p99/red99 slated to get shut down when SOPA passes

[purest]

if u dont know anything about SOPA then watch this video:

<iframe src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/31100268?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0" width="640" height="360" frameborder="0" webkitAllowFullScreen allowFullScreen></iframe>

sopa is in committee right now

stream here: http://keepthewebopen.com/sopa

every single sane amendment has been swiftly voted down so far, including the lofgren amendment

Zoe Lofgren has an amendment that says a DNS operator should have no obligation to block a website if doing so would impair the security or integrity of the domain name system or the operator's system or network. I'm sure opponents will say this makes the blocking toothless, but what they're really saying is they don't care if censoring websites they don't like harms the security of the internet.

as it stands, sopa is set to go straight from committee un-amended to the floor where it will pass by a landslide, both parties eagerly support it flush on campaign contributions from hollywood studios and the like

red99/p99 would undoubtedly be taken down if this passes, according to rogean (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showpost.php?p=468271&postcount=13)

if this thing were to pass it would be bad news for the internet. It would also mean no more Project 1999, as it would practically give SoE the ability to shut us down without a lawsuit (as opposed to right now they would have to prove in court that we are violating the DMCA, which would be difficult for them to do without garauntee of success, waste time and money, and the gains if succeeding would be minimal)

write and/or call your representative now if u enjoy p99 or red99 or the internet in general as we know it:

http://fightforthefuture.org/

[Truth]

SOPA / NDAA / etc Pointless to care now. Once you step just a lil into tyranny it goes downhill.

The folly of luminaries who have warned us about this for decades.

[RandonActs]

So, if I am understanding this correctly, I can get banned/thrown in jail/sued if I sing someone else's song. But if a popular musician does a cover of someone else's work it is ok?

[Uthgaard]

There's only one thing left that can save America.
The banhammer must fall on the fools in congress and the house of representatives.
Uthgaard 2012.

[Autotune]

There's only one thing left that can save America.
The banhammer must fall on the fools in congress and the house of representatives.
Uthgaard 2012.

^ has my vote.

[gaard the tard]

There's only one thing left that can save America.
The banhammer must fall on the fools in congress and the house of representatives.
Uthgaard 2012.

You sir, are no John kennedy.

[Razdeline]

If I hooked up some Kanye West outside and put it on a loudspeaker, Would that mean all the people listening on my street would be pirates?

[Etorryn]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6s4n76ti3Xs

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

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnqZMgCXHx4

[Etorryn]

ignore my post wrong thread

[stormlord]

The issue to me isn't whether it's wrong to block an IP that's giving users illegal things, it's whether the issuing is accurate. For example, if domain A is offering users a free download for a commercial product and company A issues a block IP order... what is there to PROVE that the order/issuance is genuine and correct? Will the courts be used or will the order to block an IP pass through without any oversight?

[GETINMYVAN]

If the government thinks people are batshit crazy because of the whole Occupy movement, just wait until they take away our interwebz. Full blown fucking chaos will ensue.

[stormlord]

What if they use this to block anti-american sites?

The other issue is that it's so easy nowadays to copy things and share them that it's getting silly to worry about it so much. The problem isn't the people copying/sharing so much as it's their business model, imho.

For example, what if we had a machine that could replicate any object in existence? What if I could put my TV into it and make a replica? The company that made the TV would immediately sue me when it finds out, right? How would they prevent this machine from being able to replicate patented or commercialized products?

I think the whole idea of how we do business is going to be changed.

[stormlord]

If you look at EQ, it's a bit different than a stand-alone product. For example, while p1999 uses an old client (and the models and everything that came with it), it does NOT allow p1999 users to log onto live for free. All of the server assets are created from scratch. It's like receiving half of a CD and having to recreate the other halve, but even then, you only get scratchy/inferior playback. Whatever the diehard gamers do on the outside, they'll always be behind EQ live. Furthermore, it's absolutely off-limits for these emulated servers to require users to pay money. This means the money to create the servers and maintain them and pay their networking costs is all out of pocket.

[stormlord]

If emulated servers could, in theory, do BETTER than the actual commercial servers, then wouldn't that suggest that profiteering is happening? If FREE services are better than proprietary services then something is wrong. What I think is going on here is a small niche is being met by these emulated servers, but, in all practicality, EQ live is not existentially threatened by this whatsoever. It's like having a heart attack because someone that's mentally retarded and disabled -might- be better than you! In fact, I think EQ live benefits from this. They might even be able to get information to make their own product better.

[stormlord]

It's like a homeless man sneaking into your store and stealing a bottle of wine and then throw him in jail for 50 years. It doesn't make any sense to do that.

It only makes sense if this is all much MUCH bigger than any of us realize. For example, this guy isn't homeless after all. He's a millionaire and he steals wine from multiple places and resells it.

[stormlord]

It's like a homeless man sneaking into your store and stealing a bottle of wine and then throw him in jail for 50 years. It doesn't make any sense to do that.

It only makes sense if this is all much MUCH bigger than any of us realize. For example, this guy isn't homeless after all. He's a millionaire and he steals wine from multiple places and resells it.
Or your country is filled with homeless people stealing wine from stores.

In that case, the problem is that you have so many homeless people. Putting them in jail will bankrupt the country unless you have forced labor.

[pickled_heretic]

combo breaker?

[Lulz Sect]

http://i.imgur.com/AQ2ys.gif

[oblexsis]

Stormlord i agree with you totally on everything you say. The problem lies in the fact that its not the people that do the work that are pissed off , take the recording industry of America . It isn't the artists making the music that are mad , they are happy people are listening to their art that they created it , enjoying it and they are still making fair bit of money in the process . Its the managers , marketers , and all the other faceless goons of the industry that couldn't play a note if they wanted to that are being taken out of the picture . And these are people that are worth alot of money , so they are fighting to have their jobs sustained even though they are the bloat to the industry and are the ones that made Cd's cost 25 dollars a piece for a CD that had 2 good songs on it .

[purest]

ok so voting on sopa was postponed until about a month from now, i can tell you that if voting occurred today like it was supposed to, it would have been a landslide pass

we are talking about legislation that will completely change the internet, not to mention shut down p99

at this point we have another month before SOPA gets voted on, take the 2 seconds from poopsocking to petition your representative before this bill passes and you can poopsock no longer:

http://fightforthefuture.org/

[Jon Lemon]

get out while you still can

[EverquestJunkie]

Shit really needs to be changed in this world,
And im pretty sure we are gonna see something BIG happen in are generation.

Theres way too much Greed going on and people suffering.

[Hasbinbad]

I love how you all hated on me so hard about occupy, which is about the same issues from a IRL perspective, yet when your pixels get threatened NOW YOU'RE MAD!!!

Reminds me of the type of cognitive dissonance required to become indignant about 9/11, when the number of people Americans have killed around the world completely so dwarfs that figure.

I heard Occupy boiled down very succinctly the other day; there is a paradigm shift occurring between an extended generation of people who believe that seeking one's own best interest is moral, and a new generation of people who believe that seeking everyone's best interest is moral.

The same thing applies for the internet. Free for everyone is better for everyone, except the guys that own all rights to the songs (5-6 top dogs in 3-4 major record label conglomerates own and/or control just about everything in the music industry). Those guys are still trying to force the physical media / iTunes lifestyle, and will never realize that their irrelevant to the new society that has been created using the internet.

Musicians and record companies should provide a nice enough product that it is worth going to the store and buying one. Same with movies. Let's at least have some cloth maps and pot metal collectors items for that $20.

Instead we get cheap as possible gem cases with 1980s media that is guaranteed to be destroyed eventually from scratches, and if you happen to get one bad scratch, you are shit out of luck. FFS - Old technology cds, dvds, blu rays = improved 1970's technology (dependent on RPM's of a motor [lol?]) instead of using real media like flash drives..

..inb4 EVERYONE HAV CD PLAYR, Is confus..

THIS IS A DIRECT EXAMPLE OF 1% TACTICS AND GREED. It is systemic, like that, throughout all business. They try to fuck us at every angle, not just here. If you don't see it, wake up. We need you. We can change this all using the General Assembly if enough people do it. You have to come to understand. Come. There are more of us than you think.

Expect us.

[Hasbinbad]

omfg inb4 they're

[EverquestJunkie]

THIS IS A DIRECT EXAMPLE OF 1% TACTICS AND GREED. It is systemic, like that, throughout all business. They try to fuck us at every angle, not just here. If you don't see it, wake up. We need you. We can change this all using the General Assembly if enough people do it. You have to come to understand. Come. There are more of us than you think.

Expect us.

Your right hbb people need to wake up and discuss these things and go tell your friends and they tell there friends.

The media has done such a good job at brain washing people for years through tv ect that people need to wake the fuck up and stop being fooled.

[Autotune]

no one is mad that p99 might get taken away.

but omfg youtube and my porn... i'll fuckin HULK UZI EVERYONE!

[Awwalike]

tite! no more catering to TMA/TR

[Jon Lemon]

I love how you all hated on me so hard about occupy, which is about the same issues from a IRL perspective, yet when your pixels get threatened NOW YOU'RE MAD!!!

Reminds me of the type of cognitive dissonance required to become indignant about 9/11, when the number of people Americans have killed around the world completely so dwarfs that figure.

I heard Occupy boiled down very succinctly the other day; there is a paradigm shift occurring between an extended generation of people who believe that seeking one's own best interest is moral, and a new generation of people who believe that seeking everyone's best interest is moral.

The same thing applies for the internet. Free for everyone is better for everyone, except the guys that own all rights to the songs (5-6 top dogs in 3-4 major record label conglomerates own and/or control just about everything in the music industry). Those guys are still trying to force the physical media / iTunes lifestyle, and will never realize that their irrelevant to the new society that has been created using the internet.

Musicians and record companies should provide a nice enough product that it is worth going to the store and buying one. Same with movies. Let's at least have some cloth maps and pot metal collectors items for that $20.

Instead we get cheap as possible gem cases with 1980s media that is guaranteed to be destroyed eventually from scratches, and if you happen to get one bad scratch, you are shit out of luck. FFS - Old technology cds, dvds, blu rays = improved 1970's technology (dependent on RPM's of a motor [lol?]) instead of using real media like flash drives..

..inb4 EVERYONE HAV CD PLAYR, Is confus..

THIS IS A DIRECT EXAMPLE OF 1% TACTICS AND GREED. It is systemic, like that, throughout all business. They try to fuck us at every angle, not just here. If you don't see it, wake up. We need you. We can change this all using the General Assembly if enough people do it. You have to come to understand. Come. There are more of us than you think.

Expect us.

People "hate on you" because you're an annoying cunt, not because of your political position. I bolded to the part where I stopped reading.

[Szeth]

AMURICA!

[Autotune]

People "hate on you" because you're an annoying cunt, not because of your political position. I bolded to the part where I stopped reading.

at least i made it to the end of the first line.

[purest]

People "hate on you" because you're an annoying cunt, not because of your political position. I bolded to the part where I stopped reading.

this is true

[Awwalike]

tite! no more catering to TMA/TR

[Muchew]

I heard Occupy boiled down very succinctly the other day; there is a paradigm shift occurring between an extended generation of people who believe that seeking one's own best interest is moral, and a new generation of people who believe that seeking everyone's best interest is moral.


I use to think this was the case too. I feel like I meet more and more people each day that are just worried about themselves though. I think it may be as you grow older you lose the thought that you can actually change how things work, and just try to make the best out of what is available.

Hell, I'm getting tired of trying to convince people not to vote for tards like Romney and Gingrich and I'm only 23...

[Hasbinbad]

I use to think this was the case too. I feel like I meet more and more people each day that are just worried about themselves though. I think it may be as you grow older you lose the thought that you can actually change how things work, and just try to make the best out of what is available.

Hell, I'm getting tired of trying to convince people not to vote for tards like Romney and Gingrich and I'm only 23...
ITT: defeatist and jaded virgins try to agree with both side of the argument simultaneously while seeming above the argument

[Awwalike]

http://i.imgur.com/4igxU.jpg

[purest]

awwalike or whatever, didnt u make like 10 threads on both pvp and pve forums begging for guise loot rights (lol)

considering how much u care about something as gay as ability to turn into a dark elf, im pretty sure youd would cry the most here when p99 gets taken down

[Awwalike]

awwalike or whatever, didnt u make like 10 threads on both pvp and pve forums begging for guise loot rights (lol)

considering how much u care about something as gay as ability to turn into a dark elf, im pretty sure youd would cry the most here when p99 gets taken down

I have 1 thread offering fungi tunic from blue for it, but you have me confused with someone named Animosity. u mad?

[Jon Lemon]

tite

[purest]

i care deeply about my pixels and have 10 threads in 2 subforums begging for something as gay as turning into a dark elf but i swear i dont care if project99 gets shut down please believe me guys

tite

[Awwalike]

tite tho rite?

[Jon Lemon]

<object width="420" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/VAmhM3ZMQEQ?version=3&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/VAmhM3ZMQEQ?version=3&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="420" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

[Jon Lemon]

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111216/11102617108/sopa-markup-runs-out-time-likely-delayed-until-2012.shtml?r

Just kidding about the delay - did you finish getting the word out that the vote was off already, citizen? Woops!

[purest]

In a nutshell, here’s what the law would do:


Assign liability to site owners for everything users post, without consideration for whether or not the user posted without permission. Site owners could face jail time or heavy fines, and DNS blacklisting.
It would require web services like YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter to monitor and aggressively filter everything all users upload.
It would deny site owners due process of law, by initiating a DNS blacklisting based solely on a good faith assertion by an individual copyright or intellectual property owner.
It would give the U.S. government the power to selectively censor the web using techniques similar to those used in China, Malaysia and Iran. The Great Firewall of China is an example of this type of embedded, infrastructural internet censorship.


Imagine a user posts a video clip to the Tom’s Community of a step-by-step guide on how to set up water cooling on an overclocked i7 CPU. Playing in the background behind the voiceover is “Derezzed” by Daft Punk. The studio representing Daft Punk could issue a complaint, without being required to notify us or request a take-down. Tom’s Hardware would be liable and prosecuted solely on a good faith assertion of the copyright owner, without notification, with the site operators subject to possible jail time for not preventing the video from being posted.

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/toms-hardware-sopa-Stop-Online-Piracy-Act-PROTECT-IP-Senate,14393.html

[Psionide]

I really think pirates need to get some of the blame here, and I know while saying this on a internet forum is probably pretty stupid but seriously some of this shit needs to be put on piracy in the firstplace. Everyone knew what they were doing and had there different reasons to justify it.Yeah nobody wants to go to the theatres when its 8.50 for a popcorn that costs the theatre a quarter and there big feature is The Expendables sure but then you got somebody downloading whole lists of shit and throw pieces of trash movies like that on there download list simply because they can.

Music, now I can see there pain when I go to shows and I see the fuckin band after there done playing there set come around selling there shitty ass tee shirts and posters like hobos in traffic in the city.

So like I'm not totally against it but hell maybe just maybe if it wasn't abused to the degree it was we wouldn't be dealing with this instead of wishing for common sense to appear in congress?

[Hasbinbad]

Pop musicians are not seeing massive cuts in their lifestyles. Non-pop musicians have always been poor.

People that pirate shit wouldn't have been able to buy it in the first place.

I don't see the problem.

[Hasbinbad]

Oh wait, less bottom line for execs!

FUCKING INTERTUBEZ PIRATES!!

[Hitchens]

Since when is being wealthy something bad?

[Jon Lemon]

my sig disappeared due to nazis but i improved it

[Doublestep]

if you can't afford to buy a 14.99 album once every year or so to support your favorite artist, you shouldn't be listening to their music/calling yourself a fan.

[Doublestep]

I don't pirate because in the small (read: extremely small) chance that I actually do get a record out, i'd like to at least sell more than 10 copies.

[Humerox]

Let's not forget the Senate version of the legislation, either.

PIPA (http://www.americablog.com/2011/11/pipa-kill-internet-bill-is-close-to.html)


In answer to the posting about how all this would have passed by a landslide if it had been voted on like it was supposed to be...

This is NOT the first time this has been gunned down. COICA was the first attempt and it was gunned down. Grassroots campaigns by people such as Demand Progress (http://demandprogress.org/) and Stop American Censorship (http://americancensorship.org/) have brought millions of emails and telephone calls directly to the White House in recent months...and that's the reason the legislation has been stalling. GoDaddy (http://americancensorship.org/) just had thousands of accounts pulled because of their previous pro-SOPA stance, and I say previous because the almighty pocketbook of the 99% made them change their minds.

You can sit back on your butts and talk about it, or you can join up and help with an email or call.

I been harping on this stuff ever since COICA...glad to see others are waking up to it.

[Humerox]

So, if I am understanding this correctly, I can get banned/thrown in jail/sued if I sing someone else's song. But if a popular musician does a cover of someone else's work it is ok?

We could look forward to the Aussie example (Australia has a blacklist type legislation enacted) of Men at Work being retroactively sued by the new copyright owners of Kookaberra (Larrikin Music), who actually won 5% of royalties for the song for a three-second flute riff.

On 4 February 2010, Justice Jacobson ruled that Larrikin's copyright had been infringed because "Down Under" reproduced "a substantial part of Kookaburra.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Down_Under_%28song%29)

If a 3-second flute riff - which was incidental btw - is substantial...
Also, this after 28 years of time that the previous copyright owners had no issue.

Crazy BS...plain and simple.

[Harrison]

Let's not forget the Senate version of the legislation, either.

PIPA (http://www.americablog.com/2011/11/pipa-kill-internet-bill-is-close-to.html)


In answer to the posting about how all this would have passed by a landslide if it had been voted on like it was supposed to be...

This is NOT the first time this has been gunned down. COICA was the first attempt and it was gunned down. Grassroots campaigns by people such as Demand Progress (http://demandprogress.org/) and Stop American Censorship (http://americancensorship.org/) have brought millions of emails and telephone calls directly to the White House in recent months...and that's the reason the legislation has been stalling. GoDaddy (http://americancensorship.org/) just had thousands of accounts pulled because of their previous pro-SOPA stance, and I say previous because the almighty pocketbook of the 99% made them change their minds.

You can sit back on your butts and talk about it, or you can join up and help with an email or call.

I been harping on this stuff ever since COICA...glad to see others are waking up to it.

I'm a supporting member of demandprogress.org

I've personally spoke to Barney Frank via email over this. (likely one of his aides, but whatever...)

[Hasbinbad]

I'm a supporting member of demandprogress.org

I've personally spoke to Barney Frank via email over this. (likely one of his aides, but whatever...)
Good job Harrison.

[ZEROSUM]

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2009/04/goldman-sachs-hires-barney-frank.html

[ZEROSUM]

anyways, GoDaddy came out in support of SOPA.

The same day, they lost 30000 people, including Wikipedia.


Capitalism at work.


Wikipedia is also threatening to take down all their stuff if it passes. They did this with sucess in Italy before.

[Doublestep]

go wiki-merica

[purest]

interest groups that support sopa: http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-h3261/money

Top recipients for ALL supporting interest groups
Name Amount Received Vote On Passage

Rep. Eric Cantor [R, VA-7] $462,292
Rep. Howard Berman [D, CA-28] $436,000
Rep. Steny Hoyer [D, MD-5] $387,000
Rep. James Clyburn [D, SC-6] $323,500
Rep. John Boehner [R, OH-8] $289,350
Rep. Addison Wilson [R, SC-2] $251,281
Rep. Nancy Pelosi [D, CA-8] $250,050
Rep. Michele Bachmann [R, MN-6] $235,367
Rep. Michael Thompson [D, CA-1] $227,282
Rep. William Owens [D, NY-23] $225,817



Sen. Harry Reid [D, NV] $1,383,541
Sen. Patrick Toomey [R, PA] $1,116,789
Sen. Charles Schumer [D, NY] $1,049,215
Sen. Scott Brown [R, MA] $1,024,012
Sen. Robert Portman [R, OH] $720,433
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand [D, NY] $656,875
Sen. Barbara Boxer [D, CA] $588,074
Sen. Roy Blunt [R, MO] $543,651
Sen. Marco Rubio [R, FL] $540,879
Sen. Richard Burr [R, NC] $523,500



Specific Organizations Supporting H.R.3261

AFL-CIO
Motion Picture Association of America
Independent Film & Television Alliance
National Association of Theatre Owners
Deluxe Entertainment Services Group Inc.,
National Music Publishers' Association
American Federation of Musicians
Directors Guild of America
International Brotherhood of Teamsters
Screen Actors Guild
National Cable & Telecommunications Association
Recording Industry Association of America
Alliance for Safe Online Pharmacies
Comcast
NBC Universal
Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America
National Association of Manufacturers
Concerned Women for America
Viacom
National Criminal Justice Association
National District Attorneys Association
Council of State Governments
International Trademark Association
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
International Association of Fire Fighters
U. S. Chamber of Commerce
Americans for Tax Reform
Let Freedom Ring
National Football League
Pfizer
Johnson & Johnson
Outdoor Industry Association
National Electrical Manufacturers Association
Association of American Publishers
Ford Motor Company
Automotive Aftermarket Industry Association
Underwriters Laboratories Inc.
News Corporation
Society of Plastics Industry
Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council
Software & Information Industry Association
Entertainment Software Association
American Association of Independent Music
Eli Lilly and Company
Merck
Specialty Equipment Market Association
Xerox Corporation
Universal Music Group Inc.
Walmart
Dow Chemical
Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council
Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers
Warner Music Group
Major League Baseball
National Confectioners Association
Estee Lauder Companies
Sony Pictures Entertainment
CBS Corporation
National Basketball Association
Greeting Card Association
Advanced Medical Technology Association
Beam Global Spirits &Wine
Sony Music Entertainment
Adidas America
Acushnet Company
ABRO Industries, Inc.
1-800-PetMeds
1-800 Contacts, Inc.
Blue Sky Studios, Inc.
Bose Corporation
Broadcast Music, Inc. (BMI)
Burberry
Electronic Components Industry Association
HarperCollins Publishers
Kekepana International Services
LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton
Nike, Inc.
Nintendo
Taylor Made Golf Company, Inc.
Timberland Company
Tiffany & Co.
Time Warner
Sporting Goods Manufacturer's Association
3M Company
National Retail Federation
Retail Industry Leaders Association
Viacom
Philip Morris International
National Association of Broadcasters
Disney

[Jon Lemon]

weird when you follow the money it's almost like D and R don't even exist in reality

who'da thought

[Uthgaard]

It does when you look at the opposing side:

Top recipients for ALL opposing interest groups
Name Amount Received
Rep. William Owens [D, NY-23] $300,459
Rep. Chellie Pingree [D, ME-1] $203,700
Rep. Gary Peters [D, MI-9] $166,220
Rep. Niki Tsongas [D, MA-5] $146,400
Rep. Kurt Schrader [D, OR-5] $105,550
Rep. Anna Eshoo [D, CA-14] $100,759
Rep. James Moran [D, VA-8] $94,600
Rep. James Himes [D, CT-4] $88,964
Rep. Gerald Connolly [D, VA-11] $88,730
Rep. Allyson Schwartz [D, PA-13] $84,800

Sen. Michael Bennet [D, CO] $1,320,304
Sen. Barbara Boxer [D, CA] $362,994
Sen. Patty Murray [D, WA] $273,397
Sen. Harry Reid [D, NV] $254,460
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand [D, NY] $251,244
Sen. Charles Schumer [D, NY] $224,784
Sen. Chris Coons [D, DE] $209,150
Sen. Richard Blumenthal [D, CT] $156,849
Sen. Patrick Leahy [D, VT] $156,470
Sen. Ron Wyden [D, OR] $135,950
Specific Organizations Opposing H.R.3261

