Putting a stop to CISPA!

  • Thread starter Thread starter The Catboy
  • Start date Start date
  • Views Views 6,019
  • Replies Replies 62
  • Likes Likes 5
I mean personally I wouldn't like piracy going away but what's the old saying, "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few"? It's whatever Spock said in Wrath of Khan. I mean piracy is a rather moral shithole and yeah, it's not direct stealing, but I think anyone who says it doesn't hurt the industry is kidding themselves.

I'm actually seeing myself move away from piracy a lot anyways. I started using Spotify so I don't need to pirate music, I subscribe to Netflix so I can watch most movies, and the consoles I buy for nowadays (Xbox 360 and Vita) I don't pirate on anyway.

I think piracy is an issue that eventually needs to be addressed legally, no matter how much people may hate it, but it just needs to be approached right. Right now their approach is dropping a guy on fire into the ocean when all they need is a bucket of water. Their legislation is too "broad" and too much of a "shot in the dark" philosophy, but they'll be shooting a shitload. It needs to be targeted in a way that wouldn't affect a non-pirate but would effectively stop it as a whole.
Well I believe that its more of the industry's fault that piracy seems like a better option than buying games, I don't want to get into this because I don't think its relevant.

The key problem here is that I find its wrong that they don't target the bigger issues on the net but rather what the corporate world wants, I mean there are things on the net that should never ever exist (and no I don't consider emulators, ROMs and ISOs one of them again I don't want to explain) and no one making these policies or whatever seem to even notice it.

At the moment anything in these legislations are like you said too broad and too many things can bring to much of a big punishment when its bloody clear that the punishment never fits with the crime. I don't think piracy should be a big issue that it is being treated at the moment but unfortunately the corporate world has too much power to see that there is more important issues out there than just stopping people get some media for free.
 
I mean personally I wouldn't like piracy going away but what's the old saying, "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few"? It's whatever Spock said in Wrath of Khan. I mean piracy is a rather moral shithole and yeah, it's not direct stealing, but I think anyone who says it doesn't hurt the industry is kidding themselves.

I'm actually seeing myself move away from piracy a lot anyways. I started using Spotify so I don't need to pirate music, I subscribe to Netflix so I can watch most movies, and the consoles I buy for nowadays (Xbox 360 and Vita) I don't pirate on anyway.

I think piracy is an issue that eventually needs to be addressed legally, no matter how much people may hate it, but it just needs to be approached right. Right now their approach is dropping a guy on fire into the ocean when all they need is a bucket of water. Their legislation is too "broad" and too much of a "shot in the dark" philosophy, but they'll be shooting a shitload. It needs to be targeted in a way that wouldn't affect a non-pirate but would effectively stop it as a whole.
This isn't so much about piracy, it's privacy. It's one thing to target something like piracy, but then it's another to just invade someone's computer as if they were looking for witches.
I do agree that piracy is an issue and even I am trying to step away from it (I only do dead/old systems now, it's a start), but I am not in favor of a bill that can be used to either take over the internet and make sites like GBAtemp look like monsters or spy on people because they want to make sure they aren't doing anything illegal. These laws give too much power to people who should have that much power.
Does this mean I am not in favor of a future law about piracy? A little, when they can make one that isn't so broad, it would be nice. But since this is the internet, it's a grey area to say what is really piracy or what isn't piracy.
 
This isn't so much about piracy, it's privacy. It's one thing to target something like piracy, but then it's another to just invade someone's computer as if they were looking for witches.

Oh absolutely, and that's what wrong with current laws.

Right now their tactic is just a scare tactic. Making examples of people and making pirates fear that they can be found, fined, and jailed. Most any type of law whose main deterrent is fear is usually pretty bad. If they took the time to go after the main piracy websites then maybe the issue won't be resolved completely, but it'll be decreased significantly.

I always liked to say that piracy is like weeds in your driveway. You can go out there time and time again and cut down the weeds (the pirates) and it'll look nice for a time, but they'll just grow back. But if you take the time and effort to just pull them out by the route (the uploaders and hosting sites) then not only will your driveway look nice, but the weeds won't be coming back for a long time.

Like honestly, going after Megaupload and such isn't a bad idea, but to go after the whole company because of what their users do is a bad way of doing it. Offering incentives or enforcing regulations that require websites to cut down on piracy is what they should do. Killing a service that plenty of people use for legitimate purposes is not the way.

Now if they spent more time going after The Plunderer's Dock instead of everyone who uses it, the issue would taken care of without as much backlash from rights organizations and without a lot of people getting hurt.

Well I believe that its more of the industry's fault that piracy seems like a better option than buying games, I don't want to get into this because I don't think its relevant.

Well, when one copy of a game is free and the other is $60, it's a pretty obvious choice. There's really not many ways to beat piracy on the industry side. DRM was basically a fad and is, by many people from the industry, getting cut down.

The best alternative to prevent piracy is to implement popular multiplayer since it's still rather hard to get a pirated copy of a game to play on the same multiplayer as legally obtained copies. Tons of games are picking up multiplayer nowadays for more reasons than it being fun. You ever think Assassin's Creed would've gotten a multiplayer? It's probably more than a coincidence that Brotherhood dropped DRM and got a multiplayer mode (that people actually really liked) at the same time.
 
Well I believe that its more of the industry's fault that piracy seems like a better option than buying games, I don't want to get into this because I don't think its relevant.

Well, when one copy of a game is free and the other is $60, it's a pretty obvious choice. There's really not many ways to beat piracy on the industry side. DRM was basically a fad and is, by many people from the industry, getting cut down.

The best alternative to prevent piracy is to implement popular multiplayer since it's still rather hard to get a pirated copy of a game to play on the same multiplayer as legally obtained copies. Tons of games are picking up multiplayer nowadays for more reasons than it being fun. You ever think Assassin's Creed would've gotten a multiplayer? It's probably more than a coincidence that Brotherhood dropped DRM and got a multiplayer mode (that people actually really liked) at the same time.
Yep a good multiplayer would encourage people to buy instead of pirate but unfortunately not alot of games can do that. Still I think its more genre specific than anything else.
 
As a great man once said
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VzjrIk05YyU


With that said, we need to stop them and show them that we are the ones in control and the more they hold us back, the stronger we will get. We are the future, their time is limited and the older they get, the stronger we will become.

Well said. I see another American Civil War in it's infancy, slowly developing..but lets hope that never happens.


In any case, why does the US government insist on giving, no, taking power from citizens and into corrupt, stupid and naive politicians and senile, power-hungry old men?


Let me add another quote to that..

...It is a well known fact, that those people who most want to rule [other] people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it... ---Douglas Adams - The Restaurant at the End of the Universe
 
In any case, why does the US government insist on giving, no, taking power from citizens and into corrupt, stupid and naive politicians and senile, power-hungry old men?

Except we elect these "naive politicians and senile, power hungry old men" so technically we're the source of power here. Want to blame someone for putting some shit politician into office? Blame yourselves.
 
Tbh, I'm much more concernet about ACTA for the moment (since it's the one that is already being accepted by so many countries). z.z
Although this is really bad, nowadays more and more of these things just come on comming... I guess we have a very sad future ahead of us.
 
Not another Wikipedia blackout in the making...

They really want to piss off a part of the American public on an Election year? That's like shooting themselves in the foot with NoKor's Epic Fail Rocket... or is it?

Anyone able to explain this 'well it got shot down before, let's try a different route the same shit!' ideology?

Guess shitty politics = shitty law-making.


PS
Not sure what I can do from way over here in the boondocks [our country's currently on a tussle with China over barely-there islets, lulz], so... keep fighting the good fight guys!
 
In any case, why does the US government insist on giving, no, taking power from citizens and into corrupt, stupid and naive politicians and senile, power-hungry old men?

Except we elect these "naive politicians and senile, power hungry old men" so technically we're the source of power here. Want to blame someone for putting some shit politician into office? Blame yourselves.
I am going to disagree. Being that most people here are either under 18, just turned 18, or aren't American citizens, they have little to do with the current senators, president, or even 99% of the laws in play now. What's the blame is the older generations putting these people back in power and even supporting them since a good number of them don't understand, nor want to understand modern day technology and will support anything against it. Now this being said, it doesn't mean every old person out there wants to shut down the internet, but they are the ones who put these current politicians in play and should be the ones to take responsibly for their actions.
Blaming someone from Canada over an American law is just plain silly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
Well, there is another thread in the USN, methinks. Plus, everyone's basically said what needs to be said. This is more or less just another rehash of SOPA, after all.
 
Silly America trying to kill the internet, oh you...


Lobbyist douchebags and bribeable 70+ year old politicians who have no idea how the internet works exist globally.
They're not a unique feature of the US and A.


Still has to be stopped, though. If one country gets a law like this through it will fuck up the internet majorly for everyone.
 
No offence to the American Government, just because they have a president doesn't mean that they control everything that happens in the world. Even if CISPA does go through, it will affect a whole lot of websites and the way are allowed to speak our own views an post content on the internet.

Prime Ministers are just as important as Presidents. Also, MPs are the similar equivalent to Senators. the way our government works to any other may be different, but... It's still the same either way with policies and laws.
 
No offence to the American Government, just because they have a president doesn't mean that they control everything that happens in the world. Even if CISPA does go through, it will affect a whole lot of websites and the way are allowed to speak our own views an post content on the internet.

Prime Ministers are just as important as Presidents. Also, MPs are the equivalent to Senators.

...

OpoQQ.jpg


Seriously... seriously?
 

Site & Scene News

Popular threads in this forum