SOPA Protests

Umm...I have a question: What is this?

Same here,Unknown,is there going to be virus on Jan. 18 or something because I couldnt fully understand what this meant.Especially in your first sentence when you said, " Glad to know that one of the largest hacker groups are on our side."

I highly support this protest.

So this group that made the video is a hacker group and they are protesting against SOPA too.
Well I'm not turning on the computer on Jan. 18 anymore.

Same here.

The worlds most idiotic thing about this is the way the people who propossed this bill cannot LEGALLY get it passed because much of their evidence and reasoning was attained illegally... They make an offshoot company saying here we'll give you this as a download for free... then the main company says "Hey you stole that!" and they are making millions off that. This bill is illegal and is NOT allowed to be passed due to the fact the companies who made this bill used illegal means to be able to provide reasons for why the bill is needed. This bill is null and void because of such. And I will fight all forms of law that try to put me in jail for such, fine me, shut down my businesses etc. I will not rest till it is repealed if it is passed. The companies should not set up sites giving away their materials for free if they intend to sue the people they are giving things to. It isnt dangling a carrot to make people steal. It's giving away possessions claiming that they are gifts then claiming thievery.

I don't know how it works in your country, but in mine it's not companies or financial interests that directly pass laws, it's the parliament. Even if financial interests do have something to do with it behind the scenes, it doesn't actually involve the actual law passing. It's not a court where evidence, etc. may be presented, to be therefore considered illegal due to false evidence, if the parliament finds it to be acceptable they pass it with a majority vote, simple as that. I think you are going about it the wrong way, and never will you find "salvation" in saying their evidence is false, because that is completely irrelevant to everyone involved. It is a law that restricts people's rights to expression, speach and to share information freely without your government being able to filter whatever that information may be. I have no idea what you people are led to believe for the how the laws that dictate your lives are made, but around here, whether it is what happens or not (of course no government listens to its people, however it seems that over there you don't even know they are supposed to), they are made by the parliament which are supposed to be representatives of the people and are supposed to answer to them, similarly to how your congress works, which should be your legislative authority as far as I know. With my limited law knowledge I believe by definition there is no such thing as an illegal law, only anti-constitutional law which in modern capitalism doesn't mean shit.

What I am getting at here is, people going at it that way are looking at the wrong right. Do you really mind the internet-investors that brought this evidence that much, or is it the restriction of your rights that you do not want to see? Whatever plan they supposedly had working from this, it is control that is going to come from policing and censoring the internet, and the benefit goes to those in control, pointing at entertainment companies on this, no matter what they did, is a lot more than stupid. By the definition of democracy it is the opinion of the people that becomes law, if the people are against any law they don't have to present evidence against it. Present it to who? It is made by them and for them supposedly. Supposedly they simply need to voice their opposition and will, that is the right you are looking for, not playing lawyer.

I don't know if people long since forgot how to not be under control or if that always was the case... But if you don't really claim your rights no one is going to give them to you, not even your government and definitelly not lawyers. I know you are too young to go there, but that's something to remember for the future.

And the hacktivist group name is Anonymous. I cannot fathom, being a person who is supposedly in a civilized world, which has supposedly evolved to the level we claim it to be, being unable to mention the name of a group of people. Besides, the word actually means something, it's not like we will be limiting our vocabulary for it.

whos sopa?

@Al
What?

Bloo wrote:

whos sopa?

Either read the posts here or google it, that was a silly question, and that is the kind way to say it

Red wrote:

@Al
What?

...
there, there, go back inside, don't mind the scary world.

The higher-ups can decide whatever they want. In the end it's the people that decide.

Al... I see what you mean, but our country lost interest in what the people want long ago. It's all about who can pay who how much money and so forth. America's government fell from grace in the 90s at the latest...

And in our country, you do have to present reasoning behind why a law is needed. Otherwise it wont get passed. And they illegally tricked people into pirating media so they can say "See! There is need for this law to be passed! And see how few people are opposing it? Many are people who stole from us in the first place!" And because the rich pay more money to politicians to push their agendas than they pay in taxes, the law will get passed despite the opinion of the vast majority of the public.

Evidence are the means of convincing Congressmen, I don't believe it is an actually legal precedure, only swaying of opinion, however, you say, as I do of course agree, that your government, as all governments under american financial imperialism that have to function under such laws of the market are, is corrupt, and I will tell you it was not in the 90s, it was long before that, and since you do believe that, it should be obvious that presenting evidence to Congressment is simply a front for the just decision making to be a believable process, the validity of them is irrelevant, their believability alone is enough, and even that may be relinquished every now and then.

So what is your stance against it? Saying corrupt systems are corrupt? Then they are legally, democratically, and truly rightfully elected and approved of along with any actions, by that acceptance in people.

Sadly, I 100% agree... Im not old enough to vote so I cant stop them from passing this with my vote of congressmen. Im not of influence to be able to convince anyone not to vote for this. I cant do squat.

My stance is this... people should not give something and claim they were robbed. The money they get from that alone is considered stolen. I believe the government should be replaced with a better one, one where everyone actually gets a vote on everything. WE are the Congress as long as we are informed on what is going on we are allowed a vote. It shouldnt matter what our age is as long as we understand what is going on. I believe that the higher-ups should have less of can impact on politics than they do. I also believe America is going down in flames and I refuse to pledge allegience to a country ruled by so much darkness that it will not choose to change and look at what is right. I believe that there will be a second civil war between the people and government and it is going to end bloody. That is why I plan on hightailing it out of here as soon as possible.

So basically, the american government is trying to "control" or "ruin" the internet because major Corporations (who provide some financial backing to the american government) want to stop their property from being downloaded or used illegally.

Yet what I don't get it why ONE country thinks it has the power to pass a law that affects the entire world?

Because America thinks it has the right to do whatever the hell it wants not realizing it's screwing itself in the long run...

I don't mean to put any threats on the internet before it happens, but bad things may happen to the white house if this works......

Okay, bad joke.

This law isn't illegal. As much as I disagree with it, if you use that argument seriously you'll be shot down xD Just as a warning.

They didn't hand out pirated software, that would be illegal. That would, as you say, be gifting people and then reporting them for thievery.

They just gave out the tools to give away and use pirated stuff. Think of this more as like.... Handing somebody the keys to your house, telling them when you'll be going on holiday, then hiding indoors with a shotgun and two police officers and waiting for them to break in. xD

I still hate SOPA though, it's horrendously stupid. Everybody that uses the internet for the internet (i.e. uses youtube, etc.) are not old enough to vote. Most of the people that can vote are unable to understand how SOPA will affect the internet so they're just saying "Yes" because they have some deluded concept that 'piracy is bad' and don't know that people are now taking 'piracy is bad' as an excuse to basically remove human rights from any internet user around the world.