
Bush signs controversial anti-piracy law - nickb
http://www.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idUSTRE49C7EI20081013
======
jpcx01
This is a disaster. Bush is an idiot for signing this, but just remember who
controls congress. Looks like there's finally something both parties can agree
on, and that's to use government resources to enforce sweeping, intrusive
copyright laws.

~~~
cabalamat
Both parties get donations from the content cartels, and do what their
paymasters tell them. Government of the corporations, by the corporations, for
the corporations.

~~~
anamax
Repubs only get token money from RIAA and MPAA and their members. They go
along on this one because they're the stupid party. The Dems would probably go
along for free because they're the evil party, but they're happy to take the
money, and it's a lot of money. (The Dems big three donor classes are trial
lawyers, wall street, and "entertainment", read MPAA/RIAA members.)

------
cabalamat
It's irrelevant. Copyright is dead (by which I mean that business models based
on selling copies of a piece of information are becoming non-viable); the
worst this bill will do is harm a few thousand individual file sharers. This
will slow down the transition to the information-is-free-as-in-beer society,
but it cannot halt it.

This is not to be read as a moral judgement: what I say is true regardless of
whether I -- or anyone else -- approves of it. Bits are copiable, and the law
cannot change that, any more than a law could make water not wet. The only way
to stop filesharing would be to destroy the computing and Internet
infrastructure, which no nation can do unless it wants to be as poor as North
Korea.

In the medium term the main effect of this might be to stimulate the creation
of new P2P software that is more robust against attacks, and which makes it
harder for the MAFIAA to snoop on what files people are sharing.

------
fallentimes
I want limited government.

