20 replies to this topic

[Rols O'Bertilsson]

No brainer for me - I must be one of the few sympathetic to Wikileaks, much less this attempt at control.

[nykfan845]

baron-pierreIV, on 18 January 2012 - 10:24 AM, said:

I think the LEGISLATION should be passed IMMEDIATELY.

Did you actually read the ramifications of the bill before making this post?

:Looks at later post:

Didn't think so.

[deawebo]

Against! Try spainsh wikipedia i'll help if anyone needs translations... Also against the SOPA law!!!

[Texas]

Citius Altius Fortius, on 18 January 2012 - 12:54 PM, said:

... and no GB Eurovision Song Contest...


I am totally against this bill - I wonder who got this idea...

Former Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd, who is the current head of the Motion Picture Association of America.

I don't see this passing. It would greatly affect pro sports and not just in the United States. There are a lot of international footballers who use Twitter, including Cristiano Renaldo, Wesley Sneidjer, Landon Donovan, Mezut Ozil, Wayne Rooney, Cesc Fabregas and others.

[Mainad]

Seems like yesterday's protest by Wikipedia has had some effect on making US lawgivers think again about their controversial proposals!

Quote

Wikipedia - after the blackout

Breathe again students, relax fact-checking journalists, Wikipedia is working once more - so let's step back and evaluate Wednesday's blackout. Did the dramatic gesture made by the online encyclopaedia and other websites really change anything?

And before we get started - yes, I know we should not rely on Wikipedia as an unimpeachable source so please take my first few words with a pinch of salt. And I also know that it was easy enough to get round the blackout if you wanted, but that's really not the point.

The aim of the gesture was to raise the profile of the debate about America's proposed anti-piracy laws, Sopa and Pipa, and to try to change the terms of that debate. And it looks this morning as though the blackout succeeded on both counts.

The Wikimedia Foundation, the organisation behind the site, reported this morning that 162 million people had "experienced the Wikipedia blackout landing page" in the space of 24 hours.

Perhaps more significantly, eight million people in the United States looked up their congressional representatives through Wikipedia and, it is claimed, went on to protest about Sopa and Pipa. Wikipedia paints a picture of jammed switchboards at Capitol Hill and servers buckling under the weight of email from protestors.

Now this kind of internet protest is easier to organise than getting thousands of people onto the streets to demonstrate - and often has even less effect on the course of legislation. But this time it does seem to have worked.

One prominent Republican backer of the new laws, Senator Marco Rubio, announced on Twitter "After hearing from people with legit concerns, have withdraw support for #Pipa. Let's take time to do it right." And when the BBC in Washington tried to find voices on Capitol Hill willing to be interviewed in support of the legislation, nobody returned the calls.

Rupert Murdoch was not so shy. "Seems blogosphere has succeeded in terrorizing many senators and congressmen who previously committed. Politicians all the same," he told Twitter, before asking: "On Sopa, where are all big film stars with many millions to lose?"

But it looks as though the media backers of Sopa and Pipa have lost this round of the battle to Silicon Valley and the web activists.

Now of course Wikipedia was far from the only website taking action, but without its involvement the whole protest would have had a much lower profile in Washington and around the world.

So its strategy - not a total blackout but one that was effective enough for users and the global media to notice - has proved effective. But has Wikipedia damaged its reputation in the process? I note that the politician sponsoring Sopa called the blackout a "publicity stunt" and said that it was "ironic that a website dedicated to providing information is spreading misinformation about the Stop Online Piracy Act."

I learned that, by the way, from Wikipedia's entry on Sopa. I suppose I had better go and find another source to check that quote...

http://www.bbc.co.uk...nology-16614643

[Guardian]

Well, I am against SOPA and PIPA that the American government is trying to pass. I do not like the idea of people, like "RM", having "complete control" of what information can come out. If this gets passed, the CCP would be all too happy to extend its "firewall" for export to other countries. This is starting to be like "1984."

[Tatsh]

and now the FBI closed Megaupload. That's a crime against knowledge and it's also a form of discrimination against poor people.

the FBI could had locked only for USA, but they disturbed to all the world, when the fact is that all world people -except USA- are not involved in USA laws'.

[DannyelBrazil]

Simple solution:

Move all the internet servers and main sites to Brazil.
(Indeed, Wikileaks was the first site to consider this)
We don't have a proper Internet regulation law... And we will never have, since Internet in Brazil is taken as a free terroritory.

It would be the land of the freedom for everybody!

[intoronto1125]

DannyelBrazil, on 20 January 2012 - 12:59 AM, said:

Simple solution:

Move all the internet servers and main sites to Brazil.
(Indeed, Wikileaks was the first site to consider this)
We don't have a proper Internet regulation law... And we will never have, since Internet in Brazil is taken as a free terroritory.

It would be the land of the freedom for everybody!

That would be certainly welcome!

[DannyelBrazil]

I'm sure Mod would love to live seaside in Rio, everyday drinking some coconut water and seeing some bikinis passing by...