Google's fake blackout says they are in favor of regulating the internet

[Jeremy]

Google's fake blackout says they are in favor of regulating the internet, as long as it isn't them.

"Fighting online piracy is important. The most effective way to shut down pirate websites is through targeted legislation that cuts off their funding. There’s no need to make American social networks, blogs and search engines censor the Internet or undermine the existing laws that have enabled the Web to thrive, creating millions of U.S. jobs."

How selfish.

[TheViper]

Google's fake blackout says they are in favor of regulating the internet, as long as it isn't them.

"Fighting online piracy is important. The most effective way to shut down pirate websites is through targeted legislation that cuts off their funding. There’s no need to make American social networks, blogs and search engines censor the Internet or undermine the existing laws that have enabled the Web to thrive, creating millions of U.S. jobs."

How selfish.
There is a difference in piracy and censorship. That's what the problem with SOP/PIPA is all about.

[kylejack]

Intellectual property is a controversial subject even in libertarian circles.

[Jeremy]

Intellectual property is a controversial subject even in libertarian circles.

I know, but they are asking for the government to shut down websites. The same day they are supposed to be standing up for internet freedom....

You wouldn't see Wikipedia doing something like this.

[ShaneEnochs]

I love piracy. I pirate something at least once a day, and I don't feel bad about it at all.

[MooCowzRock]

I know, but they are asking for the government to shut down websites. The same day they are supposed to be standing up for internet freedom....

You wouldn't see Wikipedia doing something like this.

They are two totally different concepts. Taking down websites for possibly linking pirated material, giving record companies and production companies the power to find and execute such censorship is an issue. What google is suggesting is focusing on places that actually pirate, and keeping the record companies out of it. If pirating is illegal and considered stealing, that is a perfectly reasonable suggestion. Whether is should be legal or is stealing is another debate altogether.

[onlyrp]

Jeremy, are you suggesting that only people who want piracy legal and unstoppable are 'against regulating the internet'?

[tttppp]

Why doesn't the government wait for a market solution to the problem? The private sector is far more capable of solving the problem efficiently than the government. The government just wants to use any excuse it can to regulate the internet and turn it into shit. Look at every other industry outside the internet. They are all struggling because the government has over regulated them.

[TheViper]

Why doesn't the government wait for a market solution to the problem? The private sector is far more capable of solving the problem efficiently than the government. The government just wants to use any excuse it can to regulate the internet and turn it into shit. Look at every other industry outside the internet. They are all struggling because the government has over regulated them.
You answered your own question.

[Dsylexic]

I love piracy. I pirate something at least once a day, and I don't feel bad about it at all.
+rep. without 'piracy' there is no progress. progress is only made by unauthorized copying of ideas.
ideas are not property . the usage of ideas by party A doesnt diminish the ability of user B to use or sell it .
property rights apply to only scarce resources. ideas are not scarce.once available ,they can only multiply unlike a pencil or any physical object.
i'd say HUMAN PROGRESS DEPENDS ON PIRACY.

[TheViper]

+rep. without 'piracy' there is no progress. progress is only made by unauthorized copying of ideas.
ideas are not property . the usage of ideas by party A doesnt diminish the ability of user B to use or sell it .
property rights apply to only scarce resources. ideas are not scarce.once available ,they can only multiply unlike a pencil or any physical object.
i'd say HUMAN PROGRESS DEPENDS ON PIRACY.
You have an absolutely confused understanding of piracy and patent.

[tttppp]

You answered your own question.

I was really just stating my argument against this regulation. A market solution is far more desirable. Its not like online piracy is killing anyone or is an imminent threat to national security. If that was the case I could see regulation as an option temporarily until the market can find a solution.

The Obama administration is doing a bang up job of creating jobs. Dodd-Frank stops banks from making any loans. This new bs regulation will ruin the only functioning industry we have.

[Dsylexic]

You have an absolutely confused understanding of piracy and patent.
no siree. i have studied it in depth over at Kinsella's website. i was conflicted too ,but i am now convinced patents are an abuse of state power. if your specific point is that producer A doesnt gain when B pirates his idea,i'd say too bad -he needs DRM or he needs a better business plan.such kind of objections arise from leftist labor theory of value which have been discredited by austrians ages ago

[DamianTV]

Piracy is Competition. Nothing more, nothing less, and needs to be treated as such.

If you listen to a song on the radio, is that piracy? You didnt pay for it. No, it came across free, usually because of advertising, or if it is Sirius XM Satellite Radio, you have a subscription, but dont have to pay for each and every song. Piracy needs to be competed with the same way, by fighting Free (Pirated) with Free (Legally). There is nothing more dangerous than having a small group of dominant men hold hostage the works of the creators who want people to use the content they create, be it a song, a game, a movie, or a Medical Study. What fails is the Business Model when trying to fight piracy.

But that is hardly what this is about. Censorship is much like a Hydra and has many ugly heads. One of which is Piracy, however the one we need to be concerned with is the flatout and total Restriction of Free Speech of the People amongst themselves. Sites like RonPaulForums would immediately be taken offline, not for Piracy, but it would be the first excuse that would emerge. But we all know the real reason they would want to get rid of the Ron Paul Forums.

Ron Paul would not have the support he has today without an UNCENSORED RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH, a Right that Congress SHALL NOT infringe upon.

[Sullivan*]

My view is that the Internet should not be regulated, period. People shouldn't pirate, and if/when they do and are caught, they should be punished for it, but not punitively. I don't give a flying rats ass what those in Washington have to say, either, the FCC doesn't get to regulate my fucking Internet. PERIOD. The Internet, at its core, is free speech incarnate. PERIOD. DON'T FUCK WITH MY INTERNET.

A little strong, maybe, but clear enough eh? :toady:

[CaptainAmerica]

GOOGLE could give a shit less as long as they get their paycheck. Look at what they do to China.

[Elfshadow]

Whether you agree with IP laws or not....... The government is protecting buggy whip makers. Technology has changed. Their business model needs to change as well. The government will be able to do nothing about protecting the IP of these people. They will just push the black market into darknets. If you want to see a distribution system that works in a piracy filled world look to Valve's Steam platform. You compete with free by making you product easy to get and cheap enough that you dont worry about the price.

[TheViper]

no siree. i have studied it in depth over at Kinsella's website. i was conflicted too ,but i am now convinced patents are an abuse of state power. if your specific point is that producer A doesnt gain when B pirates his idea,i'd say too bad -he needs DRM or he needs a better business plan.such kind of objections arise from leftist labor theory of value which have been discredited by austrians ages agoAgain, you are failing to separate piracy from patent.

I own a few patents and also have digital goods for sale. I'd think I'd be just as pissed about someone stealing my physical goods as my virtual goods. Property rights still apply.

I'm not saying the current system is a good system, hell not, it stinks. But because the system is broken doesn't give you the right to someone else work. That makes you a thief.

You don't fix the system by stealing my works. If fact, you make it worse. It is because of you that draconian DRM and draconian laws are being introduced. You want to fix the system? Great, let's do that. But don't steal from the very people you're trying to help.

[Dsylexic]

Again, you are failing to separate piracy from patent.

I own a few patents and also have digital goods for sale. I'd think I'd be just as pissed about someone stealing my physical goods as my virtual goods. Property rights still apply.

I'm not saying the current system is a good system, hell not, it stinks. But because the system is broken doesn't give you the right to someone else work. That makes you a thief.

You don't fix the system by stealing my works. If fact, you make it worse. It is because of you that draconian DRM and draconian laws are being introduced. You want to fix the system? Great, let's do that. But don't steal from the very people you're trying to help.
the patents you obtained were FROM THE GOVT.not from the market.it doesnt arise out of a natural transaction between nonviolent human beings. you have just hired the govt goons to protect your 'digital goods'.

befor i say anymore to you,could you please read Kinsella? he is as Misesian as you get.in fact is he an Hoppean -the best one outside of Hoppe himself.

[TheViper]

Naturally under the current laws I am going to file for patents to protect my work. Not doing so is insanity. Again, I want the laws changed but if you don't get your work protected, you may as well just give it away to a big company.

Basically, for a single person like myself to go from product conception to prototyping to mass manufacturing, to mass marketing, to mass distribution is something that will take years given my limited time and limited budget. But if I'm not legally protected, a big company can take it and have it all done in 2 weeks and my years worth of work is gone and I'm bankrupt. Maybe you're Ok with this since you don't mind piracy. You're OK with someone stealing your work, your products, your ideas but I'd kinda like to enjoy the fruits of my labor.

