Everybody who thinks this won't be put in a huge omnibus appropriations bill within the next 3 years, I've got a bridge to sell you.

They are just waiting for you to forget.

Rome The US is the mob.

Now when the recent furor dies down and they try to vote on this again in 3 months, are we going to have to suffer another series of blackout protests? Because dammit, I'm gonna need Wikipedia to find out who the cute alien in the background was in "Doctor Who: the Sensorites,"

Aarontology: My money is that it'll be hidden somewhere in a defense appropriations bill within the next six months.

They just had the big nonsense with the NDAA.

Maybe that will be the wonderful surprise in the 2013 NDAA.

I wonder how many states they'll have to gerrymander "re-district" before they get what they want.

Aarontology: bulldg4life: Everybody who thinks this won't be put in a huge omnibus appropriations bill within the next 3 years, I've got a bridge to sell you.

My money is that it'll be hidden somewhere in a defense appropriations bill within the next six months.

Try "December"

Once they're sure the right people are in power and everyone is busy with the holidays.

/calling it

bulldg4life: Everybody who thinks this won't be put in a huge omnibus appropriations bill within the next 3 years, I've got a bridge to sell you.

Yeah the content cartel was probably unprepared for this round, but they have plenty of time and money to keep chiseling away.

Sock Ruh Tease: Aarontology: bulldg4life: Everybody who thinks this won't be put in a huge omnibus appropriations bill within the next 3 years, I've got a bridge to sell you.

My money is that it'll be hidden somewhere in a defense appropriations bill within the next six months.

Try "December"

Once they're sure the right people are in power and everyone is busy with the holidays.

/calling it

I don't think they're willing to wait that long to cash their checks. It'll be earlier and just as hidden.

EyeballKid: I wonder how many states they'll have to gerrymander "re-district" before they get what they want.

This bill has bipartisan approval and bipartisan hatred. The industries pushing this bill were smart enough to give money to all sorts of people, so it doesn't really matter who is in power.

bulldg4life: Everybody who thinks this won't be put in a huge omnibus appropriations bill within the next 3 years, I've got a bridge to sell you.

That's not how appropriations bills work. They can provide funding to an organization to stop copyright infringement but a good number of the provisions in SOPA/PIPA would still need a separate vote. It isn't like they are just adding/subtracting funding to something they are creating entirely new laws.

SecretAgentWoman: [www.princessbrideforever.com image 200x233]

"It's a miracle!"

Have fun storming the Capitol!

Good bye boys! Have fun storming the MP/RIAA!

You think it will work?

It would take a miracle. Good bye!

Carth: That's not how appropriations bills work. They can provide funding to an organization to stop copyright infringement but a good number of the provisions in SOPA/PIPA would still need a separate vote. It isn't like they are just adding/subtracting funding to something they are creating entirely new laws.

Ok, so they'll put it in the NDAA.

Jackson Herring: I wish MY last name was Boozman.

His real name was Smith. They just called him that a lot in college, and it stuck.

LeoffDaGrate: Now when the recent furor dies down and they try to vote on this again in 3 months, are we going to have to suffer another series of blackout protests? Because dammit, I'm gonna need Wikipedia to find out who the cute alien in the background was in "Doctor Who: the Sensorites,"

Am I the only one that only realized mid-day that wikipedia really was protesting because I decided to turn java on?

The problem is too many members of congress are old farts with zero grasp of the internet.

threadjackistan: Am I the only one that only realized mid-day that wikipedia really was protesting because I decided to turn java on?

If you're smart enough to turn java off you're not the target of the protest. Yes, it's a very low bar. Yes, 90% of Americans fail to clear it.

PanicMan: threadjackistan: Am I the only one that only realized mid-day that wikipedia really was protesting because I decided to turn java on?

If you're smart enough to turn java off you're not the target of the protest. Yes, it's a very low bar. Yes, 90% of Americans fail to clear it.

Interestingly enough, if you're smart enough to turn Java off, you're also smart enough to get around the restrictions SOPA/PIPA would place.

In a world... of instant gratification and immediate access... the hands guiding the information superhighway occasionally feel the need to show the people what they're taking for granted.

Jake Havechek: The problem is too many members of congress are old farts with zero grasp of the internet.

But what the young ones lack in autistic disengagement, they make up for in malignant sociopathy.

sprawl15: PanicMan: threadjackistan: Am I the only one that only realized mid-day that wikipedia really was protesting because I decided to turn java on?

If you're smart enough to turn java off you're not the target of the protest. Yes, it's a very low bar. Yes, 90% of Americans fail to clear it.

Interestingly enough, if you're smart enough to turn Java off, you're also smart enough to get around the restrictions SOPA/PIPA would place.

Wouldn't you at least need a VPN to get around the deep packet inspection?

Yeah, well.
It'll pass, just not under the names SOPA or PIPA.
What's all this hubbub about people wanting to watch movies, listen to music, and read books for free? And never mind linking to copyrighted "news" and blog pieces.

My gawd, it's as if the entire nation is rising up and declaring itself to be a lawless gang of thieves. Think of the poor, poor movie and record companies and book publishers. Why not let them bribe congress into passing laws that makes the government their enforcement agent instead of making them go to all the trouble of actually going through the legal system to prosecute pirates using lawyers and the court system? Think of the persecuted plutocrats!

They'll slip another form of this into the next defense appropriation bill right before the presidential elections. Obama will be powerless to stop it.

Phil Moskowitz: Jake Havechek: The problem is too many members of congress are old farts with zero grasp of the internet.

But what the young ones lack in autistic disengagement, they make up for in malignant sociopathy.

You're assuming the old farts aren't raging sociopaths, too.

HotIgneous Intruder: What's all this hubbub about people wanting to watch movies, listen to music, and read books for free? And never mind linking to copyrighted "news" and blog pieces.

The whole loss of information control and shaping of the content available to the average citizen has utterly ruined one key layer of their propaganda model. It makes turning the people of the ostensibly "free" nations into puppets more expensive and less reliable.

They'll have to utterly defund education just to balance the effect.

SilentStrider: Now how about taking the damn thing out back and having it shot?
No bringing it back. Ever.

Please. They're probably already writing the second version of this, trying to think up new and catchy acronyms. The really interesting part of all this is if the Internet can manage to mobilized/get pissed about this again when it's inevitably brought to a vote again in a year or two.

Magorn: HotWingConspiracy: bulldg4life: Everybody who thinks this won't be put in a huge omnibus appropriations bill within the next 3 years, I've got a bridge to sell you.

Yeah the content cartel was probably unprepared for this round, but they have plenty of time and money to keep chiseling away.

But they ain't, by far, the biggest dogs in this fight. 3 of the Largest corporations in America (Msft, Apple, and Google) don't like this law, and even if you believe we are operating on a strict "Lucre dixit" (money talks) system, they can speak louder than any other players on this law

Agreed. Without the support of Google/Facebook etc I don't think all the calls to Congress would have made any difference. Congress just realized the companies of tomorrow are against it while the companies of years past support it. They care more about future donations than what people did for them last election.

Congratulations to Google, Facebook, eBay and all the other giant corporations which bravely opposed a law which would hurt their revenues. Truly this is a great victory for democracy.

Jake Havechek: The problem is too many members of congress are old farts with zero grasp of the internet.

Oh, they grasp it just fine.

"What's that? There are almost zero consumer/owner laws protecting website owners? And the majority of websites are owned by non-corporations? Sounds like a real easy way to "Protect copywrite" while totally cockblocking my major special interest contributor's competition."

Any legal way to strong arm a small business, is a win to them. It's just a bonus that it would be the government doing it with zero oversight. And since the majority of the voting block is full of computer illiterate morons who can't put 2 and 2 together...well, internet laws get passed.

jayhawk88: SilentStrider: Now how about taking the damn thing out back and having it shot?
No bringing it back. Ever.

Please. They're probably already writing the second version of this, trying to think up new and catchy acronyms. The really interesting part of all this is if the Internet can manage to mobilized/get pissed about this again when it's inevitably brought to a vote again in a year or two.

I just wonder who the guy who writes the acronyms and whether he gets royalties every time someone uses them.

Carth: sprawl15: PanicMan: threadjackistan: Am I the only one that only realized mid-day that wikipedia really was protesting because I decided to turn java on?

If you're smart enough to turn java off you're not the target of the protest. Yes, it's a very low bar. Yes, 90% of Americans fail to clear it.

Interestingly enough, if you're smart enough to turn Java off, you're also smart enough to get around the restrictions SOPA/PIPA would place.

Wouldn't you at least need a VPN to get around the deep packet inspection?

Nope. There's two ways SOPA/PIPA are mainly intended to work; the information hit is targeting a site and forcing US sites and search engines to stop linking to it, forcing US advertisers to no longer advertise on the site, forcing US payment networks to stop dealing with that site.

The other aspect is preventing US service providers from resolving the DNS. You could still connect to a blocked site if you knew their IP address.

To make the enforcers' job even harder, there's absolutely no understanding of the complexities of the internet in their definitions of what's 'domestic' vs 'foreign'. Blatantly stolen from a Reddit blog:

The concept of 'domestic' versus 'foreign' on the internet is complex. For example, reddit's primary servers are located in Virginia, however we have domain names through foreign registrars (redd.it, reddit.co.uk). The site is hosted via a third-party content-delivery network (Akamai). This means that if you connect to reddit from a foreign country, you are likely connecting to an Akamai server not located in the U.S. This legislation naively ignores this complexity, and simply labels a site 'foreign' or 'domestic' based solely on the domain name.

Even were it to be passed, it would be farking impossible to enforce...yet the big companies would be wiped out in a heartbeat because most people are too computer illiterate to be able to get around the roadblock. It would be a world of people trading IP addresses on neutral ground message boards.

I wouldn't really call it a victory for democracy. Some corporate legislation ran afoul of other powerful corporations who hit back. I'm glad it happened but it wasn't exactly a "by the people" moment.

heinekenftw: jayhawk88: SilentStrider: Now how about taking the damn thing out back and having it shot?
No bringing it back. Ever.

Please. They're probably already writing the second version of this, trying to think up new and catchy acronyms. The really interesting part of all this is if the Internet can manage to mobilized/get pissed about this again when it's inevitably brought to a vote again in a year or two.

I just wonder who the guy who writes the acronyms and whether he gets royalties every time someone uses them.

Sadly, it's not that hard. Then, you come up with a bill called the "Children Are Really Essential Act" or "CARE Act", where the acronym is useless, and serves only to shortcut the association - "How could you be against the CARE Act?! Surely, this means you do not care! And about teh chillrunz, too1 YOU MONSTER!"

You'll notice, people came up with the colloquialism "Obamacare" because PPACA (Pee-packa, as I usually say) doesn't mean anything.

// Obama should have called it the "Health Insurance Goes Home As Safe Americans Keep Illness Threats Elsewhere"

threadjackistan: LeoffDaGrate: Now when the recent furor dies down and they try to vote on this again in 3 months, are we going to have to suffer another series of blackout protests? Because dammit, I'm gonna need Wikipedia to find out who the cute alien in the background was in "Doctor Who: the Sensorites,"

Am I the only one that only realized mid-day that wikipedia really was protesting because I decided to turn java on?

Javascript.

Dr Dreidel: You'll notice, people came up with the colloquialism "Obamacare" because PPACA (Pee-packa, as I usually say) doesn't mean anything.

Oh, it means something alright. Just not a good thing, like you'd want.

odinsposse: I wouldn't really call it a victory for democracy. Some corporate legislation ran afoul of other powerful corporations who hit back. I'm glad it happened but it wasn't exactly a "by the people" moment.

Corporations are people too.

Al Franken is going to be really upset about this!!
Let's see if he gets unhinged again.

SilentStrider: Now how about taking the damn thing out back and having it shot?
No bringing it back. Ever.

They'll still vote for it. They just don't "support" it.

Glad to see Roy Blunt withdraw support, though the man is still an idiot.

got this from him after sending him a letter regarding PIPA -

"Intellectual property industries employ more than 19 million people, making it an integral part of our economy. Rogue websites dedicated to the sale and distribution of counterfeit goods and pirated content are a direct threat to these jobs and to entrepreneurs growing and building legitimate businesses online.

Businesses have lost $135 billion in revenue annually as a result of these rogue sites"

Really. $135 BILLION? 1% of the entire US GDP? I tried to get a follow up or a cite. The only thing I found was an uncited and unsourced number in advertisement from MarkMonitor.