Google, Amazon, Facebook & Twitter Consider a Blackout for a Day to Protest SOPA

[ZappaFan]

From
http://techland.time.com/2012/01/05/...ne-in-protest/

SOPA: What if Google, Facebook and Twitter Went Offline in Protest?
Can you imagine a world without Google or Facebook? If plans to protest the potential passing of the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) come to fruition, you won’t need to; those sites, along with many other well-known online destinations, will go temporarily offline as a taste of what we could expect from a post-SOPA Internet.

Companies including Google, Facebook, Twitter, PayPal, Yahoo! and Wikipedia are said to be discussing a coordinated blackout of services to demonstrate the potential effect SOPA would have on the Internet, something already being called a “nuclear option” of protesting. The rumors surrounding the potential blackout were only strengthened by Markham Erickson, executive director of trade association NetCoalition, who told FoxNews that “a number of companies have had discussions about [blacking out services]” last week.

According to Erickson, the companies are well aware of how serious an act such a blackout would be:

This type of thing doesn’t happen because companies typically don’t want to put their users in that position. The difference is that these bills so fundamentally change the way the Internet works. People need to understand the effect this special-interest legislation will have on those who use the Internet.
The idea of an Internet blackout should seem familiar to anyone who’s been paying attention to the debate so far. In addition to a blackout already carried out by Mozilla, hacking group Anonymous proposed the same thing a couple of weeks ago, suggesting that sites replace their front pages with a statement protesting SOPA. That suggestion itself came a week after Jimmy Wales had asked Wikipedia users about the possibility of blacking out that site in protest of the bill.

(MORE: ‘Anonymous’ Blacks Out the Internet in Response to SOPA Debate)

As a way of drawing attention to the topic, it’s something that will definitely work. Just Google alone going dark would cause havoc online, but the idea of it happening at the same time as Facebook, Twitter et al. follow suit seems almost unimaginable.

The question then becomes how to translate the inevitable confusion and outrage from those who don’t know what SOPA is into activism. The key, I assume, lies in the execution of the blackout: Will the sites that voluntarily go down be entirely unavailable or will they follow the Anonymous-proposed model of replacing the front page with a statement explaining what is going on, why and how users can best become involved in the discussion? If the sites do go entirely dark, is the hope that the resulting outrage will be enough to fuel news stories about the reason behind the decision? And that users will not transfer their frustration to the sites themselves, as opposed to the bill they’re protesting?

The fact that Facebook and Twitter are both said to be considering taking part in the blackout is simultaneously heartening and worrying. The former because, well, they’re standing up for what they collectively believe in — and that’s a good thing. But the latter because the lack of availability for social media on the proposed blackout day feels like it’s giving up the best chance to harness the frustration and energy people will feel about the temporary loss of the Internet as they know it, and a great possibility to focus and direct that energy into productive activism against SOPA. Then again, it may take losing Facebook and Twitter to really drive home how dramatically SOPA could affect the Internet.

All of this may come to nothing, of course. The companies may decide not to black out their sites and find other ways to protest SOPA. That could be for the best; collectively closing down the most trafficked sites on the Internet to prove a point will certainly garner a lot of attention, but the effects it’ll have beyond that (and the reactions it’ll cause as a result) are difficult to predict and could easily end up causing a backlash against the sites responsible at a time when they least want it. But still … just try to imagine an Internet without Google, Facebook or Yahoo. Even for a day. Almost makes you want it to happen, just to make people realize how reliant we are on the Internet as we know it now, doesn’t it?

Related article:
http://michaelhalvorsen.com/2012/01/...-protest-sopa/

GoDaddy faced a huge backlash for supporting SOPA. In a PR stunt, they released a press release saying they no longer supported SOPA, only to still be on the official list of supporters. Then they finally came out against SOPA, but it was already too late. I’m not going to quote any number, but people definitely left GoDaddy in mass for their support of SOPA.

The Stop Online Piracy Act is a terrible piece of legislation that was written by lobbyists who support the content industries with no help from the technology sector. A co-sponsor of the bill Mel Watts (D-NC), was pretty blatant in saying, “I’m not a nerd,” while babbling about how he is not an expert and that the experts were wrong. The sponsors of the bill have absolutely no idea what they are talking about, but they still want to pass the bill.

With nearly EVERY big Internet player that your grandmother has heard of coming out against SOPA, they may have a trick up their sleeves to be sure everyone is aware of how serious of a threat this is to their very existence, let alone our Freedom of Speech. Apparently, the NetCoalition (who include Google, Amazon, Facebook, Twitter, eBay, and Yahoo) are considering a day of protest. While it is not clear if the companies themselves have agreed to a blackout day, it does have the ability bring some serious punch to the fight against SOPA.

I’m not so sure any of these companies would really shut down their entire sites for a day, it is certainly possible that they will have messaging throughout their sites that explain what SOPA is, why it is bad, and what you can do to speak out against it. As a Search Marketer, it will definitely be interesting to see how this plays out. Word has it that the black out day would be set for January 23, a day before Congress is set to reconvene on the issue.

[iMagiNation]

[excitedcaps]ddos the entire internet[/excitedcaps]

I will fucking laugh as they go down and NOTHING OF IMPORTANCE WILL BE LOST.

No but seriously, good on them. Grew some balls finally. Also, the Internet is Rising against global fascism. revolution, 2012, nothing lasts, nothing is lost.

[jheit8]

Originally Posted by ZappaFan

From
http://techland.time.com/2012/01/05/...ne-in-protest/





Related article:
http://michaelhalvorsen.com/2012/01/...-protest-sopa/

So? The federal government and the media companies will play it up as a pro-piracy demonstration, and maybe even go after the companies for "disrupting the peace"

[iMagiNation]

I sure hope so.

[L33tz]

Internet nerdz own the internet.

governments are no match.

[The Pat-Man]

that would make your average retard aware of what's going down that's for sure.

[TheWitchDoctor]

I hope this happens. Too many dumb asses that use that stuff everyday haven't even heard of SOPA.

[DiStOrTiOn]

What Google should do is leave their search engine up but make 90% of all the resulting searches censored/blacked out, and then the header message at top says something like "these results are from the future after the SOPA bill has passed"

[NamelessNom4d]

They should definitely do something like that, just because I want to see what would happen. More people need to know about SOPA though, because it's a scary idea.

[Louie Carwash]

I like you now, Zappa. You've finally made a post containing slight relevance to the section that it's contained in.

[Shrike]

Why only a day? Why not a week? People would lose their fucking minds, it would be awesome.

[HTS]

Originally Posted by Shrike

Why only a day? Why not a week? People would lose their fucking minds, it would be awesome.

This. A day ain't shit. That's long enough that anybody could brush it off - having no internet for a day because something happened that you couldn't control is a common experience for a lot of people. Having it go out for days on end though... not many are prepared for or have experienced that.

Then again I guess the idea isn't to torture hopeless net addicts but to raise awareness. A day'll do for that.

[ZappaFan]

Originally Posted by Scribus

I like you now, Zappa. You've finally made a post containing slight relevance to the section that it's contained in.

Thanks. You still gay though.

[crackmaster3000]

that would be awesome. Fuck facebook, Amazon, Twitter and Goolge

[DiStOrTiOn]

Originally Posted by crackmaster3000

that would be awesome. Fuck facebook, Amazon, Twitter and Goolge

Yeah, fuck those guys who are the only ones standing up for our freedom

[Built To Last]

What is SOPA? Why should I expect Google and Facebook to be acting in my best interests?

[iMagiNation]

^^If you aren't aware of what SOPA is you deserve to lose the internet, in a small way. The internet is acting in the best interests of the internet. We are becoming aware now.

[DiStOrTiOn]

Originally Posted by Built To Last

What is SOPA? Why should I expect Google and Facebook to be acting in my best interests?

SOPA essentially allows the media companies to control and block any website they wish. Any website simply including a link to copyrighted material can be fined and/or shut down. ISP companies also will have to enforce the regulation or else be fined and shutdown too


SOPA bill makes it a felony to pirate anything. If you download a mere lady gaga song, you will be turned into a felon and barred from owning guns, voting to repeal the SOPA law, and be severely limited in employment for the rest of your life

[iMagiNation]

the lulzy thing is that lady gaga herself is a pirate so that means that you'd end up in jail with her and could just ask her to sing you the song and then make out with her and shit

http://humanasemeritus.com/2011/10/3...ternet-piracy/

except rich people don't go to jail, unless they're martha stewart and wait, why is it that martha stewart went to jail but shit like this is happening?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-w...ilout-lawsuit/

WASHINGTON — A company run by the former CEO of American International Group Inc. is suing the government for $25 billion in damages over its taxpayer bailout of the big insurer.

Former AIG CEO Maurice "Hank" Greenberg's current company – Starr International – filed lawsuits Monday in two federal courts against the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. The suits accuse the government of taking valuable assets from AIG's shareholders without their consent or fair compensation, in exchange for the government's 80 percent stake in the company. The suit says the government's actions violate parts of the Fifth Amendment.

Much of the $182 billion in rescue money that AIG got from the government went to pay the New York-based firm's obligations to big banks.

C!O!G!N!I!T!I!V!E
D!I!S!S!O!N!A!N!C!E

[DiStOrTiOn]

Originally Posted by iMagiNation

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-w...ilout-lawsuit/

this rape of America could only be funny if corporations were clowns

[Built To Last]

Why is banning piracy so bad? Protecting people's creative work seems like an awesome idea to me. Perhaps the internet's current lack of Van Gogh's, Keats's, and Bach's (despite millions of users and access in every corner of the globe) is due to the fact that there isn't any incentive to be creative on the internet.

If you were to release creative work of any value (cultural, monetary, etc.) it would instantly be pirated and distributed, without any credit or value going back to the creator. Is that right? Why should the internet benefit thousands of mouth-breathing leeches and not a few creative artists?

[-SpectraL]

The corporate-back thugs in the government won't care one bit if all the sites go down. In their narrow, basically empty, heads, the potential for increased profits elsewhere on the Internet far outweigh any concerns of public unrest. They'll go ahead with their plans all the same, and nobody can really do anything about it. Nothing short of another American Revolution could stop them now.

[DiStOrTiOn]

Originally Posted by Built To Last

Why is banning piracy so bad? Protecting people's creative work seems like an awesome idea to me. Perhaps the internet's current lack of Van Gogh's, Keats's, and Bach's (despite millions of users and access in every corner of the globe) is due to the fact that there isn't any incentive to be creative on the internet.

If you were to release creative work of any value (cultural, monetary, etc.) it would instantly be pirated and distributed, without any credit or value going back to the creator. Is that right? Why should the internet benefit thousands of mouth-breathing leeches and not a few creative artists?

First of all, fuck you. You're the real fucking parasite in society. How about you stop leeching the freedom out of every aspect of human life?


Creative work should not be a multi-million dollar career. It should be a hobbie and passion for people who do it. Even with piracy, these people will easily pull more bank than the top scientists and doctors in this country combined. LOL these people are not going anywhere. What do you think they're gonna do, get a job that pays 250k/year and doesn't require a college degree?

[HTS]

Originally Posted by Built To Last

Why is banning piracy so bad? Protecting people's creative work seems like an awesome idea to me. Perhaps the internet's current lack of Van Gogh's, Keats's, and Bach's (despite millions of users and access in every corner of the globe) is due to the fact that there isn't any incentive to be creative on the internet.

If you were to release creative work of any value (cultural, monetary, etc.) it would instantly be pirated and distributed, without any credit or value going back to the creator. Is that right? Why should the internet benefit thousands of mouth-breathing leeches and not a few creative artists?

No doubt. Piracy is wrong. Anybody who feels piracy should be defended just has an entitlement complex. you cant afford to buy it? you cant have it. thats life. or it was before people got this idea that piracy was some kind of right that should be protected rather than the crime it is.

Originally Posted by DiStOrTiOn

First of all, fuck you. You're the real fucking parasite in society. How about you stop leeching the freedom out of every aspect of human life?


Creative work should not be a multi-million dollar career. It should be a hobbie and passion for people who do it. Even with piracy, these people will easily pull more bank than the top scientists and doctors in this country combined. LOL these people are not going anywhere. What do you think they're gonna do, get a job that pays 250k/year and doesn't require a college degree?

Creative work should be whatever an artist wants it to be. It doesn't have to be a hobby. There's no reason it should be. Art is art whether you're doing it on rainy days or focusing your life around it. Even with piracy they'll make a lot either way? How does that justify anything? Just because somebody makes what seems like a lot of money to you doesn't make them any less entitled to what they lose to piracy.

[DiStOrTiOn]

Originally Posted by HTS

No doubt. Piracy is wrong. Anybody who feels piracy should be defended just has an entitlement complex. you cant afford to buy it? you cant have it. thats life. or it was before people got this idea that piracy was some kind of right that should be protected rather than the crime it is.

Since you condone attackers and condemn victims, I am surprised you'd have such a retarded view on the sharing of information

Well piracy is not wrong. Information should be free, and if these fuckers can earn a few million off of it in the process then good for them. The market is big enough that even if half the population was pirating, they would still be marketing their product to a country with 150 million people. There's no need to further exploit the capitalist system and squeeze more money from people when someone's earning 10+ million a year

[jheit8]

Originally Posted by Built To Last

Why is banning piracy so bad? Protecting people's creative work seems like an awesome idea to me. Perhaps the internet's current lack of Van Gogh's, Keats's, and Bach's (despite millions of users and access in every corner of the globe) is due to the fact that there isn't any incentive to be creative on the internet.

If you were to release creative work of any value (cultural, monetary, etc.) it would instantly be pirated and distributed, without any credit or value going back to the creator. Is that right? Why should the internet benefit thousands of mouth-breathing leeches and not a few creative artists?

Successful troll is successful.

[Ghost Buster]

Originally Posted by DiStOrTiOn

Since you condone attackers and condemn victims, I am surprised you'd have such a retarded view on the sharing of information

Well piracy is not wrong. Information should be free, and if these fuckers can earn a few million off of it in the process then good for them. The market is big enough that even if half the population was pirating, they would still be marketing their product to a country with 150 million people. There's no need to further exploit the capitalist system and squeeze more money from people when someone's earning 10+ million a year

Retarded view point. Their abundance of profits doesn't make your theft morally right asshat.

Now, that being said, I am against this bill for other reasons relating to free speech. If there was an effective way to prevent internet piracy I would be for it (in theory anyways), but there isn't, their only plan is to eliminate free speech, which is much worse than piracy in the first place.

And don't get me wrong, I download all my shit, I just don't have retarded delusions about the reality of what I am doing. I am stealing whatever I download. Do I feel bad? No. Everyone I'm stealing from is rich already. So I don't feel bad. But is it right? No. Of course not. Theft is theft.

[L33tz]

it isn't quite the same as stealing, since the only thing they lose is potential profit, not any production costs.

[DiStOrTiOn]

Originally Posted by Ghost Buster

Retarded view point. Their abundance of profits doesn't make your theft morally right asshat.

Yes it does.

[iMagiNation]

Originally Posted by L33tz

it isn't quite the same as stealing, since the only thing they lose is potential profit, not any production costs.

FUCKING THANK YOU.

It doesn't cost them a god damn thing for you to copy paste some files. If I buy a book, I can loan it out to as many friends as I want, however if I buy a song on itunes I can't just send it to my friends.

Why is banning piracy so bad? Protecting people's creative work seems like an awesome idea to me. Perhaps the internet's current lack of Van Gogh's, Keats's, and Bach's (despite millions of users and access in every corner of the globe) is due to the fact that there isn't any incentive to be creative on the internet.

You are a giant douche-nozzle. There are PLENTY of creative and intelligence individuals that are making some fucking AMAZING THINGS.

And some of them don't charge a god damn thing (See: the open source movement, Dwarf Fortress, etc)

Piracy is not stealing, nor is it wrong. The fact that we still call it piracy is actually pretty lulzy because it has so very little to do with piracy. It's all about the distribution of information, and the internet as a SUPER CONSCIOUSNESS demands the free flow of information.

If your neurons had to pay for every time they had an action potential, we'd all be brain dead.

No doubt. Piracy is wrong. Anybody who feels piracy should be defended just has an entitlement complex. you cant afford to buy it? you cant have it. thats life. or it was before people got this idea that piracy was some kind of right that should be protected rather than the crime it is.

Fuck off. I'm entitled to life, by the very fact that I'm here. The fact that you seriously think piracy is wrong seriously makes me wonder what kind of a fucking totsean you are.

READ * KNOW * DO - But first pay us. Otherwise it's illegitimate.

WHY? All this money is fucking fake in the first place.

[Ghost Buster]

at the retarded biased hypocritical hippies in this thread.

[DiStOrTiOn]

Originally Posted by Ghost Buster

at the retarded biased hypocritical hippies in this thread.

unfounded accusations and ad hominem conclude that you have no real argument.

:youmad:

[Ghost Buster]

Originally Posted by DiStOrTiOn

unfounded accusations and ad hominem conclude that you have no real argument.

:youmad:

I don't have a real argument? lol. I know you're trolling but I'm sure at least a few people here are serious.

This is the argument you have collectively put together

Originally Posted by L33tz

it isn't quite the same as stealing, since the only thing they lose is potential profit, not any production costs.

Which is a bullshit argument. If you twats knew anything about business, especially the film industry, you would realize how retarded that sounds. When someone invests in a film they give up a large amount of money, typically in a pool with others, to make the movie. Sometimes hundreds of millions. That money is in the air. It can fail hard, make nothing, or it can break even or it can be a major success. Consider that for a moment, from someone other than your own broke ass's perspective. Consider that someone with a family may lose a lot of their money on a flop movie. That's the business. There's a huge risk to it. And no matter, if you made a movie that breaks even, or is a huge success, there was still that initial risk taken. By pirating a movie that you would normally pay for you are reducing the overall payout to the investors, who may or may not have broke even on the film, but either way they put more money on the line then you will ever have. People reducing profits from downloads impacts the whole industry, since movies are less likely to make a profit, there is less motivation to invest heavily in a risky venture, since even if becomes a hit, it may be stolen effortlessly by anyone.

So, ya keep pretending you aren't stealing anything because it was just a digital copy, but your actions negatively impact the film industry, no question about it.

And right now not many people download movies, most adults over 40 can't comprehend it, or aren't willing to learn, in my experience. So this problem is only going to get more severe as this generation replaces the old.

[iMagiNation]

^^Indie movies of a high quality with a low budget are becoming more and more prevalent EXACTLY thanks to the open source movement and better technology & software and what not.

Fuck the film industry, fuck the music industry. YOU DO NOT NEED ALL THAT OVERHEAD.

They are a bunch of dinosaurs that are dying and grasping for power.

And right now not many people download movies, most adults over 40 can't comprehend it, or aren't willing to learn, in my experience. So this problem is only going to get more severe as this generation replaces the old.

There is no problem. All the dumb people will die and the smart, internet-savvy people will inherit the earth. Once the world is ruled by the internet, Gaia will become self conscious and maybe we can use the Earth as a spaceship to explore the universe.

[HTS]

Originally Posted by iMagiNation

Fuck off. I'm entitled to life, by the very fact that I'm here. The fact that you seriously think piracy is wrong seriously makes me wonder what kind of a fucking totsean you are.

READ * KNOW * DO - But first pay us. Otherwise it's illegitimate.

WHY? All this money is fucking fake in the first place.

Copyrighted material is not life. I'm just being honest here man, don't act like I'm crazy. Explain to me how it's fair or ethical. Explain to me why you should be allowed to continue to damage the entertainment industry in these harsh economic times?

Oh and piracy isn't the same as stealing, no. It's still harmful though. It's still something you shouldn't be allowed to do. I pirate things because I can, but I know it's not an ok thing to do just because it's popular. I'm not a whiny bitch with an entitlement complex - the end to easy, nearly risk free piracy just means I'll remember fondly being able to get away with never paying for games, movies, or music.

[iMagiNation]

Explain to me why you should be allowed to continue to damage the entertainment industry in these harsh economic times?

Because the only people that will suffer are the fucking FAT CATS that deserve to get fucked in the ass. See: Metallica & Napster waaaaaaaaaay the fuck long ago, in a galaxy far, far away. It's not affecting artists at all. Most of the artists I know actually download RETARDED amounts of music, because if you love music you're going to love a FUCKING LOT of music and there is NO WAY to support the kind of music habit some people have. I mean, honestly, I know people that would be paying FAR more for their music addictions then their HEROIN addictions.

Even at a dollar a song, a music collection of say, 20k to 200k is a lot of fucking money. And there's more music to find all the time.

And yet if these artists were NOT able to listen to a far flung collection of music there would not be NEARLY as much creativity.

Oh and piracy isn't the same as stealing, no. It's still harmful though. It's still something you shouldn't be allowed to do. I pirate things because I can, but I know it's not an ok thing to do just because it's popular. I'm not a whiny bitch with an entitlement complex - the end to easy, nearly risk free piracy just marks the start of when I remembered when we were allowed to get away with such insane shit.

lol, who the fuck is saying its okay because its popular? Fucking antisocial nerds think that everything is about popularity, just because its in the collective (un)conscious. And yes, I think you are a whiny bitch with an entitlement complex because the only reason you'd bring up psychological problems is if you were manifesting them and seeing them mirrored.

So in short, get fucked you hypocrite, who pirates even though you think its wrong.

There are other things artists can do to make money then charge for their music. An artists that charges for art is like a dolphin that charges people for watching it swim. WTF?! ITS IN YOUR BASIC NATURE TO DO THIS.

[HTS]

Lol what an entitled bitch. "Waahh I'm poor and these guys are rich! I should be able to get the things they make for free! Because they're rich and I'm not! Yeah!"

What the fuck man. Just because people are successful doesn't mean they deserve to lose money. You're fucking stupid. A movie being pirated while it's in theaters could cause millions of dollars in lost ticket sales. That could make or break some productions.

You think fucking over the fat cats is possible too, which is the funny part. They're in charge. They decide how much everyone else is making. If you think it's record executives who are suffering here you're retarded. It's the people under them who will end up fired to make up the difference and to award the exec another raise raise. Seriously, you can't make the heads of industry suffer like that. They just shift the damage to those under them.

Get real you fuck and grow the fuck up. Piracy is not freedom of speech. It's not a right. Oh and yeah, the wide spread popularity of piracy doesn't make it easier to feel safe. If SOPA was coming out and piracy was a crime committed by a select few, nobody would deny it was illegal and wrong. Because everyone is in on it it's easy to avoid seeing the fault in it.

[iMagiNation]

lol, thank you HTS, for proving that you have lost all ability to think freely

fucking apologist for the highest levels of greed and corruption...you're a fucking dandy.

the sheer amount of double think going on in yr head makes me lol

Also, I love how you don't even address anything outside of the POOR FUCKING RICH PEOPLE LOSING SOME MONEY

seriously, eat a dick. eat many of them.

[Ghost Buster]

Originally Posted by iMagiNation

lol, thank you HTS, for proving that you have lost all ability to think freely

fucking apologist for the highest levels of greed and corruption...you're a fucking dandy.

the sheer amount of double think going on in yr head makes me lol

Also, I love how you don't even address anything outside of the POOR FUCKING RICH PEOPLE LOSING SOME MONEY

seriously, eat a dick. eat many of them.

I'm assuming you've never met anyone that has a lot of money, but believe me most people don't get shit handed to them. If they have a lot of money odds are they worked hard their whole life and made a lot of smart business moves. They don't deserve to penalized because you're fucking jelly and don't like the system. Don't like our system? Go live with the native americans on a reserve. Or you could always move to north korea. Fucking asshat.

[HTS]

Originally Posted by iMagiNation

lol, thank you HTS, for proving that you have lost all ability to think freely

fucking apologist for the highest levels of greed and corruption...you're a fucking dandy.

Greed? Sounds like believing you deserve things for free even though the artists who made it are asking for money. Sounds like attacking anti-piracy bills because you wont be able to get all the things you like for free anymore. Corruption? Like claiming piracy is a religion? I'm not against file sharing. Any artist who can legally distribute their own music and wants to do so for free should be allowed to do to. What should not allowed is forcing artists who are asking for money for their art to allow it be given away for free. How is that fair at all? Rich people have the same right to receive compensation for their work as anybody else does.

Say a homeless dude is writing a book and he lets me take home what he's written for $10. He asks me to see if I think it'd get published. I think it's so amazing that everybody should be able to read it now, so I scan all the pages and distribute it for free as an ebook. I give him back his book and tell him it was amazing and definitely worth the $10. It was great! Being the champion for justice and the freedom (of distributing files) that I am, you'll be happy to know anybody else who wants it will be able to get it without having to pay you for it.

That's fair right? Or is it unfair because he's poor?