SOPA & PIPA, Read Me Options

[Redjack]

While this is off topic to this forum, this is the most widely read forum so for one day I will invoke admin privilege.

If you are a site member or site guest in the United States, please learn about SOPA and PIPA.

I elected not to block the site, but you need to understand that fan sites like Dumpshock would HAVE to shut down permanently if either SOPA or PIPA became law. Currently, SOPA appears stopped in the Senate, but PIPA is still continuing.

Partisan attacks and commentary will not be allowed. Money is flowing to, and being received by, members of both primary political parties to drive this type of legislation.

-Redjack
Dumpshock Sysop

[Paul]

I think it's appropriate for this forum to at least mention this issue, regardless of our individual politics I think we can all agree on that.

[3278]

I elected not to block the site, but you need to understand that fan sites like Dumpshock would HAVE to shut down permanently if either SOPA or PIPA became law. Currently, SOPA appears stopped in the Senate, but PIPA is still continuing.

This is a complex and significant issue, so perhaps you could explain, from your perspective as a site operator, why Dumpshock and other fan sites would need to shut down if one of these bills were passed. [There are so many things wrong with the bills that it's often difficult for people to work out what specific problem applies to their own interests, and most people don't care about things that don't affect their own interests.]

[Redjack]

This is a complex and significant issue, so perhaps you could explain, from your perspective as a site operator, why Dumpshock and other fan sites would need to shut down if one of these bills were passed.

For us, the basic premise is that (1) this bill could be interpreted to remove access to "fair use" of copyrighted material and (2) that despite any good faith attempts to keep piracy from the board, the site operators would become criminally and civilly liable for even links to formerly appropriate use of copyrighted material.

[There are so many things wrong with the bills that it's often difficult for people to work out what specific problem applies to their own interests, and most people don't care about things that don't affect their own interests.]

Agreed. The over reaching arm of corporations in the areas of "intellectual property" and "copyright" have completely perverted the original intent to the point of currently stifling technological innovation and in the future potentially moving into the realm of the draconian levels of censorship.

I believe people should be compensated for their work and, if popular enough, even get rich from it. I do not believe that grants them permanent ownership of thoughts. Even Disney, the biggest purchasers of current US copyright law, owe a great many of their entertainment products to building upon previously released songs, skits, plays, stories, etc.

[Doc Chase]

For us, the basic premise is that (1) this bill could be interpreted to remove access to "fair use" of copyrighted material and (2) that despite any good faith attempts to keep piracy from the board, the site operators would become criminally and civilly liable for even links to formerly appropriate use of copyrighted material.

Respectfully, I disagree. While I dislike the power that the pair of acts give to the entertainment industry as a whole and the MPAA/RIAA in particular, I don't believe that Catalyst or Topps would be boneheaded enough to slap Dumpshock with a cease and desist or DNS bomb.

Let's face it: The majority of us on this board do legally own or have legal access to the material we discuss. Furthermore, any text taken directly from the works in question is generally cited to the copyrighted work if not by the poster than by someone else later in the thread.

On the subject of being liable for use of copyrighted matieral, Topps/Catalyst do still have to provide you official notification to cease and desist before they can DNS bomb. As I said, I don't think either of them would do so; to do it would be counterintuitive to the business model that the tabletop industry(insofar as it can be considered one) has cultivated.

Slapping an injunction on a gaming forum for utilizing the material as intended would drop enough of a dramabomb on the District Court circuit to get the judiciary much more heavily involved. That is not SOPA/PIPA's intended purpose.

[Redjack]

On some points we will simply need to agree to disagree.

Respectfully, I disagree. While I dislike the power that the pair of acts give to the entertainment industry as a whole and the MPAA/RIAA in particular, I don't believe that Catalyst or Topps would be boneheaded enough to slap Dumpshock with a cease and desist or DNS bomb.

It is much larger than Topps and Catalyst. It is any and every product/IP that might be linked to or referenced. I would refer you to the litigation of RightHaven, the BSA, RIAA and the MPAA under current, horribly written laws for the temperature of what would follow.

Let's face it: The majority of us on this board do legally own or have legal access to the material we discuss. Furthermore, any text taken directly from the works in question is generally cited to the copyrighted work if not by the poster than by someone else later in the thread.

Time and time again there are reports of current take down notices being sent without valid infringement, but that does not stop them from being sent. I feel these laws would dramatically shift the burden of proof in those cases.

On the subject of being liable for use of copyrighted matieral, Topps/Catalyst do still have to provide you official notification to cease and desist before they can DNS bomb. As I said, I don't think either of them would do so; to do it would be counterintuitive to the business model that the tabletop industry(insofar as it can be considered one) has cultivated.

Again, the issue is bigger than Catalyst/Topps. RightHaven, the RIAA, SCO and other companies have created a business model on litigation.

Slapping an injunction on a gaming forum for utilizing the material as intended would drop enough of a dramabomb on the District Court circuit to get the judiciary much more heavily involved.

The judiciaries responsibility is to interpret the laws. Badly written laws, quite frankly, get interpreted badly.

That is not SOPA/PIPA's intended purpose.

Given the continued effects of Disney's fight to continually change copyright laws, I would disagree with you. The checks have been cashed.

[Paul]

That is not SOPA/PIPA's intended purpose.

I don't think it's intended purpose will be a useful measure of how it will actually be used. And while you may be correct that as it exists right now the people writing Shadowrun and the people at DSF get along, what happens if that relationship should change?

I respectfully submit that this laws intended purpose may not actually have much to do with how it ends up being used.

[Doc Chase]

I don't think it's intended purpose will be a useful measure of how it will actually be used. And while you may be correct that as it exists right now the people writing Shadowrun and the people at DSF get along, what happens if that relationship should change?

I respectfully submit that this laws intended purpose may not actually have much to do with how it ends up being used.

True, but every law is that way, thus why the judiciary interprets the laws that are passed. Prior to the explosion of cyberbullying laws, prosecutors used false representation laws to serve a woman who drove a girl to suicide with a false Facebook posting with a jail sentence. Such actions drive further legislation, overturn legislation, or clarify legislation.

A mature, intelligent Legislature would make laws that minimize this kind of impact, thereby reducing the strain on the Executive in signing and the Judiciary in interpreting in the future/building precedent. Using SOPA/PIPA in such a way would see a court overturning/clarification against such actions within months after passage (simply because the courts can take for freakin' ever). The stink we see today is simply pre-emptive building of precedent.

I would not even say that DSL and Catalyst get along that swimmingly. There have been many a harsh word in the past, but at the same time I do believe the business model at large would undeinably suffer if the copyright holders started shutting forums such as DSF down because it would shake consumer confidence.

In an industry this small, such a blow could and would kill the revenue stream.

Now, are SOPA/PIPA badly-written pieces of legislation forwarded by people who believe the Internet is a series of tubes? Yes. We've established that the 112th Congress of the United States is out of touch with the county as a whole, and is such on a scale that could only be considered willful malevolence.

However, would SOPA/PIPA as they stand be capable of killing DSF as have been described?

For that, I don't believe so(and mind you, I am thankful for such).

[Warlordtheft]

On the subject of being liable for use of copyrighted matieral, Topps/Catalyst do still have to provide you official notification to cease and desist before they can DNS bomb. As I said, I don't think either of them would do so; to do it would be counterintuitive to the business model that the tabletop industry(insofar as it can be considered one) has cultivated.

That is parto f the issue with SOPA from what I understand---the requirement to send a cease and desist letter is nullified. THey just go to a judge, the site gets blacklisted. Part of the reason it works this way is that if you are dealing with a site that is off-shore there is no legal obligation of said site to acknowledge or follow said cease and desist order. Basically how it works is that google, yahoo, and other search engines and ISPs would block U.S. visitors from going to that site.

Not sure what the Differences between PIPA and SOPA are, though from how things work here in DC the differences could be major ones. Hopefully this bill will get killed in the Senate cause Obama will most likely sign it.

[X-Kalibur]

SOPA and PIPA, as currently presented, would be veritable nukes to the internet as we know it. The landscape would be changed forever. Leaving our options to (ironically) using non-domestic sites that are helped by the US government for people living in countries plagued by censorship or to simply create a new internet (matrix 2.0?) to which SOPA and PIPA would not apply.

[Doc Chase]

@Redjack: No disrespect meant. I don't like SOPA/PIPA as much as the next person because they're poorly written and show a striking insight into how out of touch the 112th Congress is with the world, as well as the industries that support it.

At the same time, I believe both would be sorely modified if not struck down outright as First Amendment violations the moment someone tried to slap, say, DSF with a cease-and-desist for promoting the DDH issues.

I realize what you are saying here - that I am looking strictly at how it would affect DSF and that you are looking at the bigger picture. You would be right. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif) I do feel, however, that outside of the grip of RIAA/MPAA that industries would be quite a bit smarter about wielding the kind of power that SOPA/PIPA would give them.

Or at least there would be someone like you or I in the DoJ with the rubberstamp for these looking at each and going "What the fuck are you trying to pull? DENIED SIR" and throw the paperwork back in the industry troll's face.

Hope springs eternal. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

Regarding Righthaven: Fortunately, that band of idiots has been rendered impotent by the justice system they sought to turn into a revenue stream. Their domain has been auctioned off, they are under review to see where the funds they have extorted have gone off to, and the business itself has been found in gross violation of basic courtroom procedure.

Too many have decided that throwing a grenade into a community that's wrapped in court papers is the way to get ahead. All it takes is someone saying 'no, prove it.' The burden of proof is, as always, on the plaintiff.

[Aaron]

Shadowrun Resources is down for the day, too, and for the same reason.

To be fair, that probably won't inconvenience anyone, but it's the principle behind the thing.

[nezumi]

I'm not too worried about CGL putting a complaint against DSF. But what about Microsoft should they put out the next XBox game, Shadowrun 2: The Awakening (and we nitpick it to death, posting up chunks of script and the manual, screenshots and everything else we can get our grubby hands on)?

Ultimately though, I think DSF specifically is relatively safe ... but I wholly agree with redjack's decision, because there's plenty of other stuff in our lives which are threatened; derivative works, video collages, bronies.

Funny thing though, I do agree that it's a very cyberpunk change. Don't forget to brush up on how to use Tor. One day it might actually be used for more than dirty porn after all.

[Dr.Rockso]

I'm not too worried about CGL putting a complaint against DSF. But what about Microsoft should they put out the next XBox game, Shadowrun 2: The Awakening (and we nitpick it to death, posting up chunks of script and the manual, screenshots and everything else we can get our grubby hands on)?

Ultimately though, I think DSF specifically is relatively safe ... but I wholly agree with redjack's decision, because there's plenty of other stuff in our lives which are threatened; derivative works, video collages, bronies.

Funny thing though, I do agree that it's a very cyberpunk change. Don't forget to brush up on how to use Tor. One day it might actually be used for more than dirty porn after all.

From what I understand, using Tor to go around these laws will become illegal as well.

[Naysayer]

What you all seem to fail to realize, though, is that SOPA is a veritable chance to nuke free and fair access to information via the internet wholesale, thus creating a real incentive for hacker/decker-type professions.

Face it, if you love Shadowrun, you owe it to yourself to support SOPA...

[nightslasthero]

I think the dumpshock data haven would be in jeopardy anyway if Topps/Catylyst sent a cease and desist order, but thats given my limited legal knowlege and could be completely wrong (At the sametime such a legal battle could be handled by Topps way more than Dumpshock, so it is probably a mute point on whether said activity is legal or not)

In my intro to law class we actually talked about Disney and how they got copyright laws changed so they could keep certain items (I think one being Mikey Mouse) copyrighted. Wonderful Corporations.

As to the bill itself, the first part is definitions. The second part of the bill focuses on Foriegn companies and the sites that link to them. (Quickly scanning the bill it seems that the services that link to them will be notified by a court order to take reasonable actions to block the foriegn site. The third section of SOPA targets websites that are in violation of copyright law, but from skimming it, nothing appears to indicate DumpShock (or likewise) would be in jeopardy. As for lawsuits, it appears to me the bill does not have anything that would automatically make dumpshock responsible for anything on its site that breaks copyright law or links to anything that breaks copyright law, provided dumpshock follows the court order to remove/prohibit access to the content.

Overall it appears the Bill only allows penalties for companies that either are breaking current copyright law or possibly refusing to make reasonable attempts to block content that infringes on copyright laws.

I didnt' see anything in the bill which would prohibit fair use. The bill appeared pretty much focused on foreign companies and laws that were already currently law. However I did skim the bill rather quickly since I didn't have enough time to read all 78 pages. If I've missed something important in the bill, feel free to bring it to my attention.

[edit]

With that said, I undestand there is a vague definition of reasonable...i.e. I don't think I actually noticed reasonable defined within the bill, so that would up in the air.

Threat of legal action is obviously a danger to small companies like dumpshock, though it would appear to me there wouldn't be a major issue until Topps/Catalyst filed charges and those woudl already be covered by other laws.

[Paul]

True, but every law is that way, thus why the judiciary interprets the laws that are passed.

Given the current state of the Judiciary forgive me for not trusting them to make right decision.

A mature, intelligent Legislature would make laws that minimize this kind of impact, thereby reducing the strain on the Executive in signing and the Judiciary in interpreting in the future/building precedent.

I am trying to imagine you saying this with a straight face. Again forgive me for not being able to make the leap. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

We've established that the 112th Congress of the United States is out of touch with the county as a whole, and is such on a scale that could only be considered willful malevolence.

On this we agree.

However, would SOPA/PIPA as they stand be capable of killing DSF as have been described?

For that, I don't believe so(and mind you, I am thankful for such).

As described? Perhaps not. In some other way? Possibly. And that's enough for me to oppose legislation like this.

[Sengir]

What you all seem to fail to realize, though, is that SOPA is a veritable chance to nuke free and fair access to information via the internet wholesale, thus creating a real incentive for hacker/decker-type professions.

Face it, if you love Shadowrun, you owe it to yourself to support SOPA...

Yeah, I just had to think of the piece on the history of the Nexus from Denver Sourcebook...oh well, might as well quote it is long as we still can (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)
(Not that I believe CGL would use their new possibilities to the full extent. But what good is "Nah, they'd never do that?" as the only safety?)

THE INTERNET
The Internet was a loose amalgam of thousands of computers
spread all over the world. Unlike the older, centralized, first generation
networks. the Internet revolved around no central
hub. Each and every computer connected to the system served
as Its own hub, equipped with software enabling It to receive
and send messages from other computers on the net.
This decentralized architecture quickly turned the Internet
Into a hotbed of on-line culture. Net discussion groups debated
topics ranging from pet care to health Issues to new trends In
pornography to the latest government foul-ups. The lack of a
centralized hub prevented any group from censoring or monitoring
these network communications.
Governments have never considered free speech a really
good thing. In their vision. they accept the validity of the theory,
but are always looking for limits. After all, If speech Is truly
free. what's to stop someone from publicly criticizing government
policy or revealing the truth behind the latest and greatest
cover-up or suggesting that a regime Is not serving Its dtlzens
as well as It can? The Internet enabled people around the world
to discuss an Infinite number of topics without fear of censorship
or consequence.
»»>Is this the 20th century we're talking about? The fragging
Jurassic Age of computing? Security was so primitive back then
that any hacker worthy of the name could slice into the Internet
and track down the ident of anyone posting unpleasant comments.)<<<<<
-Pop (20:05:46/5-18-55)
»»>(Sure. the Internet wasn't the Matrix. but don't sell short
the ingenuity of the network pioneers. They devised ways of
speaking anonymously. For example. they used blind-distribution
nodes to forward messages to the rest of the net. nodes that
conveniently "forgot· the user's ID In the process. Not as slick as
using false-trace worms and microcode plasmids, but It
worked.)<««
-Fast Jock (00:45:59 /5-19-55)
By the mid 1990s, the U.S. government found Itself a mite
irked at just how free speech was really turning out to be on the
Internet. Not only were people saying unpleasant things about
government corruption (to take a single example) for anyone to
read. but they were encrypting messages to each other!
Encrypting them using schemes so sophisticated that watchdog
agencies like the National Security Agency (NSA) couldn't crack
them within the projected life span of the universe. The gov
types decided that this was totally unacceptable.
»»>(A little history for trivia buffs. Bock in the '90s, the NSA took
to flogging its own encryption algorithm, a little gewgaw called
the Data Encryption Standard (DES). The NSA wonted everyone
to protect their data by using this ·unbreakable" algorithm.
despite incontrovertible evidence that the NSA could crock the
DES with one cerebral hemisphere tied behind its bock. so to
speak. Entrepreneurs began marketing alternatives to the DES
, that nobody could break-not with the state of the cryptanalytic
art of the day. at least And when the government outlawed
such products. these entrepreneurs distributed them free over
the Internet. The girls and boys at the NSA were not
amused.)<<<<<
-FastJack (00:47:43/5-19-55)
As In most countries. United States law lagged decades
behind the times even In the 1990s, and It failed to address all
the wizzer new developments In electronic communications In
a timely fashion. The government attempted to use this situation
to Its advantage by applying the vague existing laws in a
way that would establish electronic communication as somehow
Inherently different from all other forms of communication.
Though the spoken and printed word was protected by
the Arst Amendment. the government argued that protection
should not extend to electronic communications such as electronic
mall.
>>>>>(With a frightening degree of success. to Its eternal
shame.}<<<<<
-fast Jock (00:49:51 /5-19·55)
Organizations sprang out of the woodwork to fight the new
government policy. In the early- to mid-1990s. the Electronic
frontiers foundation (EFF). an amorphous movement of "cypherpunks."
did what little they could. But corporate and government
Information networks -- privately owned, centrally controlled,
and layered with the precursors of what today we call
IC -- proliferated at an astounding rate, and public datanets
began to shrink. Under government pressure, organizations that
once had maintained Important Internet nodes began to dose
down their portions of the network.
»»>(The guvmint would approach universities and subtly link
continued government support with the "control" of "subversive"
datanets like the Internet. Because universities and other
node operators hod no way to "police· what was going on
across the Internet. they sow no way to abide by the government's
"suggestions" for eliminating subversive message traffic
other than closing down the Internet node entirely. And that
was just what the government wonted In the first place.)««<
-Finnigan (13:33:50/5-24-55)
As these key nodes shut down, the backbone of the
Internet disintegrated. Independent groups. most notably the
EFF. kept their own Internet nodes running, challenging In
court every attempt by the government to dose them down.
Unfortunately, the number of active nodes quickly dropped
below the critical mass necessary to keep the Internet up and
running as a meaningful International network. The volume of
traffic quickly choked and overloaded the remaining nodes,
and It looked as though the Internet, along with the whole
"wired society" and the free-Information philosophy It
espoused. was dead.
Certain private providers, such as the EFF and a pirate BBS
named "Shadowland", refused to accept defeat and kept operating,
In outright deflance of several newly promulgated laws.
The access numbers for these pirate boards passed only
between friends and colleagues. Though the government eventually
tracked down some of these ever-changing access channels,
the pirates by that time had discovered the wonders of
multi-node blind relays. making It Impossible for their enemies
In government to track their location or operations from these
access numbers.

[Bull]

More importantly... CGL/Topps doesn't have to complain. Anyone can do it. Anyone can report a violation, and it can get shut down without notice, to DSF or CGL. Sure, we could probably get things straightened out, and maybe the SOPA folks won't be so trigger happy as to not shut down first and ask questions later, but... Really... I don't trust it.

Bull

[Eimi]

Yeah, I just had to think of the piece on the history of the Nexus from Denver Sourcebook...oh well, might as well quote it is long as we still can (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

I thought of that exact bit of alt history when I studied up on these acts a month or so ago, myself.

[3278]

Respectfully, I disagree. While I dislike the power that the pair of acts give to the entertainment industry as a whole and the MPAA/RIAA in particular, I don't believe that Catalyst or Topps would be boneheaded enough to slap Dumpshock with a cease and desist or DNS bomb.

You may be right. [I think you're right.] A lot of the moderate voices in the intellectual copyright conversation might be. [I am, obviously.] But in a lot of ways, it doesn't really matter: if the administration of this board and boards like it felt like their world would end if they kept their sites up, it would be a real problem for a while. Draconian moderation. [More draconian, by my admittedly historically liberal standards.] Moderator approval before any contribution is published. Sites just shutting down on speculation. Not to mention the chilling effect on users, who don't want to quote from their favorite sourcebook because that could get them banned or get their favorite site shut down.

In this case, perception of risk - which is, in this case, much greater than the risk itself - can have as much or more effect as any actual risk.

[Warlordtheft]

For me it is not that they could shut DS down, it is the fact that they could do so without trial and the site's owner being affected would not know they tried to access it in the US.

[Trigger]

This video explains a lot about the potential uses of SOPA:

PROTECT IP/SOPA Breaks the Internet

[JanessaVR]

For my part, I live in Sacramento, CA.

My Congressional Representative is Doris Matsui, and she is already opposed to it. One less phone call to make.

Unfortunately, both of my state's Senators - Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, are not only for it, they're co-sponsors! Wasted phone calls there. Dear gods, these 2 twits are not only out of touch with their voters, but apparently out of touch with reality as well.

Alternately, they've just cashed their checks from the RIAA, etc. and are doing what they're told. How very Sixth World...

[X-Kalibur]

For my part, I live in Sacramento, CA.

My Congressional Representative is Doris Matsui, and she is already opposed to it. One less phone call to make.

Unfortunately, both of my state's Senators - Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, are not only for it, they're co-sponsors! Wasted phone calls there. Dear gods, these 2 twits are not only out of touch with their voters, but apparently out of touch with reality as well.

Alternately, they've just cashed their checks from the RIAA, etc. and are doing what they're told. How very Sixth World...

Boxer and Feinstein have been out of touch with the majority of California for most of their current reign. I don't know how those twa errm, twits, keep staying in place.