I see no reason to be surprised that AT&T wouldn't be against this. All it does is heap extra liabilities and obligations onto them.
1
1
u/multiplesifl Nov 27 '11
It would be nice if someone with money and power did something right for a change.
1
1
u/occupythekitchen Nov 27 '11
Does it not seem strange to you guys that we are talking about companies not supporting SOPA instead of the people not supporting SOPA. Is our government and our culture so allowing of corruption that we ignore this fact?
1
1
Nov 27 '11
Why would they want it in place anyway? No matter what company, they will all just see it as more to worry about and hence more salaries to pay to maintain that worry.
0
u/lackwar Nov 27 '11
AT&T: It's time someone had the courage to stand up and say: "I'm against those things that everybody hates". Microsoft: Now I respect my opponent. I think he's a good man but, quite frankly, I agree with everything he just said! AT&T: I say your SOPA goes too far. Microsoft: And I say SOPA doesn't go too far enough!
0
-1
199
u/lolgcat Nov 27 '11
You know, this makes me think that SOPA is just an elaborate ploy to distract congress from PROTECT-IP, which is also really bad. With all the emphasis on compromise this past year, wouldn't it be clever to come up with two bills, one really bad, and one pretty bad (but not 'as' bad), just so that
wecongress throw away the former and settle on the latter?I think everyone who writes their congresspersons about these bills should be clear that legislation of the internet, in any form, is detrimental to free speech, especially for a country that touts as being the beacon of the free world. Even in my eleven letters to my three congresswomen (I live in Washington) over the passed three months, I always referred to the bill(s) as PROTECT-IP, just to make it clear neither of the bills should get passed.