I wholly support the "ban younger Jewish guys making stupid posts" act as well. :thumbsup

Youtube does respect copyright law. One DMCA notice and the video is gone. That's what made them big.

I voted YES.

This comes from the blog of the "security officer" of LeaseWeb:

"If it is up to the Dutch Minister of Economics, Maxime Verhagen, net neutrality will be legally adopted in the Netherlands. This was stated in the Dutch Parliament during a debate yesterday regarding a new telecommunications law where the “net neutrality” amendment was embraced by most political parties. The amendment requires Internet providers and telecom operators ensure equal access for customers to all types of content, services, or applications and prohibits the blocking, delay or obstruction of specific services."

I totally disagree with that. I support law enforcement and full government control on the internet. Our societies are based on human rights and laws and the internet is and should be part of our societies. If you ask me if the internet should be subject to the law, my first concern would be CP, crushing videos, pedofiles scanning for minors, distributing hard drugs and fake viagra, gambling scams (all things that kill and ruine people) and only after that I would worry about copyrights and the interests of the porn business. I rather get out of business and live in a clean and safe society than having to live in an anarchistic mess and making millions a year.

IF the internet can be fully controlled is another question.

i agree. the pubic should be protected from serial-killer looking cat loving producers of shit and piss porn on the internet.

Law (the enforcement of rights) and government control are 2 totally different things.

Laws don't stop crime. I'm sure you know about policemen, courts, prisons, etc. These are there for those who break the law. Remove the laws and there's no need for any of them and the biggest armed mob rule.

Fools who think they can protect themselves are just selfish delusional idiots. Because the evidence is clear, without laws the tyrants take over. Then impose new laws that unless you go along with the tyrants you suffer. This is what would happen with an unregulated Internet exempt of all laws.

"Net Neutrality" whose to enforce it without laws? Without laws, the IPs get together and decide Net Neutrality isn't good for them and decide they own the Internet, priced and run to suit them.

Yes u-Bob without laws, you will suffer and whose to make and enforce the laws? Certainly not the individual, companies, a committee of people who think like you or a committee of people who think your rights don't matter and their bottom line matters?

Is a Democratically elected Government the best to make and enforce laws? Until I see a better model, I vote yes.

And so far no one ever has come up with a system that works better.

laws are just how tyrants keep their population enslaved.

Paul... you write that laws don't stop crime, but you're in favor of laws? I don't get it... I agree with you that without laws, the biggest armed mob rules. That's exactly what happens in places like Johannesburg, Mexico, Somalia, Afghanistan. And I'm happy that I'm not living in one of those places. It's also what happens on the web, the biggest armed mob rules, with in this case money being the arms.

No laws work 100%, that's why we need police to catch the law breakers and bring them to justice. They reduce crime, by making it a crime. Take that away and you have anarchy.

You have places like Afghanistan, Somalia, where the local war lord makes the laws.

Yes you still have laws. :(

Agreed. The problem is doing away with laws, lets more tyrants impose their laws. :Oh crap

wut ..................................

OK let me explain it to those with less comprehension.

Without laws, the worse ALWAYS rise to the top to take power. The weak do not inherit the world, this is a lie put out by the strong to keep the weak in their place.

So an Internet not governed by laws means all the scum are free of any penalties, yes I know they get away with a lot now which is why more and better laws are needed. It means ISPs can do what they like. "Net Neutrality" relies on their goodwill to provide it, if they think there's more profit in going another route. They go that way.

I can log into Brazzers, Met-Art, RK's sites, BangBros's sites. Download the whole site, put up a Tube or paysite and do what I like with it. Sell memberships at $5 a lifetime. And cancel them the week after. No CBs because. "I broke no laws".

Of course opening a Tube site would be the easiest thing to do.

Or copy all the programs from Microsoft, get a programmer to hack them and take out password protection and give them away. Or anything else I want to do.

Because. "I broke no laws".

What stops me?

Yes you got it. Laws.

I like to think my own personal morality stops me, but if it stops me, we know many here it won't stop. Yes laws are all we have to maintain some sort of order and we know the laws we have today are inadequate. Therefore need strengthening or creating.

Just making the point on how ridiculous it would be to have no law on the internet, Laws are needed.

Hmmm, I was thinking the internet came from the usa, is that not true? either way, the usa should be able to govern the internet here, If someone doesn't want to play by the rules, then they are blocked from anything us. traffic, processing etc.

Why does everyone act like if you can't stop something 100% there is no point? Things are so bad right now, my girlfriend who can barley use a computer knows how to download all the mp3's she wants, my son "10 years old" knows sites to go to where he can stream any movie he wants, including ones still in the movie theater, with more strict laws in place it won't be easy for any average person to steal anything they like...

and I unlike alot of people, I do not let my son use those websites! as far as music, I listen to Pandora, if there is an artist I like, I'll buy the album, a movie I want to see, I'll go to the theater, rent or buy it.

I'm of the opinion
Justice = Just Us
Illegal = Ill Equal
So No, Fuck No.

Must visit you for my holiday. Living in the real world, it would be great to come and see you living in a fantasy land.

It stops most. Otherwise anarchy would rule and they would really know how to stop you. Dead.

OK. You never know here with all the keyboard warriors.

Laws won't stop crime, they limit it.

not entirely fair.. any person able to pull those countries together mysteriously is killed

edit god dammit

No, the original question is retarded.

That question doesn't even make sense. Are you talking about existing laws?

Who cares.. you're entire hatred for online business and theory of it's demise can be beaten by another simple theory - if nudity weren't allowed on the internet without credit card verification then porn would sell like 1998, even you put up nude pictures on your site Paul. OMG FREE PORN! You are part of the problem also.

Only if you answered wrong. There is no other answer. It's either subject to laws or not, you can't pick and choose which laws and once you agree to laws, you have to agree that laws will be updated to keep up with changes. Thinking they don't have to change is retarded.

And if existing laws do not fit online or the world in 10 years time, they stay the same? That's a retarded position.

What a lot of BS. I love the Internet. It has made us a lot of money. And continues to. The last 3 years without working our income has been 90% from online. A completely retarded statement based on nothing. I hate the way some have taken it over with theft of other peoples property and some think it's right or should be allowed to continue.

Wanting to put a wrong right, doesn't mean you hate the place it's happening.

Retarded attitude.

Here are just a few examples why laws have to be applied and adjusted to online.

2257.
Never was a good law, yet for offline it worked because offline people were in fear of getting caught and getting sued by allowing something to be published that wasn't covered by full 2257 documentation.

Online it's clear it doesn't work. Exgf site popping up with "user uploads" get around it all the time. Who's to say if the models featured are over 18 or gave their consent to be published? Then companies stealing these images and using them on their sites. So a law designed to protect vulnerable, naive kids from themselves and pornographers clearly doesn't work. So it should be left as it is or changed?

DMCA
Again clearly not working. The clause to exempt hosting services and services attached to the online publisher are clearly not working. I don't have to explain where and why, we all know.

So leave them as they are or make people lie hosting, processing companies and advertisers who profit from an illegal piracy site immune, while the victims are left to chase the site owners around the world. Or bring in a change to make all those who profit liable to damages. So Microsoft or a film company can go after the advertisers to get recompense on the crime of stealing their property?

I can see how these laws might hurt little people who profit or benefit from piracy. Will it mean less people online, less money spent online or a weakening of the Internet. No it would have the opposite effect. The Wild West when it was run by gangsters and a few land barons, was largely deserted, it only sprung up as law and order was enforced allowing the ordinary people in. Who previously were the prey of thugs.

Yes Jake this might mean you have to work a little harder. The rewards will be huge for the law abiding. It will root out some of the thieves. People like those who advertise on piracy sites or sell advertising on piracy sites will suffer because they will have to change the way they do business. If you're one of those, it's a case of adapt or die.

The problem ultimately is some who benefit from the freedom want the freedom to remain. If it's a freedom to steal or benefit from others stealing, then is it a freedom that should be continued?

Also if a person makes a mistake by letting a friend take pictures of him/her in a compromising but legal act in private. Does this give others the right to abuse their privacy and others still to profit by abusing their privacy. In the case of that person being a minor. The law is very clear and the answer is no. So should a site, like Facebook, Youtube, or any other "user upload" site. Be given the freedom to do something that an offline publication doesn't have?

When we consider this and apply it to the Exgf niche we see clearly freedom has become a possibility to abuse for profit or benefit.

Speaking of law and law enforcement, reading just now that in Columbia the homeless are being killed by government supported militias. So having a law and police alone is not enough.

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/col...ial-cleansing/

It's not a menorah, Paul, it's a dreidel. You spin a dreidel. Troll as you must but do us all a favor and cool it with the anti-Semitic remarks.

This was my quote.

Where did you get yours from?

Do me a favor, cool it with the libel.

Hey, I'm a child of divorce. Give me a break.

doudt if yes voters thought once before what they voted for?

Hell no unless there's a fraud or an actual phisicle threat to an individual, actually even for those cases responsibility should be up to person in the first place.

You are the people who make money out of internet, stop acting like welfare parasites who no more than are voting machines to polititions.

if your video taypes are stolen and shared on boards blame Yourself not the pirates or nor ask for government regulation.

when it comes to computer technologies the limit is skye yet i wonder how You content producers can't protect your own shit :2 cents:

Maybe you can educate us all how content can be protected. With big companies like film, music, games, programers unable to do it. If you have the solution you'll be the richest man on the planet. Until everyone steals your formula. :Oh crap

It's really quite simple.

If you want your content to be 100% protected, don't sell your content.

If you run out of money, find something else to do for money.

Easy Peasy!

.................................................. .................

Thanks for the bump PJ.

I thought some might like to rethink their votes. No harm in doing it again. With the news of MU and other File Lockers getting nervous.

Jimmy, even people that didn't sell their content had it stolen.

Heheheheh.

i don't think so.