TorrentFreak

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

‘Rogue’ Attorney General Spreads MPAA-Fed SOPA Propaganda

Last weekend Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff wrote a column in the Salt Lake City Tribune supporting the pending SOPA and PIPA anti-piracy bills. In his article Shurtleff argues that the bills are a necessity if the US is to “stop Internet thieves and profiteers.” An interesting take, but not very credible, as the Attorney Generally who may soon have the power to seize domains, simply passed off MPAA-penned propaganda as his own words.

mpaaIt is no secret that the MPAA and other pro-copyright groups lobby politicians and law enforcers, but when a column by a prominent Attorney General appears to be written directly by the entertainment industries something is horribly wrong.

A few days ago Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff wrote an article in the Salt Lake City Tribune. In the column the Attorney General stresses how important it is for Congress to pass the SOPA and PIPA bills. The MPAA is delighted with the support and praised it in a blog post yesterday.

“Shurtleff effectively hammers the point that Google, Yahoo and others have spent millions trying to distort – that states which allow rogue websites to operate unfettered will experience massive revenue reduction and job loss,” the MPAA writes.

The Attorney General’s statements do indeed bolster what the MPAA and other pro-copyright groups have said all along. By itself this is not unusual, but when we examined the article in more detail we began to notice that many of the sentences that are passed off as Shurtleff’s work actually look very familiar.

Could it be that the column was partly written by the MPAA?

We say yes. To back up this claim we will highlight a few sentences from the Attorney General’s article, and compare them with those previously delivered by the MPAA and affiliated pro-copyright groups.

The first sentence that caught our attention is: “It will take a strong, sustained effort to stop Internet thieves and profiteers.”

Strong words, but also familiar ones. In fact, former MPAA President Bob Pisano uttered exactly the same words in 2010 when he congratulated the Senate Judiciary Committee with unanimously approving the COICA bill, the predecessor to SOPA and PIPA.

mpaa

But that’s just the tip of the iceberg really. Here’s another example.

“Congress can make a significant contribution to that effort with legislation to strengthen law enforcement tools. In the interests of American citizens and businesses, it is time for Congress to enact rogue sites legislation.”

The sentence above is copied from a pro-COICA column (bottom paragraph) written by Mike McCurry, co-chairman of the pro-copyright outfit Arts+Labs. At the time, McCurry’s piece was praised by pro-copyright lobby groups and in his writing McCurry also uses the previously mentioned sentence from the MPAA’s former president.

But there’s more. The column from McCurry, which is often quoted by the MPAA and affiliated groups such as FightOnlineTheft, displays more similarities with the article published by Attorney General Mark Shurtleff.

For example: “[Rogue sites legislation] cut off foreign pirates and counterfeiters from the U.S. market and deprives them of what they want most — our money. By disrupting the business models of these online criminals, this legislation would make it less profitable and more difficult for those who wish to engage in blatant intellectual property theft.”

Now compare that to this quote from McCurry’s MPAA-inspired column which is nearly identical, far beyond what can be called a coincidence.

mccurry

The Attorney General was also directly inspired by the Coalition Against Counterfeiting and Piracy, a Chamber of Commerce outfit that belongs to the same pro-copyright clique.

Compare: “[rogue sites] represent the worst of the worst infringers on the Internet, are a threat to our economic security and they have no place in a legitimate online market.”

..to this quote (PDF) “[rogue sites] represent the worst of the worst on the Internet, and have no place in a legitimate online market.” And the list goes on.

Although we can’t say with certainty that Attorney General Mark Shurtleff was fed by the MPAA directly, it is obvious that the article wasn’t written by him. It’s a collection of ripped off sentences that can be directly traced back to the MPAA and affiliated groups.

This is quite a concern coming from someone who is supposed to be objective, especially considering that this Attorney General will have the exclusive power to grant requests for domain seizures and DNS blockades if SOPA or PIPA passes. The way we see it now, this Attorney General is clearly in the pockets of the pro-copyright lobby.

Holmes Wilson of the citizen rights group Fight for The Future agrees with this assessment.

“This is a reminder that SOPA/PIPA—the language, the money behind it, and the arguments used to justify it— are coming straight from the same place: the copyright industry,” he told TorrentFreak. “It’s possible that they’re turning up the heat in Utah in response to the meetings Utah residents have scheduled with Utah Senator Mike Lee.”

Unfortunately this isn’t an isolated incident. A lot of seemingly independent groups that recently supported PIPA and SOPA use the exact same language that appears to be fed to them by a single source.

Just Google the sentence “Criminals have turned to the Internet, abusing its virtually unlimited distribution opportunities,” and you’ll see that it was used in pro- SOPA/PIPA letters by the National Governors Association, Public Safety and First Responder Groups and others. Letters that were coincidentally all highlighted on the MPAA blog.

The more we dig, the more we find…

Related Posts

Previous Post | Next Post

  • http://torrentfreak.com/ Rob8urcakes

    This guy’s either a freakin’ twat – or in the pay of the MAFIAA.
    Either way, he’s a LOSER.

    • RogueBooBooKittyPhuck

      He’s a freakin’ twat, paid by the Mafiaa AND a phucking loser.
      Probably takes it in the ass too.

      • Abunchofgibberish

        Just what we needed. Some good old homophobia. Nothing drives your point home like taking cheap shots at gay people. Nice work, faggot.

        • Guest

          “Taking it in the ass” in this case, I believe, was likely meant more of an indication that the guy is submissive as opposed to “homophobia”.

        • AVGN Junior

          Calm down kids, go play your “consoles” :P And what total assness @ the article.

        • Muffink

          “Nice work, faggot” the ending there combats your own arguement. Smart move. ^_^

          Anyhow, whilst we’re on the topic… I think the laws against people saying this is Bullshiz to the first degree! It’s freedom of speech. I don’t mind it being illegal to treat someone differently cus they’re black, gay or female (or even all 3 of those :O) as that makes sense… but making our freedom of speech illegal takes that freedom away. It’s like saying “Freedom of speech* …. (small text) *but only as long as you follow these rules: ….” If saying stuff about gay folk is illegal then so should insulting anyone for any reason be!

          For the record. I’m a bi + I’m partly french. So everytime I see a anti-french or anti-gay comment but ment in a jokey way such as RogueBooBooKittyPhuck’s… I laugh. Open-minded people FTW.

        • BooBooKittyPhuck

          “Some good old homophobia.” “Nice work, faggot.”

          Hypocrite much? Or are you just an anally retentive PC douche?

          As Guest put it, “in this case, I believe, was likely meant more of an indication that the guy is submissive as opposed to “homophobia”.”

          Exactly. Abunchofgibberish, take your rabid PC heterophobia elsewhere. Moron.

      • P_scott64

        That gives takin it in the ass a bad name

        • BooBooKittyPhuck

          Agreed. Any girl who does = a friend of mine hahaha… <3

    • http://twitter.com/alicesmith8719 Alice

      Life is too short. Have you ever felt that a wonderful thing should be injected? Come —onenightcupid.C/0/M—, it’s the most effective place in the world to find like-minded people and rediscover lost passion. You will not regret for dating with pretty girls and cute guys in your area. Just sign up and nothing will lose if you don’t like it. Thanks.

      • Abc

        Spam flaged

        • BooBooKittyPhuck

          If Alice posts n00dz, PLEASE don’t flag and / or remove… <3

  • Anonymous

    Oh please….talking points are nothing new (on either side). Grow up and focus on the issue at hand. Piracy for profit is wrong.

    Google has its playbook and plenty from the anti-SOPA crowd repeats that crap endlessly.

    The lady doth protest too much, methinks. (Google that why don’t you?)

    • Anonymous

      Agreed, both sides twist the ‘truth,’ sometimes to an extreme, but it doesn’t hurt to point that out every now and then.

      Also, I believe something’s clearly wrong when a supposedly objective Attorney General, who soon may decide over the fate of many accused websites, is rehashing MPAA propaganda.

      • Guest

        “Agreed, both sides twist the ‘truth,”

        Ya, but us we are going to kill them all while they can not kill us all because there is way too many of us. Beside we were the one who use to give them money.

        • Danny

          “We were the ones who used to give them money.”

          Damn we only have ourselves to blame! :-P

        • Guest

          “Damn we only have ourselves to blame! :-P ”

          Go ahead blame the victims! Idiot!

      • http://twitter.com/icanhazsake Ninja

        Specially when there are plenty of neutral studies that either state that file sharing has no impact or it’s actually a positive thing and they are systematically ignored.

        If file sharing becomes impossible the only thing that will happen to me is that I’ll save $1000 per year as most of stuff I buy are downloaded from the net first. So maybe in the end SOPA is a good thing?

      • Terminal420

        How has the anti sopa side at all twisted the truth? They have no need to, it’s every bit as draconian as stated and they will abuse whatever power it provides to the maximum. Don’t be so quit to compromise, it grants them, and their arguments, credibility they haven’t earned, and can’t.

    • Guest

      Indeed, piracy for profit is wrong because that IS stealing. But 99% of the victims here are not making a profit from pirating.

      • sense

        Your right! Even if a website is doing money through ads, then the website is paying the operational cost and not making so much money about it.

        I was told in my engineer class that 50% of current jobs will cease to exist in 50 years and will be replace by other job. The music industries will cease to exist because we don’t need them anymore.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IZ5BM5GNLA54OADSWGSXAMA7SY Jay

          Small note, the music industry is doing fine.

          It’s the recording industry that will cease to exist.

        • Ven

          Music engineering has never been a field with many jobs. It had run for decades on the master-teaches-apprentice model, and only recently has been shoved into schools as a degree program. We need maybe one engineer for every 50 artists. The math isn’t good.

          Every “Engineer” I know either volunteers to do sound work for free, took their degree and has been using it to intern without pay for years (seriously), or they are working food prep/retail.

          Surf the internet and most people in-the-know will tell you to take the $20k+ you would spend on the degree and build your own garage studio and build a portfolio.

        • Danny

          Or do a real audio engineering (electronics) degree and do something useful and make loads!

        • http://twitter.com/icanhazsake Ninja

          @sense even if they are profiting from the ads, they are providing a SERVICE ppl WANT to use. I torrent both free content and copyrighted too at TPB (consequently at PublicBT and OpenBT trackers (and other open stuff). So if they are offering something I want why shouldn’t they make money on it? I often use Rapidshare/Megaupload to exchange pics, work stuff (non sensitive) and others. Granted mega has infringing content but they offer a good service. They should be making money yes.

          The day MAFIAA provides content DRM free, for a reasonable price and in torrent form I’ll gladly throw my money that way. Providing they stop being greedy assholes obviously.

          Till then, my money goes to where I find ethic and moral. Ppl like the humble bundle guys, minecraft, Louis and many others that offer me a direct channel.

        • Terminal420

          Forget “need”. We dont’ WANT them anymore. They’ve been nothing but parasitic and cancerous. Toxic to real art, toxic to quality music in both content and certainly production (loudness etc), toxic in manufactured talent, toxic in controlling the message (no anti war)… absolutely poisonous. If they weren’t all of the above, people would not be jumping ship the first chance they got. In fact it’s because they’ve always been so toxic that the means to do away with them so quickly materialized and were adopted.

      • Terminal420

        “Or do a real audio engineering (electronics) degree and do something useful and make loads! ”

        Brilliant, Danny Deluded. Just like all the Foxxcon employees that make your Ipod, who’re collectively threatening to jump off the roof of the building to their deaths.

    • Guest

      This isn’t an issue of “talking points”, it’s an issue of authorities and elected officials being used as sockpuppets by the copyright industry, an issue of law makers and law enforcers being transparently subordinate to CEOs sitting in board-rooms somewhere.

      Attorney Generals aren’t supposed to be disseminating propaganda written by a corporate public relations department, but lo.

      Way to miss all the points.

      • http://profiles.google.com/zerianis10 Christopher Kidwell

        Well, with all due respect, if s/he agrees with them and it actually isn’t a matter of him being BRIBED to spread their propaganda? Yeah, s/he can disseminate the stuff all s/he wants. We can however remove him/her from office for doing that if most of us disagree with him, which a lot of people do today.

        • Guest

          There’s a real big difference between agreeing with the copyright industry, and letting it ghostwrite for you. Mark Shurtleff is a puppet. Watch the MPAA make him dance.

          Then remember that he’s also an Attorney General and say “oh shit”.

        • Terminal420

          all due respect if they agreed with it they could use their own words to discuss it intelligently. Also agreeing with it isn’t enough when you’re biased by the promised of increased power and bought by increased revenue.

    • Guest

      Again, willa, show us the millions of dollars that teenagers have made from downloading music, and then you might have a valid point.

      • Tonyg123

        I believe the piracy for profit here is ad revenue on torrent sites. I wouldn’t be so actively against a bill supporting some type of legislation against torrent hosts, but SOPA and PIPA just go too far. The indignity suffered by a people who’s elected representatives cease to represent them will not be forgotten. Even if the Attorney General in question agrees with the bills, he should form his own opinion and give it, not chew up and spit out everything he’s heard.

        He’s copying information about a stance on copying other people’s work. Someone re-elect this genius, quickly!

        • guest

          the attorney general shouldn’t form his own opinion and give it, he should listen to the opinions and desires of the people and go with that.

    • Terminal420

      If all you have are talking points you’re manufacturing a false consensus and that’s fraudulent.

      They want control over the internet and they’re using FUD to do it.

      Those who are actually in the know and in the right don’t need to rely on talking points.. as evidenced by this very post, you paid shill.

      But anyway I don’t pirate for profit, so I’m super glad you totally approve of pirating.

    • Christopher

      …because it’s hilarious when someone evangelizing this copyright bullshit is caught lifting their entire article from other sources. Oops! Remember, copyright laws are only for the little people.

    • Tonyg123

      Here’s the thing, Google and other companies are PRIVATE CORPORATIONS. An Attorney General should not be forming his opinions on things with copy+paste. Using “grow up” in a debate just makes people think you need to grow up. If you want to live in a country with DNS (information/freedom) blockers, then by all means grab a flight to China or Iran.

    • John Penland

      Ghostwritten articles are fairly common. Unfortunately, the people that are signing their names to the articles in question rarely read/review the facts concerning the article.

  • Cyke1

    Funny now how their focus is counterfitters for this bill, in previous speeches to get bills passed they used the whole “stop child porn” speech. Same BS, just different wording.” It won’t stop anything, Internet in its effect is its own country that is no laws. Since its world wide you can’t enforce laws of 1 country on another.

  • B3144994

    as the Attorney Generally who may soon have the power
    Generally -> General

  • Guest

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Shurtleff#Scandals – I think that’s the most citations I’ve ever seen on Wikipedia

    • Indeed I am a walrus

      Mother of God…

    • sense

      “The media has reported allegations that Shurtleff allows political donations or personal relationships to affect regulatory or prosecutorial decisions. [8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29]“.

      LOL, so many references!

    • Danny

      Benton, oh Jesus Christ! This guy seems a little corrupt to say the least!
      Another shining example of the US political system in action!

    • http://twitter.com/icanhazsake Ninja

      And what’s his job again?

      I swear, I’m not surprised.

  • LickMyPeen

    People need to start taking action against these vile creatures. Remember citizens, it’s hard for these evil doers to vote…With an arrow to the knee

  • Anonymous

    It’s called “Dollar-a-Holler” and I recommend that TorrentFreak begin to use the term where applicable — like here. No doubt the AG’s election fund has received a nice healthy boost from the MPAA as a result of this op-ed.

    • Danny

      “Dollar-a-Holler” sounds very retarded.
      How about, “Your average US politician”?

  • Anonymous

    he should be absolutely ashamed of himself. how could he possibly say, in all good conscience, that he isn’t a ‘bought and paid for’ copyright supporter who is already extremely biased? what chance has any person or website got when a someone in such a powerful position isn’t interested in what he should be striving to seek, ie, THE TRUTH!

    • Danny

      Simple he has no conscience, he just sees the money and uses it to fill his pool with champagne!

    • Terminal420

      Same old problem you have with every politician vs corporation/multinational in general.

      They’re all fn puppets and that’s obviously why we have these discussions

  • Kr0nZ

    Does it really matter if SOPA passes?
    all that will really change is less revenue for websites hosted in the US, and the DOT-COM TLD will no longer be the most popular TLD. DNS servers will just move off shore, out of reach of the US government.

    As soon as the US makes it too difficult to host there, the internet will evolve, and hosting in the censorship states will become a thing of the past.

    Companies will move to where they can make the most profit, they won’t just bend over to the censorship, and the beauty of the internet means that your website can be hosted thousands of miles from your actual residence.

    • David Pratt

      While what you say is true. Those companies moving off shore will cost jobs. The same companies will get funding from off-shore interests so further profits will move, again, away from US citizenry. The real issue here is not the DNS servers, it’s handing to the Entertainment industry the ability to litigate growth of the internet into stagnancy. They want to have the final say in what you can see and say. SOPA will not work. The work arounds are there, the technology and community will adapt quickly to make them irrelevant. BUT the remaining law will still sit in place and allow them to stomp any “Upstart” they deem as competition… Unless that competition happens to be on foreign soil…

      • Anonymous

        money moving out of the US is a good thing, that way the US has less power to bully the rest of the world.

        for that reason I kinda want SOPA to pass, just to see the exodus of talent and money.

        • David Pratt

          Thank you for your support. You agree that passing SOPA will harm the very country those politicians are hired to work for.

    • ndmushroom

      Silly me, I thought SOPA was directed at foreign (i.e. non-US) “rogue” sites, especially when it comes to the “funding” provisions… Oh, wait, it is!!!
      http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/pdf/112%20HR%203261.pdf

      • Kr0nZ

        Foriegn sites that use US services. Google, paypal,verisign,Visa/MasterCardm, icann, etc. There objective is to censor sites by blocking their usr if us services. Wikileaks is attempted ti be censored by blocking there payment processors

        When the us makes it to difficult to host without the use of these services, alternate services will appear on foreign soil.

        How can they censor something when it is in noway connected to them.

        And if u think only foreign sites will only be targeted then you trust ur government waayyy too much

    • Terminal420

      Do NOT underestimate the power of a corrupted american government to export oppression globally. See marijuana prohibition.

      In fact they’re already doing exactly that, and the reason why is, the corporations that control the govermnent are multinational, they’re the only global aspect of globalization.

      • LibertyRentalsCheap

        “..only global aspect of globalization.”

        That would be besides the Internet, of course. Which might be why we’re now dealing with a full frontal assault on information flow. Schmucks with money buy power and when that is at risk.. well.. you eventually get war. The real kind.

        • Terminal420

          It kind of had to be. They had to leave it alone just long enough for reliance to set in. But again, they control it. They’ve already segretated factions of it and will continue to do so grain by grain if they need to.

          Even if I want to do business now I’m screwed paying extortionary prices because that’s how business works.. If I shop around for the best price and it’s in the US somewhere, they won’t ship it to me, because they have distributors in Canada that charge 3X the price.

          So, globalization only applies to government and their controlling corporations while we remain fenced off.

  • foff

    This guy is a piece of shit. He spends his time writing books when he should be working and focuses all his attention chasing polygamists as if he is on some holy quest. As attorney general he has not pursed one case that has benefited the general populace of Utah, he has not pursed even one anti trust issue. SO Fuck him and anything he has to say.

  • Anonymous

    If the Attorney General wants something to read then I would recommend the News page on DaJaz1′s website. It is worth noting that not only is DaJaz1 now back online with a beautiful website but they also give an awesome attack (over 4 parts) not only on SOPA/PIPA but also the state of the current market and the abuse done by existing laws that when created was also claimed could not be abused… but they were.

    Seeing that DaJaz1 had their domain seized for a year with all due process denied then there is no better point of eduction than the very “victim” who is also the true representative of many musicians.

    Very powerful words that I am sure will soon be repeated in Congress. Maybe TF can cover this story?

    • Guest

      Holyshit.

      I just ran a search for “dajaz1″ and I think it deserves to be elaborate on a little bit more.

      First, here’s the background:
      http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111208/08225217010/breaking-news-feds-falsely-censor-popular-blog-over-year-deny-all-due-process-hide-all-details.shtml

      And then the 4 part article from DaJaz1:
      http://dajaz1.com/2012/01/10/reality-check-show-me-the-language-part-1/

      The gist of it is, the domain of a law-abiding website was illegally seized by ICE just because the Vice-President of Anti-Piracy Legal Affairs for the RIAA, Carlos Linares, told ICE to seize it. ICE, for its part, acted swiftly on Carlos’ order without doing any fact checking whatsoever. When they were notified that they had made a mistake, they tried to illegally cover it up.

      I remember a great quote I read on TorrentFreak a long time ago. Can’t remember the exact wording, but it went something like this: fascism is produced by the marriage between corporation and government.

      Seems apropos.

      • Anonymous

        Yes it is a very worthy read and reflects the future of hundreds of websites should SOPA/PIPA pass.

        In Part 1 he challenges Lamar Smith to prove that SOPA cannot be abused when Lamar Smith once said the same about Pro-IP and guess what it was abused to obtain this very domain seizure that ICE uses in their “Operation in Our Sites”

        Then in Part 2 he covers the planned attack SOPA aims to do including many lawful websites, Six are the same class as DaJaz1 and others are simply stupid like Archive.org and Vimeo.

        Part3 demonstrates how DaJaz1 and OnSmash (also seized) come endorsed by the musicians and play part of putting fans and musicians in direct contact. This totally discredits the pro-SOPA supporter’s claim that they are doing this to protect the artists. Nope as demonstrated organizations like Universal are actually attacking them.

        Then Part 4 is about how musicians want to embrace this new market by giving out songs and mix tapes for fans to enjoy in order to build up a fan base. Just a shame that DMCA was abused to take down 1300 of those freely distributed songs.

        Well in all it is a beautiful attack that covers both known and unknown aspects and clearly highlights how the RIAA is trying hard to kill the new market. The monopoly protects itself and ICE are their bitches,

        I am quite sure those words with ring around Congress for weeks to come. A beautiful and rare read.

        • Terminal420

          “Then in Part 2 he covers the planned attack SOPA aims to do including many lawful websites. Six are the same class as DaJaz1 and others are simply stupid like Archive.org and Vimeo.”

          There’s nothing stupid about Archive.org, and even Vimeo can be very useful.

          You have to understand what they want to do is not attack “Counterfitters” or anything BS, they want to control the message in order to control the people, which ultimately sites like don’t allow them to, and so they have to be erased.

  • Pingback: === popurls.com === popular today

  • Caesar Invicitus

    I’m surprised Anon hasn’t been going after supporters that are obviously paid off, either in a bribe or campaign contribution, aka a bribe.

    If they could hack his email or get ahold of the MPAA’s emails I’m sure it would show some pretty steep corruption.

    I hope they have something planned for this.

    • Anonymous

      I always thought it would be awesome if someone hacked the congressional email server. In fact I think they should make a law that forces all major politicians to disclose all non-personal and non-classified communications.

      • Justin

        So you’re talking about a law that demands all federal information be accessible to the public? Like some sort of freedom of information act? Where do you think we live?!?

        • Anonymous

          The problem with FOIA is that most information is only provided on request. I’m talking about a law that would require politicians to record all communications (email,text,speech,etc.) and submit them to a public database in a timely manner.

  • Alyssa Blindy

    This looks just like a case of plagiarism in XXXXX Elementary School that you would find on Meggy’s report because she didn’t want to put the sentences in her own words.

  • Pingback: Notrackingme | Proxy » Blog Archive » ‘Rogue’ Attorney General Spreads MPAA-Fed SOPA Propaganda

  • Bob

    I couldnt help but laugh, then i shit my pants, again…Oh god this is what age does to you. Dont get old…

  • http://nowtweet.it/6ig Tanya Denis

    Can’t we all just get along.

    • Guest

      Pro-SOPA individuals aren’t too keen on that. See Anon (you know which one), Jack Murdoch, Pelouze, willaLavie, etc.

    • Guest

      No. We are going to kill them all.

    • Guest

      No. We are going to kill them all.

  • Pingback: ‘Rogue’ Attorney General Spreads MPAA-Fed SOPA Propaganda | TorrentForce Blog

  • Jonesmatthewm

    For the anti-SOPA statements to come true, a presiding judge would have to be a complete and utter moron. The leaps they are making are like Evel Knievel’s jump over the Grand Canyon. Read the bill. http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/pdf/112%20HR%203261.pdf It creates a fair legal process for defending your right to make a living as a content creator. You would be pro-SOPA if Google was listing 10 places to illegal download your movie. Isn’t Google aiding and abetting in copyright infringement?

    • Anonymous

      You can already defend your right to make a living as a content creator.

      What more do you want? If you want to wipe out all the websites that people use to download, then you’ll only lose even more control over the Internet. And you’ll be hurting innocents in the process.

      Let me put it this way: If there was a thief in your neighborhood, would you want the justice system to arrest everyone in that neighborhood? If 90% of the neighborhood were thieves, would you be okay with going to jail because of them? Of course not.

      There is a way to stop piracy, but SOPA isn’t it. The method to beat piracy is through creating a better way, not to stamp out peoples’ rights.

      • Jonesmatthewm

        If there is a thief in your neighborhood, and you let the thief hide in your garage, you abet in the crime. Making you part of the crime. By definition, anyone who links to an illegal site is complicit in stealing it. If you advertise on the internet that your neighbors car is ripe to be stolen, you are part of the crime. These type of laws have been on the books for generations. This is nothing new. Only the context is new. And in the case of SOPA, there is a legal PROCESS that allows for defending yourself, your company and your actions.

        • Guest

          Situational strawman. If someone asked you for directions to the local bank and you tell them, and it so happens that the someone robs the bank, does that make you as guilty as he is?

        • Jonesmatthewm

          Under your example, the current laws would not have grounds to prosecute that person. This is already covered extensively by our justice system.

        • Anonymous

          Your comparison fails – imagine the thief hiding his loot in your yard and when the police finds it, you are automatically presumed guilty and have a whopping five days to successfully defend yourself or find yourself evicted, having your account frozen, and fired from your job. That is the real-life comparison to SOPA.

          Similarly the real effects of SOPA means that your landlord also has to defend himself for renting you the house, your provider of electricity and water, similarly.

          This is the problem with a law which focuses on the providers of infrastructure which SOPA does.

          Here’s the problem. SOPA still won’t touch online piracy. not one bit. It’s completely and utterly powerless in that regard. Hence the negative effects are the only result of that piece of legislative garbage.

          I can somewhat understand your need for a magical talisman changing human nature. That does not mean human nature will change.

    • Guest

      “You would be pro-SOPA if Google was listing 10 places to illegal download your movie.”

      But what if I’m *not* a fantastically stupid and petulant douchebag who thinks illegal downloads are making me lose money?

      • Jonesmatthewm

        Than I would say you have no idea what it takes to make a movie and are extremely out of touch. And could probably use a couple business and accounting corses at your local community college.

        • Guest

          I think we can presume that Jonesmatthewm has experience in making a box office bomb.

          Personally, Jones, you’re the one who could use a couple of courses in – y’know – managing your budget and whatnot, because good movies can be made without having to pay through your nose if money is that big of an issue.

        • Guest

          So what you’re saying is, what it takes to make a movie is to be a fantastically stupid and petulant douchebag.

          That sounds about right. Although you forgot about one other thing it also takes: a dump truck full of cocain.

          Thankfully some film makers are an exception, but damn, are they few and far between.

        • Jonesmatthewm

          You have confirmed my above statement. Way to expose your complete lack of knowledge on the subject.

        • Anonymous

          Every movie making the top ten of most fileshared productions has also – after being fileshared – turned out to generate an increased amount of revenue in sales.

          You are hanging your entire claims on a falsified hypothesis therefore.

          I’m leaning toward the idea that you simply haven’t created a movie good enough to make the cut and are now blaming the lack of public interest on filesharing. Fine. I’m not one to tell you what to imagine or whom to blame.

          Some of your concerns are indeed valid. This pales into insignificance, however, when your solution is a piece of legislative garbage like SOPA. It’s quite bluntly obvious that you have no idea what that legislation does or enables.

          It’s similarly painfully obvious that you have no idea how useless SOPA will be to prevent or hinder filesharing.

          Basically filesharing is today largely decentralized. It consists of swarms consisting of millions of individuals distributing the indexing and information to be exchanged. You can block and take down websites until you’ve abolished 99% of the visible internet but as long as person A can establish contact with person B at all, the swarm can persist and filesharing continue unabated.

          The only way legislation can prevent this is if you abolish the internet altogether. Every other solution fails. I don’t see that happening. So if you can’t find a way to sustain your business under a paradigm of unrestricted filesharing then my advice for you to get another line of work.

  • Abunchofgibberish

    The difference between anti-SOPA/PIPA folks and their pro-censorship counterparts is simple. People who support the SOPA/PIPA acts (and indeed COICA) see internet piracy of digital goods as a problem, rather than a solution to a problem. The real problem is that we have allowed big businesses to manipulate and monetize artwork for so long that people have forgotten that music, movies, and images are all works of art.

    If you want to profit from your art, good for you, but I’m gonna be giving my money to the artists who create whether they make money from their output or not. Not all record labels or film studios are evil. Without them, most people would never discover some of the world’s finest music and movies. Just don’t let yourself be fooled into thinking that artists need money to create (they don’t). A musician, filmmaker, or photographer who really loves their craft is going to pursue it whether or not they’ve got a few loans and some marketing to back them up.

    Also, you should be downright angry that the writers of legislation like this are putting people who download digital goods into the same category as people who commit identity theft or produce and sell physical counterfeited goods. Check out the list(s) of sites that have recently been “seized” by the ICE. By making it seem as if the legislation protects consumers — by cracking down on counterfeit Gucci bags and such — rather than restricting them, all manner of corporations are going to voice support for the bills.

    • Jonesmatthewm

      You clearly have never made a film. It’s takes coordination, many people, time and money. Way more than an average person can save. The process sometimes taking longer than a year. If you can’t return even part of your investment, your film career is over. Period. You can’t pay your rent, you can’t pay the electricity, let alone actually making another film. Your rebuttal makes no sense in the real world. These debates seem to skip over one thing. IT IS NOT YOUR RIGHT TO WATCH TV AND MOVIES! So, self entitled to think it should be free. So out of touch with reality. And the main argument isn’t about big studios, it’s about small studios. The true infringement on the 1st amendment is harming an open market for filmmakers to express themselves, and not be handcuffed by corporate interest. This only happens when there is a market place to sell their goods, recoup their costs and work on the next project. It’s not a point of profit, it’s a point of survival. Sony’s profit margin isn’t the issue. They can absorb a 2 million dollar loss to piracy. A small company can not. One thing that these short sided articles don’t add to their research, is how many smaller film companies, not on the national radar, that have closed their doors. Does the distribution model need to change? It already has. Amazon and Netflix have done that. But, that doesn’t help when 150 million file shares are stealing your work. Good bye any return on investment. Good bye to future investment, which creates small business jobs. It’s not cool. It never was. It’s not a victimless crime. I know, because myself and many of my fellow filmmakers are victims. What your doing is wrong.

      • Guest

        So please, Jones, cite your sources. Cite how you’re losing 2 million, or how all your money went down the drain. Maybe people will look at your work, like it, and support you. Right now you’re coming off as angry at everyone else. That won’t win you support.

        • Jonesmatthewm

          “Cite how you’re losing 2 million, or how all your money went down the drain.”

          2 million was my example, and not outside of the realm of possibility. All depending on the title. Anyway, how can you confirm this data on a rogue site? I know for a fact, based on the amount of reviews before we released our movie for distribution, that it’s more than 100 and less than a million. Theft is theft. And even under a fair mark up of $1, we lost at a minimum, thousands of dollars. I don’t know about you, but a thousand dollars hits my pocket book pretty hard. You are trying to justify it. “Well we didn’t steal that much…” Um, still stole it. And I’m not arguing we should have gotten rich. I’m arguing for a chance to make our money back, for a fair market to earn a living. And express our selves. Utilizing OUR 1st amendment rights. This window was shut by online piracy. So, by the definition of Reddit, we should exchange our right to express ourselves, for yours?

          As for the sounding angry. It angers me when people say ignorant things like they are fact. With no background or experience on the topic. When they lie about something and defend it to be true. And when I try to point out the issues I have experienced 1st hand, and have someone call me fantastically stupid and a petulant douche bag. For stating facts, not opinions. For citing the bill, not echoing someone else’s assumptions, and stretches of imagination. I guess this forum is for fil

        • Jonesmatthewm

          I guess this forum is for file sharers to sit around and pat themselves on the back for giving it to “The Man.” When really, they are just screwing everyone.

        • Guest

          To be fair neither of us can actually verify whether our life experiences are actually accurate, but since you’ve kindly decided to do so, I’ll chance an arm and share a bit of my own experience as well.

          Currently I’m taking a university degree course in game design (I know, I don’t actually have any commercial experience), and I’ve got two anecdotes from lecturers who’ve been very active in the industry. The first is a film lecturer who, during a module in which we were to make a short film, cautioned us against using even classical music in our shorts because even though the original pieces are likely to be public domain (given that the composers kicked the bucket some centuries ago), their copyright is likely to be still owned by some orchestra that performed the present-day piece, or the family estate or whatever, so we’d still need permission to use. The second is a drawing lecturer who, during our matte painting module, said that the industry regularly takes images from Google search and paints over them to make new mattes, clearly without citation to the original sources. As an example he gave us a look at Uncharted 2′s art book and pointed out each and every source to each and every background design, and he remarked that it’s how the industry works.

          What I’m trying to say, Jones, is that IP law is more than screaming “Theft is theft”. It’s a confusing array of laws that somehow, in my above two examples, work and are enforced differently. This annoys the majority of us who can’t see how allegedly downloading 24 tracks nets you a $1.5 million fine, which is why we’re oft to take cited losses with a huge pinch of salt – the MPAA’s already been found guilty of this when their piracy claim was found to be inflated by 300% (they later retracted that statement and admitted their mistake). Sure, a good majority of us are angry at “The Man”. But it’s not necessarily because we don’t wish to pay. DRM, censorship (the MPAA recently flamed Ars Technica for not being sympathetic to their stand), regional locks number amongst the reasons people download. Take some time to read up on the issues, if you can (or desire to); you’ll find that things aren’t so black and white.

          And, I’d like to take this chance to say it’s nothing personal, and I apologise if you found me trivialising your lack of income. Few people, I believe, think that artists should never be compensated for their effort. However, it is a known fact that certain individuals have dedicated themselves to treating everyone else as a pirate deserving of mockery (Hang around this site a little more; you’ll soon come to see), waiting for the day when our proverbial guts are on the garters. Treating opposing views with contempt is the standard operating procedure for both sides, though I’ll say that we’re the ones to usually cite findings and data. If you’re keen to I think there are members of this community who will understand and empathise with your position through honest discussion, and I’m sorry to say that assuming all downloaders are pirates is not the best way to begin such conversation. Thank you, though, for taking the time to share your own life experience.

        • Jonesmatthewm

          Please see my most recent post below. It was long and I didn’t want to post it twice.

      • Guest

        “IT IS NOT YOUR RIGHT TO WATCH TV AND MOVIES!”

        It is not your right to receive money just because you put a film out there. You seem to be yet another self-entitled narcissist who can’t accept personal responsibility for the dissapointing ROI of your own project, and has to lay the blame on a bogeyman(e.g. filesharing) because it could never be your fault. Out of touch with reality much, Jonesy?

        Everything you accuse filesharers of being seems to sum you up.

        • Jonesmatthewm

          I do have a right, under a capitalistic society, to a fair market. You can argue merit all day long. That is someone’s opinion. And that is what a netflix and amazon user review is for. You make your decision based on the reviews. Not stealing it, and maybe deciding to pay for it later. Which would never happen. Who’s out of touch with reality?

      • Anonymous

        What is wrong is your idea of what constitutes a commercial venture. You can own information only by keeping it a secret. This has been known for all of recorded history. It’s basic human nature. Information has value only in it’s generation. Everything else is the sale of a service. The information, once having no replication costs, becoming “worth” little or nothing.

        Like any other creator, if your work does not persuade afficionados and collectors to purchase the official edition, then you should get yourself another job. That in the past fifty years some idiots have decided to reinvent the idea of changing human nature through IP ideology does not mean it works.

        First of all, your posts regarding SOPA are ignorant. SOPA will not protect your interests. Piracy can not be stopped by any other means short of pulling the plug on the internet altogether. SOPA is just a very good weapon for one business to leverage against another business instead of applying actual competition however. Ripe for abuse.

        Secondly, regarding your philosophical views on how spreading information is wrong – no philosophers are willing to agree with you here. Very few of the great economists subscribe to IP as “viable”. Even Milton Friedman describes Intellectual Property as a dangerous exception to property rights.

        This goes way back to the founding fathers – so if I had to say which chair you were sitting on it would be a very anti-capitalist and unamerican one. That you think you are entitled to say what person A and person B do with information which has come into their possession at all smacks directly of old-style sovjet-era communism. Justifying this view of yours with a sob story doesn’t provide any better basis for your claims.

        In any free market, if you hang your hat on an unsustainable business model then your business will fail. It’s that simple. Anyone whose job relies on an unsustainable business model not failing should have known better than to take that job in the first place. Where artists and creators are concerned, we’ve known for a thousand years that a very small percentage out of those who try ever succeed.

        • Anonymous

          Free for all, is inherently Communistic. Your example is contradictory to the definition.

      • Abunchofgibberish

        I haven’t made a film before, you’re right. But I do know a few hobbyist filmmakers who do make films because they enjoy it, not because they’re looking for a paycheck.

        I make music. I’ve spent thousands on instruments, computers, software, and all of the odds and ends that go along with recording music. I don’t expect to make that money back because I’m not stupid enough to believe that selling music is a viable way to make money. I bought a $1,300 Moog and a copy of Ableton Live and a copy of Massive and a copy of Ozone and a copy of Guitar Rig and invested money into a powerful computer and bought good cables and microphones and a good audio interface and spent years of my time learning how to mix and master because I enjoy making music, and I wanted to learn. I didn’t purchase those things hoping that one day I might be able to write them off on my taxes as a business expense.

      • Abunchofgibberish

        I’d also like to add that, after reading some of your ridiculous comments, you are suffering from many of the same problems that are driving the MPAA and RIAA to take such outrageous measures. You haven’t adapted to a changed marketplace yet. Piracy isn’t going to stop. It’s here to stay. If you think that people are going to just accept a bill like SOPA or PIPA without some sort of backlash, you’re wrong. Innovation is going to continue, and there will always be ways around things like this.

        Going back to what I was previously saying, being a musician, I’ve realized that you can’t expect to make money from selling media, be it movies or music or photographs. They’re too easy to pirate. I could attempt to sell my album for five bucks (or something more outlandish), but by the time the first copy has left my hands, it has the potential of being pirated by everyone on the internet. Which is awesome. So I’ve learned to cut out the middle-man and give everything away. I’ll probably work in a completely different profession for the rest of my life, but I’ll continue to make music for my own enjoyment as long as I can afford to.

        What I’m saying is that you have to stop thinking of movie and music sales as guaranteed income. Nothing is guaranteed in media anymore. Ever. Sitting around being bitter about spending money on something you supposedly enjoy doing, expecting every copy of your product to be purchased legitimately, is much like expecting the rain to instantly stop and the sun to come out at your whim. It’s not possible.

        • Anonymous

          Abunchofgibberish, how do you pay the rent? How do you pay for your equipment? How old are you? “I’ll probably work in a completely different profession for the rest of my life” This says to me, you are all of 22 years old. And have no frame of reference for getting a project off the ground. The defining different between music and movies is that you can make money touring. And when it comes to movies, the investment, on a minimum, is 10 times what it is to make an album. You can’t really even compare it. Music you can make on your own. And I’m sure it is a garage band level. One day, you will want to do something big. Something ambitious. And it will cost you every dollar you have. That will be the disappointing point in your life, worthy of a bullet in that head. That you can’t obtain your dream, because a bunch of file sharers don’t want to pay a $1 under a fair market. What I find amusing about this argument. File sharers clearly like Movies. If not, why steal them? And yet you are eroding the core of the industry and depriving yourself of quality entertainment. I hope you are looking forward to a decade of Jersey Shore and The Bachelor. That’s where you are heading. Enjoy selling insurance for the rest of your life.

  • Anonymous

    OK you have to admit that makes a lot of sense. WOw.

    http://www.Total-Privacy dot US

    • Abc

      Flaged, when will you get the msg to stop spaming this blog and fuck off?

  • Anonymous

    Supporters of the current copyright regime (in general) and supporters of SOPA (in particular) are losing allies and credibility almost at the speed of light. Their achilies
    heel is not money or power, but legitimacy and Time.

    Are they desperate? Wouldn’t you be, if your Veloptuous Midas Touch perpetual money machine was being undressed in public to reveal a fat and waddeling legally previledged parrasite for all to see?

    This public unveiling is the most palpable manifestation of their failure. Why? First, because that unveiling would not be happening if the opposition were just a few hundred million abused customers being fleeced through a legally protected monopoly premium. Second, because that grotesque unveiling would not be accelerating at such speed if the passage of Time were not progressively uncovering the true meaning of their claims for all the world to see and be horrified by.

    With all that Money in their war chest and all the political power that they have been able to purchase, the content monopolies could only wish that they could present their
    claims with the same economic and political and social coherence as their opposition. After all, it must get harder every day to work at persuading citizens that what they really need is yet another law limiting constitutional and civil rights in order to protect entrenched monopolies from smaller, more agile, more productive, and more publicly preferred competitors.

    This is the real meaning of legitimacy: The more truth is revealed, the less reasons you have to exist. Put another way: Big Content becomes Little Content; and, ultimately, No Content At All.

    • Anonymous

      Nice read. +1 for TUTD. =]

    • Jonesmatthewm

      Like I said above, it’s not about big studios. It’s about small studios. File sharing doesn’t discern between the two. And this is not a 1st Amendment fight. Quit saying that. Nothing in the bill takes away your right to your own opinion. Just if your are stealing. Justify it however you want. You are the criminal in this scenario.

      • Guest

        Cite your sources, Jones. You’re looking like Indiana Gregg right about now.

        • Jonesmatthewm

          “U.S.-directed site is primarily designed or operated for the purpose of, has only limited purpose or use other than, or is marketed by its operator or another acting in concert with that operator for use in, offering goods or services in a manner that engages in, enables, or facilitates copyright infringement.”

          That’s a pretty narrow definition. Where does it say that you can be shut down for your opinion? How does this infringe on your freedom of speech? How does this definition stop you from having a political blog? And during the process of filing for a SOPA injunction, you would have the opportunity to argue your rights under the 1st amendment. Therefore blocking the injunction. If your argument goes, “I like free movies and software.” That’s not much of an argument.

        • Jonesmatthewm

          Also, I’ve been actively producing films for over 10 years now. Currently live in LA, working for a company in the entertainment business. And have countless friends in the business, all experiencing the same thing. 1st hand experience isn’t good enough for this discussion?

        • Guest

          >That’s a pretty narrow definition. Where does it say that you can be shut down for your opinion? How does this infringe on your freedom of speech? How does this definition stop you from having a political blog? And during the process of filing for a SOPA injunction, you would have the opportunity to argue your rights under the 1st amendment. Therefore blocking the injunction. If your argument goes, “I like free movies and software.” That’s not much of an argument.

          The definition doesn’t by itself do anything of the above, but what’s worrying is that there doesn’t appear to be any standard by which plaintiffs have to adhere to in staking their claim. As it stands, it seems that anyone can just go up and say, “That site is dedicated to infringement, you have to shut it down!” I phrase this interjection extremely simply and crudely, but this claim has been extended to Youtube, Twitter, Facebook, and a bunch of other sites just for including links. This isn’t quite a farfetched claim, it’s already happened. And in the time between the claim and the counterclaim, the site is shut down with no means of getting it back up.

          http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120110/11395317367/website-censored-feds-takes-up-lamar-smiths-challenge-heres-your-hypothetical.shtml

        • Jonesmatthewm

          Ok. I appreciate lowered tone of the last couple of posts. And will begin this with saying, I don’t want people to go to jail. What I want, along with my peers, is the ability to protect our livelihood, legally. To make an impact on society by producing a film that will entertain, inform or impact the audience. I don’t want to be blocked by big business and a bunch of greedy jerks standing in the way of mass distribution. But, I can’t do any of that without a budget. Which is generated by showing a series of successes. Return of investment. Which I can’t successfully do, if 150 million people refuse to pay to watch one of my movies.

          I too am depressed with the dumbed down nature of Hollywood releases. The constant regurgitation of previous titles and franchises. Betraying my childhood and the mythos of the universe they created. But, I do believe whole heartedly that online piracy is partially to blame for this.

          I will express my apologies for some of the comments I made on this article. But, will not retract the content of said discussions. Some of the comments on this page can only be construed as contempt for the filmmaking industry. Along with some very generalized and outlandish claims about the SOPA bill.

          You guys don’t know me, but I am a firm believer in the 1st Amendment. I hate censorship, (goodbye and good riddance Blockbuster). I hate working for “The Man.” And I hate how corporate policies and money men will kill something awesome. Like Conan the Barbarian. What a travesty that movie was. I digress, there needs to be some order to things. There needs to be a fair market for films. Otherwise, one of the most influential art forms known to man will be reduced to rubble. And to assume that it should a die a painful death is absurd. Seriously, who doesn’t like movies?

          Currently, I am working on getting another project off the ground. And there has been a great deal of discussion of how to market and distribute it. So, I pose this question? What should the new model be? $20 for new releases on DirectTV onDemand? After 6 months, reducing this to $5, and then eventually $1? $1 seems to work well in the context of Apple Store Apps. Take into consideration, that some of the bigger movies (Avatar) cost hundreds of millions to produce. The model needs to justify the investment.

          Also. One thing I have not seen in any of the anti-SOPA articles, are any suggestions of what to add to protect website companies? I read the above link. And the part that wasn’t addressed was, “Did they get a chance to respond to the allegations? Did they give contact information for a person in charge of the site?” That’s the real question. Most of the torrent sites have no contact information. How do you confront this issue if they are hiding?

          Before I went off the handle on this topic. I made sure to read the bill. Attempted to get Google to stop listing the sites that are pirating my movie. And tried to contact http://extratorrent.com/. In so many words, in a blanket terms of services, both Google and Extra Torrent said “Tough Shit.” Really? I have no way to contact someone and reason with them? I have no way to protect my movie? How is that fair? 95,000 people liked Extra Torrent on Facebook. WTF? Right out in the open, stealing my stuff. And 2, billion dollar corporations, are profiting from it? Both supporting the site, if not directly but indirectly. That’s aiding and abetting in copyright infringement. Straight letter of the law.

          I fear the misconception of the SOPA bill is thinking that they are going to go after everyone. Where I think the intent, is to legally force Google, Facebook, Myspace, etc. to do the right thing. Stop promoting theft. Help enforce claims of theft. Do the right thing. Not purposefully ignore it. That’s a crime, by definition. So tell me Internet Community, what wording would make you feel safe? SOPA needs to happen. Rights need to be protected. On both sides of the argument.

          And don’t say, nothing. I will start insulting you again. Nothing, is not an option.

          The bill currently has these provisions:
          DEFENSE.—A defendant in an action under subparagraph (A)(i) may establish an affirmative defense by showing that the defendant does not have the technical means to comply with this subsection without incurring an unreasonable economic burden, or that the order is not authorized by this subsection

          A statement that the holder of the intellectual property right has a good faith belief that the use of the owner’s works or goods in which the right exists, in the manner described in the notification, is not authorized by the holder, its agent, or law.

          What else should be included? There is a process. You have a chance to defend yourself. There are provisions that protect smaller companies from being destroyed? And all you have to do is, help. What else?

        • Guest

          >So, I pose this question? What should the new model be? $20 for new releases on DirectTV onDemand? After 6 months, reducing this to $5, and then eventually $1? $1 seems to work well in the context of Apple Store Apps. Take into consideration, that some of the bigger movies (Avatar) cost hundreds of millions to produce. The model needs to justify the investment.

          I’m glad that you’re willing to accept that middlemen are a part of this problem, because those are the guys that give this debate the largest headaches. They don’t represent the issues of either, but instead tend to attribute everything to downloads while consistently giving themselves larger pay rises. However, I think you also recognise that you don’t need hundreds of millions to produce movies. If you choose to, go ahead, but realise that you’re making that much more risk spending it on effects that don’t guarantee the audience will like them. It’s also probably worth noting there are cases in which movies can make millions, but the studios perform Hollywood accounting and claim the movies made a loss, in which none of the people who actually lifted a finger for the movie get anything.

          >One thing I have not seen in any of the anti-SOPA articles, are any suggestions of what to add to protect website companies? I read the above link. And the part that wasn’t addressed was, “Did they get a chance to respond to the allegations? Did they give contact information for a person in charge of the site?” That’s the real question. Most of the torrent sites have no contact information. How do you confront this issue if they are hiding?

          This is part of why SOPA is frustrating. Laws have consistently been a poor option to limiting, as you call it, “stealing”; one of the reasons being the reason you’ve described. Dedicated sources know their ways around the law; even if their site gets shut down their operations may easily resume. Legitimate companies, however, have to prove their case, assuming they can afford the time and cost for litigation (which is still no guarantee of their innocence even if they followed the law, given classic cases of how technologically ignorant most judges are) – during which, none of their operations may proceed, costing them business hours and money – all of which is solely based on the faith-based allegation of another group. False positives have been notorious ever since the days of the RIAA suing kids, grandmothers, homeless people, dead people and printers.

          >So tell me Internet Community, what wording would make you feel safe? SOPA needs to happen. Rights need to be protected. On both sides of the argument.

          To sum up the previous point – SOPA, as it is, will not help you the way you think it will. I posted the Techdirt link in a previous post as an example of a site that was taken down for over a year, based on claims of hosted copyright content that was never found, thereby necessitating the return of the site. The possibility that this can happen to any site is what concerns people, compounded with the fact that enforcement over such matters has never been very accurate when it comes to targeting the smaller end-users. Let’s not forget how the MPAA is quite trigger-happy when it comes to labelling anyone as a pirate (as of writing, they’ve recently claimed that Ars Technica supports piracy because they criticise most anti-piracy laws). Anyone with a vested interest can easily go “but but but PIRACY!”, and if this convinces a judge to nod his head, you can kiss your site goodbye while you sort out the legal rigmarole.

          In short, we want a guarantee that your law will actually work, this time. Not like the DMCA, or the settlement-letter scam (fightcopyrighttrolls.com is a very good reference for how this often occurs for lawyers to scam a quick buck from scared, uninformed individuals). We’ve seen how years of enforcing copyright law has not made the artists richer; it’s made people disillusioned about law, fearful about what they can do with their purchases, and far less receptive to the plights of artists. If you’re willing to see that the opposition to SOPA is more than just a fringe minority who supports piracy, we can come closer to an agreement.

        • Guest

          Incidentally, Jones, you might wish to know that the White House has noted that SOPA as is needs to be changed due to extremely problematic portions of the bill.

      • Anonymous

        You are either an idiot or ignorant. Let me point a few things out for you about SOPA.

        1) Neither SOPA nor any other legislative act has the power to stop or hinder filesharing. The definite proof of how well information control works was when the US government sought, by all means, to hinder Wikileaks from distributing a few Terabytes worth of highly classified information. In the end, the US simply caved, having tried every means at it’s disposal and failing.

        That’s the first part. Understand? SOPA won’t touch piracy one bit. We already know this.

        2) SOPA does have collateral damage. A great deal of it. Under SOPA’s highly ambiguous guidelines it’s enough for a vested interest to point a finger without delivering proof in order to shut down a site.

        What that means in practice is that although SOPA is completely useless to combat piracy with, it will do VERY WELL as a way of established businesses to run smaler legal competitors off the market. This can not do other than shoot every established US industry with a web presence in the foot.

        3) For every tech type out there SOPA rings great big warning bells as it tries to attribute guilt through third-party liability.

        Established and legal software manufacturers can be effectively shut down under SOPA despite neither having contributed to or performed infringement. Even microsoft could have trouble – their OS’s allow for shared folders which means if that feature is ever found to be used in copyright infringement by individual users, MS might have to rewrite Windows completely.

        In short, If SOPA was about traffic laws, Ford would be in trouble for building cars used in perpetration of crime.

        If you are having problems with the current paradigm then my advice is this: Adapt or vanish. Because those “problems” you describe are only possible to undo if we start off by abolishing the internet and modern communication.

        As for the rest of your diatribe about “anti-american” behavior, I’m guessing you don’t realize that the founding fathers themselves had strong words on the idea of “Intellectual Property”. Jefferson in particular concemned the thought as ridiculous.

        • Jonesmatthewm

          Who’s on their soap box now? My questions was your suggestions for fixing it? Your suggestions for a new model? Everyone can complain, but no one actually puts any thought into it. So who’s the idiot? The one asking the question? Or the one with no answer? I thought we were through with name calling?

          Once again, this is about mass theft. Not the right to share files. What SOPA does is limits the mass theft that these systems create. If it’s a small community of file shares, that’s not going to harm the industry and won’t pop up on the radar. What is happening currently, is happening in the millions. You are legally allowed to make 10 copies every 180 days.

          Shutting down sites need to be as annoying as the sites that keep popping up. It would be an on going process. Until it absolutely is easier to get a Netflix account. This is a two fold discussion. Changing the model and defending the rights of content creators.

          And I think the sole purpose of any of the provisions about linking to other sites, is a legal precedence forcing Google to help eradicate the ease of online piracy. It’s blatant and in your face. A small base fee hardly can compete with free. I hardly think the big studios will focus on any little website with a small following. This takes money on their end. They want, as do I, the Google listings that pop to the top, providing a free download, rather than a small fee for viewing, to go away.

          Without delivery of proof? The bill clearly states that you have 5 days to respond with a rebuttal. Hardly an open ticket to go around shutting things down. Once again, a huge leap and over exaggerated assumption. There is also a provision that protects companies that would be financially destroyed by prosecution. All you have to do is help. Once again? What better wording would you like?

          Wikileaks can be defended under Freedom of the Press. And if true hackers can get around the domain name issue, than they can get their message out anyway.

          And I think Thomas Jefferson would agree that a forum for defending your rights should be provided by the government. For both filmmakers and for internet companies. Someone’s rights can’t be sacrificed for someone’s else’s.

          Big boy’s rules. If you are going to go global, better get a lawyer. That’s the American way. That’s what keeps us free. If you can’t acknowledge that, you have no grasp of the concept of the “The Pursuit of Happiness.”

          I also want to point out: What is the failed business model? A company that has their product stolen? Or a company that makes a living by stealing product?

          And this isn’t about ideas. This is about a product. A file. This is a tangible item, that costs a lot of money to produce. No different than an app, a car or a house. And in a lot of cases, more expensive. So don’t boil this down to “I discovered gravity! You can’t use it!”

          The rest of your post is a stretch of the imagination, and it’s just as easy to say this would all go away if the Sun imploded, turned into a black hole and consumed the earth. Let’s keep it real please.

        • Anonymous
  • Pingback: Find The Attorney » Rogue’ Attorney General Spreads MPAA-Fed SOPA Propaganda – TorrentFreak

  • Pingback: New Lawyer Search » Rogue’ Attorney General Spreads MPAA-Fed SOPA Propaganda – TorrentFreak

  • Pingback: This is the person that, if #SOPA passes, will be able to shutdown entire websit… | Kalex's Tome

  • Haha

    this jerk off attorney is the thief

  • FUCK-YOU-MarkShurtleff

    Someone needs to boot him off his pedastal

  • Dia

    Why does MPAA even bother to claim that states that spend more on buying entertainment than they make selling it will experience job loss. They just don’t lose money so how would they lose jobs.

    I also wonder what will happen to Netflix prices if they don’t have to compete with free.

    • Jonesmatthewm

      Job loss occurs when they slash advertising and marketing budgets. No advanced DVD authoring. No interactive websites. No game development. That’s real job loss. Even Sony has to live up to expectations of their stock holders, which is measured with profit margin. If you don’t like how much they charge, don’t buy it. That’s your choice. It’s not your RIGHT to watch it. At least not for free.

      • Guest

        >If you don’t like how much they charge, don’t buy it. That’s your choice. It’s not your RIGHT to watch it. At least not for free.

        You’re not pointing out how this translates to money in your pocket. If the cost is a problem for consumers, whether they forgo watching it or download it for free will not give you money. You can rant about how either is a lost sale, or about consumer greed or whatever, but the important point is that you will not get paid regardless.

        • Jonesmatthewm

          For the record, I am not saying the distribution method does not need to change. It does. There a million middle men distributors and theaters that should be cut out of the equation. I would like nothing more that to be able to take my films to market without those restraints. Watch new releases from the comfort of my own home. We are actively working on that now. I don’t think $1 a view is unheard of. The new model will not erase the millions of dollars of lost revenue from people who are cheap, and refuse to pay anything. Killing any chance of a smaller production company going against those norms. If they can’t prove a return, there is no chance. None.

          I have friends and co-workers who openly admit it. At what point do you call online piracy a crime against society? A creator or job loss. Anti-American. A big middle finger to blue collar citizens trying to make ends meet? Tip toe around those issues all you want. It doesn’t change the fact that what you are doing is fundamentally and ethically wrong. Let alone illegal. You are hampering a legitimate industry for your own selfish wants.

          I didn’t come on here to be a troll or talk a bunch of shit. My friends and I, see it first hand. We are living it. And we don’t drive Mercedes. We don’t live in mansions. We are normal, everyday schmucks, just trying to make a living. We are the victims of online piracy. Ignore us if you want. Won’t matter. SOPA is going through, one way or the other. Watch your backs guys, and your buttholes. The guy who pirated Wolverine, got a year in the can.

        • Guest

          >For the record, I am not saying the distribution method does not need to change. It does. There a million middle men distributors and theaters that should be cut out of the equation. I would like nothing more that to be able to take my films to market without those restraints. Watch new releases from the comfort of my own home. We are actively working on that now.

          This is good news; you’re on the same page as a good number of us, then.

          >The new model will not erase the millions of dollars of lost revenue from people who are cheap, and refuse to pay anything. Killing any chance of a smaller production company going against those norms. If they can’t prove a return, there is no chance. None.

          You’re not trying to exact pounds of flesh from people, are you? There are problems going by that route under the existing model, most significant of which is the huge amount of monetary penalties attributed to downloads and the difficulty to enforce it.

          >I didn’t come on here to be a troll or talk a bunch of shit.

          Sincerely, I thank you for this, in that you’re posting not because you want to be purposefully antagonistic.

          >SOPA is going through, one way or the other. Watch your backs guys, and your buttholes. The guy who pirated Wolverine, got a year in the can.

          I’m not sure what you’re trying to say with this, based on your wants. Your ire seems to aimed at every individual who has downloaded a movie. SOPA is not aimed at imprisoning the end users who do so, but at shutting down websites that allegedly facilitate this (or so they say, unless you’ve found something to indicate that end users will also be penalised beyond the site blackout). It’s also somewhat unfortunate you brought up Wolverine because the movie made a lot despite its month-prior leak.

        • Jonesmatthewm

          Please see my most recent post above. It was long and I didn’t want to post it twice. Also, even though Wolverine made a lot of money. It could have made more, which could have been invested in other titles. They don’t just keep it all and buy Ferraris. There are limits to their salaries, yes I acknowledge profit sharing. And the fact they made a good movie, I thought it was 3.5 star movie, and made money, shouldn’t be a justification to rip them off. And the prison rape comment was me venting my frustrations at being called names on this page. My apologies. However true it may be, I acknowledge that you can’t change hearts and minds that way. But, you really should take notice. It’s serious, and can lead to jail time.

  • HollywoodAnna

    Plagiarism is okay. now?

    Finally. I always hated having to follow Harvard Referencing Guidelines.

  • Guest

    What’s the problem with the fact that he did copy (ctrl + c) the speech of somebody else?

    :-)

    Anyway, of this crap passes, it will be good fun: the end of google & of the internet as we know it.. welcome in a darknet world :D

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_R36YDQSOLOYJNXDOZTA44Y2CDQ delisha

    @kkke……Would you like to work from home? Read more here: LazyCash4.com and you will find out how to get a nice income every month.

  • Anonymous

    Another corrupt person who works in our corrupt Government.This man sucks a dog’s dirty ass and does not deserve to live.
    SOPA/PIPA = WAR
    If this passes I hope that millions of you will be willing to finally March on the Cancer called Washington.
    SOPA/PIPA should be the last straw for all of you.Otherwise just shut your mouths and take it like a man because we will truly be screwed if nothing is done.

  • Bogosort

    I think this could be relevant. If not, it’s interesting nonetheless.

    It’s an article on the BBC http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16494872 surrounding the revelations of the expenses scandal.

    In particular, this quote: “He said he consulted lawyers before entering negotiations to buy the data, but because the information had been copied on to a disc he was advised it did not constitute theft.”

    So a top lawyer said that because it had been copied it wasn’t theft? Now that is interesting!

    • plus1

      “But I don’t think we need a marketplace. It’s a sharing world. We are at the dawn of the age of sharing where even if you try to sell things the world is going to share it anyway.”

      It is a chilling thought for defenders of intellectual property rights who have already seen piracy take its toll on the music and movie industries.

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-16503443

      • Bogosort

        Absolutely right.

        People don’t know it yet, but they all agree with us in some little way.

      • Anon

        “who have already seen piracy take its toll on the music and movie industries.”

        Except they haven’t actually seen that because it doesn’t.

  • http://twitter.com/publicknowledge Public Knowledge

    Great work on remembering the connections between these stories! Second time in two days these guys have been caught “copying”

  • Sean

    This is depressing… I live in the state that this baboon operates in.
    I don’t want to live on this planet anymore.

  • Pingback: Stop US Gov’t From Censoring Your Internet; Stop S.O.P.A!

  • http://nowtweet.it/6if Cherri Dawson

    Those darn politicians are always in the mix.

  • Anonymous

    When you cant get people on your side by reason, you gotta start lying.

  • Josephparsonsny

    i say we us r power and take out SOPA for good

  • http://www.facebook.com/jonmcmillan Jonathan James McMillan

    Please sign this so that we can stop the advancement on Government regulated internet. This act will cause damage to the architecture and innovation of the internet. It would effect sites like: Facebook, Twitter, Google, YouTube, Tumblr, Reddit, etc….

    http://tinyurl.com/77djrut

    • Anonymous

      This will not damage anything. It will only require sites to make sure people aren’t doing anything illegal. Would this be an argument if it were kiddie porn?

      • http://drgeorge.org/ ricegf

        Ah – it’s for the *children*. Didn’t see THAT one coming! :-D

        • Jonesmatthewm

          No, it’s for hard working Americans in the film industry that are having a hard time making a living. This is real. Not propaganda. I see it every day.

        • Guest

          @Jonesmatthewm: You really need it spelled out for you, don’t you, ol’ chap?

          To be crude, pics or it didn’t happen. And, no – ICE’s spanky new ad doesn’t count.

  • Patrick Henry

    This is simple to fix but it will take some time.

    Never buy anything from the copyright cabal.

    Never help anybody that works for or supports the copyright cabal – not even for pay. Never help them.

    Never support the occupational government – not even for pay.

    Let these congresswhores figure out their own computers and phones. Let them fix their own sinks and cars.

    Windows, OSX, Android and iOS all have occupational government back doors. Not just the occupational government in the US but even the one in India. Go look it up.

    • http://youronline.biz/ Jacko

      This is sad. People really are pathetic when they try to control others. Just remember star trek was only able to overcome the borg once they realized that resistance is not futile it is victory.

  • Pingback: ‘Rogue’ Attorney General Spreads MPAA-Fed SOPA Propaganda – Infowars Ireland

  • Pingback: Lastest Sopa News | HDSmoke Cig

  • Pingback: ‘Rogue’ Attorney General Spreads MPAA-Fed SOPA Propaganda

  • Pingback: ‘Rogue’ Attorney General Spreads MPAA-Fed SOPA Propaganda « Simni

  • BTGuard - BitTorrent Anonymously

NewsBits

Even more news...

  • The Pirate Bay Isn’t Down Completely, Just Having a Few Issues

    Twitter and Facebook, not to mention the TorrentFreak inbox, are currently alive with complaints that The...

  • Pirate Bay Founder Gottfrid Svartholm on Freedom of Speech

    Freedom of speech is a highly valued commodity, but should people be allowed to say whatever...

  • Blu-ray Anti-Piracy Tech Stops Discs and Promotes Purchases

    An anti-piracy system present in all official Blu-ray players since 2012 has received a fresh update...

  • Foxtel Breeds Pirates by Locking Up Game of Thrones

    One of the main reasons why people turn to piracy is the lack of legal alternatives....

  • UK Student Admits Breaching Sony Copyrights With Leak of PS3 SDK

    Last year an Internet user known as El Nomeo leaked version 3.70 of Sony’s Playstation3 SDK...

MostDiscussed

Below are TorrentFreak's most discussed articles of the past month. Join the discussion if you like.

CopyQuote

Left Quote

“The Pirate Bay has been one of the most important movements in Sweden for freedom of speech, working against corruption and censorship.

Peter Sunde Left Quote

PopularArticles

A selection of some TorrentFreak's classics dug up from our archives.