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 PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT
 

I'm already a member of DemandProgress, so I've been badgering my representatives about this bill non-stop.

orangeban:

Sober Thal:

orangeban:

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.

Then, if the company deems it as a plus, they will allow you to use their product to stream it.

It should be their choice tho.

daydreamerdeluxe:
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...

Also, consider how much content on the internet is a product of people living in America, because that stuff would go, that is how it directly affects you.

(Nice quote there Daydreamer, but make sure we don't make it appear as though we're some oppressed minority here, the thing with this bill (that may or may not pass, we don't know yet) is it's mainly the amibiguous wording that has caused all the trouble, there not directly out to get videogamers, or Americans in general for that matter)

Jail time for copyright infringement? Jail time?!?! Yeah, because that's what the U.S. needs, MORE people in jail, I guess the highest per capita prison population in the world wasn't enough

Sober Thal:

orangeban:

Sober Thal:

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.

Then, if the company deems it as a plus, they will allow you to use their product to stream it.

It should be their choice tho.

Well, okay what about reviews? Suddenly video reviews can only be made of films/games/anything copyrighted if they put up the disclaimer saying you can. Surely people deserve to be informed about such stuff?

WOOOW ! WOOOOOOOOW !! HEY !! Calm the fuck down government ! God damn it means gone is the AVGN, Irate Gamer, Spoony and other video game reviewer. Well, that fuckin' sucks im making video games reviews myself and you know that's crap. I don't want to go to jailor pay a fine. I don't see anything illegal about posting footage of games. i mean, i am not distributing hacked copies or anything i am just showing my experience with a game as a gamer...there's nothing wrong with that !

Sober Thal:

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.

All due respect but you do realize how hypocritical it is to say that people dont respect the copywrite holders and the artists should be respected for their work, and possessing and reposting copywritten material in the form of your avatar, correct? I mean do you have the permission of the copywrite holder from which ever anime that originates from to redistribute their property every time you post?

Now granted a still image from a animated show doesnt really hurt the company and if anything helps it, but by that sort of ideology it is no different than mugging the artist on the street and taking their wallet. Im not trying to be an ass or start a fight, but more to the effect of illustrating how far reaching these sorts of interpretations can be and how they are getting worse as we leave them unchecked.

The industry will decide if it wants people to have free reign over use of their product via video streaming.

Sober Thal:

orangeban:

Sober Thal:

Then, if the company deems it as a plus, they will allow you to use their product to stream it.

It should be their choice tho.

Well, okay what about reviews? Suddenly video reviews can only be made of films/games/anything copyrighted if they put up the disclaimer saying you can. Surely people deserve to be informed about such stuff?

People can be informed without a streaming video. Regardless.. The industry will decide if it wants people to have free reign over use of their product via video streaming.

However, a video demonstrating a game can be a very good tool for selling a game. I've recently been playing a lot of Solar 2, which I really enjoy, but would never have found without TotalBiscuit's "WTF is" video of it. The amount of "WTF is" videos he does would make it prohibitively awkward to request for every single one, whilst he can spread word of them to many people, at least a few of whom will buy it.

i don't understand why they'd be against these kind of videos.
piracy, i can understand, but walkthroughs?

it actually helps you with the game and it gets people interested in it.
i don't think it stops people from buying any more than written reviews on IGN.

so it's a retarded idea.

It won't happen; the financial cost and logistics of policing this would be astronomical, and would put a serious dent into the gaming business' income via lost sales. If this bill is passed I'll eat my hat.

Must........ Not........ Rage....... Against...... Stupid people!!!

OT: No, it's not the end of the internet. However, we DO need to keep an eye on stuff like this, because, like it or not, the Internet is built on copyright infringement.

In addition, showing footage of a game and showing footage of a movie are two VERY different things. A movie is static. Whatever you show will be EXACTLY the same next time. A game on the other hand, is immediately changed when you play it. That Let's Play is different than how another person might play it, making it less of "Showing the game" and more of a performance.

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.

With a simple change to the EULA, developers can allow anyone to do everything they can now. Without this bill, cease and desists have to be issued every time a site streams their content unlawfully.

I'm with you. The bill is only in the first drafts too, they will change the wording of it so that it may not affect video games. Give them time before saying a first draft bill will ruin the internet.

This law will never pass. Think of most of the companies that rely heavily on streamed content like Machinima and Rooster Teeth. And think of the games that have been promoted using streamed content and LPs. I wouldn't have bought Ico on the PS2 if I didn't watch gameplay footage of it via LPs. And think of how hard this will hit existing communities like the Call of Duty, Halo, Starcraft, and Street Fighter communities that rely heavily on user-made content. Considering that most games these days have theater and machinima modes right out the box, I fail to see the reasoning behind it.

It's not going to happen. If it does, Obama will be zerg rushed.

Don't really have strong feelings for or against, but in its current form this bill cannot be enforced.

The number of man hours required to universally enforce such a law would be mind boggling, and the US doesn't have money to piss away at the minute.

/Signed

The owners of course have the right to profit off of their product but spreading video just should NOT be a criminal activity. People are giving them free fucking advertising. I hate the fact that our piece of shit government thinks they can make even the most mundane of activities a criminal act. Fuck them, I do not agree and I will not submit.

Okey... Batshit crazy has replaced sanity (sure, that happened a while ago but still!). I may not be american but I am signing that. A lot of good stuff comes from the US.

There would be no more Freeman's Mind if the creator did not get permission from Valve. :(

Sober Thal:

orangeban:

Sober Thal:

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.

And it's ok to jail/fine the rest of the world as well because it takes too much effort to properly reword the law so it isn't a ridiculous blanket statement that outlaws among other things Unskippable, Zero Punctuation, video reviews, fragmovies, speedruns, LPs and in some cases, even bug reports?

I don't think much to this bill one way or the other, but does anyone still think online petitions mean anything?

I'm just filing this under my "silly Americans" header. From all the things there this is only minor.

They can't even take down Pirate Bay. Why should I be worried about them taking down YouTube videos?

And if YouTube is actually lame enough to take down videos on a large scale people will just find another website, one not hosted in the US. With 95% of YouTube videos breaking some form of copyright there won't be anything left if they do.

Not signing as the bill has no chance nor credibility and is causing people to panic for no reason.

EDIT: And even if it were to pass, it would finally be the end of those retarded cowadooty video's made by 12 year old's on Youtube.

You know, in the agreement everyone always read when installing software there could be a clause granting the player the right to upload footage to the internet. That would save everyone an metric shit ton of time.

Asehujiko:

Sober Thal:

orangeban:

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.

And it's ok to jail/fine the rest of the world as well because it takes too much effort to properly reword the law so it isn't a ridiculous blanket statement that outlaws among other things Unskippable, Zero Punctuation, video reviews, fragmovies, speedruns, LPs and in some cases, even bug reports?

After getting 10 warnings not to do it, without getting specific permission, and/or without the Game Industry Itself wanting people streaming videos of their games... yeah.

Hagi:
I'm just filing this under my "silly Americans" header. From all the things there this is only minor.

They can't even take down Pirate Bay. Why should I be worried about them taking down YouTube videos?

And if YouTube is actually lame enough to take down videos on a large scale people will just find another website, one not hosted in the US. With 95% of YouTube videos breaking some form of copyright there won't be anything left if they do.

They couldn't take down The Pirate Bay because it's located in Sweden, and is therefore out of American jurisdiction. YouTube, being owned by Google, is very much inside America, and would theoretically have to follow it. However, as you said, I would hazard a guess that the majority of YouTube videos either use copyrighted media, so it'd be raaather impractical. Whether the people making the bill know this or not, however, is a different matter...

This has no chance of going through as it is, all the people and companies who stream games aren't going to let it.

Think of things like starcraft which is braodcast non stop, be it people streaming themselvs or Koreans streaming an entire tournament.

If it does go through as it is, I would assume most, if not all devs and publishers would release a "you can do lets plays and stream the game" 'cos it's like free advertisment to them. They could get very douche with it and start charging for it but I very much doubt it.

There is no need to worry about this though, especially since gaming has been just classed as art very recently.

I definitely agree. Watching YouTube walkthroughs lets me know what I'm getting for my hard-earned money. If I like the gameplay, from the videos, I may actually buy it. This is especially true if I want to get a game that you really can't find in stores anymore, like SNES games. I don't want to have to spend the trouble to find the game, and the money to buy it if I have no idea what it is like.

The problem with this is that mostly movie companies are supporting this bill, not game developers. The chances of this going through is inevitable. Even if the petition is signed by millions of people, the movie companies are gonna send it through. Most companies treat customers like criminals anyway.

Based on the poll options it really makes me think you didn't even read the bill or even Section 2319 of title 18 or Section 506(a) of title 17. Hell it's actually pretty straight forward.

I am really very disappointed in people for being so alarmist over something that honestly does nothing to the average streamer of games like Starcraft or League of Legends, ect ect. Even Let's Play videos on youtube don't violate these amendments. The only excuse I can tell from this is people are up at arms because they don't understand it, now that's a little silly isn't 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.

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.

What people need to realise is that copyright holders already have the ability/right to issue a cease & desist order and stop people from streaming their products.

The problem is that the bill wasn't designed with a proper understanding of how the internet works, and due to its vagueness it would technically make any breach of copyright on the internet a felony (as long as its "value" exceeds $2,500).

...
seriously who came up with this?
Because let's be honest, even though i'm not american, it would still affect me massively, what with most game footage coming from americans.
But after that game bill was denied, this other bill could be a massive blow to the industry.
Wish i could help, really do.
...
can i?

will this also go to the people who upload movies that cant/wont be published in the US?

or what about lets plays of shin megami tensei 1 and 2 on youtube?

Sober Thal:
[ Youtube does next to nothing to protect copyright, so there is little other choice here.

Incorrect. Thus invalidateing your opinion in mine and I'm sure many others minds. I've had several videos containing obscure songs as background sound taken down due to "copyright Infringement". Please for the benifit of the thread, refrain from posting on topics you clearly do not understand.

OT: Yes I signed, and I emailed all of my friends to as well. The bill makes sense for television and film but as stated in the video the broad generalization will hurt much more than the intent.

Reason why I'm against this bill is simple...

Give the government an inch and they'll take a mile, a house, a virgin, and two of each kind - just because they can.

Does it even matter? Bills like these are suggested and shot down all the time it seems. Everyone was like "OMG THAT ANTI GAMING BILL WILL DESTROY GAMING FOREVER!!!!!" and then it was shot down 7 against 2.

I would be fairly amazed if this were ever to be accepted. But then again, I am not American so I have little reason to care.

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.

the problem being the precedent it sets like with the law banning the sale of video games to minors well since video games are no longer protected why not ban all the ones that have sex in them and if that is ok why not ban all the ones with violence in them, see so something like this while seemingly kinda benign sets a dangerous precedent like say the copyright holders get to decide who reviews a game so it only gets good reviews and such.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked