PDA

View Full Version : Ceci n'est pas un PIPA


Cheshire Cat
17-01-2012, 08:24:32
SOPA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act)?
PIPA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROTECT_IP_Act)?

I was wikiing for Erlenmeyer, when I stumbled into this

http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/English_Wikipedia_anti-SOPA_blackout

I'm working ("yeah, right") so I can't delve into the details of such issues, which so far I was almost totally unaware of.
For sure knowing I can't use Wiki tomorrow brought it to my attention, so the initiative had some effect.

Will it have impact on our US-posters, or on CG in general?
:clueless:

To: English Wikipedia Readers and Community
From: Sue Gardner, Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director
Date: January 16, 2012



Today, the Wikipedia community announced its decision to black out the English-language Wikipedia for 24 hours, worldwide, beginning at 05:00 UTC on Wednesday, January 18 (you can read the statement from the Wikimedia Foundation here). The blackout is a protest against proposed legislation in the United States—the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the U.S. House of Representatives, and the PROTECT IP Act (PIPA) in the U.S. Senate—that, if passed, would seriously damage the free and open Internet, including Wikipedia.

This will be the first time the English Wikipedia has ever staged a public protest of this nature, and it’s a decision that wasn’t lightly made. Here’s how it’s been described by the three Wikipedia administrators who formally facilitated the community’s discussion. From the public statement, signed by User:NuclearWarfare, User:Risker and User:Billinghurst:

It is the opinion of the English Wikipedia community that both of these bills, if passed, would be devastating to the free and open web.
Over the course of the past 72 hours, over 1800 Wikipedians have joined together to discuss proposed actions that the community might wish to take against SOPA and PIPA. This is by far the largest level of participation in a community discussion ever seen on Wikipedia, which illustrates the level of concern that Wikipedians feel about this proposed legislation. The overwhelming majority of participants support community action to encourage greater public action in response to these two bills. Of the proposals considered by Wikipedians, those that would result in a “blackout” of the English Wikipedia, in concert with similar blackouts on other websites opposed to SOPA and PIPA, received the strongest support.
On careful review of this discussion, the closing administrators note the broad-based support for action from Wikipedians around the world, not just from within the United States. The primary objection to a global blackout came from those who preferred that the blackout be limited to readers from the United States, with the rest of the world seeing a simple banner notice instead. We also noted that roughly 55% of those supporting a blackout preferred that it be a global one, with many pointing to concerns about similar legislation in other nations.
In making this decision, Wikipedians will be criticized for seeming to abandon neutrality to take a political position. That’s a real, legitimate issue. We want people to trust Wikipedia, not worry that it is trying to propagandize them.

But although Wikipedia’s articles are neutral, its existence is not. As Wikimedia Foundation board member Kat Walsh wrote on one of our mailing lists recently,

We depend on a legal infrastructure that makes it possible for us to operate. And we depend on a legal infrastructure that also allows other sites to host user-contributed material, both information and expression. For the most part, Wikimedia projects are organizing and summarizing and collecting the world’s knowledge. We’re putting it in context, and showing people how to make to sense of it.
But that knowledge has to be published somewhere for anyone to find and use it. Where it can be censored without due process, it hurts the speaker, the public, and Wikimedia. Where you can only speak if you have sufficient resources to fight legal challenges, or, if your views are pre-approved by someone who does, the same narrow set of ideas already popular will continue to be all anyone has meaningful access to.
The decision to shut down the English Wikipedia wasn’t made by me; it was made by editors, through a consensus decision-making process. But I support it.

Like Kat and the rest of the Wikimedia Foundation Board, I have increasingly begun to think of Wikipedia’s public voice, and the goodwill people have for Wikipedia, as a resource that wants to be used for the benefit of the public. Readers trust Wikipedia because they know that despite its faults, Wikipedia’s heart is in the right place. It’s not aiming to monetize their eyeballs or make them believe some particular thing, or sell them a product. Wikipedia has no hidden agenda: it just wants to be helpful.

That’s less true of other sites. Most are commercially motivated: their purpose is to make money. That doesn’t mean they don’t have a desire to make the world a better place—many do!—but it does mean that their positions and actions need to be understood in the context of conflicting interests.

My hope is that when Wikipedia shuts down on January 18, people will understand that we’re doing it for our readers. We support everyone’s right to freedom of thought and freedom of expression. We think everyone should have access to educational material on a wide range of subjects, even if they can’t pay for it. We believe in a free and open Internet where information can be shared without impediment. We believe that new proposed laws like SOPA—and PIPA, and other similar laws under discussion inside and outside the United States—don’t advance the interests of the general public. You can read a very good list of reasons to oppose SOPA and PIPA here, from the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Why is this a global action, rather than US-only? And why now, if some American legislators appear to be in tactical retreat on SOPA?

The reality is that we don’t think SOPA is going away, and PIPA is still quite active. Moreover, SOPA and PIPA are just indicators of a much broader problem. All around the world, we’re seeing the development of legislation seeking to regulate the Internet in other ways while hurting our online freedoms. Our concern extends beyond SOPA and PIPA: they are just part of the problem. We want the Internet to remain free and open, everywhere, for everyone.

Make your voice heard!


On January 18, we hope you’ll agree with us, and will do what you can to make your own voice heard.

Sue Gardner,
Executive Director, Wikimedia Foundation

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/01/how-pipa-and-sopa-violate-white-house-principles-supporting-free-speech

Funko
17-01-2012, 08:35:40
There are already a couple of plugins for Firefox and Chrome that'll get round this.

I think the blackout is a clever idea. It's a great demonstration of what can happen with SOPA.

Most lawmakers just seem to have no idea how the internet works.

MDA
17-01-2012, 13:36:59
"I don't even know what that is, but a lobbyist told me we should regulate it."

Funko
17-01-2012, 13:55:01
now lots of actual voters are complaining they are backtracking.

MDA
17-01-2012, 18:25:53
the big problem with democracy is letting stupid people decide who leads instead of letting me do it

I thought everybody liked Pipa

Poison Arrow Frog
17-01-2012, 18:55:13
House Republicans flip flopped and voted to kill SOPA the other day which is good news. PIPA in the Senate is still alive but without a matching House bill it can't become law.

Funko
18-01-2012, 08:34:34
Thing I read yesterday said that PIPA would probably die when the senate looked at it again after the uproar.

Shows contacting your representatives does actually help. :eek:

Cheshire Cat
18-01-2012, 09:41:49
A neutral PoV (I hope we can hold BBC as such)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-16590585

Wiki today details
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:SOPA_initiative/Learn_more

CNN and CBS views
http://edition.cnn.com/2012/01/18/tech/sopa-blackouts/
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57360665-503544/sopa-pipa-what-you-need-to-know/
I find at least positively remarkable that CBS News overtly admit in their article
CBS Corporation, which owns CBSNews.com, is a member of the Copyright Alliance -- an industry group representing content producers that supports SOPA and PIPA.

Cheshire Cat
18-01-2012, 09:46:10
I thought everybody liked Pippa

they do!

http://mevio.co.uk/2011/06/everyone-loves-pippa-as-shes-turned-into-a-cartoon/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/celebritology/post/crazy-about-pippa-a-preview-of-tlcs-pippa-middleton-love-fest/2011/08/09/gIQA3Zrw4I_blog.html
http://www.facebook.com/i.love.pippa.middleton

Noisy
18-01-2012, 16:54:06
xkcd (http://www.xkcd.com/829)

Funko
18-01-2012, 17:18:44
there's an easter egg in that if you fiddle around with contrast and stuff...

Funko
19-01-2012, 13:39:38
5Cb7xzHB5is

Nice.

MDA
20-01-2012, 16:33:06
from BBC re: confusing SOPA/PIPA protests with the Anonymous attacks over the closing of Megaupload:

In one sense the actions of Anonymous are themselves, anonymously and unaccountably, censoring websites in response to positions with which they disagree.

I believe this is because they are dickheads, not actual activists.