Creators’ Freedom Project
Engine Advocacy
4chan
Boing Boing
Creative Commons
Daily Kos
Disqus
Grooveshark
Hype Machine
Kickstarter
MetaFilter
O'Reilly Radar
Techdirt
Torrentfreak
Go Daddy (lol)
NetCoalition
Consumer Electronics Association
Computer and Communications Industry Association
Public Knowledge
Electronic Frontier Foundation
EDUCAUSE
Open Internet Coalition
Bloomberg
Google
Yahoo
Center for Democracy & Technology
Business Software Alliance
Twitter
Zynga
Facebook
AOL
Marc Andreessen, co-founder of Netscape and Andreessen Horowitz
Sergey Brin, co-founder of Google
Jack Dorsey, co-founder of Twitter and Square
Caterina Fake, co-founder of Flickr and Hunch
David Filo, co-founder of Yahoo!
Reid Hoffman, co-founder of LinkedIn
Arianna Huffington, co-founder of The Huffington Post
Chad Hurley, co-founder of YouTube
Brewster Kahle, founder of the Internet Archive and co-founder of Alexa Internet
Elon Musk, co-founder of PayPal
Craig Newmark, founder of craigslist
Pierre Omidyar, founder of eBay
Biz Stone, co-founder of Obvious and Twitter
Jimmy Wales, founder of Wikipedia and the Wikimedia Foundation
Evan Williams, co-founder of Blogger and Twitter
Jerry Yang, co-founder of Yahoo!
Progressive Change Campaign Committee
Tumblr
Mozilla
Union Square Ventures
MoveOn
Wikimedia Foundation
eBay
Reddit
American Civil Liberties Union
Consumers Union
American Library Association
Computer & Communications Industry Association
Human Rights First
Consumer Federation of America
Human Rights Watch
Microsoft
United States Student Association
Irregular Times
TechNet
Information Technology Industry Council
Association of Research Libraries
Entertainment Consumers Assocation
Writers Guild of America, West
Reporters Without Borders
Freedom House
Association of College and Research Libraries
Competitive Enterprise Institute
TechAmerica
TechFreedom
Demand Progress
U.S. Public Interest Group
Internews
New America Foundation’s Open Technology Initiative
Center for Media Justice
Center for Rural Strategies
Brookings Institute
American Society of News Editors
Benetech
Rackspace
OpenDNS

[Rogean]

Top recipients for ALL supporting interest groups
Name Amount Received Vote On Passage

Rep. Eric Cantor [R, VA-7] $462,292
Rep. Howard Berman [D, CA-28] $436,000
Rep. Steny Hoyer [D, MD-5] $387,000
Rep. James Clyburn [D, SC-6] $323,500
Rep. John Boehner [R, OH-8] $289,350
Rep. Addison Wilson [R, SC-2] $251,281
Rep. Nancy Pelosi [D, CA-8] $250,050
Rep. Michele Bachmann [R, MN-6] $235,367
Rep. Michael Thompson [D, CA-1] $227,282
Rep. William Owens [D, NY-23] $225,817


Sen. Harry Reid [D, NV] $1,383,541
Sen. Patrick Toomey [R, PA] $1,116,789
Sen. Charles Schumer [D, NY] $1,049,215
Sen. Scott Brown [R, MA] $1,024,012
Sen. Robert Portman [R, OH] $720,433
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand [D, NY] $656,875
Sen. Barbara Boxer [D, CA] $588,074
Sen. Roy Blunt [R, MO] $543,651
Sen. Marco Rubio [R, FL] $540,879
Sen. Richard Burr [R, NC] $523,500


I've remained pretty ignorant to political matters, but are they seriously getting that much money entirely on whether the bill passes or not?

[Littlegyno 6.0]

I've remained pretty ignorant to political matters, but are they seriously getting that much money entirely on whether the bill passes or not?

Their campaigns do. Corrupt as Fuck huh.

[Hitchens]

No, they have already received that money regardless of the bill's passage. They're campaign contributions, not personal checks. The money would most likely be spent on staff, office space and supplies, phones, etc.

It's just lobbying, pretty standard stuff. The support for the bill seems to transcend political boundaries as well, you've got both the AFL-CIO and the Teamsters on one side and the Chamber of Commerce on the other. Plus a whole bunch of other organizations and companies as well.

With that said, in my opinion the bill is like trying to catch a shoplifter with a bazooka. Definitely overreach, but not the end of the world and not a sinister conspiracy to control the Internet.

[Extunarian]

I've remained pretty ignorant to political matters, but are they seriously getting that much money entirely on whether the bill passes or not?

Not sure if I'm reading the question right, but this money has already been contributed to them.

I can't tell from the website, but those numbers likely are the aggregate of every dollar each member has received from those particular organizations during their tenure in congress. I can see that the numbers are from the end of the 2010 cycle, so nothing contributed after November 2010 would be counted. My guess is that each member's totals from these companies will be up 20% or more when we see the 2012 numbers, much like financial and healthcare industry contributions were way up during the healthcare and bank reform debates.

One thing to note about that list though is that those are mostly senior members and/or part of their party leadership. Those people inherently take in more money since they get to set the agenda in their chamber or committee. I'm not defending the wholesale selling-out of our elected officials, just saying that these higher-up people are getting tons of money from all sides.

[Hitchens]

I can't tell from the website, but those numbers likely are the aggregate of every dollar each member has received from those particular organizations during their tenure in congress. I can see that the numbers are from the end of the 2010 cycle, so nothing contributed after November 2010 would be counted. My guess is that each member's totals from these companies will be up 20% or more when we see the 2012 numbers, much like financial and healthcare industry contributions were way up during the healthcare and bank reform debates.

Good point and you're probably right. The bill was introduced on 10/26/11, if nothing after November of 2010 is counted then the amounts listed on the site were donated well before the introduction of the H.R.3261.

The page is somewhat deceptive in that it makes it seem like the amounts are a total donated specifically for H.R.3261. They are not.

[falkun]

With that said, in my opinion the bill is like trying to catch a shoplifter with a bazooka. Definitely overreach, but not the end of the world and not a sinister conspiracy to control the Internet.

No, its like trying to catch a suspected armed robber by shutting off access to the store he purchased the gun from.

The accuser needs minimal proof, the store can get shut down without notification from authorities, the owner of a premises is responsible for EVERY interaction between users and his property, and the store can still operate business out the back door if you know how to get there.

[Hitchens]

That analogy doesn't work, because gun stores are legal. Sites which offer pirated material are not.

That's really what SOPA targets. It doesn't target some guy downloading a movie or an album every now and then. It targets large-scale piracy distribution.

[Sextar]

AKA project 1999, emulation is considered one big piracy of sony's 15 bucks o' month

[ZEROSUM]

lo.l @ opencongress thing


Vote on This Bill
1% Users Support Bill
15 in favor / 1811 opposed

[Humerox]

Definitely overreach, but not the end of the world and not a sinister conspiracy to control the Internet.

