Slashdot Mirror
Meet the Strange Bedfellows Who Could Stop SOPA
jfruhlinger writes "In a political environment that's become very strongly defined by partisan lines, the SOPA debate has offered an unexpected ray of hope: the two main Congressional opponents of the bill are Ron Wyden, an Oregon Senator deemed a 'hardcore liberal' and Darrell Issa, a California Representative who is one of the Obama Administration's fiercest critics. (There are both Ds and Rs in favor of the bill, too.)" (Read more below.)
In the technical rather than political world, opposition seems easier to find: Trailrunner7 writes "A group of engineers, networking specialists, security experts and other specialists deeply involved with the Internet's development and growth have sent a letter to lawmakers criticizing the highly controversial SOPA and PIPA bills and imploring them not to pass the legislation, which they say would stifle innovation and 'threaten engineers who build Internet systems or offer services that are not readily and automatically compliant with censorship actions by the U.S. government.' The letter is signed by a long list of Internet pioneers and other respected figures, including Steve Bellovin, Paul Vixie, Vint Cerf, Jon Callas, Tony Li, Robert W. Taylor, Esther Dyson and Fred Baker, among many others. Both SOPA and PIPA have been criticized heavily by technologists, privacy advocates and security experts who say that not only would the proposed bills make it difficult for companies to create innovative new technologies, but they also would likely not even accomplish the goals their authors' had in mind, namely preventing copyright infringement and content piracy."
And (hat tip to Rob Malda), here's the letter itself (PDF).
And (hat tip to Rob Malda), here's the letter itself (PDF).
The only thing Congress can agree on is that something must be done to "stop those thieves!"
Meanwhile people on every side lie to them. Ruthlessly so.
This summary makes it sound like they're heroes fighting for our freedom or something. In actuality, they're just advocated for their own alternative Online Protection and Enforcement of Digital Trade Act (OPEN). And the only difference between their bill and SOPA is that SOPA will put enforcement in the hands of the Justice Department and OPEN will put it in the hands of the United States International Trade Commission, which in practice will make ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENCE to most sites being busted.
The only reason Darrel Issa and Ron Wyden are supporting it is because it provides more protection for the Googles, Facebooks, etc. and they're both from states where those companies are big players.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Or RTFA.
There are both Ds and Rs in favor of the bill, too.
Meet SOPA author Lamar Smith, Hollywood's favorite Republican.
He may be a Tea Partier from rural Texas with an "A+" rating from the National Rifle Association," but the TV, movie, and music industries are the top donors to Smith's 2012 campaign committee, according to data complied by the Center for Responsive Politics.
The Tea Party are marks. His donors are his real constituency.
So these two politicians can do what countless citizens petitioning,calling,and writing cannot... What a tragedy.
No. RTFA yourself. It describes SOPA, but doesn't bother to say what it stands for.
is it the Stop Online Privacy Act?
So you'd like such helpful parentheticals as Linux (an operating system derived from Unix), PHP (a programming language), iOS (the operating system run by Apple's mobile devices), etc...?
Sometimes you have to know your audience. The Slashdot audience can reasonably be expected to know or be able to search for SOPA and PIPA (Protect IP) at this point, considering how much they've been discussed lately.
People lying to politicians. I'm shocked.
Obviously, that must cease, politicians should be allowed to lie to people but the converse must be banned or it will destroy our entire way of life.
Stop Online Piracy Act.
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
You should actually piss off if you don't know what SOPA means by now. You obviously don't care.
The Tea Party are marks. His donors are his real constituency.
Because the Tea Party has staked out such a strong opinion on copyright? I'll bet if you explained this bill to random people on the street, 5% would be in favor, 5% would be opposed, and the rest would stare at you blankly. Copyright affects programmers directly since we are content creators, but most people are as interested in copyright law as they are in foreign-fish importation law.
When voters don't care about a subject, it leaves the congress-people free to do whatever they want. So they do.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
They'll care when someone shuts down YouTube and Facebook.
It's all in how you explain it.
"The mindset of drawing battle lines in terms of 'right' and 'left' is what has allowed politicians to move steadily into lobbyist pockets (like hermit crabs) for the past 30 years"
The mindset of viewing money as speech, and thus allowing 0.05 percent of the citizenry of the US to fund all political campaigns is what has moved our critters into the lobbyists pockets. The only practical solution to this is to legislate that all elections are State-funded, and any outside money found in any campaign is the end of that campaign. The problem is, how do you legislate this when the 0.05 percent of the citizenry currently funding campaigns opposes such reform quite loudly with their billions of dollars worth of "speech?"
Eloi are stupid, throw morlocks at them!
You mean PHP (PHP [PHP {..to infinity..} Hypertext Preprocessor] Hypertext Preprocessor)
In the same way that cyanide is a cure for over-eating... it just has side effects.
They'll care when someone shuts down YouTube and Facebook. It's all in how you explain it.
You mean if you lie to them, they'll understand your explanation? No, if you tell them that the government is going to shut down YouTube and Facebook, they won't believe you. And they would be right, the government is not going to shut down Youtube and Facebook, this is to PROTECT Youtube and Facebook.
The harshest part of this law (in my opinion, as I understand it, which is little considering it is a long law and rather confusing), is that it will increase the penalties for illegal downloading of songs. Soon you won't hear about a single mom who got charged $500k for using p2p, you'll hear about a mom who got sent to jail for a year because of p2p. But once again, people didn't care when the single mom got charged $500k, so why do you expect them to care about a year in jail? The $500k is arguably worse.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Only if you call it what it really is.
Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
Actually, I did already know what SOPA is. I don't know what PIPA is, though...
No, SOPA is not just a harsher version of DMCA, It would force U.S. internet companies like Google to censor search results as a response to a copyright allegation.
some moderate parent +trillion insightful with funny toppings :P
Pulsed Media Seedboxes
It's typoed, it should read "Stop Online Privacy Act" .... OH wait nvm, it's intentional typo
Pulsed Media Seedboxes
This is the mindset that has caused the US to move steadily to the right for the past 30 years. The lesser evil is still evil.
We have not really moved left or right exactly, so much as we have moved towards statism - where the state controls everything. That is what we must withdraw from to regain freedoms we have lost.
However it must be noted that currently the Left is far more into promoting statist ideals than the Right (which was body-checked by the Tea Party over this issue).
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I'd like to know who is calling Ron Wyden a hardcore liberal, because they clearly haven't been paying attention to Mr. Wyden recently. Just his co-sponsoring of this bill that would partially privatize Medicare should convince anyone that he's not a 'hardcore liberal.'
He's quite moderate, actually, which explains why he's trying to cut through the bullshit and actually work with people from the "opposition" party.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
Linux isn't an acronym
PHP is one of those stupid recursive acronyms So really the acronym is the name.
iOS apple never called it anything else. So it is its real name.
SOPA I would say isn't reasonable for everyone to know what it is or what it stands for. For one it is new. It is for a new bill, it hasn't been around for years. Secondly it is what the United States Congress calls it, Other countries are not always involved what the US is doing all the time... Also us Americans may not always be into seeing every bill that comes out of the US. Third Slashdotters don't always log in every day, or week or month. So when they come it these articles make no sense.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Yep, when stuff like this starts passing, it's time to leave the country.
Wait. So the main opponents to such a bill are Ron Paul and Pelosi, but IT World would rather poo-poo Ron Paul because they (like so many other liberals I could mention) would rather cut their nose to spite their face, and support a watered down version of the bill coming from more mainstream politicians? And Pelosi isn't worth mentioning at all?
Yeah, fuck you IT World.
It would force U.S. internet companies like Google to censor search results as a response to a copyright allegation.
If you think that's what this law is about, you are wrong, Google already censors search results as a response to a copyright allegation. That's what the DMCA was about.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
the government is not going to shut down Youtube and Facebook, this is to PROTECT Youtube and Facebook
No, it is not.
Only someone who lives in a cave would not know about this.
When voters don't care about a subject, it leaves the congress-people free to do whatever they want. So they do.
Yes. True leaders tell their constituents things that they need to know, so they can be better informed about the issues at hand. Conmen and grifters always try and befog their marks with a blizzard of words and concerns about extraneous things. The marks may mean well, but they're still being played.
Yes, it is (once again, I don't claim to be an expert on the law, it's too long to read and this is according to my understanding of it). The law explicitly gives the executive branch the power to block foreign websites, which is why people are comparing it to China's censorship. China wanted to promote their own internal version of Twitter, Google, etc, so they blocked Twitter, Google, etc.
When the president, or one of his minions, decides that DailyMotion.com is causing problems for Google, they can now block it. Do you believe they won't?
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
The article fails at describing SOPA and is super vague in most of its descriptions.
Better description
This falls under the same category as articles that think everybody will want Android because it can be hacked.
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
only someone who lives in a cave would think that everyone lives in their cave with him/her.
Here's the crux of the biscuit: SOPA and PIPA is the latest attempt of the MPAA, the RIAA and a whole alphabet soup of organizations representing billion dollar babies who have been crying about the internet killing their business since Napster reared its' nappy head up. This is also them trying to put the toothpaste back in the tube after realizing they should have bought a stake in the factory. This will not pass, and a watered down version of it won't pass either because the RIAA doesn't think it would go fast enough. Quit crying and adapt, people.
FYI, My New York Senator Kirsten Gilibrand is a cosponsor of PIPA (the senate equivalent of SOPA) and is the top recipient of campaign financing from the TV / Movies / Music industry. In a decent society an elected official would recuse themselves from taking a position if they received bribes campaign funding from anybody that might benefit from that position. It's a disgrace that our government comprises of crooks like Gillibrand.
SOPA I would say isn't reasonable for everyone to know what it is or what it stands for. For one it is new. It is for a new bill, it hasn't been around for years. Secondly it is what the United States Congress calls it, Other countries are not always involved what the US is doing all the time... Also us Americans may not always be into seeing every bill that comes out of the US. Third Slashdotters don't always log in every day, or week or month. So when they come it these articles make no sense.
SOPA has been mentioned at least once a week on /. for at least a few weeks, if not months, and you still don't know what it is?
SOPA is the Stop Online Piracy Act AKA the U.S. Government Lets RIAA/MPAA Hijack DNS With No Oversight Act.
GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
Yes. True leaders tell their constituents things that they need to know, so they can be better informed about the issues at hand.
Heh, once again, imagine if during a debate a candidate started talking about the finer points of lumber-importation policy. It wouldn't matter how great a leader he/she was, because people aren't interested in that. They want to hear about the things they are interested in.
The only times we get great leaders is during wartime, because that's when everyone is paying attention. As soon as voters stop paying attention, we get grifters. As they say, democracy doesn't guarantee good government, it guarantees the government people deserve.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
if you explained this bill to random people on the street, 5% would be in favor, 5% would be opposed, and the rest would stare at you blankly.
Heh. Well said, and it applies equally to most important issues, bills or policies. Disinterested, incurious and apathetic people make a perfect breeding ground for opportunistic politicians.
But the fact that he is now considered a 'hard core liberal' really show how far the party line has moved toward republicans.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
", it's too long to read "
then shut up.
You haven't read it, and you don't understand it.
"Do you believe they won't?"
no, they won't. That;s the part I'm not even concerned with. It wold be apolitical disaster. It's the same reason Marshal Law has never been declared.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
From the article.
"The letter is short and to the point, explaining that, under the provisions currently found in the Stop Online Piracy Act " stop being a dumb ass.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Well, to be fair, SOPA could stand for a number of things, such as: Stop Online Publishing Act, Stop Online Pragmatism Act, Shit On Public Act, Severely Outrageous Politics Act, Shame On Politicians Act...
Does anyone with any amount of technical training actually think this bill is a good idea? No.
Why do they think this isn't a good idea? Because they understand the internet, its design, and the people affected better than these lawmakers. Sadly, these lawmakers only here the sound of "bling bling and clink clink" as they sell out their constituents for what must be the thirteen-thousandth time. Someone should sit them down, use small words, and explain to them just how badly they're selling out their own offspring. But I digress, our culture is one of being wealthy for one day, and poor for the rest of time.
I am John Hurt.
is it the Stop Online Privacy Act?
Paul, is that you?
6th Street Radio @ddombrowsky
Wrong. The US is not becoming statist, it's becoming (is?) corporatist. You got modded up by all the Libertarians, who love this line of argument but it doesn't make sense.
The traditional left, especially the progressive wing of the Democratic party, espouse civil libertarianism, regulation of corporations, and control of industries where they feel competition does not work (i.e. medicine).
The traditional right, espouses fewer regulations on corporations so as not to become a dictator ship that picks winners unfairly and fiscal responsibility of the government as a whole, and striking a balance between federal and state powers. In the past, they have not liked spending, but when spending was called for, they called for a sensible balanced budget at all times.
The current Democratic part still espouses civil Libertarianism as a whole, but doesn't push it too hard because it stirs certain idiot groups to froth at the mouth and rather than go after them, they quiet down, and because Americans as a whole aren't very socially progressive (one of the last developed nations to free black slaves and give women the right to vote, and we'll probably be one of the last to allow some kind of marriage reform). Corporations actually fund these idiot groups and claim it's grassroots behind cleverly used laws designed to shield nonprofit corporations. The no longer push hard, as a group, for corporate regulations, because the only people able to put together enough money to help them run for office are the corporations, so they don't chime up too much about regulations. So thanks to clever corporate greed, the Democrats as a group are simply pussies.
The current Republican party still espouses fewer regulations, but to the detriment of the people as if to have no regulations and an anarchy state. This is thanks to corporations donating to them and giving them speeches that simply state that we have too many regulations and taxes when corporations are already free to run rampant and we are going broke. They get donations from those same corporations that fund the idiot groups, and are basically paid to say the same things these idiot groups say about social causes. They no longer push fiscal responsibility because they don't care if we have the money, they just keep chanting "lower taxes" instead of "fair taxes" or "just enough taxes." The taxes are lowest on the upper class and keep going lower, under the guise that if the rich get more money, they'll hire more people, which hasn't shown any truth in in decades. It's called trickle down economics, and it doesn't work. But they don't have time to talk about any other fiscal matters because they are too busy pushing the idiot group agenda. And they push it so hard then end up being supreme dicks about any issue they are on. And they look like dicks when open their mouths about some social issue that people just want to stop talking about. So thanks to clever greed, Republicans as a group are really big dicks
So yes, our government is run by a bunch of pussies and dicks fucking around and not getting anything done, being directed by corporations to not get anything done unless it makes more money for them. And we all watch it expecting something new to happen when it's the same boring stupid shit over and over. Welcome to porn Washington, DC style. Statist my ass, the state is dead!
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
You haven't read it, and you don't understand it.
Neither have 99.999% of the people on this site, including you. I know you didn't read and understand it because if you were a lawyer, you wouldn't have gotten this next part wrong:
It's the same reason Marshal Law has never been declared.
It has been declared, and approved by congress, you're just ignorant. Check it out. If you want to talk to people who actually HAVE read the law, go find a forum of lawyers.
no, they won't. That;s the part I'm not even concerned with.
Really, really no one cares what you're concerned with.~~~
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Would it be terribly insulting to our intelligence to just link to the Wikipedia article? It would cost nothing to anyone, and, well, that's why Wikipedia is there in the first place.
Yes, I can do that search on my own... I guess I can compile all my own software too. But for some reason, some OSS projects actually compile it for me. Is that really so bad of them?
Camber Linux orSuccessful BSD naptime. They shouldn't have NetBSD with its security was going to handle. trials?
Given the Tea Party's claim that they're for "smaller government", they absolutely should be against this. The fact that so many of them aren't is telling about what the Tea Party's true motives are.
WHOOSH!
Is 1563649 a prime number?
First, the fact that these two stand together on this issue is proof you can't trust anybody in congress. There is no hope until they are all purged.
I am against manditory health insurance, pro gun, pro choice, pro constitution, against government control, I support Unions, want a balanced budget at all times, I'm Anti-Islam, Anti-racism, Against illegal immigrents, and think the bankers need to be liquidated, and I'm Athiest. So sho
the hell should I vote for?
Oh? Congress isn't capable of subterfuge? Just as the meaning of a patent is contained in the Claims and not in the Abstract, the meaning of a law lies in the text itself. In the name of stopping online piracy, SOPA would give the US government, and by extension, the various intellectual property rights organizations, the power to make any internet node node inaccessible from the United States.
Might also know how to spell it.
It's 'martial" law, not "marshal" law. and it need not be capitalized. It's not a proper noun.
Posting as AC due to having moderated already.
Mod parent up.
Admittedly, you SHOULD already know what the Stop Online Piracey Act is, but whoever modded you as flamebait obviously had an axe to grind.
I have forgotten what SOPA is a couple times a week for that same period :(
If you do not know what SOPA is at this point, then you must not read /. very often. It is kind of like not knowing what the DMCA is...
Palm trees and 8
SOPA has been mentioned at least once a week on /. for at least a few weeks, if not months, and you still don't know what it is?
What if they mailed the link to their non-techie relatives? What if they just joined Slashdot? What if the person is a writer with a mind for words and phrases not acronyms? Journalistic standard is to use the full name first before using the acronym. The exception is headlines. So Slashdot should have posted:
Headline: Meet the Strange Bedfellows Who Could Stop SOPA ...
jfruhlinger writes
"In a political environment that's become very strongly defined by partisan lines, the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) debate has offered
Sorry, bro, dailymotion could never give youtube problems. I just checked it out and was constantly bombarded with 30 second ads to watch a 3 minute video. That's a worse ad to content ratio than broadcast TV! You may have a point in theory but i can assure you dailymotion specifically will in no way threaten youtube.
the Parti Internationale Pirate Association ?
When voters don't care about a subject, it leaves the congress-people free to be bought by whoever has the most money. So they are.
FTFY.
iOS used to be iPhone OS.
Learn about Photography Basics.
Issa has his hands full with the Fast & Furious investigation, I would think.
Learn about Photography Basics.
regardless of law, people are going to do what people are going to do, and that will never change no matter what bills are passed, copyrights/patents are awarded. You can't stop anyone from doing anything, all you can do is threaten and extort. Human nature will eventually win out though. STOP trying to prevent people from engaging in activities that cause no direct harm, you are wasting time and money and holding back a society that desperately needs to move forward. First order of business, stop preventing people from moving forward.
Never say never. Ah!! I did it again!
i think he was being witty. i chuckled.
No, these people are debating about screaming "SOUP" in Spanish.
These bills are not about piracy of music or movies or anything else. They are about control of ANY content that may be available on the Internet. It means that ANY site can be shut down by CLAIMING it violates the provisions of this act with no due course, proof or recourse of any kind. It is FAR worse than the DMCA. The only thing that will offset the huge amounts of money being poured out to the congrescritters to get this bill passed is for thousands and thousands of voters to contact them and tell them that if it passes they will loose your vote.
HAVE YOU CALLED YOUR CONGRESS CRITTER?
See, here's the thing. The constitution only authorizes limited government. No sane person can read it any other way. The federal government, for its part, has found such actual authorization too limiting... seriously... and so basically ignores the constitution. In doing so, it has exercised the power to enable various things it doesn't actually have the authority to implement, such as a nationwide social safety net. It has also destroyed the bill of rights and unleashed a veritable laundry list of evils upon the population.
Now, if you want the federal government to be restrained, either you need an entirely new constitution to be put in place (how???), or you need the government's exercise of power to be chopped back to the current constitution's authorized limits, and then the constitution will need amendment so that the good things, which actually consist of a fairly long list despite the long, long list of evils, can be legitimized as functions of the federal government -- because really, the constitution as it stands doesn't authorize much power for the feds at all unless you read it with a mumble, two glass eyes, and a brain tumor.
On the other hand, if you want the federal government to be free to do whatever it wants, constrained only by what congress can agree upon, so that inconveniences like constitutional conventions aren't required to implement, for instance, nationwide medicare for old folks, nationwide schooling and standards for children, and making it legitimately illegal for your neighbor to own an anthrax factory or a nuke, then (a) we're already in that situation, but (b) it unfortunately has brought with it a whole host of evils, like the sundering of almost the entire bill of rights, the inversion of the commerce clause, ex post facto law, usurpation of article 5 powers under the guise of article 3, assassination of US citizens (aka premeditated killing by stealth without anything even remotely resembling due process), congress-folk voting in things like their own raises and being immune to insider trading laws. From my POV, government freedom has been tested and found extremely wanting.
But getting to a constitutionally restrained government... I haven't got even a clue about a workable process for that. I don't think anyone else does, either. The "ammo box", so beloved of Internet tough guyz, I can't see working. Supposing the unlikely event of a successful armed revolution, I truly can't imagine enough of a framework remaining to create a new government. OTOH, if the military does it for us, that'll leave us directly in the hands of a known conservative religious organization with huge firepower, and I think the only thing that would possibly arise successfully from that is a theocracy -- something considerably worse, IMHO, than what we have now, strange as that may sound. Certainly the congresscritters aren't going to limit themselves, they're quite literally fat and happy with the status quo, and looking at the political requirements for becoming one (basically you need to be corrupt) and the bennies once you're there, why wouldn't they be?
What's going to happen here -- IMHO, of course -- is that our society is going to continue this slide down to the outright ultimate power of the 535; elections will continue to be less and less subtly rigged, as we see with the media ignoring Paul, despite his essentially equal to front runner status, with the public being steered carefully to vote only for approved candidates, and/or voting machines rigged as required, when required, again as we have already seen; laws will continue to be made regardless of constitutionality, and then backed up by the bought-and-paid-for mouthpieces on the supreme court; and the vast majority of the country will continue to not care. Technology will step in with robotics and manufacture on demand, and keep the population generally happy with "stuff" and comfort, and all will be well, as long as you are willing to be the round peg in the round hole the government makes available fo
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act of 2011, the Senate counterpart to SOPA.
the above spells PROTECT IP Act, which becomes PIPA.
He effected a bored affect.
Ron Paul? What makes him "unfit"? He's running neck-and-neck with the clown-shoes-of-the-week put forth by the party machine; he's fairly consistent, he has clearly articulated ideas. So how does he fit in with your evaluation?
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Given the Tea Party's claim that they're for "smaller government", they absolutely should be against this. The fact that so many of them aren't is telling . . .
I don't know where in the world you dreamed that up.
The republicans in Congress that want SOPA are the old garde. They claim to be against excess government controls, but the cave on social issues or tech issues. Honestly, many of them don't understand much about technology. The recording industry makes big campaign donations, and they cave.
That is very different than the tea party. We're younger, and support limit government ideals in all walks of life, including copyright and patent issues. We are frustrated that both parties have failed us. Take it from someone on the inside ... the tea party movement is very strongly against SOPA.
JFGI.
The only reason Issa would be on board is to sabotage it from within.
Issa is a career criminal, and a lockstepping member of the Conservative Culture of Corruption.
SOPA must be stopped. Here's a good list of ways you can circumvent this madness.
It'll require either that, or people voting for those other parties. Now that I think of it, for the parties to cooperate, will require people voting too. They have to be losing, in third place or lower, to ever have incentive to support election systems which don't give advantages to the top two.
It sounds like you've decided to vote against overthrowing the Republicrats. It may not be your desire, but it's what you're going to reluctantly do. It's ok, I understand. Lots of people face that terrible decision.
Hoping that the change will happen, in spite of your voting against it? Oh dear... we have a problem.
By "deal with" I think you mean "endorse and support" with your vote to maintain the status quo.
Tell ya what. I have a solution.
Come over half way. Go ahead and vote for the Republicrats, but advocate against them when you're outside the voting booth. (Don't tell anyone you're going to vote against election reform; keep that a secret.) Find one other person, and convince them to vote against the Republicrats, in order to cancel out your vote for the Republicrats. Then you can say you did the safe thing, while also saying you did no net harm. Sound good?
"Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
Protect Intellectual Property Act ?
Slipping shoelaces ?
What a wonderful world it would be.
+1 , but then again, you're just an AC
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
Reminds me of that HIRE act passed last year that claimed to be about encouraging hiring more employees in the US but was really a capital control bill.
The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.