Political News and Commentary with the Right Perspective. NAVIGATION
  • Front Page
  • News
  • Multimedia
  • Tags
  • RSS Feed

  • Advertise on RightMichigan.com


    Get the RightMighigan.com toolbar!



    Who are the NERD fund donors Mr Snyder?

    Raise the curtain.

    The Great Disconnect - or SOPA on a ROPA

    By JGillman, Section News
    Posted on Fri Dec 30, 2011 at 12:37:08 PM EST
    Tags: Freedom of Speech, Constitution, John Conyers, Read It, Michigan, SOPA, Intellectual Rights, Copyright, H.R. 3261, 1st amendment, 6th amendment, Censorship, Camels Nose (all tags)

    What a great way to shut us up.

    On the right side of this article is a picture that has a copyrighted character used in a manner that is consistent with "fair use" as it neither conflicts with the original intent or marketing aspect of the creator, and that it is being used to characterize a particular political expression; my own.  It also does not represent any significant value to myself or the owner of this website.  It is generally recognized as an acceptable use in the eyes of the law under the framework of commentary, satire, or criticism.

    But if the author asked us to remove it we would.

    If the author had reason to believe our representation in this way harmed his ability to use his creation for self benefit, he might deem it necessary to ask us to either pay for the right to use it, render it unrecognizable, or remove it entirely.  We believe in the sanctity of copyright, and ownership, and private property. You know, the concept of "what one creates, he owns?"

    Its one of those pesky rights that government often tries to usurp.

    In fact, while holding up a banner as protectors of such material rights, there are agents of censorship at work attempting to limit our ability to express ourselves.  Blogs such as RightMichigan.com which have broken news stories, offered conservative (or liberal) opinions, and challenged preconceptions, are in danger of becoming the victims of a horribly applied copyright law.  Further, the extent to which we can be punished comes not as a simple command to remove violations by court order, but through another somewhat executive process that violates constitutional principles and directly with the 1st and the 6th amendments as well.

    The use of copyright infringement is now threatening to be used as virtual duct tape tying our fingers, and wrapping our skulls to silence our voices in our opinions and political affairs.

    More Below ~

    The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), or H.R. 3261 was introduced by a Republican to fight piracy and copyright infringement.  This camel's nose under the tent has been cosponsored by a number of other legislators including Michigan's own John Conyers, a man who takes no opportunity to abuse the people lightly.  A man who likely thinks its still too long to read, yet will eagerly seek out the dotted line. From WIKI:


    "The originally proposed bill would allow the U.S. Department of Justice, as well as copyright holders, to seek court orders against websites accused of enabling or facilitating copyright infringement. Depending on who requests the court orders, the actions could include barring online advertising networks and payment facilitators such as PayPal from doing business with the allegedly infringing website, barring search engines from linking to such sites, and requiring Internet service providers to block access to such sites. The bill would make unauthorized streaming of copyrighted content a crime, with a maximum penalty of five years in prison for 10 pieces of music or movies within six months. The bill also gives immunity to Internet services that voluntarily take action against websites dedicated to infringement, while making liable for damages any copyright holder who knowingly misrepresents that a website is dedicated to infringement."

    And it puts the onus on the hosting services if they allow materials to exist on their platforms, gives the justice department the ability to shut a website down, interfere with contracts, tinker with search results, and if that doesn't work shut down internet providers.  It does so specifically naming music or movies as the carrot, but with a hidden salty switch at the ready, for opinion which includes perhaps copied text for reference, or up to now fair use materials that some may not like, and deem actionable.

    Arguably anyone on this right-minded forum is all for protecting intellectual rights.  Its a very conservative concept.  Private property is sacred. But so is due process.  From the Stanford Law Review on H.R. 3261, and  the "Protect IP Act in the Senate:

    "This 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."

    Shoot first, ask questions later.

    Any one item that is 'deemed' to violate a copyright, can result in the removal of an entire body of work without adequate defense.  Any single copy-over can give way to whole sites being taken away without appropriate arguments heard from all parties affected.  Potential?  Any powerful politician could find his likeness on a competitor's site as cause to have that competitor silenced.

    And as I am writing this, I realize that even the quotes I have used in this article alone could trigger incredibly draconian action under this legislative nightmare.

    For the success of those who support omnipotent unaccountable government to move their agenda forward, the constitution must be crushed.  And it may not be so difficult under the weight of foolhardy capitulating legislators and dangerously incompetent judges.  

    In the end, our conqueror will be a simple civil action, re-purposed as a mute button, or rather a noose, cutting off the air of discourse, opposing views, and heartfelt opinion.


    < Blogroll Updates - Round IV | Saturdays Divertere: "2012 Sabotage?" >

    Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

    Display: Sort:
    Actually, this is only part of a bigger problem. (none / 0) (#1)
    by KG One on Fri Dec 30, 2011 at 05:13:37 PM EST
    That slippery slope, made all that much more slipperier by Bush v2.0 (portions of which were extended this year by Michigan republicans who haven't read that copy of the US Constitution they handed out to the new members), got kicked into overdrive this year.

    Aside from republicans purportedly attempting to combat intellectual theft, not that anything can actually be done when the servers aren't physically located on American Soil, republicans also thought that it was a neat idea to just grab US Citizens off of the street and have them "disappear".

    Limiting means of communication.

    Removing "threats" to the state?

    Our government has been getting very intent lately on keeping tabs on, and putting into place the means of controlling its own citizens.

    From the above examples to stepping up random searches of US Citizens without probable cause, is disconcerting to say the least.

    I don't know about anyone else here, but having one of these pop up the next time you type in RightMichigan.com should be the least of anyone's worries.

    Seized Domain Notice

    Liberty without virtue exists where? (none / 0) (#4)
    by Corinthian Scales on Sat Dec 31, 2011 at 11:21:52 AM EST
    So, if I am understanding this whole SOPA and PIPA scheme correctly, the meat and potatoes of this posting is for untrustworthy bloggers to fall into mother government line, yes?  If so, what a lowly state we as a people have become.  Yannow, for generations we have been churning out functional illiterates in Socialist indoctrination, oops, I mean, publik edukayshun senturs, so I'm not really surprised with this rather poorly written legislation one iota.

    Virtue.  Case in point well defined.

    But if the author asked us to remove it we would.

    That statement, it be true.  I know the individual well enough that authored the statement, and am well aware of the quality of this blog and the folks that blog here to understand this to be gospel.  No, not in the Piously Correct sense, but just plain old common sense respect.  However, the fact remains that we live in an increasingly unscrupulous world where that turning to self moderation based upon character or, virtue is the root of these rather statist intrusions we now b!tch about seemingly on a daily bases.  It's an old story the Left and its interlopers has always enjoyed to advance the nanny state irrespective to virtue and character.

    I'm sure this was all Reagan's fault:

    That was from C-Span circa 1984, and like always with the conspiracy kook... it's the orwellian government to blame, but not the unscrupulous little bastards gaming a system causing further havoc in the human fly paper that is our modern computerized world.  Yessiree, Uncle Squeaky still out there, still Winning The Future.

    The upside.  Industrial grade CrAzY within the Liberaltarian camp might force their deity Paulestinian to own up to that fact.

    Using their iconic mic-check speaking style, the protestors spoke out against Ron Paul's campaign pledge to close the Environmental Protection Agency if elected.

    Sitting arm in arm, the members of the Occupy movement chanted; "We are fighting for the future generations. In order to live we need clean air, clean water, and safe food. Don't dismantle the EPA. We won't allow this business to open before our demands are met."

    Police gave the protestors the opportunity to move from the private entrance to the public sidewalk twenty feet away. Some complied, but five refused to move and were arrested.

    Many of the occupy demonstrators claimed sympathy, if not outright support for the ideology of Ron Paul, which made this protest especially uncomfortable for both the occupiers and the campaign.

    One of the arrested protester's named Clark Davidson claimed to be a Ron Paul precinct captain as he was led away in handcuffs.

    "I don't believe with Ron Paul on every single issue...I came to stand with my sisters. I came to address that with the campaign and I just got arrested," Davidson said.

    No one from the Paul Campaign was immediately available for comment.

    Yup.  The Liberaltarian nose under the GOP tent must be sharting himself all the way back to the end-the-war burn-a-fatty pro-abort 1972 LP founding ... just like the dark cloud over Conservatism that Ron Paul has always been.

    Virtue.  It is important that important to anyone who loves Liberty.

    Display: Sort:


    Make a new account

    Tweet along with RightMichigan by
    following us on Twitter HERE!
    create account | faq | search