Not Disney related but a serious issue that needs our attention!

[sublimesting]

Hi all,

I'm not sure if any of you have heard of SOPA or PIPA yet but they are very dangerous laws that are being put through Congress right now that will censor the internet in America, much like is done in China. I urge everyone to visit the following link and/or do some research on your own and help to defat this very dangerous bill or else we could very well lose sites such as amazon, reddit, ebay etc. Very many of us could find ourselves on the receiving end of very stiff fines and jail time. On January 18th many of your favorite sites will be blacked out as a sign of protest while Congress debates this law. I know this isn't Disney news but it is news that will dramatically affect the way we use the internet and thought it needed to be shared. I put it in this section as chit/chat dooesn't get enough viewership.

http://americancensorship.org/?acti...egJhccGf_ZvPSsZmse_gUpnN151HeCNk71Re2LnKf75BQ

Thanks!

 

[puntagordabob]

Yeah it amazes me how these laws slither under the radar.... we are losing freedoms quietly.....one day it will come up and bite us all in the ashcan sadly....

 

[Crockett]

Jail time for amazon? Unless you are illegally selling faulty products/scamming, etc...how could one be arrested over amazon?
Wal-Mart and other big retailers have been wanting amazon dead for a long while now. But arresting folks for using the site seems pretty extreme.

 

[Crockett]

I've been doing some reading up on this. May not be as bad as we think. For example: On YouTube, if you upload family videos, pet videos, vacation videos, creative original videos/vlogs...you'll be okay. BUT if you're one of those many who abuse the site by uploading Copyrighted songs, movies, etc...watch out. You'll eventually be hit with lawsuits & criminal action rather than an account banniing.

Same with Facebook. If you're using the site for what it was created for, you'll be okay. But if you're uploading/sharing copyrighted material, then the law gets involved.

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but that is what it's sounding like when doing the research on this.
Posting your family vacation video to Disney on Youtube = No problem
Social networking on Facebook= No problem
Uploading the latest new song from (insert artist's name here) or your favorite Family Guy clip on YouTube= Jailtime/fines.

 

[sublimesting]

Jail time for amazon? Unless you are illegally selling faulty products/scamming, etc...how could one be arrested over amazon?
Wal-Mart and other big retailers have been wanting amazon dead for a long while now. But arresting folks for using the site seems pretty extreme.

That's the point. SOPA not only holds a site responsible for piracy but the person knowingly using it, anyone who knows someone who MAY use it and anyone who knows someone who knows someone who may use it. Especially held culpable are credit card companies who are required to report any and all suspisions of fraud or they will be held responsible. So basically any site that may have any link to any video or music etc. will be held responsible. This will directly affect this site. Any links that any of us make would make Steve and all of his business associates on this site directly, criminally resonsible. So, for example, if I post a link to a youtube video which is pirated, Steve will be the one to suffer the consequences as well as myself and the business partners on this site such as advertisers. They would be forced to shut down while an investigation occurs. The site would have 5 days to appeal any action. This would affect Amazon because someone could potentially sell something on there that is bootlegged without Amazon's knowledge...same goes for ebay. The amount of complaints would be staggering as all entities involved would be turning in everyone they run across so that they they themselves would not be hel responsible.

The jist of the law os to be very heavy handed to force people to cooperate in turning in illegal pirates but it goes WAY too far.

 

[sublimesting]

I've been doing some reading up on this. May not be as bad as we think. For example: On YouTube, if you upload family videos, pet videos, vacation videos, creative original videos/vlogs...you'll be okay. BUT if you're one of those many who abuse the site by uploading Copyrighted songs, movies, etc...watch out. You'll eventually be hit with lawsuits & criminal action rather than an account banniing.

Same with Facebook. If you're using the site for what it was created for, you'll be okay. But if you're uploading/sharing copyrighted material, then the law gets involved.

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but that is what it's sounding like when doing the research on this.
Posting your family vacation video to Disney on Youtube = No problem
Social networking on Facebook= No problem
Uploading the latest new song from (insert artist's name here) or your favorite Family Guy clip on YouTube= Jailtime/fines.

It's more severe than that. Youtube would be held directly repsonsible as would the credit card companies and business directly associated with that site and anyonw who viewed or downloaded that video. This is why Amazon, facebook, ebay etc. have testified before Congress on this matter coming out against SOPA.

 

[ScoutN]

Take a look at how much business GoDaddy has lost since their name WAS on the supporter's list.

 

[sublimesting]

Take a look at how much business GoDaddy has lost since their name WAS on the supporter's list.

And rightly so. No one is for piracy of people's hard work but these measures are too Draconian. It is the equivalent of someone robbing a store, but the law holding the store accountable, the makers of the products the store sells accountable and the customers in the store at the time accountable for allowing the crime to occur. If this type of law were in normal society we would be right back to 1938 Germany or 1984.

 

[sublimesting]

Just an FYI that today is the day of the internet blackout for some sites as a protest to SOPA and PIPA. Check wikipedia for more info. We have to stop these dangerous bills or a blacked out site is what we're going to have in the future.

 

[bgraham34]

I've been doing some reading up on this. May not be as bad as we think. For example: On YouTube, if you upload family videos, pet videos, vacation videos, creative original videos/vlogs...you'll be okay. BUT if you're one of those many who abuse the site by uploading Copyrighted songs, movies, etc...watch out. You'll eventually be hit with lawsuits & criminal action rather than an account banniing.

Same with Facebook. If you're using the site for what it was created for, you'll be okay. But if you're uploading/sharing copyrighted material, then the law gets involved.

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but that is what it's sounding like when doing the research on this.
Posting your family vacation video to Disney on Youtube = No problem
Social networking on Facebook= No problem
Uploading the latest new song from (insert artist's name here) or your favorite Family Guy clip on YouTube= Jailtime/fines.

You are actually wrong. If you post a family video and have any copyrighted material in the background the site may be blacklisted and you may or may not be in trouble for it.

If you are a fan of Disney Podcasts then they would not be allowed to have any background music at all or have audio from any movie in it. Not too mention that when Little Mermaid opens up in Orlando you would not be able to post the video with any audio on it because it contains copyrighted material. Basically it goes for anything Disney related in the parks. Firework video with no audio, parades with no audio.

Basically this is a very bad thing. The may not go after you but they can. So basically if this law was around 10 years ago there would not be a youtube as it is today.

 

[puntagordabob]

Yes I agree...this is a crazy situation..... amazes me that congress who works for the people who give us such a crappy deal... seems like they only care about the powerful elite with money and the rest of us be damned.... its a shame...and I suppose it is part of why we are where we are today. No I am not taking political sides.... all parties and sides are responsible equally imho...

 

[sublimesting]

This sums it up nicely and is actually more scary than I originally thought:

http://mashable.com/2012/01/17/sopa-dangerous-opinion/?hpt=hp_bn12


Basically this site could easily be shut down because we upload pictures and videos and link to other sites.

 

[disney fan 13]

surprised this site has not joined the protest since we could be blacklisted if this passed...

 

[Bairstow]

You are actually wrong. If you post a family video and have any copyrighted material in the background the site may be blacklisted and you may or may not be in trouble for it.

If you are a fan of Disney Podcasts then they would not be allowed to have any background music at all or have audio from any movie in it. Not too mention that when Little Mermaid opens up in Orlando you would not be able to post the video with any audio on it because it contains copyrighted material. Basically it goes for anything Disney related in the parks. Firework video with no audio, parades with no audio.

Basically this is a very bad thing. The may not go after you but they can. So basically if this law was around 10 years ago there would not be a youtube as it is today.

EVERYTHING you described is actually already a copyright violation and is subject to takedown notices and infringement suits.

SOPA may not have been around for over 10 years, but the DCMA has, and it allows Disney to do all these things if it wanted to.

If you're genuinely interested in SOPA/PIPA, take a moment to read about the DCMA and OCILLA.

People don't realize, but the sort of copyright violations people like Tim get away with have been illegal for years and years, it's just that the laws are not enforced. If you'll remember, the RIAA and MPAA used to sue several internet copyright violators for several thousand dollars every week. The laws are still on the books- the companies only stopped because of the bad press it was generating made it not worth it to go after the little guys. SOPA wouldn't change that, especially not for a site as small as Tim's, or WDWMagic, for that matter.

 

[wilkeliza]

The scariest parts of SOPA and PIPA is that no proof will be needed for entire sites to be taken down. All someone has to do is contact an IP provider and claim that a website their are hosting is using copy righted material.

DCMA and OCILLA are no where near as strict as SOPA and PIPA are. With what is currently in place you must provide proof before action is taken and everything follows due process. SOPA and PIPA will get rid of due process. Under current copy right laws they can ask you to remove the content and it ends there. SOPA and PIPA want to give companies the ability to take you to court over something very small. Under the current proposal of SOPA that simple youtube video with music playing in the background could land you in jail for up to 5 years. The current laws do not allow that.

SOPA will change things because it holds the bigger cooperations that host smaller sites accountable and you better believe the big guys don't want to be shut down for something the little guy is doing. I liken it to when a floor manager is told by the company that he will be held accountable for the actions of his floor employees. You better believe that manager will act very different than someone who is not personally held responsible for the short comings of others.

 

[SobchakSecurity]

This ties into Obama's speech in WDW today. Why else would Disney allow (actually, they probably invited him) the park to be shut down if they didn't think one favor extends to another.

 

[Bairstow]

The scariest parts of SOPA and PIPA is that no proof will be needed for entire sites to be taken down. All someone has to do is contact an IP provider and claim that a website their are hosting is using copy righted material.

DCMA and OCILLA are no where near as strict as SOPA and PIPA are. With what is currently in place you must provide proof before action is taken and everything follows due process. SOPA and PIPA will get rid of due process.

Proof that a site is infringing, under penalty of perjury, must still be brought by the rightholder to allow action under SOPA/PIPA, just like the DCMA. Where SOPA and PIPA differ is how they address foreign vs domestic web hosting sites and the difficulty of serving them with notice of a violation.

Not sure what you mean as far as a lack of due process.
All violations and takedowns, if challenged, would still end up with all parties having their day in court.

Under current copy right laws they can ask you to remove the content and it ends there.

This is completely untrue. You're referring to the way takedown notices work under the DCMA, and the way business is usually settled these days on places like Youtube. Takedown notices are a way of online service providers, like Youtube, of limiting their liability for the infringement of their users.

However, just because content is removed from the website does not absolve the infringer of liability in civil court for the damage he's done, and it doesn't do anything to cure potential criminal liability under 17 USC § 506.

What matters for criminal/civil liability for the infringer isn't whether the content was taken down, but what "damage" it managed to do while it was still up.

SOPA and PIPA want to give companies the ability to take you to court over something very small.

While there are minimum infringement requirements for criminal liability under 17 USC § 506, there are no minimum requirements for civil liability in the current copyright scheme and SOPA/PIPA do nothing to change this one way or the other.

The only thing stopping Disney from suing Tim right now for minor infringement is that it's not worth the time or money it would take to do it. Again, no change under SOPA/PIPA.

Under the current proposal of SOPA that simple youtube video with music playing in the background could land you in jail for up to 5 years. The current laws do not allow that.

You're referring to the proposals to alter 17 USC 506(a)(1)(b) to include a provision for streaming video, not just downloads. Even if that were done, which needs to happen anyway, a post-SOPA/PIPA statute would still have the same requirements of the number of downloads and that the infringement was done for personal monetary gain, unlikely in the scenario you describe.

SOPA will change things because it holds the bigger cooperations that host smaller sites accountable and you better believe the big guys don't want to be shut down for something the little guy is doing. I liken it to when a floor manager is told by the company that he will be held accountable for the actions of his floor employees. You better believe that manager will act very different than someone who is not personally held responsible for the short comings of others.

This is true to some extent, and is the reason why Google/Youtube, a company which profits considerably by allowing their users to break copyright laws, is spreading untruths and hysteria about what SOPA/PIPA does and does not do. It's a bad law, but not for all the reasons these companies are saying. There's plenty of information out there on both sides.

 

[Jimmy Thick]

The laws are simple and not as restrictive as you are being made to believe.

If you don't infringe on other's copyrights, you have nothing to worry about. Piracy is incredibily bad for movies, games and especially music, thats what these laws are being aimed at.

But...

If you made a movie for a Disney World ride, like say Splash Mountain and posted it on Youtube, you would be commiting a criminal act because you would be infringing the copyright Disney has for that ride. Its Disney's property.


I would personally like to see this law passed, and Iam not saying that to spark a outcry on this forum, Iam saying it because Piracy is why lawmakers are going to such drastic lengths.


Jimmy Thick- Stealing that mp3 didn't hurt no one?

 

[sublimesting]

But it holds too many people responsible for other's actions. If I post a pirated link on this website, Steve would be held directly responsible, as would I. But so would Paypal, who would be ordered to cease all actions on this site. The site would be blacked out within 5 days. Steve could then file a counter suit stating why he feels this site isn't responsible but he would have to go to court. If they determine this site did host a pirated link he would have a charge of felonious perjury added to his permanent record. For him to prevent this from happening Steve would have to hire scoes of moderators to go through every single posting in every single forum and check every single link as well as the links on the pages that those link to.

This would be too cost prohibitive and the site may have to either shut down, risk it and hope no one posts copyrighted materials, or change what they allow, meaning we can not post pics, video or links. This last option would be the most reasonable for Steve to do...BUT, other sites would not have this option and would have to cease doing business, such as youtube or ebay or reddit etc.

 

[sublimesting]

Furthermore this isn't going to stop piracy at all. People will find ways around this as the always do. Additionally, damages from piracy of electronic media is hard to ascertain. You really can't show how much, if any, money you lost. The reason why is because you have to prove that the pirates would for a fact have purchased your product anyways. It's not like a physical medium is stolen in which case you've lost production time/money etc and have to replace said product. What is stolen is, in actuality nothing unless the pirate would have gone to the store, in which case you have lost future revenues from something someone may have purchased. In reality a lot people who are stealing music, movies etc. probably weren't going to buy them anyways and so no loss occurred.
It's kind of the same as saying, I placed ads on billboards for my car dealership. A vandal ripped the ads down. Now customers who would have seen those ads and potentially bought my cars can't. Therefore I have lost potential business. The vandal, by damaging my ads has potentially cost me hundreds of thousands of dollars. Thusly the vandal owes me hundreds of thousands of dollars. As do the makers of the spray paint he used, people who witnessed his crime and didn't stop it , etc.