It wold be the end of the Internet as we know it, and give effective control of the Internet to corporations.

Giving the government power to do something and then relying upon their "good sense" not to is pretty friggin' stupid, any way you look at it. If you want proof just look at history.

[Hitchens]

It wold be the end of the Internet as we know it, and give effective control of the Internet to corporations.

Corporations already have effective control of the Internet by being your service provider, which they can disable at any time for suspected piracy.

I never said I thought the bill was a good idea, I just don't think it will change much. Activists for any cause or issue are notoriously hyperbolic.

[Humerox]

Corporations already have effective control of the Internet by being your service provider, which they can disable at any time for suspected piracy.

I never said I thought the bill was a good idea, I just don't think it will change much. Activists for any cause or issue are notoriously hyperbolic.

ISPs would have to be given the power to deep inspect packets compromising privacy. The government would be given broad, vague, and general powers to enforce copyright without court order. The entire DNS backbone of the Internet would have to be changed.

The only ISP's that are disabling are doing so on a voluntary basis, and it's in their interest if they are. (Hello, Comcast). My ISP doesn't block for any reason.

Piracy isn't even the issue anymore. I agree steps and measures need to be taken to protect interests, but they're not going to do it this way.

If you seriously believe SOPA and PIPA wouldn't change much, I daresay you know nothing about what power the bills give the government, and suggest you do a little more investigation.

[Hitchens]

Piracy isn't even the issue anymore. I agree steps and measures need to be taken to protect interests, but they're not going to do it this way.

I agree.

If you seriously believe SOPA and PIPA wouldn't change much, I daresay you know nothing about what power the bills give the government, and suggest you do a little more investigation.

My mistake. I should have said SOPA wouldn't change much for the average end-user.

[Humerox]

I should have said SOPA wouldn't change much for the average end-user.

I know what you're saying, but dwell on this for a moment.

DNS redirect would be so easy to get around it isn't funny. Nothing the government can do under SOPA or PIPA can be effective in stopping piracy.

They won't be able to control what the pirates put online, so they will control ordinary users' access to the internet as a substitute.

Failed legislation will bring more restrictive legislation, and the final result will be allowing end users to connect only through approved government portals. That would be the only effective method of controlling piracy.

The sad thing is that the money "lost" to content providers is all hypothetical. They are really doing better right now than other industries economically speaking.

[Orruar]

Until we address the issue where we allow government near unlimited power to regulate any activity it seems fit, we'll have a neverending series of SOPAs affecting every industry. Give the power to 536 people to regulate a multi-trillion dollar economy and those with money will use that concentrated power for their own ends.

[Humerox]

Two of the people responsible for writing these bills (SOPA and PIPA)— the key writer for the House version and the key writer for the Senate version — have just accepted positions for two of the lobbying organizations pushing for the bill.

Allison Halataei, former deputy chief of staff and parliamentarian to House Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith and Lauren Pastarnack, a Senate Judiciary Committee senior aide, have accepted gigs with two of the lobbying firms that stand to gain the most from the passage of these bills.

Now that she helped write the bill and get it into consideration, Allison Halataei is officially the National Music Publisher’s Association chief liaison to Congress.

In other news:

Chris Dodd served as a U.S. Senator from 1981 through 2011, a total of 30 years. Now, despite claiming repeatedly that he would never accept a lobbying position, the esteemed former Democratic Senator from Connecticut is now the Chairman and CEO of the MPAA.

Gee... help write a bill or two for powerful lobbies then take a high-powered position from them after leaving Congress or the Senate.

Who'da thunk?

[Orruar]

The MPAA and RIAA are simply trying to use government to protect their failed business model. Not much different than the bankers really. Imagine if we had this level of government interference back in the early 20th century. We'd have outlawed the gasoline engine to protect the horse and buggy industry.

Of course, even if this passes, people will still find ways to "pirate" music and movies. Fighting against changing technology will simply impoverish us further.

[Humerox]

The MPAA and RIAA are simply trying to use government to protect their failed business model. Not much different than the bankers really. Imagine if we had this level of government interference back in the early 20th century. We'd have outlawed the gasoline engine to protect the horse and buggy industry.

Of course, even if this passes, people will still find ways to "pirate" music and movies. Fighting against changing technology will simply impoverish us further.

Amen.

The ways have already been figured out. Desopa (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/desopa/) is an interesting little Firefox add-on that negates DNS fiddling by the US. Then, as I've mentioned before, if you know the numeric IP to a site you can bypass the DNS redirect all day long.

[Orruar]

The MPAA and RIAA are simply trying to use government to protect their failed business model. Not much different than the bankers really. Imagine if we had this level of government interference back in the early 20th century. We'd have outlawed the gasoline engine to protect the horse and buggy industry.

Of course, even if this passes, people will still find ways to "pirate" music and movies. Fighting against changing technology will simply impoverish us further.

I take back that first part. Even the bankers were wise enough to quit doing some of the stupid shit they were doing. They just wanted free money for their stupidity. What the RIAA and MPAA are trying to do is even worse when you think about it. I wonder if we'll ever see Occupy Hollywood. Somehow I doubt it.

[Humerox]

I take back that first part. Even the bankers were wise enough to quit doing some of the stupid shit they were doing. They just wanted free money for their stupidity. What the RIAA and MPAA are trying to do is even worse when you think about it. I wonder if we'll ever see Occupy Hollywood. Somehow I doubt it.

Funny you bring that up!

Occupy Hollywood (http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/ntmzp/how_to_stop_sopa_occupy_hollywood_heres_a_plan/)

Then there's pure out-and-out civil disobediance should SOPA pass (from the Reddit thread):

Another Idea for SOPA, if it manages to pass:

The way the bill is written, anyone can make a copyright claim about any website, and then prior to arbitration, the site is blocked. So claim against WB. And the MPAA. And Whitehouse.gov. And ATT. And Verison. And Comcast. And Fox. Make a claim against every legitimate website you can find. The law would reveal itself to be utterly useless in actually preventing piracy if the office is overloaded with claims against large corporate websites. And while the big corporations rally up their lawyers and wring their hands and pull their hair in frustration, Congress will be forced to either take down the internet entirely (read: call down the wrath of EVERYONE) or change the law in such a way that it actually deals with copyright claims legitimately instead of being an easy tool for censorship.

