

Ask HN: If the DMCA didn't "kill the Internet," would SOPA? - codex

Legitimate question here: before the DMCA was passed, there were many claims that it would kill the Internet.  Is there any research into the positive or negative effects that it did have?  I'm trying to get past the groupthink to objectively evaluate SOPA, and perhaps measure the effects it would have should it pass.
======
joebadmo
The DMCA obviously hasn't killed the internet, but it is having some subtle
and (IMO) pernicious effects on our culture. I wrote about some of them in
this post on the Atlantic Tech Blog:
[http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/01/the-
st...](http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/01/the-startup-
challenging-the-centralized-internet/250008/)

Here's the relevant excerpt:

 _An interesting example, as Ben Fino-Radin reports, is YouTube's removal of a
video that incorporates spammy metadata into its conception as artwork.

> The video, likely known to most readers, features Cortright mundanely
> clicking through the stock effects of a $20 webcam, gazing bored into the
> screen of her computer, trance playing in the background. Far from offensive
> content. The violation lies in Cortright's use of keywords. The video
> description contained 733 keywords, ranging from "tits, vagina, sex, nude,
> boobs" to "san francisco, diego, jose, puto, taco bell, border patrol,
> mcdonalds, KFC, kentucky fried chicken, trans fat".

Andy Baio investigates another vector on which emerging art and culture are
colliding headlong with proprietary services and broad legislation. YouTube's
necessarily automated and algorithmic enforcement of copyright simply cannot
make distinctions about fair use, and as a consequence is in some sense
destroying the notion altogether. Mashups, remixes, and cover songs are
routinely taken down with very little recourse for users._

Here's another interesting Andy Baio piece about someone who put up the movie
_Pulp Fiction_ in its entirety in chronological order:

 _A couple things struck me about this video.

First, I'm surprised that a full-length, 2.5-hour very slight remix of a
popular film can survive on YouTube for over six weeks without getting
removed. Now that it's on Kottke and Buzzfeed, I'm guessing it won't be around
for much longer.

But I was just as amused by the video description:

> "The legendary movie itself placed into chronological order. If you'd like
> me to put the full movie itself up, let me know and I'll be glad to oblige.
> Please no copyright infringement. I only put this up as a project."

These "no copyright infringement intended" messages are everywhere on YouTube,
and about as effective as a drug dealer asking if you're a cop. It's like a
little voodoo charm that people post on their videos to ward off evil
spirits._

<http://waxy.org/2011/12/no_copyright_intended/>

Or there's the recent incident in which Universal issued DMCA takedowns of a
youtube video that they had absolutely no rights to:
[http://searchengine.tvo.org/blog/search-engine-blog/audio-
po...](http://searchengine.tvo.org/blog/search-engine-blog/audio-
podcast-116-megamutiny)

[http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111209/14234917026/univer...](http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111209/14234917026/universal-
music-issues-questionable-takedown-megaupload-video-that-featured-their-
artists.shtml)

~~~
jeffool
And let's not forget the damage ICE does not only by taking down legit
websites, but by refusing to act within their own procedures by not giving the
seized domains in a timely manner.

[http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/12/ice-
admits-m...](http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/12/ice-admits-
months-long-seizure-of-music-blog-was-a-mistake.ars)

No, it won't break the Internet, but it could break a legitimate business
because of the media industry's eagerness to give away material to create
buzz, then attempt to sure and financially ruin people claiming they were
robbed of income. (And this isn't just some hiphop thing. Even Google/YouTube
say copyright owners upload their own material under unassuming names, demand
Google take it down, then get angry when it's removed.)

