If you copy a patent, there isn't much you can do with it, except sell the product. If someone copied the patent just to look at it, I would have no problem with that. If they started using it to make money, I would expect the owner of the patent to sue the person making money off of their intellectual property. Again, there is a difference between consumers sharing goods and people copying ideas or copying material in order to profit.
No I finished it by saying: Of course you can just disregard it and try turn it around on me. Saving jobs is just ridiculous, it's clearly to give the government more power just like the patriot act. It got renewed because of fear mongering about terrorism. Do you not understand the fucking magnitude it would take to be able to enforce SOPA? It would require basically monitoring EVERYONE's traffic. I'm done though, not wasting any more time on responding to your skewed backwards logic.
You can't own an idea unless, perhaps, you keep it to yourself. These intellectual monopolies are getting ridiculous. At the least, get the federal courts out of this. Look at how profitable patent trolling has become. Are patents helping us, as a society, to progress? Are innovators entitled to an intellectual monopoly (for decades) just because they thought of an idea first?
wait, you read the bill, right? then you would know that it would give government authority over DNS blacklisting via an ISP.. which really has nothing to do with client communication, or "EVERYONE's traffic" as you put it. not to mention it could be easily worked around with less than 15 minutes of work, ultimately making the internet less secure. would just create more problems than fix it. so, on topic, this bill will be delayed like it's predecessors, such as the protect-ip bill.
Well people seem to be fine with the patriot act, which was used to stop terrorism but is now being used for much much more. I could see something similiar happening with this.
if one morning america woke up to find facebook censored by the US government, in my honest opinion, i don't think things would go to well. surprisingly a lot of people supported the patriot act in its time (mostly republicans), but mass censorship should be considered a bipartisan assault
There is no difference between art as intellectual property and a patent as intellectual property. Like I stated before, both warrant the protection of a civilized society because they both are arrived from the same formula.. talent, ingenuity, imagination, effort.. so on and so forth. You guys sound bitter these celebrities are making so much money, who fucking carrreeesss. Just because someone isn't profiting off the art after it's copied and passed along does not justify allowing piracy of intellectual property. This is really a state issue and it's derailing the thread so lets agree to disagree so we can unite and talk about how unconstitutional this SOPA is.
They would of course have an excuse. Only some would be upset, whereas the rest would look at the some as irresponsible juveniles. Do you really think they would just censor facebook? No, they would censor certain people for irresponsible behavior or terrorist even treasonous organizations. They would say that these people hate our way of life, etc, etc; we've heard it all before. Republicans are often just as "big government" as democrats, so don't get confused here.
So true. They're going to waste hours of time discussing a bill called the "Stop Online Piracy Act" and, even if it is passed, it will barely affect piracy at all.
The difference is as I stated. If people want the goods, they will pay for them. Besides there will always be legitimate selling of tickets, books, etc. I just went to a Phish show I payed 60$ for. Why? because it was well worth it. Phish makes tons of money, 9/10's of it is probably from touring. I recently bought an album from a guy who is just starting. Why? because his music is amazing and I want to support him. Besides there is likely no way to copy his music because he is brand new. So if I bring my music around in my car, and I have a person riding with me, do they have to pay for the album before being allowed to listen to it with me? Come on man, I've been through this already. There is a difference between consumers sharing goods, and selling the copied material for profit.
You mean I won't be able to go on youtube and watch cop beatings anymore? Aww shit, now what am I going to do on my Saturday nights?