Though granted, this would require concerted effort. But good civil disobedience generally does.

[usedtobejubaloftorv]

If SOPA passes I am going to get into the business of providing third party proxies outside of US jurisdiction.

[Dlardlar]

January 24 2 15 pm is voting day

[Cast]

i for one welcome our new internet overlords, do we get to vote on new GMs?

[Dlardlar]

Lol cast

[Rogean]

So hey.. If this bill passes senate and house.. does the president have the option to veto it? would he?

[ZEROSUM]

He could, but most likely won't. He's only vetod 2 bills so far

December 30, 2009: Vetoed H.J.Res. 64, Making further continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2010, and for other purposes. Override attempt failed in House.[32]

October 7, 2010: Vetoed H.R. 3808, the Interstate Recognition of Notarizations Act of 2010. Override attempt in the House failed.[33]

[ZEROSUM]

Not to mention if you look at the corporations sponsoring the bill and compare it to his campaign contributions, he's right in the good ol white shoe boy club

[Doublestep]

I'm pretty sure he said he would veto if it came to that.

[Dlardlar]

How long does pres have to veto bill by?

[ZEROSUM]

I'm pretty sure he said he would veto if it came to that.

You believe a word this guy says LOLOOL :p

[Dlardlar]

Looked it up 10 days to decide to veto law

[ZEROSUM]

Yes it is a short period of time. Congress goes on recess, unable to override it.. its like ulta vetoed... theres an official term for it

SOPA will pass though dont be stupid or hopeful

[Humerox]

SOPA will pass though dont be stupid or hopeful

If it does the courts wil strike it down as being unconstitutional. Bet on it.

From a recent Stanford Law Review article (http://www.stanfordlawreview.org/online/dont-break-internet):

(SOPA) not only violates basic principles of due process by depriving persons of property without a fair hearing and a reasonable opportunity to be heard, it also constitutes an unconstitutional abridgement of the freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment. The Supreme Court has made it abundantly clear that governmental action suppressing speech, if taken prior to an adversary proceeding and subsequent judicial determination that the speech in question is unlawful, is a presumptively unconstitutional “prior restraint.” In other words, it is the “most serious and the least tolerable infringement on First Amendment rights,” permissible only in the narrowest range of circumstances. The Constitution requires a court “to make a final determination” that the material in question is unlawful “after an adversary hearing before the material is completely removed from circulation.”

The procedures outlined in both bills fail this fundamental constitutional test. Websites can be “completely removed from circulation”—rendered unreachable by, and invisible to, Internet users in the United States and abroad—immediately upon application by the government, without any reasonable opportunity for the owner or operator of the website in question to be heard or to present evidence on his or her own behalf. This falls far short of what the Constitution requires before speech can be eliminated from public circulation.

[Orruar]

If it does the courts wil strike it down as being unconstitutional. Bet on it.

From a recent Stanford Law Review article (http://www.stanfordlawreview.org/online/dont-break-internet):

(SOPA) not only violates basic principles of due process by depriving persons of property without a fair hearing and a reasonable opportunity to be heard, it also constitutes an unconstitutional abridgement of the freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment. The Supreme Court has made it abundantly clear that governmental action suppressing speech, if taken prior to an adversary proceeding and subsequent judicial determination that the speech in question is unlawful, is a presumptively unconstitutional “prior restraint.” In other words, it is the “most serious and the least tolerable infringement on First Amendment rights,” permissible only in the narrowest range of circumstances. The Constitution requires a court “to make a final determination” that the material in question is unlawful “after an adversary hearing before the material is completely removed from circulation.”

The procedures outlined in both bills fail this fundamental constitutional test. Websites can be “completely removed from circulation”—rendered unreachable by, and invisible to, Internet users in the United States and abroad—immediately upon application by the government, without any reasonable opportunity for the owner or operator of the website in question to be heard or to present evidence on his or her own behalf. This falls far short of what the Constitution requires before speech can be eliminated from public circulation.

I wouldn't bet a penny on the courts doing their job.

[Humerox]

I wouldn't bet a penny on the courts doing their job.

I would. You only have to look as far as the Communications Decency Act to see how seriously the court views freedom of speech.


In a landmark decision issued on June 26,1997, the Supreme Court held that the Communications Decency Act violated the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of speech.

The Court's opinion, written by Justice John Paul Stevens, resoundingly rejects censorship of the on-line medium and establishes the fundamental principles that will guide judicial consideration of the Internet for the 21st Century. EPIC is proud to have participated in this historic litigation as both plaintiff and co-counsel.

There have been two new appointees to the court since then, but I'm betting things haven't changed much.

[Orruar]

I would. You only have to look as far as the Communications Decency Act to see how seriously the court views freedom of speech.


In a landmark decision issued on June 26,1997, the Supreme Court held that the Communications Decency Act violated the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of speech.

The Court's opinion, written by Justice John Paul Stevens, resoundingly rejects censorship of the on-line medium and establishes the fundamental principles that will guide judicial consideration of the Internet for the 21st Century. EPIC is proud to have participated in this historic litigation as both plaintiff and co-counsel.

There have been two new appointees to the court since then, but I'm betting things haven't changed much.

1997... The court has become increasingly statist since then.

[Humerox]

1997... The court has become increasingly statist since then.

Reference me a couple decisions reflecting that. I'm not arguing, just curious.

[Humerox]

Golan vs. Holder is a pretty good indication to me that the court isn't swayed by corporate interest or Congress regarding copyright.

This was decided this year:

Golan vs. Holder is a case originally filed in 2001 challenging the constitutionality of restoring copyright of foreign works that were previously in the United States public domain by the United States Congress.

Judge Babcock wrote:

In the United States, that body of law includes the bedrock principle that works in the public domain remain in the public domain. Removing works from the public domain violated Plaintiffs’ vested First Amendment interests. [...] Accordingly—to the extent Section 514 suppresses the right of reliance parties to use works they exploited while the works were in the public domain—Section 514 is substantially broader than necessary to achieve the Government’s interest.

Of course appeals are slated for 2012...but I suspect they'll be fruitless.

[Orruar]

Reference me a couple decisions reflecting that. I'm not arguing, just curious.

Actually, looking back in the realm of free speech, you may be right. The major cases in the past decade have all sided on the side of free speech. When I think of the failures of the supreme court, they mostly come in the realm of economics and the expansion of the commerce clause.

[Humerox]

Actually, looking back in the realm of free speech, you may be right. The major cases in the past decade have all sided on the side of free speech. When I think of the failures of the supreme court, they mostly come in the realm of economics and the expansion of the commerce clause.

THAT we can agree on!

[funhorroryes]

why is everything about america

doesnt effect me.

[Humerox]

why is everything about america

doesnt effect me.

each bill could derail efforts to make the Internet more secure, according to experts, and might even break the global network by forcing drastic changes in the way users connect to websites.

doesn't affect you?

[Doublestep]

each bill could derail efforts to make the Internet more secure, according to experts, and might even break the global network by forcing drastic changes in the way users connect to websites.

doesn't affect you?

Doesn't effect him either.

[Humerox]

has no effect on him?

[Humerox]

back on topic...

both bills will risk fragmenting the Internet’s global domain name system (DNS) and have other technical consequences. ...

[Cyclone]

Technically it effects the whole internet, not just America. The way it works is if this bill passes (Which I highly doubt because of the outrage involved) then America can shut down any site they choose and deem "against the law".

It effects everyone, and I hate to say it, but American Congress/House is acting like they "own" the internet, when in reality it has spread much farther than that, and cannot fathom how even a bill would be allowed to pass, as this will effect not just America, but the whole worlds net.

I do not see how you can say "this does not effect me" when it does, it effects everyone. Good Example, EQ-emu, as it stands right now we are fully legal, but now you introduce this vague bill, it passes, now any and all companies can say no, I want that shut down, instant shut down, no court, no nothing, instantly gone.

Another example, You decide to make a fan based web page about Everquest, suddenly one day you log into that page and its gone, poof, because someone complained that you were using a trademark. No requirement to notify you, no nothing, its gone. Exaggeration I know, but when and were will the "control" end? This is not just about pirated software, nor about making any type of profit, its plain overlord control of the internet by the one country that claims to have freedom, USA.

Every day I live in the country I wonder what new "law" will come in effect that will change what everyone does, just because this country decides its wrong, or your cutting in my profit margin and I want to have you shot scenario. Do not get me wrong but I enjoy living in this country but in all reality if America can pass and enforce a bill to control the entire world net, I would be afraid of what the USA can do next.:(

[Humerox]

back off topic...

Affect and effect are two words that are commonly confused.

"Affect" is usually a verb meaning "to influence".
The drug did not affect the disease.

"Effect" is usually a noun meaning "result".
The drug has many adverse side effects.

"Effect" can also be used as a verb meaning "to bring about".
The present government effected many positive changes.


otherwise...great post cyclone. i was picking on one of the previous posts, really.

[Doublestep]

has no effect on him?


doesnt effect me.

[Humerox]

i think you missed what i was doing there, double.

[Rogean]

I think I saw someone mention, maybe in this read or in somewhere else, that "Didn't SoE already agree to 'look the other way' on P99 as long as we don't charge money" and while that in some aspects may be true, let me put this out there.

I have had interactions with the President of SoE and that brief discussion I will not get into details on, what I will talk about is SoE's legal department, which operates on it's own free will on anything they deem necessary short of full law suites.

This means they will at their own discretion send out Cease and Decists and threatening letters/emails to persons, datacenters, upstream providers, and etc, for anything they stumble across that mentions the Everquest (or other SoE Trademark) name. The legal department does not need to coordinate with the senior management/executives of the company in order to do this. If there is a website legitimately using their Trademarks, it would be on file with SoE Legal Department.

However, in order to fully bring down a project such as ours, it would require a court order (so long as our datacenter has our back in not bowing down to corporate pressure, which it has already demonstrated this to us, as well as our legal protection of the DMCA). In order to proceed with that type of legal action, I'm sure it would need to be something carefully considered by SoE Legal AND the company executives/management, at which point, the questions come up, how does this course of action help/improve our company and protect our interests.

The truth is, it doesn't. There is no benefit for SoE spending legal time and money to come after us, especially considering they may end up losing in court anyways (We do operate on a grey line, but we are very arguably a legal project). At that point if Smed had a say in it I'm sure he would say don't bother, and I'm sure SoE Legal has never even brought it up to him to begin with, as they know themselves it isn't worth it.

Now to get to the point of all this, if this SOPA thing passes, you would have legal departments just like SoE's, operating of their own free will just like they are now when they fire off C&D's like candy, but instead they would be firing off SOPA Violation letters for any small thing they deem infringing, without due process, to shut down projects such as ours. Consider things like Lucy or Rasper's getting shut down because it has a walkthroughs for Everquest content. It would be done without the need for any sort of permission or involvement from the company's executives.

[Szeth]

I have had interactions with the President of SoE and that brief discussion I will not get into details on

It's Lumie isn't it? He told you about the lizard people didn't he?

[Humerox]

Hopefully Congress will come to its senses and take a good look at the OPEN Act (http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/12/the-open-act-significantly-flawed-but-more-salvageable-than-sopaprotect-ip.ars).

SOPA and PIPA need to die...but restating what I said before in the thread, these bills are unconstitutional, and they would immediately be suspended by the court system until they were officially declared so.

I outlined the Stanford Law Review analysis a few posts back...and them boys don't play.

[Doublestep]

;)

[odizzido]

if they did want to shut down P99, the devs could get a server in another country and everyone could proxy to it.

[Xanthias]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/14/white-house-sopa-pipa_n_1206347.html

[scumfuck]

yea because that fucking retard doesnt ever lie

[Juugox2]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwQhNE65wmg&feature=g-u&context=G2f4e071FUAAAAAAABAA

[Doublestep]

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/377893_10150703873342576_13848807575_12251987_1651 923031_n.jpg

[pawmaul]

http://www.siliconrepublic.com/new-media/item/25366-controversial-sopa-bill/

[muratadidas]

Thank you for sharing.