Internet Censorship in America
November 17, 2011 8:54am CST
I'd call your congress people on this one. The day after the OWS eviction and Bloomberg's media black out, censoring what we have access to on the internet has garnered bipartisan support. hinging on one single democrat holding it up. Net neutrality simply allows every one's website and emails to load with the same speeds, hence - neutral. That means a big hotel chain site would have to load in the same time a small hotel's site would load (depending on what they have on it, of course). Without net neutrality, bigger companies can buy better loading times than those starting up, which effectively rigs the system. Thankfully, that was voted down. Now we have an even bigger battle. Under the cloak of being an anti-piracy bill, congress is attempting to censor the internet, just one day after the OWS eviction. It took 40 departments across the US, including the FBI to shut down Zucotti Park. By now, they know they communicate on social networks. "Under current practice, copyright owners such as TV networks and Hollywood studios reach out to websites to request that pirated videos be taken down. Under the new regime, they could ask banks, Internet service providers and domain name registrars to stop doing business with websites that they believed were devoted to piracy. They could, for instance, go straight to YouTube's domain registration company and demand that the entire YouTube website be taken down. And if the registrar resisted, the copyright owners would have the legal ability to take the registrar to court." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/16/sopa-internet-censorship-online-piracy-house-hearing_n_1098255.html This came a few weeks after google refused to take down the footage of the police brutality at the protests. You don't have to agree with the protestors messages (though I can't fathom why a return to prudent banking is a bad thing). You don't have to like what they wear or their odor. [b] But you have to support their ability to get their message out. [/b] If not, you could be next. A tea party leader even said that. Dems and Repubs support this. This is what buying policy looks like and shows just how easy a corporation makes things into a government takeover. Tea partiers and progressives are on the same side as this one. You wouldn't know it, because the only ones playing partisan games in the forums are the tea party members. We have to work together on this one.
18 Nov 11
It's appalling the things that so called "free countries" will try to do under the name of protection. It's another shameless attempt at control, which at some point will have a hefty dollar sign attached for somebody. There will always be piracy in any form of media or communication. Back in the day, people recorded songs off the radio. What's the difference? Exposure. Mass audiences. The inability to keep things quiet. One little leak can go global in a day. If those in power don't want their reputations ruined by the internet, they should conduct themselves respectfully rather than trying to force control over the medium. News and media outlets are already fundamentally jaded and completely unbiased. They report what they are told to report. This latest attempt to manipulate fears and prejudices under the cloak of protection is just that, a manipulation of a system that is spreading awareness. Yes, maybe they can cut back on piracy issues and other illegal sites, but I don't have confidence that it will stop there. Someone will take advantage of the power. Someone always does.