Quote:
Originally Posted by joshgirls
SOPA is specific in target websites dedicated to piracy. i would expect the AG to make a distinction between fair use & sites dedicated to piracy.
|
there's a few problems with that.
1. You're putting a lot of faith in government bureaucrats. Even under the current system, sites that didn't violate IP rights, have already been taken down.
2. 'dedicated to piracy' is not defined clearly.
Over here in the EU, news paper publishers have been pushing to reform the copyright system. They want copyright to apply to titles of news articles. They admit they've been losing readers to alternative news sites and blogs. They hate the fact that people will for example use Google News and arrive at a page containing a single article on their site instead of people visiting their site directly.
Let's say those news corporations manage to get those laws changed so that copyright also applies to those very short sequences of words. If that happens, any blogger that blogs about a recent news paper article would be violating the new IP laws. If he blogs about more than one article, does that establish a pattern of IP rights violations and does that mean that his blog is "dedicated to piracy"?
Quote:
|
hollywood, with unlimited lawyers & cash, cannot stop foreign sites dedicated to piracy. What do you think they should do, other then find a government remedy? Whats your private sector solution for hollywood?
|
Frankly: that's hollywoods problem. I'm responsible for my own business. I do no harm. I trade with others on a voluntarily basis. I refuse to do business with companies that I consider to be criminals. But I have no responsibility whatsoever to use my time and resources to defend hollywood or bollywood or Justin Bieber (who's anti SOPA btw) etc