to think that SOPA will be the death of mumsnet and any site which ordinary people can post on?

[threefeethighandrising]

The SOPA blackout yesterday - it was about piracy on the internet, right? Well yes and no.

If SOPA passes, then it will be illegal not only to host illegal content (e.g. songs) but to link to them. And it's not just in the US - they want to censor everyone in the world.

So, that wedding video of yours where you're dancing to your favourite tune for example? If you post a link to your youtube video of it on mumsnet, not only will you be committing copyright infringement, so will youtube, and mumsnet too for linking to it.

You, youtube and mumsnet will be committing a crime under US law
Under these new laws they will have the power to effectively switch off mumsnet, extradite and jail or fine you, the owners of mumsnet and youtube.

(If you think this won't happen, see this [[http://www.chad.co.uk/news/local/alfreton/bolsover_mum_calls_on_government_to_step_in_after_son_loses_extradition_battle_to_united_states_1_4151073 23 year old student extradited to US and facing up to 10 years because he made a website - legal under UK law - which ^linked( to material which was infringing copyright

[[http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2007/10/riaa-jury-finds/ Single mother fined $222,000 for downloading 24 songs).

The US government will see mumsnet as coming under US law - as mumsnet has a .com address, it's american as far as they're concerned.

If the website breaking their law is outside of the US, then they will still have the power to effectively shut down the site - even if what the site is doing is legal its own country. The law also prohibits the website owners from suing - e.g. for having their business destroyed - even if found innocent! (There's loads of room for abuse for commercial gain by rival companies here).

If passed what this will mean in practice is that it's just too risky to run websites which have user-generated content.

Youtube, Flickr, Facebook, Twitter are obvious examples, and sites like mumsnet too.

It will destroy the internet as we know it.

Why are they doing it? The sponsors of the bill include many large media companies. They basically want to turn the internet into a media channel, where they can broadcast to us. There's a huge amount of money at stake here for them.

Some of the sponsors have pulled out, yes, and there has been public outcry.

They are talking about reviewing some of the wording. This is not the same thing as scrapping it, there's still a way to go yet.

The sponsors behind the bill have spend many, many millions lobbying congress to get this through, they're not going to back down without a fight.

This article is interesting Money, power, and Congress: how lobbyists will determine the fate of SOPA

He says "Getting Congress to listen is not the problem with SOPA or PIPA, because they are listening ? to the loudest voices with the most money."

I think the problem is it is so complex - I don't fully understand it really. Wiki going offline yesterday was a good move - I'm a teacher and the children were really interested in it because they can't imagine a world without Wiki.

Is if going to be retrospective? In that they can hunt down ANYONE who has EVER watched free film on the internet?

threefeethighandrising what can we do?

i suspect if it passes, our children in 20 years will look back and pinpoint that was the moment the internet's freedom/power was cut short. i don't want to be talking to my GCs about a bygone time when you could link to whatever website you wanted (whether you checked copyright, illegality within US law, not just british law, and so on) without getting arrested by police and potentially shipped off to the USA for it!

This is a very important development and I am absolutely sure that it will be used and misused by US commercial and Govt interests. One major problem is that the UK-US extradition treaty is one sided. UK citizens can very easily be extradited to the US but not the other way round. The continued push by the US to make its laws extraterratorial (ie reach into other country's jurisdictions) is the driver behind this law.

This is not 'tin foil hat' it is a real serious issue. I thought of MN when I heard about this along with the many other blog/forum sites I read. They all potentially could be affected. While I agree that internet piracy needs to be stopped I am afraid this law will become extended in ways that are not actually about stopping piracy.

I didn't realise it could affect UK sites too. It's frustrating though because if you're not American you can't appeal to your congressman about it or anything

The elite would love to see the end of the internet as it is now and reduce it to a simple sales tool. The net helps to quickly spread important information throughout the masses and that can be damaging to their interests (e.g Wikileaks) so it must be stopped. Did you hear Rupert Murdoch's attack on Google?

They want to turn the internet in to a big online shopping mall where people just consume, not learn anything or pass on information. This is a big issue and the protection of the internet is probably one of the only things I would go on a demo in support of.

Sleepy, I was thinking that. As in, back when I was a child there was this thing called the internet that let toy access all this knowledge..Why did they shut it down then, Granny? ....because they...

"Would everyone else in the world be able to bring lawsuits against the US - vexatious behaviour or something? "

I like your thinking

Actually we would stand a chance at suing some of the very companies involved for being massive distributers of pirated material!

• warning - the guy in that video is perhaps a little over the top in his delivery :)

Also I can't say I agree that this was a set up from the start - personally I think the companies are trying to make as much money as they can from the situation as it is now, as commercial companies are bound to do - but I find it hard to believe it was a grand plan all along!

However the relationship it shows between some of the major players behind the act and their history as distributors of pirated material is interesting to say the least!

Capricorn - good point. Big corporations and politicians who are often linked (ie the elite) HATE the internet because it spreads information faster than they can control it but they love it because it sells us things.

They want to control what is being said and control who and what we buy. It really is as simple as that.

threefeethighandrising what can we do?

Well a very simple thing you could do is go on twitter, and search "WTF is SOPA" and then reply to anyone who's asking with a tweet explaining it.

"WTF is SOPA" was trending last night and there are still lots of people asking it.

I can't do any more as I've maxed my twitter account!

The text I was using was this:

#SOPA wants to destroy the web as we know it: youtube, facebook, flickr, twitter could go. Check it out youtu.be/tzqMoOk9NWc

That's good. grass-roots awareness raising.

What can we do in a bigger sense? I'm not sure - anyone have an idea?

MoreBeta, I'm often reminded at times like these of the historical issues around freedom of information e.g. the 15th century decree making it illegal to read or distribute the Bible in English without permission of a member of the Church, lest the "common folk" get too educated for their own good.

This is a modern day equivalent.

Gives the proles too much power.

I'm not an expert on this by any means, but I do think there's quite a bit of unrealistic hype about this.

I can't imagine any large US corp going out of its way to 'shut down' the internet or very popular sites - can you imagine the consumer backlash? And the political backlash from US voters?

I'm quite prepared to believe that this is a sledgehammer/nut problem and that the legislation is badly drafted, but I don't think there's any evidence that it will be used to go after random individuals putting up links to wedding videos.

The guy who's being extradited was (I think) running a site that enabled users to download TV shows without paying for them: stealing and breach of copyright on a big scale. I don't have a lot of sympathy for him, to be honest. (And he's being prosectuted under existing laws anyway, so it's not really anything to do with SOPA.)

YouCanDoTheCube are you sympathetic to this woman?

Single mother fined $222,000 for downloading 24 songs

Well obv it's a ridiculous fine, but there's a reason that case gets dragged out so much - it's because it's incredibly unusual for a relatively 'ordinary' individual to get targeted in that way.

I think internet users need to get their heads around the fact that movies, TV shows and music need to be paid for.

For a start off we can make our lazy politicians aware that this is an attack on our freedoms as UK citizens. The UK needs to push back on the ridiculous extradition treaty Blair signed and stop extraditing people for activisties that are not illegal in this country.

Another example of this was the arrest of key personnel (as they passed through US territory) and severe curtailment of the business of UK internet gambling sites on the grounds that they were allowing US citizens to play poker online. The funny thing is that the US having disabled the rapidly growing UK internet gambling industry is now talking about making it legal to run these sites in the US. Sounds like US commercial interests were being given an advantage. As far ss far as I know, these UK sites were not breaking UK law but the UK Govt didn't say a word about these people being arrested.

@YouCanDoTheCube. No offence but you do sound a bit naive as to what this all means and what the real intention of the authorities are. It's not simply a case of if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear here.

YANBU

If the US gov. just had the power to shut down TV Shack then that would be one thing, but I don't think that he should be facing 5 years in prison in the US. They are already persuing ordinary people and now they will have more power to do this. Its awful.

Capricorn: yes that's quite possible!

It's not that I think major corporations are all great and innocent (I think they should pay more bloody tax, shouldn't be able to lobby governments on the sly, I think party funding on both sides of the Atlantic should be addressed as a matter of urgency to stop big corps effectively buying government policy - they way US health corporations have bought the Coalition's health policy on the NHS, for example.)

I just think, politically, there's no way anyone's going to turn off Twitter or Facebook, or even Mumsnet. There's no way 'ordinary' individuals are going to go to prison for posting up links to their wedding videos. And I do think internet/tech enthusiasts have a tendency to think apocalyptically at every turn.

There are many, many petitions that you can sign even if you are not in the US (which would help, because they would know how they are affecting foreign policy, and contrary to popular belief, some of them actually care).

SOPA and PIPA will pretty much mean an end to the internet as we know it.

I am not advocating piracy and I think if you are going to own something, then you ought to buy it first. But treating everyone like they are a criminal or a potential criminal is wrong and I really REALLY hope that they stop this bill or it gets vetoed.

Capricorn76 I hadn't seen that - thanks for that Murdoch's anti-google outburst

Without having read anything in to it, I have spent the last couple of days thinking that the jist of it was that they were just going to crack down on illegal downloading of music, films, games etc which I don't really have a problem with.

After reading this thread though, and trying to wrap my brain around this (I am NOT a techy person, I have been known to struggle with a Word doc) I am beginning to think that this is just one more reason to be rather anxious about the kind of place the world is going to be.

I know that there are plenty of links on this thread that will explain it, but can somebody please take pity on me and explain what it means in words of one syllable in no more than three sentences?

Wonderstuff, can I ask why you don't think the guy deserves a prison term? he was effectively handling stolen goods on quite a large scale.

I take the point that it's not an offence in this country, and agree that our extradition policy with the US is incredible lop-sided and unfair. But on a basic point of principle I have no problem at all with this guy going to prison.

It is the length of the term you object to, the extradition, or the very possibility of a custodial sentence?

They're trying to plug a broken dam with a little pinky finger it's not going to work because you cannot silence a billion and a half people with legislation it just doesn't work.

In fact things are probably going to get worse for them and the way they control people through big stick threats.

Puts tin hat on for next bit.

Maybe the Arab spring has unsettled big brother a little?