Slashdot Mirror


Net Companies Consider the "Nuclear Option" To Combat SOPA

Atypical Geek writes "Alec Liu of Fox News reports that Amazon, Facebook and Google are considering a coordinated blackout of the internet to protest SOPA, the Stop Online Privacy Act being debated in Congress. From the article: 'Such a move is drastic. And though the details of exactly how it would work are unclear, it's already under consideration, according to Markham Erickson, the executive director of NetCoalition, a trade association that includes the likes of Google, PayPal, Yahoo, and Twitter. With the Senate debating the SOPA legislation at the end of January, it looks as if the tech industry's top dogs are finally adding bite to their bark, something CNET called "the nuclear option." "When the home pages of Google.com, Amazon.com, Facebook.com, and their Internet allies simultaneously turn black with anti-censorship warnings that ask users to contact politicians about a vote in the U.S. Congress the next day on SOPA," Declan McCullagh wrote, "you'll know they're finally serious."'"

39 of 507 comments (clear)

  1. Such an option is going to cause panic... by vikingpower · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...not among politicians, but among all the kiddies who can not communicate anymore but via Facebook. Under-18 Doomsday guaranteed.

    --
    Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
    1. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by AngryDeuce · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They should start by targeting the entire U.S. and other "pro-SOPA" countries and leave the other countries alone. Why punish people all over the world just because a small minority of people in the U.S. are corrupt douchebag cockheads?

      Targeting only D.C. isn't going to do much...the vast majority of the people, particularly legislators, that are supporting this legislation hardly even use the web.

    2. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by Hadlock · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You must be new here, just last year we wrote the copyright legislation for Spain and New Zealand, and shoved it down their throats (they passed it, grudgingly). We've twisted China's arm about movie piracy in the past, and plenty of other countries as well. We're terrible about installing dictators in countries, but we're really good at writing laws and making them law in other countries. What copyright law passes here in our bellwether country becomes law in 20-70% of the rest of the world.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    3. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Our government (NZ) passed it eagerly. We also did some blackout-style protesting, but the bill was passed anyway because of the emergency powers available to the politicians after the devastating Christchurch earthquake.

      That move alone absolutely sickened me, and I have lost all faith in our politicians.

    4. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by russotto · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They should start by targeting the entire U.S. and other "pro-SOPA" countries and leave the other countries alone. Why punish people all over the world just because a small minority of people in the U.S. are corrupt douchebag cockheads?

      Because

      A) These are American-based companies and will have to follow SOPA even in their overseas operations.
      B) Once SOPA passes in the US, the copyright industry will immediately move to have it implemented in Europe in the name of harmonizing. And the European corrupt douchebag cockheads will go for it. The rest of the world will follow, because no country has any shortage of corrupt douchebag cockheads.

    5. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by gman003 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Make it global from day 1. SOPA would be a problem not just for Americans, but for everyone.

      I'm pretty sure that if Google, Facebook, Youtube, Twitter and Wikipedia all went down for a day, even Washington would realize that SOPA can't stand. And if they went on a blackout until SOPA was defeated (with the implied or explicit threat of shutting down permanently should SOPA pass), defeating SOPA would become the #1 priority of Congress. Because *NOBODY* would vote for "the Senator that killed the Internet".

    6. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by ancientt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I hope they do and I hope you are right. Nothing could be better for the future of our country than for the impressionable youth to realize that their freedoms and access are protected only at the whim of corporate policy and fickle government oversight. I could actually hope the coming years would reflect the will of the people if the youth of today were sufficiently shocked.

      --
      B) Eliminate all the stupid users. This is frowned upon by society.
    7. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by AngryDeuce · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm still waiting to hear why things like Minimum Wage and EPA regulations are "job killers" while things like SOPA aren't...

      The companies that are going to be most effected by this stupid bullshit are the few American companies that are actually doing well right now. I thought we had to make America "open for business"? Are these not businesses as well, or do they not donate enough to qualify for that kind of consideration?

      It's just so retarded on so many levels. The web brings in 100 times more revenue than the MAFIAA does. Why are we going to cripple it? It makes no sense whatsoever...

    8. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by wagnerrp · · Score: 5, Informative

      They're not trying to persuade the senators directly, they're trying to make the issues known to the general public. The average internet user likely hasn't even heard of SOPA, much less realize the implications it entails. On the other hand, hundreds of millions use sites such as google, yahoo, and twitter daily. If instead of their normal behavior, all of those people using those pages get a notice about SOPA, a quarter will likely read it at least once, and a quarter of those might actually understand why that's a bad thing, and a tenth of those might actually take the time to try to contact their representatives about it. You're looking at potentially millions of constituents, all trying to contact their senators within a couple hour time frame, the day before the issue goes to a vote.

      The vast majority of politicians are in it to make money, not make the country a better place. That means accepting donations and favors, and staying in office as long as possible to accept more donations and favors. Argue that all you want, but the fact is that politicians don't get paid all that much, yet Senators all live very well, well beyond what a $175k/yr salary would suggest. If a particular bill becomes unpopular, they aren't going to support it and risk losing their position in the next election, regardless of how much lobbyists are otherwise pushing it.

    9. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by Rakarra · · Score: 5, Funny

      Make it global from day 1. SOPA would be a problem not just for Americans, but for everyone.

      I'm pretty sure that if Google, Facebook, Youtube, Twitter and Wikipedia all went down for a day, even Washington would realize that SOPA can't stand.

      I'm not sure, you have to balance the dislike for having those sites down... against the amazing productivity gains that would result! If they all went down for a day, we'd have flying cars, cold fusion, and warp drive the next day.

      But I didn't think the actual sites would be down, just the front pages.

  2. Just blackout 4/5 of the screen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Let people access facebook, etc, but only in a tiny little window. Have the rest black with a message "Call your politician right now to remove this".

  3. No need ... by PPH · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... to black out an entire site. Just drop the candidates' Twitter, FaceBook accounts and websites immediately prior to various state primary elections or caucuses.

    You want panic? That'll be panic the likes of which you've never seen.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:No need ... by Overzeetop · · Score: 5, Informative

      I can practically guarantee that loss or suspension of an account at the sole discretion of the provider is in their terms of service. Completely legal, and already agreed to by the candidates. Game, set, match.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  4. Re:Editing fail by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Alec Liu of Fox News reports that Amazon, Facebook and Google are considering a coordinated a coordinated blackout of the internet to protest SOPA, the Stop Online Privacy Act ... *SNIP*

    PIRACY act, it's the Stop Online PIRACY act. Talk about a grammar failure. /GrammarNazi.

    Are you the same guy that keeps pointing out that Micro$oft is not actually spelled with a dollar sign?

  5. Stop Talking by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... and do it. Either you have a backbone or you don't. Pick a day, middle of the week, say Jan 12th, and just do it. Announce you're doing it, and watch the others fall in line. True leadership doesn't wait.

    --
    Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  6. Re:Democracy in Action by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What's interesting is that despite their size and financial power, the technology companies are very poorly organised and do very little lobbying when you compare them to the media companies. Which is why we get such horribly lopsided legislation such as SOPA.

    If the tech. companies actually got themselves organised in Washington instead of pulling silly stunts, they might actually find they can get a lot more done.

  7. Re:Srsly? by OS24Ever · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I would think Facebook could implement something geographically that based on what they know about you, tell you who to call to get your Facebook account restored and have it be the senators of the state you live in, and the house of representatives for your zip code.

    That could be spectacular. I mean the phone systems would melt down. I find this idea rather funny.

    --

    As a rock-in-roll Physicist once said, No matter where you go, there you are.

  8. Re:They can find better protets methods... by mrclisdue · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A simple splash screen is fine.

    Except that, once SOPA is enacted, you will be greeted with a 404 when you try to login to your favourite site...forever.

    The point being that once SOPA is enacted, everybody becomes hostage.

    cheers,

  9. Re:They can find better protets methods... by nurb432 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And that attitude is why we are in this mess in the first place. You are all for it, as long as you are not inconvenienced.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  10. Re:Democracy in Action by tjhart85 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes, exactly! Getting the people involved is NOT the solution! The real solution is that they just have to offer a bigger bribe than the media companies!

  11. Re:Editing fail by Nemyst · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I actually like that name. It certainly reflects the wishes of the politicians better.

  12. Re:Better option -- Targeted blackout by shentino · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I wonder if Google's anti censorship stance is what got them under the antitrust microscope in the first place?

    Far easier to pass a bad law when you have your opponent by the balls.

  13. SOAP is what you get by RichMan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    When the politicians admit
    a) they don't understand the tech
    b) are willing to take the positions of the media companies that donate to them

    So the US is led by ludites who have sold their favor to the corporations. And this (the US) is the self descibed "leader of the free world".

    Where is the power of the people in this process? Where is the representation of the taxed?
    Where is the educated and informed action that is supposed to happen in a democracy?

    Do we need more proof we are living in a corporatocracy ?

    1. Re:SOAP is what you get by Artemis3 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Americans do not believe in Democracy. Power to the masses to them equals ignorants ruling. They crafted a system where the rich (educated) elite is able to influence politics to the extreme, the "Lobby system" which is basically illegal in the rest of the world; rich people and corporations openly funding politicians (elsewhere a scandal).

      Technically they don't define themselves as a democracy either, its a republic at best. A federal states union or something along those lines; each ruled by the wealthy (now corporations) in practice. A form of plutocracy, and it was intended that way. The rest is (corporate) propaganda to keep the masses controlled, and brag the world of how perfect they are and how undeveloped everyone else is.

      --
      Artix
      Your Linux, your init.
  14. Re:And when they don't? by Kjella · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Nope. That doesn't mean rattling your sabers didn't have an effect. Nobody launched a single nuke during the Cold War, but both the explicit and implicit threats obviously had a huge effect. They don't really want to go nuclear any more than anyone wanted WWIII.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  15. Re:Pot calling the kettle black by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    What's the difference between Facebook, Google, et. al. taking themselves offline compared to the government doing it for them? From an end user's perspective, there is no difference.

    This is the most idiotic thing I've heard anyone say in a while.

  16. Re:This move is lame... by GreatBunzinni · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You are confused. The fact that corporations do write legislation tailored to their needs is an obvious sign that the government is corrupt. Yet, having corporations react to the legislation that corrupt representatives are forcing onto a country is hardly any reason to worry about. You may complain that these companies are actively engaged in the democratic process, but this is the very definition of activism, which is supposed to be one of those inalienable rights which, when expressed, represent what a democratic system is all about.

    So, why exactly do you believe that activism is somehow worse than having corrupt politicians act as the lap dog of other corporations and special interest groups?

    --
    Slashdot, fix your code or at least hire someone who is competent at it to do it for you.
  17. Re:Pot calling the kettle black by Chrisje · · Score: 5, Funny

    I have to second what the AC said below. That is the most idiotic thing I've heard in a long time.

    You're really asking us what the difference is between choosing not to say something or having your government making sure you don't say a given thing? If you are a US citizen AND you would say such a thing, I suggest you print out your Constitution and Declaration of Independence and henceforth use it to wipe your ass with.

    Wow.

  18. Oh shit... this is getting serious by erroneus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm not "oh shit"-ing because there might be a global demonstration against what the US government is attempting to do. I'm "oh shit"-ing because many businesses are willing to interrupt their business to get notice and make a stand. Of course, this is so they can preserve what they have now, but this is also "oh shit" because they are seeing the future beyond tomorrow or the next quarter.

    It's getting serious.

  19. Re:They can find better protets methods... by bmo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    >Ah, more fearmongering. No, my personal site will never be affected by SOPA because I generate all its content myself. My own photography, videos, thoughts and data feeds.

    Someone, maybe me, maybe someone else accuses you of infringing, whether true or not. Your upstream gets 100 percent protection from liability if they cut you off and none if they don't, because that's how "good faith" is defined in the bill.

    And I, as the accuser, do not suffer any consequences for false accusation.

    Guess what happens to your site.

    Go ahead, guess.

    --
    BMO

  20. Re:They can find better protets methods... by mrclisdue · · Score: 5, Informative

    Fearmongering?

    Let's suppose someone from Time-Warner decides that "your own photography" resembles theirs? "your own videos" resemble theirs (how could *anyone* possibly have the same or similar ideas as anyone else?)

    Once *someone-with-more-pull ($$)* than you decides that you're infringing on their widespread copyright/trademarks/patents, you're doomed.

    You may feel that you're immune, but you won't be; there simply aren't enough checks and balances to ensure you're immune. The dollars win every time.

    cheers,

  21. Re:They can find better protets methods... by HeckRuler · · Score: 5, Insightful

    because I generate all its content myself. My own photography, videos, thoughts and data feeds.

    Prove it. Prove that it isn't owned by someone else. Then take that evidence proving a negative to a court, fight the district attorney, convince a judge that your personal site was wrongfully blocked. And then your site will be unblocked.

    Until they do it again.

    (Also, the parent said "favorite sites", not "personal site". With SOPA, the DA, at the behest of content owners, could block any site that they deem is infringing their copyrights or is aiding infringement. Like if Slashdot linked to a site that explained how to bypass SOPA blocks.)

  22. Re:Editing fail by Totenglocke · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It should be called SOAA - Stop Online Activity Act, because that's the real agenda here. Companies that failed to adapt to a changed market and blaming the internet for their failures and want it banned.

    --
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
  23. Re:Has Google, Amazon et al proposed an alternativ by dgatwood · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You can't combat piracy. Externalities are a cost of doing business. Anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding him/herself.

    There's exactly one way to maximize profit, and that is to deliver a product that people are willing to pay for at a price that they are willing to pay. The pirates were never your customers and never will be, and the sooner the companies accept that and focus on the real problems (massively overpricing everything when first released, delivering products that can't easily be moved between devices because of the restrictive/broken DRM, and the declining quality of entertainment products in general), they'll have better profits. That's not what SOPA/PIPA and similar legislation are about, however. They're about eliminating legitimate lower-cost competition.

    What scares the industry most is that these days, any jackass in his home could make a movie of comparable quality to most of the non-SFX Hollywood films. Moderately high-end HD cams cost a couple of grand or three—well within the price range of most people if they are willing to save up for a bit. You can buy halogen lights at Home Depot for fifty bucks, then rebuild the reflectors yourself and build your own barn doors for just about nothing. And there are millions of people out there who can act, not just a few dozen in Hollyweird, so there's no shortage of available talent.

    In effect, this means that commercial movies are too expensive by about a factor of a thousand. But instead of finding ways to take advantage of new technologies to cut their production and distribution costs, they are instead focusing on destroying new means of distribution to prevent competition. You see, YouTube is in a great position to deliver paid content from independent producers to consumers. The studios know this, and they know that if the Internet turns into anything approaching a free market, they're basically out of business. For this reason, they do everything within their power to kill such sites—not because they can be used to pirate Hollywood movies, but because they can be used to sell non-Hollywood movies without having to spend millions of dollars in infrastructure. That ability of the general public to do what the major studios do is the greatest threat to their power.

    Game studios are similar. There's no reason why people who want to write games should go work for one of those sweatshops, working unholy hours for terrible pay. You can go off on your own and work with a handful of people and write a great game, sell it, and make a fair amount of money. If everyone did this, the sweatshop game studios of the world would collapse, and the Internet makes that not only possible, but downright easy. They know this, and it terrifies them. So they do what they can to create liability for any ISP that might dare to distribute software, thus discouraging the practice.

    And so on. It's not about piracy. It's about control. They want to control the entire content production industry, and our Congresspeople are almost all too fucking stupid to realize that these laws only serve to turn the big studios into a state-protected oligopoly and thwart small businesses' attempts to compete. And this is why we don't have jobs in this country.

    --

    Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  24. Re:First they get my hopes up, then ... by LVSlushdat · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Simple: Each one of the major players, put up a black splash page with info about SOPA and WHAT to do about it... That's all, No Google searches, no Facebook statuses, No buying on Amazon/eBay. If you go to one of these sites ALL you get is the black splash page... EasyPeasy...

    --
    THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
  25. Re:Good by ancientt · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It is very apt that they're referring to it as a nuclear option, because it harms much more than just the intended target. Every visitor to a site with blackout boxes or censorship warnings will consider for a moment what their other options are. This action would be to inform people of something they probably don't realize they care about. It will cost the participants real money as customers switch to alternatives and even those who don't switch will be a little more aware that they need alternatives.

    There will be fallout.

    You fear corporate action to influence behavior? Many people seem to think that they have a right to the services provided, rather than realizing it can be revoked or changed at whim, and I welcome the education of the masses.

    --
    B) Eliminate all the stupid users. This is frowned upon by society.
  26. Re:They can find better protets methods... by kheldan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Better watch out. Your camera manufacturer may change the EULA on the software your camera runs, claiming copyright on all photographs taken with the camera that you are granted license to use (you didn't really think that you OWN the camera, did you? No no silly boy, you merely bought a license to use it! All you base are belong to us!), therefore anything you post online is an infringement on THEIR copyright. Don't worry, I'm sure they'll let you off with a warning -- and a royalty fee for every photo you post on your website. Oh, and you website hosting company may change their EULA to claim copyright on all content they're hosting -- merely to protect YOU, of course -- so don't go thinking you own any of that, either. As if you ever did: The EULA on the software you used to create your site? Same deal: they change the EULA, and viola! Nothing you create with it is really yours, you just have a limited license to it, revokable more or less any time they decide you did, and unless you have a zillion dollars to pay a lawyer to fight it, you're screwed. And so on, and so on. Welcome to the world of SOPA: You own NOTHING.

    --
    Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
  27. harmonizing douchebag cockhead end-run by epine · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes, and the harmonization process involves negotiating treaty consent in a closed process, then bringing it back and claiming in the face of democratic opposition "we've already promised this" without any democratic consent in the first place.

    I wouldn't complain about my life suffering a DOS day for these companies to band together and make a point.

  28. In our darkest hour -- a savior will return by Krishnoid · · Score: 5, Funny
    They came after his candidacy ... and he stood down.

    They came after his planet ... and he started working to find a solution.

    Then they came after his child.

    Nobody comes after his child.

    GORE

    Summer, 2012.