
Reject the PROTECT IP Act - apievangelist
https://secure.eff.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=487
======
redthrowaway
>PROTECT IP = Private Rightsholders Opposed To Emerging Consumer Technologies,
Innovation, and Progress

I find it odd that, while I'm uniformly turned off by Stallman's
"iBad/iGroan/Swindle" characterizations, I can fully get behind this
repurposing of the PROTECT IP acronym. Perhaps because it doesn't reek of
Stallman's immaturity, or maybe because it is actually descriptive; I
nonetheless find myself supporting it.

~~~
9999
I groan at iGroan because it's a bad pun, but Stallman's position seems more
or less sound. DRM sucks.

This article from the EFF is too brief and poorly annotated to really lead me
to any conclusions on its own. I would like to read a fully fleshed out
position paper/article on the deficiencies of the PROTECT IP act. Anyone know
of one?

edit: Found this from the EFF themselves:

[https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/05/plus-ca-change-
protect...](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/05/plus-ca-change-protect-ip-
domain-name-system-and)

They link to the bill itself which is only 30 pages. It is pretty poorly
thought out.

~~~
redthrowaway
I don't have a problem with Stallman's positions, just his tactics. He
marginalizes himself and the FSF by behaviour that appeals only to his most
devoted followers. As a hacker, he should realize that his solution is
suboptimal and find ways to improve it. Instead, he brushes off those who
criticize him as being in league with the forces of oppression, or at least
not caring enough about freedom to see why he's right. He presents a false
dichotomy: either you agree with me and my methods, or you agree with Apple
and theirs. He ignores the obvious majority opinion amongst hackers: I agree
with you, but I find your methods distasteful and ineffective. For that
reason, I can't support you or your organization.

~~~
mquander
I don't think that the majority opinion amongst "hackers" (as in, the general
programmer audience here) agrees with Stallman in a meaningful sense. A
majority might sort of _prefer_ free software, but don't care to fight for it
very much; how many people use and develop for & on proprietary software and
locked-down hardware anyway because they care more about convenience and
utility than freedom?

RMS calls it like he sees it.

------
plainOldText
I hope people who read this story are not just upvoting it but also signing
the petition/form.

Politicians sticking their noses in technology is like a pshychopathic
criminal with a machine gun. They don't have a clue what they are doing and
what consequences thereof will be.

~~~
gnosis
I hope the people who sign the petition also write a letter to their
congresscritter, or at least make a phonecall.

A flood of letters will be much more effective than any single petition.

But what really needs to be done is ongoing education and active participation
in the political process -- long term. And that means more than just voting
once every 4 years, or signing the occasional petition.

~~~
frossie
It's not a petition. It is a form that emails your congressperson, which it
derives from your address (you can either include your own message or use
their form letter).

------
younata
The entire reason acts like the PROTECT IP act even get this far is because NO
ONE understands the internet, and the potential of it.

Yeah, we're slightly more enlightened than the politicians, but that's not
really saying much.

All we know is that it'd be better to just leave the internet alone for now,
until we have a better idea of its potential (which, I acknowledge, may never
happen).

Of course, as other commenters have said, the idea that the US can basically
say "follow our law, or you have no internet" is disgusting. Unfortunately,
this threat will hold until some country decides to call the US's bluff.

------
randomwalker
Signing petitions is fine, but as a tech expert[1] there are many ways of
long-term engagement by which you can have a much bigger impact. I just wrote
about some of them (I'm an academic computer scientist who's been involved in
policy for the last couple of years): [http://33bits.org/2011/06/07/bad-
internet-law-what-techies-c...](http://33bits.org/2011/06/07/bad-internet-law-
what-techies-can-do-about-it/)

[1] If you don't feel like an expert, don't worry about it. The bar in
Washington for who's considered an expert is fairly low :-)

Edit: I just submitted this here:
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2630141>

~~~
hallowtech
submitting the form will mail and fax your congressmen. so, it is not just
another online petition. i got replies from two of them, though canned they
seemed, but i know they got them at least.

------
lwhi
Once mechanisms are in place to block websites encouraging 'IP infringement',
how likely is it that these mechanisms will be repurposed?

Although I'm not entirely convinced, part of my wonders whether governmental
support for these lobbyists might be partly swayed by the simple proposition
that these methods to control the internet could eventually be used for more
varied forms of censorship.

~~~
jbooth
Governmental (more accurately Congressional) support for lobbyist-supported
legislation is a 3 step process.

1) God I am so fucking sick of dialing for dollars.

2) This guy has a bag of money.

3) I spend all my time dialing and none of it on policy so I can't tell the
difference anyways.

Hey, I'll just do what he's telling me.

It's not quite that cut and dried but that's what it comes down to in the end,
with a little dancing in between so the congressman can convince himself he
isn't being bought.

------
nhebb
Being from Oregon, the submission is kind of funny. It automatically sends an
email to your two senators and district representative. So Wyden got an email
from me stating "I urge you to join Senator Wyden". Well, maybe it will
buttress his resolve.

~~~
jimktrains2
You can edit the text... :)

------
norova
Could someone explain in layman's terms what exactly the PROTECT IP act
proposes to do? I'm not much for politico speak and don't really have the time
to rummage through the entire text myself to figure it out.

~~~
djd
A domain name server(DNS) is what leads you to a particular website, For
example when u type <http://news.ycombinator.com> its forwarded to your ISP
DNS and from there it is forwarded to the IP of Hacker news. This new act if
passed will have let them have control over all the DNS servers of ISP's. That
means the site which they dont want you to see get blocked easily.

------
jeffool
I find it interesting some of the stories that get more upvotes here. Is there
anyone here that's actually in favor of this? I'm curious to know why. (And
I'll be polite about it.)

Maybe it's just cynicism?

------
kahawe
You have got to be kidding me... the same idea has haunted us Europeans not
too long ago!

The (then) Minister of Family Affairs (,Senior Citizens, Women and Youth) sold
it as "fighting against child pornography" and despite every serious expert
stating that it is completely useless, it got passed, was taken out of effect
later on, then put on hold by the president, it turned out to possibly being
unconstitutional and now seems to be scheduled for being lifted again.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ursula_von_der_Leyen#Blocking_i...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ursula_von_der_Leyen#Blocking_internet_child_pornography)

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zugangserschwerungsgesetz>

For the life of me, I will never understand politics.

------
shareme
Here lets rename the act correctly:

PROTECT THE REPUBLICS Lobbyists ACT

------
TuxPirate
We should ban the united states from the Internet and leave them with their
own will.

Simply, disgusting.

~~~
steve-howard
Please don't punish the citizens for what our idiot politicians do. I didn't
vote for them anyway. :(

~~~
bluedanieru
But enough idiot American citizens did, and those idiots have indirect control
over much of the world's IT infrastructure. Too much.

But what organizational body can take control? The UN? I don't think the
Internet would be any safer in anyone else's hands.

~~~
younata
Whoa, whoa, whoa. Let's back up and take a deep breath.

Ok. These politicians get "elected" because they, quite simply, can buy their
elections. When you can tell your constituents "look! I got you <latest bill
of pork>! I'm doing good for you! Re-elect me!", they will re-elect you.

The only thing we're guilty of is being incredibly short-sighted.

~~~
deepinit
>"The only thing we're guilty of is being incredibly short-sighted."

This has shorter name- Being an idiot, so he is exactly RIGHT. ->
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiot_(Athenian_democracy)>

And speak rather for Yourself(or Your group, im not in).