[Dsylexic]

Naturally under the current laws I am going to file for patents to protect my work. Not doing so is insanity. Again, I want the laws changed but if you don't get your work protected, you may as well just give it away to a big company.

Basically, for a single person like myself to go from product conception to prototyping to mass manufacturing, to mass marketing, to mass distribution is something that will take years given my limited time and limited budget. But if I'm not legally protected, a big company can take it and have it all done in 2 weeks and my years worth of work is gone and I'm bankrupt. Maybe you're Ok with this since you don't mind piracy. You're OK with someone stealing your work, your products, your ideas but I'd kinda like to enjoy the fruits of my labor.

i sympathise that your business model is not successful unless you hire govt goons.but really,the moot point is 'if ideas are property at all'. starting from first principles of liberty, ideas are NOT property.i am not against you filing for patents.you are only playing the only game in town(just like all of us today use the dollar inspite of what we feel about it being fiat money).

please consider 'Ideas are free. the case against intellectual property ' http://mises.org/daily/4848

you might want to follow his arguments in depth at his website.please do,it is an enriching discourse.it is just like libertarianism,it repuls the dems and republicans equally,but it makes sense to anyone with a rational mind.

[moderate libertarian]

Other than completely taking itself offline, it's pretty significant that they have a black banner catching so many eyeballs. Yahoo is the fake actor here, not google imo.

From other thread:


Wiki is leading the charge and Google also has a black banner completely covering its logo:

https://www.google.com/landing/takeaction/

Yahoo is neocon central and has nothing marking this event on front page but what is facebook's excuse?

http://100gf.wordpress.com/2012/01/17/why-hasnt-facebook-joined-the-sopa-pipa-blackout-opinion/


For the record, I'm not convinced that facebook is CIA funded as some conpiracy theories had suggested. But fb still had big membership even after some cancellations over its shady privacy policies and could have tried to redeem itself.

[mczerone]

There is a difference in piracy and censorship. That's what the problem with SOP/PIPA is all about.

Yeah! Censorship involves snooping agents threatening you if you don't let them look around your personal stuff for objectionable material to steal and destroy. (actual) Piracy involves snooping agents threatening you if you don't let them look around your personal stuff for valuable material to steal and use personally.

Oh, wait...

[mczerone]

Naturally under the current laws I am going to file for patents to protect my work. Not doing so is insanity. Again, I want the laws changed but if you don't get your work protected, you may as well just give it away to a big company.

Basically, for a single person like myself to go from product conception to prototyping to mass manufacturing, to mass marketing, to mass distribution is something that will take years given my limited time and limited budget. But if I'm not legally protected, a big company can take it and have it all done in 2 weeks and my years worth of work is gone and I'm bankrupt. Maybe you're Ok with this since you don't mind piracy. You're OK with someone stealing your work, your products, your ideas but I'd kinda like to enjoy the fruits of my labor.

If you publish your work or sell it openly within the US no one can "steal" it from you by gaining a Patent. There are other ways of protecting your business, and no one is stealing anything from you in the first place, as you have lost no objective objects or property.

[TheViper]

If you publish your work or sell it openly within the US no one can "steal" it from you by gaining a Patent. There are other ways of protecting your business, and no one is stealing anything from you in the first place, as you have lost no objective objects or property.
You're not a business owner or a person that sells a product they've created, are you?

While true you are afforded some protections (depending on your state of residence and the sale of the product), it's incredibly minimal and unless you are very wealthy from your products, don't expect to get anywhere in the courts with it.

As for stealing, did you miss that whole section on piracy we were debating? I also sell digital goods. If you take my digital products without paying for them, you've stolen my product. Why is that a difficult concept to understand?

And for the record, I black out my site today in protest of SOPA/PIPA.

[mczerone]

You're not a business owner or a person that sells a product they've created, are you?

While true you are afforded some protections (depending on your state of residence and the sale of the product), it's incredibly minimal and unless you are very wealthy from your products, don't expect to get anywhere in the courts with it.

As for stealing, did you miss that whole section on piracy we were debating? I also sell digital goods. If you take my digital products without paying for them, you've stolen my product. Why is that a difficult concept to understand?

And for the record, I black out my site today in protest of SOPA/PIPA.

You're not well versed in Patent law are you? (sorry, just returning your demeaning accusations)

Patent law in the US is federal law, and as long as you can demonstrate that the patentable device/method was in use/for sale/published before the opposing party tried to patent it themselves, you can bar them from gaining the patent. Thus you are still free to sell whatever ideas you had.


As for stealing, did you miss that whole section on piracy we were debating? I also sell digital goods. If you take my digital products without paying for them, you've stolen my product. Why is that a difficult concept to understand?

Stealing is defined as the taking of property from another with the intention of permanently depriving them of the use of such property. If I were to take a hard drive containing the only copy of your work from your office, I'd have stolen something. However, If you publicly use a digital product and I copy it, you have lost nothing. NOTHING. There may be a contractual issue here if I'm using a server that forbids copying, but it's not theft, regardless.

Imagine a candy shop that sells candy bar X. One day they notice that a competitor down the road also is selling candy bar X. They cry "theft!" But when they do their inventory they find nothing missing. Has a theft occurred?

[TheViper]

You're not well versed in Patent law are you? (sorry, just returning your demeaning accusations)

Patent law in the US is federal law, and as long as you can demonstrate that the patentable device/method was in use/for sale/published before the opposing party tried to patent it themselves, you can bar them from gaining the patent. Thus you are still free to sell whatever ideas you had.
Didn't I just say that you have some protections and that it does vary from state to state? Because not all protection is patent based but property right based.

And no, just because you can demonstrate prior art or prior use, does not guarantee you exclusive rights as though it were a full patent. I just told you I have patents.

And no, the snail mail cheap patent doesn't help much either (mailing yourself your concepts and ideas).



Stealing is defined as the taking of property from another with the intention of permanently depriving them of the use of such property. If I were to take a hard drive containing the only copy of your work from your office, I'd have stolen something. However, If you publicly use a digital product and I copy it, you have lost nothing. NOTHING. There may be a contractual issue here if I'm using a server that forbids copying, but it's not theft, regardless.

Imagine a candy shop that sells candy bar X. One day they notice that a competitor down the road also is selling candy bar X. They cry "theft!" But when they do their inventory they find nothing missing. Has a theft occurred?
You are confusing a reseller with a proprietary seller. A reseller is the candy shop. They resell candy from a brand. A proprietary shop sells a product they designed themselves.

It's still theft if I haven't granted you authorization to sell my product. Do you think Ford would be OK if Chevy fully manufactured a Ford and started selling brand new Fords on their Chevy lots?

Put years into an idea, put thousands of dollars into that idea, work your absolute ass off for that idea...then tell me you don't care if someone else copies it day 1.

[kylejack]

Why doesn't the government wait for a market solution to the problem? The private sector is far more capable of solving the problem efficiently than the government. The government just wants to use any excuse it can to regulate the internet and turn it into shit. Look at every other industry outside the internet. They are all struggling because the government has over regulated them.
The private sector is solving the problem. They own the legislature and it is doing their bidding.

[jkr]

ideas may be free but GOOD, USEFUL, WORKABLE, ideas are not.
there is A GREAT DEAL OF TIME involved in taking a spark in your head and putting it in someones hands

or should i work for free? guess ill go on grubb stubbs...

[MrTudo]

Yeah wanna see censorship? Here, from wikipedia

http://blog.wikimedia.org/2012/01/16/wikipedias-community-calls-for-anti-sopa-blackout-january-18/comment-page-484/#comment-68199

Here's mine:
Tom Pilitowski says:
2012/01/17 at 21:39
Only one presidential candidate has taken a position against these two horrible bills. Dr Ron Paul, Rep Tx. I think it’s time to recognize the things that Dr Paul speaks out against and send him some of our support especially considering NOBODY ELSE in government seems to think our freedom is important or that freedom is a given and we should all just be quiet and vote the party line. Dr Paul has a 30 year track record of upholding and defending the Constitution, sometimes being a lone voice of the people. Just like he is right now. Please research this man, search youtube and see for yourself the track record and find out why those of us who support Ron Paul for president seem to be everywhere and growing.
He’s the only candidate who will reverse the erosion of our liberties that have occured over the last several decades, restore fiscal sanity to washington, pay down the debt until it’s so small it will no longer be a weight on our children and grandchildrens futures, allow America and Americans to once again become ambassadors of GOOD WILL and BUSINESS rather than threats, bombs and occupations.
We could be on the verge of the most enlightening, free and prosperous times in American history and the leader is a little old Doctor from Texas. Please research Ron Paul!


It was approved and then within 5 minutes GONE to which I replied again. The times of these posts are clearly visible and verifiable
http://blog.wikimedia.org/2012/01/16/wikipedias-community-calls-for-anti-sopa-blackout-january-18/comment-page-486/#comment-68224

Can you fking believe it? They nuked my post ! So I posted this :

Tom Pilitowski says: Your comment is awaiting moderation.

2012/01/17 at 21:48
I posted about Ron Paul being the only candidate who opposes these bills and it was deleted by the wikipedia censors? What hypocrites. You deserve whatever happens. Cowards.


Think I'm just an anonymous poster? Think again.

[Dsylexic]

ideas may be free but GOOD, USEFUL, WORKABLE, ideas are not.
there is A GREAT DEAL OF TIME involved in taking a spark in your head and putting it in someones hands

or should i work for free? guess ill go on grubb stubbs...
nobody is asking you to work for free.but dont expect me to define your business model.

[Jingles]

Google did the right thing. There is a difference protest and shutting down a great deal or trade/business for the world. While I'm sure it would make a great impact wikipedia is really taking that up. I mean really, honestly, when you what quick information on a subject where do you turn? Wikipedia. Google is more of a means to get to sites. Their opposition composed with the other sites protesting will suffice.

(Also, I don't know what the hell I would do without the internet for a day. It would be like if they outlawed/were trying to outlaw clothes to me so for that reasons we all went naked for the sake of protesting the outlawing of them. I agree 100% with the sopa protest, but maybe we can just wear short-shorts instead of being totally nude.)

[jmdrake]

Regardless of Google's motives I'm glad they are directing people to contact their senators/congressmen in protest against this bill, even if they might not be on board to fight against the next bill if it's written in a way that doesn't affect them. Let's cross that bridge when we get to it.

[trey4sports]

whatever. Just as long as the oppose the current legislation we'll fight the next battle, next time.

[Rothbardian Girl]

such kind of objections arise from leftist labor theory of value which have been discredited by austrians ages ago
I disagree with this point, but agree with your general opposition to patents/IP. There is a lot of critique of the patent system from a leftist viewpoint. Benjamin Tucker named patents as one of the four main monopolies in his work "State Socialism and Anarchism".

Patents constitute a monopoly because they promote a concentration/centralization of capital, which leads to unequal wealth distribution that would not otherwise arise in a free market. Note my point isn't that unequal distribution of wealth is inherently bad - but it is when it is backed by state privilege. They also represent barriers to entry (so there is less competition when patents are involved, which is always bad).

[thoughtomator]

90% of piracy would disappear overnight if we got back to our original durations for copyright. The abuse of copyright law is the seed of piracy.

[brandon]

I know, but they are asking for the government to shut down websites. The government already shuts down websites for a variety of reasons such as failure to comply with DMCA.

If you're interested in a bit of history, Back in the late 90s the internet was in a huge uproar about the possibility of DMCA passing. I even bought an anti-DMCA shirt from 2600 (yes I was a nerd) There was a long time that the internet wasn't censored by the DMCA. Despite the uproar, it passed anyway and now it's barely ever even talked about or debated anymore.

[LibertyRevolution]

If I can use a tape deck to record a song that is playing on the radio, why is that any different than me using a program to record it off pandora?
If I can use my VCR to record a TV show, why can't I use a program to get that same show off the net from someone else who record it?
If I record a movie on HBO, and then put it on a VHS tape and give it to my friend, thats fine. But if I send it over the interent to save some gas and time, thats wrong??
The way I see it, the first time you publicly broadcast your song/movie, it is now public property. I think that "first sale" law should apply to first broadcast.

[libertygrl]

Google's fake blackout says they are in favor of regulating the internet, as long as it isn't them.

"Fighting online piracy is important. The most effective way to shut down pirate websites is through targeted legislation that cuts off their funding. There’s no need to make American social networks, blogs and search engines censor the Internet or undermine the existing laws that have enabled the Web to thrive, creating millions of U.S. jobs."

How selfish.


GOOGLE = CIA



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_L_MoQxTuA


FACEBOOK = CIA


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIGdWsxHJlM