Anti-Piracy Bill To Cost Taxpayers $47M To 2016

What this amounts to is the entertainment industry using the government to do their dirty work and the taxpayers foot the bill. With the budget crisis the country is facing,it's amazing how arrogant these people are. People used to think that the visions of a corporate run world in movies like the original Rollerball were just fiction that could never happen,but it's getting closer every day.
 
The middle east revolutionary shit has a number of governments shaking in their boots.
The governments show a lot of solidarity against revolution.

When Honduras' president called for a referendum on ending his term limits (trying to circumvent their constitution), their judges told him to his face that it was illegal and the military (who defends their constitution) threw his ass out. Right away a bunch of other leaders, including our own president, condemned it as a military coup.

Now they're seeing what's been going on in Africa and asking themselves "how could we prevent this from ever happening here?" The solution, of course, is to lock it down China and North Korea style.
 
So the government has no money, but they're looking for more ways to spend money.
 
C'mon, just raise taxes on the Music/Motion Picture industry.

We all pay property taxes. So they should have to pay intellectual property taxes. This will keep them from hoarding old works. They will have to pay a tax on them, or put them in the public domain.
 
So the government has no money, but they're looking for more ways to spend money.

Sir we are but invincible!

Greenspan says the government will never default because we can always print more money

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6vi528gseA

Guess what? We spend money on TSA too (and it is a lot more than 5m a year), we didn't 20 years ago.

Outrage I tell you. Lets get rid of all law enforcement. It is just a waste of money.

Sarcasm or no??? Hard to tell, the first sentence seems no, but the second sentence seems yes. Its funny if you go to google and type "how many terro", the first suggested auto complete is "how many terrorists has the tsa caught". Wonder what would make people search for that. Surely there must be so many examples given all the money and rights we've had to give up.
 
Sarcasm or no??? Hard to tell, the first sentence seems no, but the second sentence seems yes. Its funny if you go to google and type "how many terro", the first suggested auto complete is "how many terrorists has the tsa caught". Wonder what would make people search for that. Surely there must be so many examples given all the money and rights we've had to give up.

No, it wasn't sarcasm. I don't see why everyone is so outraged over new laws adjusting for modern times. Theft is illegal and now the laws are finally catching up to modern times.
 
No, it wasn't sarcasm. I don't see why everyone is so outraged over new laws adjusting for modern times. Theft is illegal and now the laws are finally catching up to modern times.

The law does not cover theft, nor does it punish thieves. It does not even punish those that infringe really.
It merely gives the government another way to quickly, and at whim, shut down sites in the US, or to block access to them at the ISP/DNS level. As well as the ability to force search engines to censor their results. I really can not see how you fail to see how this can, and likely will be, misused.


Not even going into the "infringement is not theft" argument, if someone does not get the difference by now, it is unlikely they ever will be able to understand reason.
 
This new law does not cover theft, nor does it punish thieves. It does not even punish those that infringe really.
It merely gives the government another way to quickly, and at whim, shut down sites in the US, or to block access to foreign sites at the ISP/DNS level. As well as the ability to force search engines to censor their results. I really can not see how you fail to see how this can, and likely will be, misused.


Not even going into the "infringement is not theft" argument, if someone does not get the difference by now, it is unlikely they ever will be able to understand reason.


Edits in red. Forgot I was in the no edit zone
 
Its little articles like this that cause the people to get pissed off, by a much higher percentage, than anything anonymous has ever done to protest anything..

Taxpayers foot the bill? Yup...your dying model has yet another coffin nail hammered into it... goodluck with that... Im sure i will see you soon in a john doe lawsuit....
 
Freaking frivolous gov.'t spending. :mad: I wish we could vote all these jackasses who voted for this bill out of office. :mad:
 
Protect IP coupled with the Protecting Children From Online Pornographers Act has chilling implications. What you said + records of everything you do online for 18 months = Gestapo busting down your front door at 4am.

Bills with names like that should be illegal. What a loaded name, who's going to stand against it? It would be political suicide even if the bill stated that we must protect children by drowning them all.
 
The law does not cover theft, nor does it punish thieves. It does not even punish those that infringe really.
It merely gives the government another way to quickly, and at whim, shut down sites in the US, or to block access to them at the ISP/DNS level. As well as the ability to force search engines to censor their results. I really can not see how you fail to see how this can, and likely will be, misused.

How would you word a bill that allows the gov to go after sites that mine pirated material? You may be able to word it differently but at the end of the day, it still would give the gov powers that don't only apply to pirate sites.
 
How would you word a bill that allows the gov to go after sites that mine pirated material? You may be able to word it differently but at the end of the day, it still would give the gov powers that don't only apply to pirate sites.

I would not write a new bill at all. There is already a legal process available in the civil courts to deal with this. They already stripped fair use away with the DMCA. This law would give them the ability to essentially censor the web in any way they saw fit. Don't like a website that disparages the current regime, that's OK, just sign up for the forums and post a link to a piracy site, then close the site down.

I just don't see much of any benefit to taxpayers in this new law. It is not going to curb piracy much or for long. While at the same time, I see a ridiculously high likely hood the law will be abused by our government. I dare say the temptation to use it improperly, is far too high to let them have this new toy.
 
Vote Ron Paul if your pissed about this. Regulating the internet through tax payers dollars is retarded!!!
 
Back
Top