Results 1 to 4 of 4

One of SOPA's claws removed, perhaps evidence that Washington is getting the hint

This is a discussion on One of SOPA's claws removed, perhaps evidence that Washington is getting the hint within the General PS3 Discussion forum, part of the Everything PlayStation; Rep. Smith Waters Down SOPA, DNS Redirects Out | Threat Level | Wired.com Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), the chief sponsor ...

  1. #1
    PRO Member
    Gauss's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,243
    Reputation
    98

    One of SOPA's claws removed, perhaps evidence that Washington is getting the hint

    Rep. Smith Waters Down SOPA, DNS Redirects Out | Threat Level | Wired.com

    Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), the chief sponsor of the Stop Online Piracy Act, said Friday he is removing a major provision of his bill that would force changes to internet infrastructure to fight online copyright and trademark infringement.

    The announcement from the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee came a day after Sen. Patrick Leahy, the main sponsor of similar legislation in the Senate, announced the same move. For the time being, that means if the bills become law, ISPs won’t have to perform DNS redirecting of sites the attorney general concludes are facilitating online copyright and trademark infringement.

    Both Leahy and Smith left open the possibility that redirecting could be brought back in at a later time. But the lawmakers appear to have conceded to opposition from security experts who say the plan would sabotage U.S. government-approved efforts to secure DNS against hackers and break the internet’s unified naming system by introducing lies into infrastructure.

    “After consultation with industry groups across the country, I feel we should remove Domain Name System blocking from the Stop Online Piracy Act so that the committee can further examine the issues surrounding this provision. We will continue to look for ways to ensure that foreign websites cannot sell and distribute illegal content to U.S. consumers,” Smith said in a statement.

    It was not immediately clear whether Smith would also remove the requirement that, if an ISP decided not to redirect, it must employ other censoring methods as outlined in the bill such as IP address filtering to prevent American citizens from visiting sites the attorney general maintains are dedicated to infringing activities.

    The two bills are in response to Hollywood’s arguments that hundreds of thousands of jobs are lost every year due to pirate websites. On the other side, much of the tech world maintains that the open nature of the internet has created millions of jobs, that millions of people pay for content online and that copyright and trademark holders already have the legal tools to fight copyright infringement.

    “Both proposals still threaten openness and freedom online with a range of overbroad measures,” said Matt Wood, a Free Press policy director. “We believe that the rights of content creators should be respected, but many problems remain with the approach these bills take to achieve that goal.”

    Michael O’Leary, a Motion Picture Association of America vice president, continued dismissing technical criticism of the bill Thursday, saying the DNS issue was overblown (.pdf) and echoing a statement he gave in a SOPA hearing in November.

    “We continue to believe that DNS filtering is an important tool, already used in numerous countries internationally to protect consumers and the intellectual property of businesses with targeted filters for rogue sites. We are confident that any close examination of DNS screening will demonstrate that contrary to the claims of some critics, it will not break the internet,” he said.

    Internet experts maintain that the SOPA (.pdf) and the Senate’s Protect IP Act would break the internet’s universal character and hamper U.S. government-supported efforts to roll out DNS-SEC, which is intended to prevent hackers from hijacking the net through fake DNS entries.

    However, both bills essentially grant the government the authority to bring lawsuits against so-called rogue websites and obtain court orders requiring search engines like Google to stop displaying links to them. They would allow rights holders to seek court orders instructing online ad services and credit card companies from partnering with the infringing sites.

    In May, the PIPA legislation sailed out of the Senate Judiciary Committee that Leahy heads, but it was blocked from going to a Senate floor vote by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) who invoked a rarely used Senate hold.

    On Jan. 24, the Senate is expected to vote on whether to unwind Wyden’s hold, which would take 60 votes. On the House side, a Judiciary Committee markup of the SOPA bill was abruptly halted in December, and no House Judiciary Committee vote dates have been set.

    What’s more, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-California) will conduct a hearing Wednesday before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. Issa, the committee’s chairman, is calling prominent internet security experts and others to testify about the security ramifications of DNS redirecting.

    Among those summoned are Stewart Baker, a former Bush administration Department of Homeland Security policy director, who has said tinkering with the Domain Name System “would do great damage to internet security.”
    For those of you who aren't huge fans of reading or don't understand the verbage, basically what this means is one of the major pieces of SOPA has been removed: The Government's authority to force ISPs to censor content.

    Now, of course, the manner in which the bill is written is still too vague and extreme and ultimately still targetting the idea of government filtration of information rather than something that holds violators accountable in a fair, transparent manner (you know... like the 5th and 6th Amendment protects).

    However, this news is huge because its the first time since SOPA hit the senate floor that lawmakers have caved on a major piece of this stupid legislation they are pushing.

    With growing opposition to the law, including Hilary Clinton who recently spoke about internet rights, I think this is clear evidence that the protests and black-outs are working.

    Perhaps this is the first brick that will fall in this wall, and hopefully this re-invigorates some of you who have been avoiding taking sides on this one to get up and do something. Apathy is right up there with close-mindedness in regards to what enables tyranny in any social society.
    Gauss's Piracy Uncertainty Principle: When you pirate a game, that act inherently changes the results of what is to come after your pirating. You can't make any statement with any certainty regarding what would have happened had you not pirated the game.


    Gauss's Rating Rationale:
    0-1: A game whose very existence is abhorrent to all things creative and intelligent.
    2-4: A just plain bad game.
    5-6: A game that has alot of mistakes, but is atleast playable and has some enjoyable sections. Good for a rent.
    7: An average game, should be played at some point
    8: A good game, should buy at some point
    9: A great game, day-one purchase
    10: A game that goes above and beyond the generation, its transcendent.

  2. #2
    RPG Master
    Shemhazat's Avatar


    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    RPG Nexus
    Posts
    648
    Reputation
    35

    Gauss, you should also like this article:

    PIPA needs work, says Senator Leahy
    THE US SENATOR that proposed the Protect IP Act (PIPA) has admitted that it needs more study, however the same cannot be said of the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA).

    Commenting in a release on his web site, Senator Leahy, who introduced PIPA back in 2010 as a way of protecting intellectual property, said that he will suggest further study and, along with other sponsors, write an amendment to it.

    At issue is the part of PIPA that lets law enforcement obtain a court order that makes internet service providers (ISPs) use the Domain Name System (DNS) to block access to "foreign rogue websites".

    "This provision was drafted in response to concerns that law enforcement has remedies it can take against domestic websites, but does not currently have the power to stop foreign rogue websites," said Leahy. "I worked closely with the ISPs in drafting this provision to ensure they were comfortable with how it would work, and I appreciate their support."

    During this process problems with blocking web sites using DNS popped up, and Leahy warned that should these issues and criticisms not be resolved, then PIPA could lose support.

    "It is also through this process that I and the bill's cosponsors have continued to hear concerns about the Domain Name provision from engineers, human rights groups, and others. I have also heard from a number of Vermonters on this important issue," he added.

    "I remain confident that the ISPs - including the cable industry, which is the largest association of ISPs - would not support the legislation if its enactment created the problems that opponents of this provision suggest. Nonetheless, this is in fact a highly technical issue, and I am prepared to recommend we give it more study before implementing it."
    Sig by JK_Blade
    Shemhazat's Trophies

  3. #3
    PRO Member


    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    184
    Reputation
    7

    Interesting read. Seems your countries digital "Berlin Wall" is starting to crumble before it's built.


    Now playing
    EVE ONLINE
    Who needs a life anyway


  4. #4
    PRO Member
    Gauss's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,243
    Reputation
    98

    Quote Originally Posted by BadWolf2142 View Post
    Interesting read. Seems your countries digital "Berlin Wall" is starting to crumble before it's built.
    As it should, while this law isn't bad in theory, it is one of the many political philosophies that can be ruined in execution. This is a great example of how something honest can be made into something tyrannical simply by wording and the fact the government has no check in this situation.

    Its not just our countries problem though, Britain, France, Spain, Germany... They are all drafting/drafted similar laws that are meeting/have met with similar ire.
    Gauss's Piracy Uncertainty Principle: When you pirate a game, that act inherently changes the results of what is to come after your pirating. You can't make any statement with any certainty regarding what would have happened had you not pirated the game.


    Gauss's Rating Rationale:
    0-1: A game whose very existence is abhorrent to all things creative and intelligent.
    2-4: A just plain bad game.
    5-6: A game that has alot of mistakes, but is atleast playable and has some enjoyable sections. Good for a rent.
    7: An average game, should be played at some point
    8: A good game, should buy at some point
    9: A great game, day-one purchase
    10: A game that goes above and beyond the generation, its transcendent.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:59 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.10
Copyright © 2018 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO