Possibly the oddest interview with a senate candidate and his son you'll ever see

halloweenie2 · 3 months

Cause that's the first thing I though when I read it...

halloweenie2 · 4 months

I dig it too, but it freaks me out...

halloweenie2 · 4 months

Ah thank you

halloweenie2 · 4 months

"A service provider shall take technically feasible and reasonable measures designed to prevent access by its subscribers located within the United States to the foreign infringing site (or portion thereof) that is subject to the order"

I think the "or portion thereof" is important. The site shouldn't be blacked out, just the infringing post. And even then, "A service provider shall not be required ... to continue to prevent access to a domain name to which access has been effectively disabled by other means." Meaning if reddit, for instance, were to remove the offending post then no other action would even be taken.

The fact that blocking a post or site could happen before they can appeal the claim is troublesome...

halloweenie2 · 4 months

"If someone else would have posted it other than me and copied it word for word as I did, would that not be a violation of my copyright? How could reddit possibly monitor that?"

I think this is what is difficult to understand about the bill. It's meant in large part to combat blatant disregard for copyright -- i.e. someone uploading a movie or album to the Internet, for instance -- but cases like this are worrisome. I'd hope as things proceed this will be made more clear, otherwise no one could post anything online at all...

halloweenie2 · 4 months

"if the operator of the U.S.-directed site DOES NOT TAKE ACTIONS to avoid confirming a high probability of the use of the U.S.-directed site to carry out acts that constitute a violation "

The sites you listed already have rules in their terms of use stating not to infringe in ways that violate the law, and sites like YouTube already takes actions against these types of violations. I don't think the wording of the bill supports the fear that is claimed.

I disagree with your second paragraph. All the no liability thing means is that you can't sue reddit, for instance, if your post is removed for infringing on copyright. Which is how the law stands now, anyway, unless I'm mistaken.

Again, I don't think the website will be taken down, just the offending post, video, etc. The only reason a whole website would be taken down is if it's like piratebay, which exists solely on pirated material, or if the website consistently refuses to remove infringing content.

halloweenie2 · 4 months

I could be mistaken, but I don't read it that way. My understanding is that if a sole poster or commenter on reddit were to post a comment pointing to the piratebay, reddit would simply have to make that post or comment unavailable to users, and only if they were specifically requested to do so by the Attorney General.

halloweenie2 · 4 months

I like the guy, but there's a difference between talking a lot and saying something.

halloweenie2

TROPHY CASE

you'll need to login or register to do that

create a new account

login