Did you sign the forum to save the internet?
Yes!!! I am a good person who cares about internet freedom.
72.3% (345)
72.3% (345)
No,I don't care\ this doesn't affect me.
27% (129)
27% (129)
Want to vote? Register now or Sign Up with Facebook
Poll: The death of internet freedom; AKA bill S.978

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT
 

This morning during my usual internet routine I was checking Notch's blog and his latest post led me to this video. If you care about netnutrality or internet freedom please watch this video.

http://youtu.be/ib7-vSrp6y8

The video does a better job of explaining what Bill S.978 is than I could but the bottom line is that while this bill will unintentionally destroy game videos, walkthroughs, game and movie reviews, home recorded talent shows,and pretty much every other video or document on youtube and the internet in general that has anything to do with copyrighted material.

The only good part about this is that there is something you can to to prevent this.
This link will take you to a page where you can send a message to the goverment and tell them not to pass this bill, or to amend it. The message is already written up all you have to do is add in your contact info, and you can change it as you see fit, or send it as is. This only took me 30 seconds to complete and it could save our way of life.

http://act.demandprogress.org/letter/ten_strikes?akid=700.450896.5hVZPC&rd=1&t=1

Please spread the message, tell you friends and family we need to act on this before it is too late. Also if anyone could embed the video in a post so others can watch it, I would appreciate it, I would do it myself, but I don't know how.

Didn't sign, don't plan to. Copyright holders should have the right to decide if they want people to stream their products.

Here is your video anyways:

What people need to realize, is that if a company wants to allow you to make your 'Lets Play' and what not, they can easily give permission to stream their content. They don't have to do so on an individual bases like this video implies.

I am very concerned about this bill, as it may destroy much of the current internet culture. It would strike particularly hard at the Street Fighter community, since much of its core has become live streaming tournaments.

Ultradavid is a part of the SF community and is also a lawyer. He's written about the potential impact this bill might have at his website.

Have a read and sign petitions opposing the bill, or do whatever to get your voice heard. Maybe, for once, someone will listen to us internet folks.

Sober Thal:
Didn't sign, don't plan to. Copyright holders should have the right to decide if they want people to stream their products.

Yes, I realize this is true and completely fair. However, I think it's a difference between pirating a stream showing gameplay from a copyrighted product for the intention of earning money, and uploading a video game related clip to YouTube or hosting a stream without financial gain, as is with the Street Fighter tournaments. The latter examples are basically free advertisments for the game, Capcom has even stated that it's beneficial to have such a community.

Sober Thal:
Didn't sign, don't plan to. Copyright holders should have the right to decide if they want people to stream their products.

I'm signing, but I won't be too broken up if it passes. Because this guy is right.

And most game companies and such WANT their material on the open web, so they simply have to add a clause to their ToS that says "You can use footage from this product in fan videos/walkthroughs/speed runs/guides/etc." And make no mistake, most companies will do that. Notch has already said he would.

I'm only signing on principal, as I don't like internet policing in terms of copyright.

By the way, I'm too lazy to watch the video. Will this affect any websites based in countries that aren't the United States?

Sober Thal:
Didn't sign, don't plan to. Copyright holders should have the right to decide if they want people to stream their products.

They already have that right, the video explains that at any time a game company like valve could call up a you-tube account and demand that they take down all the videos regarding their games. But game companies don't do that because they know that you-tube videos are great marketing. This bill would take that decision out of the hands of the game companies and give it to the government. Game companies wouldn't have any say in the matter. The goverment would consider lets plays a crime, and would automatically fine or send to jail people who post them.

Any way thank you very much for the video.

jimahaff:
The

Sober Thal:
Didn't sign, don't plan to. Copyright holders should have the right to decide if they want people to stream their products.

They already have that right, the video explains that at any time a game company like valve could call up a you-tube account and demand that they take down all the videos regarding their games. But game companies don't do that because they know that you-tube videos are great marketing. This bill would take that decision out of the hands of the game companies and give it to the government. Game companies wouldn't have any say in the matter. The goverment would consider lets plays a crime, and would automatically fine or send to jail people who post them.

Please reconsider, and at least watch the video. so that you understand the issue fully. But thank you very much for the video.

Watched the video already. It's just wrong. I say this in the sense of 'at any time a game company like valve could call up a you-tube account and demand that they take down all the videos regarding their games' is just wrong. It doesn't work out as well as you make it sound. Same with all forms of media. Unless people get financially hit, they just make a new account and post the same shit. Youtube does next to nothing to protect copyright, so there is little other choice here.

Damn. I just saw th youtube link and...
That sucks.
But I'm not an American, so I can't really do anything.

[quote=Will this affect any websites based in countries that aren't the United States?[/quote]

Yes and no, non Americans will be able to post videos and other content because the bill only applies to Americans, but any content that was posted by Americans will be taken down, and nobody American or other wise will have access to it.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!! The government is trying to control the internet again! That's hilarious! Yeah, good luck with that. You can't even take down the pirate bay much less a whole bunch of gameplay videos from youtube. Even if they did, it would probably cause a rebellion of mass proportions.

TheIronRuler:
Damn. I just saw th youtube link and...
That sucks.
But I'm not an American, so I can't really do anything.

You can still sign the form.

I'd like to see them reinforce this one.

Sober Thal:
Watched the video already. It's just wrong.

I don't claim to be an expert, but this news alarmed me and I thought more people should have access to the information so that they can make up their own opinions about it. The fact that this post has already gotten 5 people to sign the message who might not have otherwise, more than satisfies me. (Edit, I am the typo king)

Hoe many topics about this do we need? A couple hours back I visited the site and 3 of the 7 latest topics were about this bill, and none of them was this one. None offered any special angle on the subject, they are all just "Here's the bill. OMFG it sucks. Discuss."...

Anyway, this has absolutely nothing to do with net neutrality. It is of course about freedom though. I don't know what the bill says exactly, but if it says that you can't produce a video with music or footage from a copyrighted product, I am not sure how that is not already covered in the law. I am not in favor of going after sites like YouTube, and think that the people who post and create those videos should be the ones that get blamed, although ideally that won't happen either.

I am in favor of fair use policies, and I don't really see how a decrease in Let's Play videos etc. will do anyone (including me) any good. But to me it does make sense that when you hold a copyright to something you can control who copies it. In short, I don't like how this bill might affect the internet, but that doesn't mean it is wrong. I think all companies should be happy when someone is using their music, or promoting their game in popular videos and should rush to give all content creators permission to do just that.

As much as I'd disagree with the bill, your insults and populist bullshit aren't exactly making me run to help your cause.
Neither does making 10 threads per hour about it.
Then again, it's not like I'm American in the first place.

Sober Thal:

jimahaff:
The

Sober Thal:
Didn't sign, don't plan to. Copyright holders should have the right to decide if they want people to stream their products.

They already have that right, the video explains that at any time a game company like valve could call up a you-tube account and demand that they take down all the videos regarding their games. But game companies don't do that because they know that you-tube videos are great marketing. This bill would take that decision out of the hands of the game companies and give it to the government. Game companies wouldn't have any say in the matter. The goverment would consider lets plays a crime, and would automatically fine or send to jail people who post them.

Please reconsider, and at least watch the video. so that you understand the issue fully. But thank you very much for the video.

Watched the video already. It's just wrong. I say this in the sense of 'at any time a game company like valve could call up a you-tube account and demand that they take down all the videos regarding their games' is just wrong. It doesn't work out as well as you make it sound. Same with all forms of media. Unless people get financially hit, they just make a new account and post the same shit. Youtube does next to nothing to protect copyright, so there is little other choice here.

Bwuh? Youtube is super paranoid about copyright infringement, as soon as a claim is made they instantly take down said video. There like a coiled spring, does nothing, until a company springs them into action.

Here, http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=11738#more-11738
This is a post on Shamus Youngs blog about youtube and copyright infringement. Arbitary and heavy-handed I believe he calls it.

Sober Thal:
Didn't sign, don't plan to. Copyright holders should have the right to decide if they want people to stream their products.

Here is your video anyways:

What people need to realize, is that if a company wants to allow you to make your 'Lets Play' and what not, they can easily give permission to stream their content. They don't have to do so on an individual bases like this video implies.

You watched the video, so what do you thing about that thing where in, say, a kareoke party occurs where your friends sang, and you thought it was funny and put it on Youtube, suddenly putting that video up is a federal offence. How is that fair?

I'm not even in the U.S but I've signed Screw this It's a ridiculous Bill...

orangeban:

Sober Thal:

jimahaff:
The

They already have that right, the video explains that at any time a game company like valve could call up a you-tube account and demand that they take down all the videos regarding their games. But game companies don't do that because they know that you-tube videos are great marketing. This bill would take that decision out of the hands of the game companies and give it to the government. Game companies wouldn't have any say in the matter. The goverment would consider lets plays a crime, and would automatically fine or send to jail people who post them.

Please reconsider, and at least watch the video. so that you understand the issue fully. But thank you very much for the video.

Watched the video already. It's just wrong. I say this in the sense of 'at any time a game company like valve could call up a you-tube account and demand that they take down all the videos regarding their games' is just wrong. It doesn't work out as well as you make it sound. Same with all forms of media. Unless people get financially hit, they just make a new account and post the same shit. Youtube does next to nothing to protect copyright, so there is little other choice here.

Bwuh? Youtube is super paranoid about copyright infringement, as soon as a claim is made they instantly take down said video. There like a coiled spring, does nothing, until a company springs them into action.

Here, http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=11738#more-11738
This is a post on Shamus Youngs blog about youtube and copyright infringement. Arbitary and heavy-handed I believe he calls it.

Dude, that's Shamus Young... he calls you an idiot if you vote poorly about games he likes!
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/experienced-points/8819-Experienced-Points-DLC-for-Dummies

There are plenty of people who hate youtube because they constantly have their material posted, regardless of how many times they are asked to take it down. The people who post it just make a new account. Which is why they need to step it up and fine them.

Sober Thal:

What people need to realize, is that if a company wants to allow you to make your 'Lets Play' and what not, they can easily give permission to stream their content. They don't have to do so on an individual bases like this video implies.

I know, but to be honest, I don't care what a company thinks of what I or anyone else does with their content. More relaxed copyright laws stimulate art and culture in my opinion, and I think the internet is proof of that in how it's allowed people to disregard the law and spread, remix, adapt and combine media and expression.

Sober Thal:

jimahaff:
The

Sober Thal:
Didn't sign, don't plan to. Copyright holders should have the right to decide if they want people to stream their products.

They already have that right, the video explains that at any time a game company like valve could call up a you-tube account and demand that they take down all the videos regarding their games. But game companies don't do that because they know that you-tube videos are great marketing. This bill would take that decision out of the hands of the game companies and give it to the government. Game companies wouldn't have any say in the matter. The goverment would consider lets plays a crime, and would automatically fine or send to jail people who post them.

Please reconsider, and at least watch the video. so that you understand the issue fully. But thank you very much for the video.

Watched the video already. It's just wrong. I say this in the sense of 'at any time a game company like valve could call up a you-tube account and demand that they take down all the videos regarding their games' is just wrong. It doesn't work out as well as you make it sound. Same with all forms of media. Unless people get financially hit, they just make a new account and post the same shit. Youtube does next to nothing to protect copyright, so there is little other choice here.

No other choice than to arrest them and put a felony on their record? That's cold heartedly fucked up.

I'm not American, but that's pretty harsh, this is not the way to go forward in this age where uploading content is so normal.

orangeban:

Sober Thal:
Didn't sign, don't plan to. Copyright holders should have the right to decide if they want people to stream their products.

Here is your video anyways:

What people need to realize, is that if a company wants to allow you to make your 'Lets Play' and what not, they can easily give permission to stream their content. They don't have to do so on an individual bases like this video implies.

You watched the video, so what do you thing about that thing where in, say, a kareoke party occurs where your friends sang, and you thought it was funny and put it on Youtube, suddenly putting that video up is a federal offence. How is that fair?

I don't care about people being able to lip synch and post a video on youtube.

I realize most people don't care about copyright, this should open your eyes. The blood sweat and tears people put into a product should be respected. If the creator wants people to use their work for free, they can allow it.

THAT is fair.

You know, this isn't the first time america has tried to controll something it has no real ability to controll. Last time it was imposing democracy on the middle east, which is Ironic because America's democracy isn't working too good as it is. Now it's the internet. Next time they do something like this, it won't be much different. The american goverment will do something, claim it's helping, fuck it up, the citizens will still suport, and the 20-30 americans with a functioning brain (myself included) will wonder why the hell they keep doing this. The rest of the world is going to just have to get used to it, because congress has no intent of stopping now. Man I really need to move.

blakfayt:

Sober Thal:

jimahaff:
The

They already have that right, the video explains that at any time a game company like valve could call up a you-tube account and demand that they take down all the videos regarding their games. But game companies don't do that because they know that you-tube videos are great marketing. This bill would take that decision out of the hands of the game companies and give it to the government. Game companies wouldn't have any say in the matter. The goverment would consider lets plays a crime, and would automatically fine or send to jail people who post them.

Please reconsider, and at least watch the video. so that you understand the issue fully. But thank you very much for the video.

Watched the video already. It's just wrong. I say this in the sense of 'at any time a game company like valve could call up a you-tube account and demand that they take down all the videos regarding their games' is just wrong. It doesn't work out as well as you make it sound. Same with all forms of media. Unless people get financially hit, they just make a new account and post the same shit. Youtube does next to nothing to protect copyright, so there is little other choice here.

No other choice than to arrest them and put a felony on their record? That's cold heartedly fucked up.

10 strikes, and you are out, then you have to pay a fine.

normalguycap:
You are an idiot that doesn't really understand the implications this has. Please rethink your stance or look up more info.

You need to quote me BEFORE you start calling me names, or else how am I to know you are talking about me : P

Suffice to say, I have to sign up, period. My current job as an Examiner in gaming requires that I make use of streamed gaming content one way or another, either in embedded videos or at least the viewing of play-throughs so that I have a full understanding and actual presentation for the review. The more interesting my review page is, as well, the more watchers I will have, because Jack did something interesting.

Aside from me, more notable reviewers make use of streamed gaming content to get the look in on a game, LIKE UHHHH...YAHTZEE! Yes, you may recall in his interview that Yahtzee explained that since he does ZP weekly, he doesn't always have time to go through the whole game to get a grip on it personally, so that he would actually USE Let's Play videos and such in order to fill in the gaps! This bill would actually take a chunk out of the industry, in that he's probably not the only pro reviewer doing so!

TheLaofKazi:

Sober Thal:

What people need to realize, is that if a company wants to allow you to make your 'Lets Play' and what not, they can easily give permission to stream their content. They don't have to do so on an individual bases like this video implies.

I know, but to be honest, I don't care what a company thinks of what I or anyone else does with their content. More relaxed copyright laws stimulate art and culture in my opinion, and I think the internet is proof of that in how it's allowed people to disregard the law and spread, remix, adapt and combine media and expression.

Then it should be up to the 'artist' to not copyright their product.

Then they can kiss all publishing funds and support goodbye, but it will be their choice, just as it has always been.

If I was American I'd sign it. I'm not though, and I dont believe I should be getting involved in the legal system of other nations, unlike American politicans who believe everyone is accountable to them.

Also I can't imagine this petition doing much good. Idealistically it's good and at least you can say 'I tried' but I really doubt the goverment will pay the petition much notice.

let's rock:
~Snipped~

This was almost physically painful to read. Comparing invading other countries for nebulous reasons, resulting in 100's of thousands of deaths, with preventing people from streaming OTHER PEOPLE'S WORKS online?

normalguycap:
You are an idiot that doesn't really understand the implications this has. Please rethink your stance or look up more info.

You should really specify who you're speaking to, and backing up what you say with at least some kind of reasoning other than "you are an idiot", it just makes you look like a twerp.

On Topic: I don't 100% support this bill, but then I rarely do for anything but overall I'm fine with this. You can't just use other people's shit without their permission.

Regarding the whole "I'm not American, so it doesn't affect me" stance:
"First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me." - Pastor Martin Niemöller

There have also been various other takes on it since, but what that boils down to is pretty obvious. Saying "I'm not a [insert adjective here], so I'll do nothing" only works for so long...

Yea how many times has EA and other publishers already told people to stop if they did not like something. It would just make it a felony that law enforcement would pursue rather than the legal dept of EA or whoever.

This bill needs rewritten to account for fan, tributes, and parodies, without those exceptions and limits spelled out to the letter you will get an overreaching bill that will turn ordinary people into felons.

Course this is coming from the same government that gave us the patriot act and swore that it would have defined limited powers to do things, but in reality the bill pretty much said that the scope of the act was wth ever the government wanted to use it for.

Sober Thal:

normalguycap:
You are an idiot that doesn't really understand the implications this has. Please rethink your stance or look up more info.

You need to quote me BEFORE you start calling me names, or else how am I to know you are talking about me : P

And I thought I was getting a lot of flak for saying people need to chill out...

I watched that one video by that guy who did the "Fair Duke Nukem" review (DSP Gaming something or other) and he actually said something along the lines of "We'll be sent to the dark ages before Youtube where we wont know anything about video games and its going to run major corporations out of business like Machinama!" and one of the video responses is of some little kid who doesn't know what he's talking about saying how people are going to riot because of this... It's honestly completely ridiculous... I'm not saying the bill isn't something to be aware of, but there's a difference in people saying "Keep an eye out for this bill" and "This is teh end of the internetz!!!1!"

Here's that video if anyone is interested: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hytigOSjJxc

Really? Its not the death of internet freedom, but its another log on the pyre.

Make no mistake about it, We are fastly approaching a day when corporate greed strangles the life out of the internet all together.

I would sign a petition if I thought for a minute that the words of the populous would have any sway against the money of paid lobbyists and lawyers.

If you want to fix the problem youve got to go back and fix a hell of a lot of other stuff first.

Sober Thal:

orangeban:

Sober Thal:
Didn't sign, don't plan to. Copyright holders should have the right to decide if they want people to stream their products.

Here is your video anyways:

What people need to realize, is that if a company wants to allow you to make your 'Lets Play' and what not, they can easily give permission to stream their content. They don't have to do so on an individual bases like this video implies.

You watched the video, so what do you thing about that thing where in, say, a kareoke party occurs where your friends sang, and you thought it was funny and put it on Youtube, suddenly putting that video up is a federal offence. How is that fair?

I don't care about people being able to lip synch and post a video on youtube.

I realize most people don't care about copyright, this should open your eyes. The blood sweat and tears people put into a product should be respected. If the creator wants people to use their work for free, they can allow it.

THAT is fair.

Yeah, but we're talking about videogames here, watching someone else play a game isn't using the creator's work for free, in fact, it's beneficial to the company as it'll probably encourage you to buy it.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked