SOPA and GoDaddy
 

Hopefully by now you have heard about SOPA. The governments attempt to create a law allowing big media to censor parts of the Internet they don't like.

Which as far as anyone can tell is pretty much any website that allows user generated content. That of course includes the LoT. Google, Facebook and a host of others have voiced opposition to SOPA

But while opposition to SOPA is strong it also has it's supporters. An important protest against one of these companies is coming up December 29th. Leave GoDaddy Day. Which has been prompted by the vocal support of SOPA by the CEO of the domain registration company Godaddy.com. While he has since recounted under duress it's clear the companies interest still lies with big media.

I would urge anyone with any domains registered with GoDaddy to participate and switch on Dec 29th. Here is a handy how to leave GoDaddy guide from Lifehacker.com

I've always just boycotted GoDaddy solely on the basis of stupid commercials.

Wil Wheaton has been Tweeting about it quite a bit and has a lot of good links in his feed. Apparently, GoDaddy helped write the bill.

And it just keeps getting better....

GoDaddy May Be Delaying Domain Transfers On Purpose

Namecheap wasn't completely forthcoming in that story, but Godaddy is a shady outfit.

I wonder of LoT will switch away from away from Go Daddy?

Me too

Wow.

Looks like this **** is about to get real.

Google, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, etc... are hinting at a "nuclear option"

I'm normally not a sensitive soul to this sort of thing, but I really don't like metaphors like "the nuclear option" for stuff that is NOWHERE near as terrifying as nuclear war. It would be a big bucket of suck, indeed; but not at all like being incinerated.

What's lame is that they haven't done this before. I hope they do get serious about this.

I'm not the most politically active member here on LoT but I have noticed that it's an election year. Which made me think. Where do the various candidates stand in regards to SOPA?

It looks like Ron Paul is a solid against. The others seem to be waffling, except for Obama who I would have to put in the Pro-SOPA category based on his being the president and not actively working to kill it.

With the next round of debates is coming up on the 7th. I would certainly like to see this issue raised. The debate is being hosted by the New Hampshire Institute of Politics and I have sent them an email requesting they ask the candidates for their stance on SOPA.

Contact info:

Contact Information:
Name: New Hampshire Institute of Politics
Phone: (603) 222-4100
Email: nhiop@anselm.edu

News from the SOPA front....

Reddit has announced they will be going dark on Jan 18th to protest SOPA.

What do you think of the idea?
How would you feel if Facebook or Google went black for a day? Meaning a visit to their site would only show a brief description SOPA and a link to contact your representatives.

Would you rally to fight SOPA or just be pissed off that you would not be able to check in with friends or search the internet for a day?

Honestly? I wouldn't care much (I've never been to reddit except as a search result that never produces anything remotely useful).

And while I would prefer SOPA not be passed I'm not super worked up about it. If passed it is about the sixth piece of legislation over the last 15 years that I've been informed will end the internet as we know it. And they either haven't or have been struck down in the courts.

I tend not to get apocalyptic about things and really not about bills in Congress before they reach conference committee. So if I get super upset about it I guess it will be post facto.

If Google, Reddit, Facebook, et al. want to go dark for some period to protest, then I salute their dedication. But I won't much be inconvenienced unless they convince all their competitors to go along with them. And if Google takes down any irreplaceable services (like Gmail) then that will do as much to emphasize how potentially malignant they are as any particular bill in congress.

Personally I'd like to see a black theme to the Google home page and a Google-doodle about SOPA. They get the message across but don't hinder anyone's searching.


Oh who am I kidding, that's crap. I want to see utter destruction. Google should De-list search results for every SOPA supporter, Facebook should close all their pages, and Amazon should stop selling all their products. That would be a correct and measured response to this particular legislation. Which is probably why I'm not allowed to run any of those companies.

Also, SOPA has changed fairly significantly already, but Google et al keep using the same arguments.

I'm still not 100% ok with SOPA as written, but it has changed, and is still changing.

If this passes, will it outlaw certain pastries?

I didn't stop the automatic renewal with Go Daddy so the political ire did not overcome my laziness. So if the Internet dies you can blame be as a contributer.

No... It just allows the government to seize your kitchen if someone accuses you of eating their pastries.

Rumor has it that the Daily Show will be talking about SOPA this evening when their guest for the evening is "The Internet".

If true, it should be an interesting show.

I just checked and Dolly Parton is listed as tonight's guest. There is something global about her

SOPA is in the news big time these days, even main stream news media can't ignore it anymore.

Tomorrow Wikipedia, reddit and other sites will go dark for a day.

Google is rumored to be joining in a limited way, acknowledging SOPA on the home page but still functioning as a search engine. Fair enough.


The White House finally came out against the bill as written and a few of the more egregious parts of the bill have already been dropped.

The beast is wounded, time to go in for the kill.

Kill! Kill!

SOPA in its truly hateful form is all but dead.

PIPA is still alive and kicking though.

And still rockin' that @ss..!

I'm completely ok with internet places doing whatever they want to protest whatever bills working through congress they want (or any other reason).

But for those international corporations taking action against the possibility of internet censorship here, I assume they are absolutely refusing to do business in countries that currently quite actively censoring the internet. I assume, for example, that Google is constantly telling people in China to petition their government to stop censoring the internet.


Ugh, at least Google knows how to use meaningless Republican talking points when it suits them:

If you wanna see something funny, and at the same time terrifying and sad - check out Herpderpedia, A Collection of Tweets by People Freaking Out About Wikipedia’s SOPA & PIPA Blackout. Just follow @herpderpedia on Twitter.

I tried but all I see is tweets by the hundreds saying in essence check out "@herpderpedia"

I called my Senators office today (the one of the rat bastard that sponsored PIPA) and was told that the senator has changed his position on the bill and no longer supports it in it's current form.

But isn't the current form better than the original form?

Turn back in your internet card, YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG!!! :D

The best Anti-SOPA/PIPA thing I've seen so far- from my dear friend The Oatmeal-NSFW

Better, but still problematic, and PIPA has not been improved as much as SOPA.

In a getting your thumb cut off rather than your entire hand kind of way.

<shhh, don't say anything, but if you go to the wikipedia homepage and do a search, if you're fast enough on the esc. key, you can still see the results before being auto-forwarded to the SOPA blackout message>

You're right, I should have included a wink or grin emoticon with my post.

Oooh! I'm +1'ing what Wired.com has done for the blackout.

Actually, what you get are various Tweets that in effect say "Why has Wikipedia apparently shut down?!"

If you aren't fast enough with the ESC key, you can add ".m" to the URL after the "en:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cake
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cake

You sir are doing it wrong! I had to fix it for you.

Cakon.

I should have known this ages ago - Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein were co-sponsors of PIPA.

Get writing and calling NOW.

Boxer

Feinstein

Is it out of conference yet?

I'll protest when it matters and not waste time punching sand. And if other people protesting before then manages to actually result in meaningful stoppage then I get to keep all that energy for other things.

This will be a battle every year from now until eternity.

done and emailed. will likely do so again.

I'm of the opinion that this is heinous enough to require earlier action. Any acceptance of bandying about such ugly ideas is dangerous, and even if it doesn't get any further this time, emboldens the censors for the next battle. Of course there are dozens of other things going on that need strident attention, too.

Go forth and multiply (though I wish my twitter and Facebook and RSS feeds weren't 60% on the topic). I'll join you when it is likely (in my opinion) to achieve any meaningful result. And I hope I'm wrong and you all solve the problem before I feel the need to start caring.

I disagree with the bill. But:

1) I think it is unlikely to ever come to a vote in its current form, regardless of protest.

2) Regardless of changes to the individual chambers' bills, those charges are meaningless since committee can put them all back when the visibility is lower.

3) If it comes to a vote and passes, a veto is reasonably likely.

4) If somehow it isn't vetoed, I'm pretty confident it wouldn't survive judicial review. It's worse than all the people yammering on about having a good new year and "hey, did you know Jesus was a thing" a few weeks back.

So getting involved between 2 and 3 seems like a good compromise for my energies. And if all my (preferably quieter, I heard everybody well before their 63rd tweet on the topic and didn't need sixteen people giving me an identical tweetathon on which website slightly inconvenienced their customers) acquaintances accomplish their goals not only will they get the glow of accomplishment they'll get to look on me pityingly as the guy too lazy to matter.

Essentially, while I agree with the goal, 80% of the people I know online turned into annoying robocallers the day before an election. It's worse than all the yammering about having a happy new year and the "hey, did you know Jesus was a thing" stuff a few weeks back.

If anything this will get a bunch of younger people involved in the political process. Well this and Stephen Colbert running for the United States of South Carolina as Herman Cain.

According to MSN the SOPA bill has been withdrawn.

If I could figure out cut and paste on the tablet..... sorry.

You have to press and hold the text, then little bars come up for you to highlight the text. I use a stylus, but it's still a bit of a PITA

Postponed. Very different than "withdrawn". We still need to keep an eye on what happens next but postponed is definitely a step in the right direction.

In the better late than never category The Daily Show takes on SOPA

In a related issue, the Supreme Court today ruled that a warrant is needed in order for police to place a GPS tracker on your vehicle.

Next we need to look at these systems now being used by police to track the movement of citizens using automated license plate scanners.

While I'm sure the MPAA and the government want to go well beyond what I think is reasonable enforcement of copyright, the more I read about the case against Megauploads, the less sympathy I have for their side.

Someone tweeted likening it to going after the postal service or UPS because someone sent a pirated DVD through the mail. From what I can tell, what they're accused of is more like someone operating a rent per hour motel and trying to say, "I just rent the rooms, I can't police my customers do," while having video cameras in the rooms and passing around names of pimps and prostitutes that use those rooms.

As far as I can tell, it didn't say that. It said that attaching and using GPS is a search and therefore 4th Amendment jurisprudence applies. Further caselaw will potentially determine when and if a warrant is required (not all searches require warrants).

The opinion explicitly mentions that it takes no position on an argument that probable cause is sufficient for planting a GPS unit without a warrant since that argument was never made in the lower courts before being argued at the Supreme Court. In practical terms I imagine it accomplishes the same thing, but technically the requirements for a warrant haven't been addressed.

Also they mention that tracking that doesn't require trespass is a different question.

But Alito gets kind of testy in his concurrence so enjoy reading it for that.