Re: Wikipedia 24hour blackout
 

Most of that comes down to dribbling spastic policemen, or just wazzocks harassing people because they don't like the look of them. I mean really what is a serious terrorist going to have in his other pocket than his camera a) a snicker and "the tourists guide to that london" or b) half an AK47 mag and bin ladens christmas special LP ?

Re: Wikipedia 24hour blackout
 

Only if it's pirated ;)

Re: Wikipedia 24hour blackout
 

I agree but you might end up with spastic "on-line police" or even worse would be companies applying pressure on the government.
You can imagine apple wanting to shut down any website which has a white background or uses the letter "i"

Re: Wikipedia 24hour blackout
 

Have a look at the EFF commentary on these acts:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/0...ng-free-speech

In short it gives the copyright holders the ability to shut down whole sites, not just request that offending content be taken down.

For sites like this where most of the content is submitted by users it's a disaster because one link to a scanned maintenance manual could get the whole site closed down. Who's going to run a site in those conditions??

Re: Wikipedia 24hour blackout
 

Keith do you honestly think the authorities are going to shut down a site because of a single user generated post which contains a link to a banned site?? Sounds more like something China would do...

Re: Wikipedia 24hour blackout
 

Yes, yes, YES it would. It is in fact the intended use of the legislation. Saying they won't use the option once it is available to them is simply closing your eyes and hoping for the best.

1. Look at what they've done in the past with other pieces of legislation: they've introduced the patriot act to give them powers to deal with "terrorists" (even though the term was so loosely defined, it could include anyone). "We'll only use those powers to crack down on bad terrorists". A couple of months later, they're jailing without due process normal citizens. "We'll just throw a helping hand in Libya, this is not a war, it's a <kinetic military action>".
It's clear, once you look at history, that once given the power to do something, not only will they use it, they'll abuse it and then TAKE some more.
Under this legislation, if you don't like a site with user generated content because it's posting content that discredits your own ideas, you could simply covertly post some offending content and then ask that the site be taken down (which will happen without due process).

2. They already have legislation to allow them to ask sites to take down offensive material. As the president of Google put it, the way to fight piracy is to offer a better service. And indeed it is so (I'm saying this as an employee of a software company that has had to deal with piracy).

3. You quoted the radio show (which I've not listened to) in which the wiki representative kept being asked whether he'd read the legislation or not. In my view, most of the media is under the severe influence of a very few powerful people and offers a generally distorted view of what's going on / about to happen. You'll be better off listening to independent sources (like the internet which they're trying to censor).
If the fact that a large number of sites with user generated content are trying to fight this piece of legislation is not ringing alarms for you, you need to WAKE UP!! Many forums (advrider, thumpertalk etc), wiki, youtube, facebook and others are all under threat and many have taken a clear stance against the legislation. You can also find a large amount of info on those sites regarding PIPA and SOPA, so they've clearly read the legislation before deciding that they think it's no good for everyone.


4. If you think "I'm british and I'm safe", think again! The french (why is it always them) president was suggesting the very same things 1 year ago. He just wanted censorship in general for the tinternet (because all this freedom is bad for ya'!!!). Once the US makes the move, they'll have precedence for introducing such legislation in the EU and it WILL affect you then. As they say, "at first they (nazis) came for the blacks and I didn't do anything, 'cause they hadn't come for me. then they came for the jews. then (..) then (..) then (..). then they came for me and there was no one left to help me".

If you believe that doing nothing will certainly improve the situation and tilt it in your favor, I beg you to reconsider.

Re: Wikipedia 24hour blackout
 

Andreis, thanks for the advice re. waking up :)

I see yours (and others) points, you've obviously read and researched a lot more on this than I have, can't say im worried in the slightest though to be honest. I don't think you can really censor the internet, all I heard was the woman saying they want to tackle piracy, illegal drugs etc and i'm all for that. If thats all they do then fine but from what everyone is saying it seems no-one thinks they will stop there.

Re: Wikipedia 24hour blackout
 

I wouldn't quite say that I've researched this subject to death, but definitely enough to form a strong opinion about it. It doesn't mean that I'm right and you shouldn't take my word for it, but instead research yourself and form your own opinion. This goes for most topics of such nature and it often leads to overcrowding the research schedule, but you should form a habit out of researching things and not believe the first thing we hear in the media.

Re: Wikipedia 24hour blackout
 

Especially when much of the media belongs to the very people promoting this legislation. I'd suggest doing some digging around and looking at both sides, then make up your own mind.

Personally, I think it's interesting to see how the DMCA has been used to threaten students and small time file sharers while the real copyright abusers simply moved their hosting to less picky locations. I'm expecting this legislation to be abused in much the same way, so the only real beneficiaries will be lawyers and the losers will be sites like this one.

Re: Wikipedia 24hour blackout
 

You know those workshop PDF's that we link to?

You know those wiring diagrams we link to?

Those links to the Ron Ayers Microfiche website?

Those entertaining Youtube videos?

All those are probably technical copyright violations.

Imagine this site without them all...