Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Censorship Google Your Rights Online

AFL-CIO and Big Content Advocate For SOPA 295

Posted by samzenpus
from the no-piracy-for-you dept.
Weezul writes "Today's House Judiciary Committee meeting on the Stop Online Piracy Act excluded any witnesses who advocate for civil rights. Google's Katherine Oyama was the only witness to object to the bill in a meaningful way. In particular, the AFL-CIO's Paul Almeida advocated for the internet blacklist, saying 'the First Amendment does not protect stealing goods off trucks.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

AFL-CIO and Big Content Advocate For SOPA

Comments Filter:
  • by Squiddie (1942230) on Wednesday November 16, 2011 @07:08PM (#38079846)
    I'm tired of trying to follow the law within reason. They don't want to play nice, neither will I. I'm off to the store to buy a couple of boxes of DVDs and blurays and I'm going to start giving them away to people I know and ask them to pass more forward. I'm going to pirate like there's no tomorrow because even when I try to play nice they want to screw up the internet. We gave them all the tools to do away with what they deemed inappropriate use of their works and now they want more. No more Mr nice guy. You asked for it. I hope you guys do the same. Pirate for people you know. Money is the only language these idiots understand(the *AAs, not your family).
  • Re:I Agree (Score:5, Insightful)

    by roc97007 (608802) on Wednesday November 16, 2011 @07:09PM (#38079860) Journal

    It all depends on whom gets to define "steal".

  • Re:I Agree (Score:5, Insightful)

    by OutSourcingIsTreason (734571) on Wednesday November 16, 2011 @07:09PM (#38079870)
    Why should **AA be allowed to steal stuff from the public domain by means of so-called "copyright term extensions" ?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 16, 2011 @07:11PM (#38079886)

    "'the First Amendment does not protect stealing goods off trucks'" .... by AFL-CIO members !!!

    Yours In Ashgabat,
    K. Trout

  • by Surt (22457) on Wednesday November 16, 2011 @07:13PM (#38079908) Homepage Journal

    Sure, but it'd be a shame if your legs got broken, and you didn't have their worker protections. A real shame. You should think about how nice it is not to have your legs broken. Maybe you don't want to quite the AFL-CIO?

  • by Fluffeh (1273756) on Wednesday November 16, 2011 @07:15PM (#38079938)

    While I am knowingly replying to two trolls, it makes for a poignant comment.

    The rest of the world isn't too worried about this I think. With actions like this, America is just making itself more and more of a laughing stock in the eyes of the world. The credibility of America has been in decline for decades and eventually it will write itself out of the world stage that it so desperately want to stay in.

    I am not saying that everyone in the US is to be painted with the same broad brush, but the folks at the top certainly seem to have free reign to write their own legislation and rules. With that sort of playing field, it is only a matter of time before all the other teams stop turning up to matches.

  • Re:I Agree (Score:5, Insightful)

    by wierd_w (1375923) on Wednesday November 16, 2011 @07:18PM (#38079966)

    The problem is in the assignment of the word "theft" to this phenomenon.

    Say for a moment that I, personally, am responsible for domesticating wheat. I use this position to control the distribution of wheat and wheat based products, citing that my hard work in the domestication process is what justifies my monopolist behavior.

    Now, let's say that some other person finds out that they can grow their own wheat. So, they do. They do this from a single wheat seed that they legally purchased from me.

    They plant the wheat, and in a few years, have cultivated enough wheat seeds to start undercutting my monopoly. Let's say that they simply just give away the wheat seeds that they are now producing.

    Which does this constitute?

    A) stealing

    Or,

    B) competition

    The person giving away the free wheat seeds is not stealing them from my grainary. I am not losing wheat by his actions. What I am losing is market power. I am losing the ability to solely dictate the unit price for wheat. Does this constitute theft? If so, how?

  • by will_die (586523) on Wednesday November 16, 2011 @07:30PM (#38080122) Homepage
    Republicans have been pushing to have laws passed that makes it easier for you to that and provide protection if you do. There are still a few states where depending on where you work and what you do the answer would be no.
    Even if you cannot quit them you should be able to get back any monies that do not directly relate to the union and benefits they can provide. Such as, to use the occupy wall street terminology, payoffs to politicians.
  • by larry bagina (561269) on Wednesday November 16, 2011 @07:30PM (#38080124) Journal
    AFl-CIO isn't a union, per-se, it's a Federation/Congress of unions. Union Member -> Union -> AFL CIO. Like Musician -> Record Company -> RIAA.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 16, 2011 @07:33PM (#38080162)

    The "LOL! American Freedom!" comment is actually the most insightful and intelligent of the 40+ comments currently posted under this story.

    Using just three words, the author managed to make the following points:
    1) That American citizens and organizations claim to hold freedom in high regard, but then hypocritically practice the complete opposite.
    2) That the American government claims to hold freedom in high regard, but then hypocritically practices the complete opposite.
    3) That most Americans are oblivious to the sad state of "freedom" in their nation.
    4) That most Americans are oblivious to being oblivious to the sad state of "freedom" in their nation.
    5) That the rest of the world does not respect America, and finds American attitudes regarding freedom to be laughable.

    It's too bad that it's at -1. It's the best comment posted here yet.

  • Re:Well (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 16, 2011 @07:34PM (#38080172)

    the AFL-CIO's Paul Almeida advocated for the internet blacklist, saying 'the First Amendment does not protect stealing goods off trucks'

    He's quite right. It has fuck all to do with SOPA and its associated discussions, but he's right.

    That's Chewbacca defense, right? (it's actually offence, but you get the gist).

  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 16, 2011 @07:34PM (#38080174)

    The rest of the world is worried about the extent that this will spread outside your borders. The US is a very imperialist nation and will try very hard to press other nations into similar situations. They have to, because if they're the only draconian nation they're at an economic disadvantage, to say the least.

    So yes, we're worried about NAFTA, ACTA (and PATRIOT as it relates to cloud services). Beyond that, we couldn't care less. You're deluding yourself if you think the US has any credibility left. We're just looking for a bigger stick.

  • Re:Well (Score:5, Insightful)

    by residieu (577863) on Wednesday November 16, 2011 @07:43PM (#38080266)
    That's part of the ploy. You call your offense a defense to further confuse your opponent.
  • by bl968 (190792) on Wednesday November 16, 2011 @07:54PM (#38080388) Journal

    But that's just it. He sees people getting content electronically online as taking (Stealing) things out of his members trucks.He doesn't care if you bought a legal electronic copy or not. Even if you buy a physical copy his members deliver it. He's speaking solely out of self interest. He doesn't like anything that lets you get delivery electronically.

  • by amightywind (691887) on Wednesday November 16, 2011 @09:17PM (#38081224) Journal
    Is anyone really surprised that a union activist would want to place limits on free speech. Freedom is inconvenient to the socialists.
  • Re:Well (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Darinbob (1142669) on Wednesday November 16, 2011 @09:51PM (#38081520)

    We currently have no bills where we can merely accuse a random person of stealing an auto which point no service station would be allowed to sell them gasoline.

    The problems with SOPA aren't with piracy but rather that the burden of piracy prevention falls onto third parties, and the lack of needing proof of wrong doing before penalties are applied.

"Someone's been mean to you! Tell me who it is, so I can punch him tastefully." -- Ralph Bakshi's Mighty Mouse

Working...