Writer's Block: Stop Online Piracy Act

[eowyn_315]

Today, Congress holds hearings on the first American Internet censorship system.
This bill can pass. If it does the Internet and free speech will never be the same. [Learn more here.]

Do you support this bill?

First, let me say that this question is absurdly biased.

Second, yes, I support the bill, and not just because I'm being paid to. :) I generally

Comments

[boot_the_grime]

I've said before, and I'll say it again - I'm not going to lecture anyone about how downloading stuff illegally is wrong. For one thing, I'd be a hypocrite, because I'm not totally innocent on that front, either. But that's a moral decision that has nothing to do with the bill. My moral stance is that illegal downloading is not just *not wrong* but right and absolutely necessary

[eowyn_315]

How exactly will artists suffer? Any artist is allowed to put their own work online for free - that's how MySpace has operated for years. They can offer downloads or streaming on their own websites, or distribute free copies to blogs for promotional use. Nothing in the bill restricts distribution by the copyright holder in any way.

But just because some artists want to distribute their work for free, why should artists who want to get paid for their work have to suffer? Why shouldn't they be allowed to protect their intellectual property from people who want to make money off someone else's hard work?

And, you know, free advertising only works to a point. People aren't going to just keep making things for free without any compensation. Eventually, they will have to pay their bills.

[eowyn_315]

My question, though, is why can't artists do everything you suggest without digital piracy? Nothing is stopping them from distributing their music for free. It's incredibly easy to throw a song up on YouTube, MySpace, Facebook, etc. or offer downloads via a number of sources - I've downloaded free tracks from iTunes and Amazon, which introduced me to new artists. There's no reason to maintain websites that are dedicated to copyright infringement when they can get all the publicity they want from legal distribution.

I am only keen on seeing an end to those people who burn CDs, DVDs and sell them on the street and the moneys that fund drug trade and crime. Those are the targets we need to see more work done, not your avaerage kid our young adult who hears an artist from another country, in another languageTo be clear, we're NOT targeting the average kid here. We're targeting the digital equivalent of those people who burn CDs and sell them on the street. The sites that host all these copyrighted works aren't doing it for the greater

[eowyn_315]

Well, I would point out again that this bill does nothing to affect piracy in other countries - it only blocks American consumers from accessing it. So if that's the only way for people to access work that's unavailable in other countries, they'll still be able to do that.

I do think that the entertainment industry should do a better job of providing legal online access (streaming, download, etc.) to their content. But, in their defense, it's pretty hard to come up with a business model to compete with "as much as you want for free."

Second, insisting on copyright would mean that relatively poor people would be at disadvantage because of financial issues, even when the said goods are technically 'available'.(if you have enough money).I'm not sure I understand your argument. Because it sounds like you're saying that people have the right to everything, and they should be allowed to have it for free if they can't afford it. So, does that mean you shouldn't be arrested if you steal DVDs from Walmart because you can't afford them? Are

[boot_the_grime]

If the alternative is to have ridiculously high prices that the majority of people can't afford, then yes, by all means, making them free is a much better option! (Disclaimer: I have no idea if they're ridiculously high for an average American. But they sure as hell are for an average Serbian, but over here we have the exact same or higher prices. If we weren't using pirated software, few people would even be using computers or going online, since you'd have to spend all your salary just on getting licensed software).

How to make culture not a privilege for the rich: just make the prices more reasonable. We're not talking about paintings or luxury editions of books or other things that makes sense to be just for the rich folks.

[eowyn_315]

I.... honestly don't even know how to respond to that. Maybe if we lived in some communist utopia where everyone shared everything and money was meaningless, I'd be all for giving everything away for free.

But... we don't. Actors and musicians and cameramen and writers still have to pay the bills. They can't just work for free because some people can't afford to buy their stuff. I don't know what you do for a living, but how would you feel if someone said to you, "I'm sorry, but you're going to have to work for free because these people in this country over here can't afford to pay you. Ninety-five percent of the work that you do, you won't get paid for, so figure out how to live on the other 5%"?

[boot_the_grime]

Funny then that it's the artists who, more often than not, don't have a problem with people sharing their music for free, and are even encouraging it? With exceptions like Metallca - poor guys, they must be having trouble paying their bills...While it's usually those artists who aren't famous and rich (but not just them) that want to share their music for free. Interesting, eh?

They only have an interest in spreading their music so more people would hear it, and some to their live gigs.

[eowyn_315]

Sorry, but I am extremely skeptical that "more often than not" artists want their work stolen. Particularly since I work for an organization that represents artists, and the vast majority want us to support this bill. I have only gotten ONE phone call from a member opposing this bill. One, out of around 80,000.

And, as I have said at least three times now, there is absolutely nothing stopping artists from sharing their music for free if they want to do that. But just because they give their stuff away fro free doesn't mean that EVERYBODY should, whether they want to or not. I really don't see why we shouldn't protect the artists who DO want to get paid.