Discussion in 'Protest Advice' started by TheDarkKnife, Apr 14, 2011.

  1. TheDarkKnife Member

  2. Anonymous Member

    It might be nice to know wtf this is about.

    OpenCongress Summary

    This bill would give the Department of Justice new power to shut down entire internet domains if they deem copyright infringement to be "central to the activity of the Internet site or sites accessed through a specific domain name." It would also require the DoJ to maintain a public list of sites they have determined are "dedicated to infringing activities," but for which they have not taken action against yet. Net neutrality and free speech advocates fear that the ambiguous wording of the bill could lead it to being used against sites like Rapidshare and YouTube that allow users to control content, and blogs that use excerpts from media articles under fair use.
    Official Summary

    11/18/2010--Reported to Senate amended. Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act -

    (Sec. 2)

    Amends the federal criminal code to authorize the Attorney General (AG) to commence an in rem action against a domain name used by an Internet site that is "dedicated to infringing activities," even where such a domain name is not located in the United States. Defines an Internet site that is "dedicated to infringing activities" as a site that is:
    (1) subject to civil forfeiture;
    (2) designed primarily to offer goods or services in violation of federal copyright law; or
    (3) selling or promoting counterfeit goods or services.Authorizes a court, upon application of the AG, to issue a temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction, or injunction against the domain name or names used by such a site.Directs any actions against domestic domains to be in the judicial district where the domain name registrar or registry is located or, if such a domain is located or doing business in more than one judicial district, in the judicial district of its principal place of business. Allows any actions against nondomestic domains to be brought in the District of Columbia if:
    (1) such a domain is used within the United States to access an infringing site;
    (2) the site directs business to U.S. residents; and
    (3) the site harms U.S. intellectual property rights holders. Requires a court determining whether a site directs business to U.S. residents to consider factors including:
    (1) whether goods or services are being provided to U.S. users;
    (2) intent;
    (3) prevention measures; and
    (4) whether any prices for such goods and services are indicated in U.S. currency.Requires an Internet service provider, financial transaction provider, or Internet advertising service that is served with a court order in connection with an action against a nondomestic domain to take technically feasible or other specified reasonable measures to prevent such infringing activities from continuing. Grants immunity to:
    (1) served parties acting pursuant to a court order; and
    (2) certain registries, providers, and services voluntarily performing actions described in this Act. Allows the AG to bring an action for injunctive relief against any served party that knowingly and willfully fails to comply with such court order.Directs the AG to inform the Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator (IPEC) and other law enforcement agencies of court orders directed to specific domain names associated with infringing sites. Requires the IPEC and authorizes certain other entities to post such domain names on a publicly available site.

    (Sec. 3)

    Requires the AG to:
    (1) publish procedures developed with relevant law enforcement agencies to receive information from the public about infringing activities;
    (2) provide specified guidance to intellectual property rights holders regarding investigations; and
    (3) establish standards, provide resources, and develop a deconfliction process with other law enforcement agencies for case management and enforcement coordination purposes.

    (Sec. 4)

    Directs the Secretary of Commerce to study and report to Congress on the impact of this Act on the use of Domain Name System Security Extensions.
  3. Anonymous Member

    your caps are hurting my ears ^n^
  4. WhiteNight Member

  5. Zak McKracken Member

  6. Anonymous Member

    This page is criticizing the US government - therefore it is infringing on copyrights. Tiem to shut it down.
  7. Anonymous Member

  8. Loki's spawn Member

    We should listen to this guy. He knows what's best regarding copyright infringement.
  9. Anonymous Member

    WTF? Why is this in the Iran section?
  10. TheDarkKnife Member

    IDK how the hell did it got in the Iran section I didn't put it HERE well pretty sure I didn't. I don't think I was that HIGH. hehehe move it if you can
  11. over9000OT Member

    I am against the cloaca. Gross.
  12. iraniam Member

    Does this post has anything to do with Iran?
  13. Anonymous Member

    OP: Naah, I'm too busy protesting a cult with 6 adherents.
  14. Anonymous Member

    Does yours?
  15. BAAL Member

    shit their goes
    where hell am i gonna find kinky milfs now?
  16. JohnDoe Moderator

    Tell me where you want to move it to. Thanks.
  17. Anonymous Member

    I propose the Tom Cruise test: any law that would prevent the sharing of Scientology's promotional video with Cruise talking about being "the only ones who can help" is a bad law. The public need to see that shit.

    So would this new law get in the way of sharing the Cruise video? If so, we should poon objections to the congressfags.
  18. Anonymous Member

    Absolutely nothing
  19. Anonymous Member

    I guess this new law is a way to hold web site owners accountable for visitor behavior, forcing sites to police what users upload or risk being shut down.

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors


Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins