Wikipedia Calls for Anti-SOPA Blackout Jan 18

  • News
  • Thread starter Hurkyl
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Wikipedia
In summary: The blocking of entire domains-The removal of material from a site-The blocking of specific pages on a siteWikipedia sees this as a huge problem, because they would be unable toremove any of the material that violates copyright, and would be at the mercy of the government.In summary, Wikipedia is protesting a proposed law that would allow the government to block websites accused of copyright infringement. They feel that the law would severely harm the website, and that it would be unable to remove any of the material that violates copyright. Many other websites are also participating in the blackout.
  • #1
Hurkyl
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
14,981
26
http://blog.wikimedia.org/2012/01/16/wikipedias-community-calls-for-anti-sopa-blackout-january-18/

Very unfortunate -- they lose a lot of standing in my own eyes.

When I see things like this, one of the first things I look for is whether they are taking a reasonable position, or if they are taking an infeasible cartoonish position.

All around the world, we're seeing the development of legislation intended to fight online piracy, and regulate the Internet in other ways, that hurt online freedoms ... We want the Internet to remain free and open, everywhere, for everyone.

and this quote looks like they're taking the cartoon position: that any laws and regulation regarding the internet should be rejected on pure principle.



I don't know anything about the particular laws they're protesting -- and their stated reasons for protest do not fill me with confidence that their protest has merit. In fact, such extreme positions have a counter-productive effect from me -- they've pushed me from apathy to actually feeling antagonistic to their cause.

I really hope that the editors just dropped the ball on this one, rather than this being a sign of Wikipedia's political direction...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
"Net Neutrality" fanatics have a rational point of view, but like most fanatics, they only have PART of a total picture because their fanaticism causes them to ignore or unduly discount other part of the picture.

I would hate to see much at all in the way of internet regulation, and I CERTAINLY do not trust politicians to come up with any reasonable solutions to the problems that could perhaps be helped by some (but not much) controls, but to dismiss the whole concept out of hand is lunacy.

I think the wiki folks see the proposed legislation as a radical point of view in one direction, so they are taking a radical point of view in the other direction. This is how America came to its present state of political gridlock that has us all in such deep trouble.
 
  • #3
In light of SOPA I don't blame their actions, even if they aren't described/put across in the best way.

On a lighter note XKCD explains best the widespread chaos wikipedia's actions will cause;
j0city.png
 
  • #4
:rofl:
 
  • #5
Hurkyl said:
I don't know anything about the particular laws they're protesting -- and their stated reasons for protest do not fill me with confidence that their protest has merit. In fact, such extreme positions have a counter-productive effect from me -- they've pushed me from apathy to actually feeling antagonistic to their cause.

Meaning no insult, but if you don't know anything about the laws they're protesting, how can you take a rational position on their blackout?
 
  • #6
Hurkyl said:
I really hope that the editors just dropped the ball on this one, rather than this being a sign of Wikipedia's political direction...

This move was fully supported by Jimmy Wales, one of the founders, and still one of the key people there. It wasn't some editor that just dropped the ball, it was a decision straight from the top.

Hurkyl said:
and this quote looks like they're taking the cartoon position: that any laws and regulation regarding the internet should be rejected on pure principle.

How can you characterize their position as "any laws and regulation regarding the internet should be rejected on pure principle" when you say

Hurkyl said:
I don't know anything about the particular laws they're protesting

They feel that wikipedia (and the internet as a whole) will be strongly adversely affected by the laws they're protesting. No doubt they have better legal counsel on hand than you do, so I'll take your thoughts on the matter with a grain of salt.

If you consider wikipedia to be a valuable resource, it might be worth looking into what they're actually protesting, since they feel it will hamper them severely.

I'd also add that they're not the only ones participating in the blackout. Many other websites will be blacked out as well. Reddit, the Cheezburger network, Boing Boing (to name a few of the more well known ones). Both Google and Facebook have come out in strongly opposition to the same laws (when do Google and Facebook agree on anything?), though it is doubtful they will participate in the blackout. Other notable companies opposed to the laws are Yahoo, Amazon, Twitter, eBay, and Mozilla.

Perhaps you should actually educate yourself, before taking a "cartoon position" on their protest.
 
  • #7
The main concern for sites like Wikipedia is that they allow people to edit pages, and then volunteers remove illegal postings that violate copyright, pirated material, etc...

The way SOPA was written, a site like Wikipedia, even PF, could have their sites blocked if they missed removing illegal content that was placed on their site without their knowledge.
The originally proposed bill would allow the U.S. Department of Justice, as well as copyright holders, to seek court orders against websites accused of enabling or facilitating copyright infringement. Depending on who makes the request, the court order could include barring online advertising networks and payment facilitators from doing business with the allegedly infringing website, barring search engines from linking to such sites, and requiring Internet service providers to block access to such sites.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act

The DNS blocking part has already been removed.
 
Last edited:
  • #8
Well, I know one person who's against the blackout of sites like Wikipedia and Google: Rupert Murdoch.

All of the news culminated in what may come to be known in the entertainment sector as Black Sunday. Rupert Murdoch, chairman of News Corp. and one of the world's preeminent media tycoons, displayed a rare public tantrum via Twitter. In his posts, he accused the president of taking his marching orders from "Silicon Valley paymasters." Murdoch suggested Google was whipping up the opposition and was a "piracy leader."

http://news.cnet.com/8301-31001_3-5...using-popular-home-page/?tag=mncol;topStories
 
  • #9
Evo said:
The way SOPA was written, a site like Wikipedia, even PF, could have their sites blocked if they missed removing illegal content that was placed on their site without their knowledge.
As I understand it the site may not get a chance to appeal this until after it has been blocked. This worries me in case a disgruntled banned crackpot arranges to have a bunch of copyrighted material posted/linked on PF before reporting us.
 
  • #10
Kudos to Wikipedia for taking a stand again this travesty known as SOPA. It seems that support for SOPA has recently taken a dive as more and more people begin to understand what it really is. The fact that it got as far as it did proves how gullible people can be. I predict other versions of this will appear soon enough though...
 
  • #11
IMP said:
I predict other versions of this will appear soon enough though...
Soon? It's already here in the form of PIPA. Depressingly I expect such attacks on internet freedom will continue until the huge industries that push for it either collapse, adapt for the 21st century or some combination of both.
 
  • #12
Ryan_m_b said:
Soon? It's already here in the form of PIPA. Depressingly I expect such attacks on internet freedom will continue until the huge industries that push for it either collapse, adapt for the 21st century or some combination of both.

Or until they eventually succeed.
 
  • #13
Char. Limit said:
Or until they eventually succeed.
Yup. That's nearly too disturbing to contemplate.
 
  • #15
Ryan_m_b said:
Yup. That's nearly too disturbing to contemplate.
It is disturbing to contemplate, imho. But I think that there are just too many people with computers, and too many organizations/companies/universities with very large server bases that oppose the proposed legistlation ... so that even if it passes, and massively visited sites are subsequently 'closed', there will be workarounds available to the masses in relatively short order.

How important are the satellite links and who controls those? I have no idea.

Anyway, I think I understand where Wiki is coming from, and support their action (which I presume is intended to raise public consciousness of the issue).
 
  • #16
I see the fundamental issue as quite straightforward.

1. The internet should be regulated somehow.
2. The USA should not have, or claim to have, unilateral authority to regulate anything world-wide. Period. That is completely non-negotiable IMO. Of course I don't expect every US citizen to agree with that position.
 
  • #17
ThomasT said:
It is disturbing to contemplate, imho. But I think that there are just too many people with computers, and too many organizations/companies/universities with very large server bases that oppose the proposed legistlation ... so that even if it passes, and massively visited sites are subsequently 'closed', there will be workarounds available to the masses in relatively short order.
Unless of course these big institutions face financial penalties in the US, if a university faced serious fines for students uploading copyrighted material they'd too their best to stop it. It's trickle-down authoritarianism.
AlephZero said:
I see the fundamental issue as quite straightforward.

1. The internet should be regulated somehow.
2. The USA should not have, or claim to have, unilateral authority to regulate anything world-wide. Period. That is completely non-negotiable IMO. Of course I don't expect every US citizen to agree with that position.
I agree. a silver lining however is that if anything like this did happen in the US is that there would be other areas of the world that would flourish and consequently become havens for internet freedom (hopefully).
 
  • #18
Ryan_m_b said:
Unless of course these big institutions face financial penalties in the US, if a university faced serious fines for students uploading copyrighted material they'd too their best to stop it. It's trickle-down authoritarianism.

I agree. a silver lining however is that if anything like this did happen in the US is that there would be other areas of the world that would flourish and consequently become havens for internet freedom (hopefully).
The law is to stop piracy, in other words *theft*, something that we do not condone here, as per our guidelines.
 
  • #19
Evo said:
The law is to stop piracy, in other words *theft*, something that we do not condone here, as per our guidelines.

Just to clarify: This law is to stop copyright infringement, which in NOT theft. For a theft to occur the rightful owner of the item/content/thing must be denied the item/content/thing. If the owner has exactly what they started with, no theft occurred. Making an exact copy of something does not deny the rightful owner the original...

I very much understand the spirit of the use of the word "theft" in this context though.
 
  • #20
Evo said:
The law is to stop piracy, in other words *theft*, something that we do not condone here, as per our guidelines.
True but it isn't just a question of theft. If I uploaded a home video of a birthday party that happened to have music in the background (copyrighted) that would be classed as theft under this law leading to the website shut down (even if temporarily) and me (were I a US citizen) potentially facing a prison sentence.

This is on the understanding that I understand the implications of SOPA correctly.
 
  • #21
Evo said:
The law is to stop piracy, in other words *theft*, something that we do not condone here, as per our guidelines.

That may be the original intent, but it's likely to have effects far beyond stopping theft.

It won't actually do much to stop theft though.
 
  • #22
Evo said:
The law is to stop piracy, in other words *theft*, something that we do not condone here, as per our guidelines.
If people weren't required to pay such exorbitant prices for movies and music, maybe they'd just buy it. The markup on this stuff is absurd. I'll pay a few dollars for a cd or dvd that cost pennies to produce, but not the $15, $20, $25 and up that they're charging. It's ridiculous. And their profits are ridiculous. So, screw them. Currently, anybody in the world can get any music or movie they want for free. Personally, I would much rather buy a shrikwrapped, professionally produced, cd or dvd for a few dollars, than to take a chance getting computer viruses (or arrested) by downloading the stuff for nothing. But I'm not going to pay what they currently want to charge for the stuff.

If internet piracy is such a problem, then how is it that some films are grossing billions, and musical recording artists and companies are still getting rich from cd sales?
 
Last edited:
  • #23
Can we keep the discussion to the implications of SOPA rather than the a general discussion on piracy and copyright? If not the thread will be locked.
 
  • #24
but they are taking a reckless approach to achieving that end. They are being ignorant about the repercussions. It's really up to the software engineers nowadays, and the companies themselves, to design good copyright protection.

Minecraft. A game that everyone I know who pirates has actually bought. And the owner, Notch, is publicaly ok with pirating... probably mostly because he knows how to program (and knows how to socially engineer his product) so it doesn't hurt him. People have to buy his game to really enjoy it. Same with most Xbox LIVE games.

There's plenty of good solutions, blind massive policy change is not one of them. All the money spent lobbying this bill could have been spent on better programmers and socially aware marketers :)
 
  • #25
IMP said:
Just to clarify: This law is to stop copyright infringement, which in NOT theft. For a theft to occur the rightful owner of the item/content/thing must be denied the item/content/thing. If the owner has exactly what they started with, no theft occurred. Making an exact copy of something does not deny the rightful owner the original...

I very much understand the spirit of the use of the word "theft" in this context though.
It's illegal. And piracy is theft. Re-read my post.
 
Last edited:
  • #26
  • #27
Ryan_m_b said:
Can we keep the discussion to the implications of SOPA rather than the a general discussion on piracy and copyright? If not the thread will be locked.
People apparently do not know what the bill is, SOPA stands for Stop Online Piracy Act.

I refer back to https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=3714533&postcount=7
 
  • #28
Don't worry, I'm sure conservapedia will still be up :)
 
  • #29
AlephZero said:
I see the fundamental issue as quite straightforward.

1. The internet should be regulated somehow.
This might be the view of some, but I don't agree with it. The internet, as it exists now, at least in the US afaik, is an essentially unregulated medium of information transmission. I want it to stay that way. With all the so-called 'piracy' of movies and music they still make millions of dollars in profits. I really don't see the problem.

But, imho, the problem of the proposed legislation goes beyond just movies and music, and would affect the free dissemination of political opinion.

AlephZero said:
2. The USA should not have, or claim to have, unilateral authority to regulate anything world-wide. Period. That is completely non-negotiable IMO. Of course I don't expect every US citizen to agree with that position.
This I agree with.
 
  • #32
Ryan_m_b said:
Can we keep the discussion to the implications of SOPA rather than the a general discussion on piracy and copyright? If not the thread will be locked.
I expect it to be locked anyway. If not, then that will be a pleasant surprise.
 
  • #33
Pythagorean said:
Don't worry, I'm sure conservapedia will still be up :)
:smile:
 
  • #34
Char. Limit said:
Don't worry, Wiki already has a counter:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:NORULES

Yeah, if you actually read the header in the POINT link, it says:

It is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply.
 
  • #35
Pythagorean said:
but they are taking a reckless approach to achieving that end. They are being ignorant about the repercussions. It's really up to the software engineers nowadays, and the companies themselves, to design good copyright protection.

Minecraft. A game that everyone I know who pirates has actually bought. And the owner, Notch, is publicaly ok with pirating... probably mostly because he knows how to program (and knows how to socially engineer his product) so it doesn't hurt him. People have to buy his game to really enjoy it. Same with most Xbox LIVE games.

There's plenty of good solutions, blind massive policy change is not one of them. All the money spent lobbying this bill could have been spent on better programmers and socially aware marketers :)
This makes sense to me.
 
<h2>1. What is the purpose of the anti-SOPA blackout on Wikipedia?</h2><p>The anti-SOPA blackout on Wikipedia is a protest against the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), a proposed legislation that would allow the government to censor and shut down websites suspected of hosting copyrighted material. The blackout is meant to raise awareness about the potential negative impact of this legislation on free speech and the internet as a whole.</p><h2>2. When will the Wikipedia blackout take place?</h2><p>The Wikipedia blackout will take place on January 18th, 2022. This date was chosen because it marks the 10th anniversary of the first SOPA blackout in 2012, which was also led by Wikipedia.</p><h2>3. Will the entire Wikipedia site be unavailable during the blackout?</h2><p>Yes, the entire English version of Wikipedia will be unavailable during the blackout. This means that users will not be able to access any articles or information on the site. However, other language versions of Wikipedia will still be accessible.</p><h2>4. How can I still access information on Wikipedia during the blackout?</h2><p>While the English version of Wikipedia will be unavailable, users can still access information through other language versions of the site, or by using a virtual private network (VPN) to bypass the blackout. Additionally, some articles on Wikipedia may still be accessible through search engine caches.</p><h2>5. What can I do to support the anti-SOPA blackout on Wikipedia?</h2><p>There are several ways to support the anti-SOPA blackout on Wikipedia. You can spread awareness by sharing information about the blackout on social media and encouraging others to join the protest. You can also contact your local representatives and voice your opposition to SOPA. Finally, you can donate to organizations that are actively fighting against SOPA and other forms of internet censorship.</p>

1. What is the purpose of the anti-SOPA blackout on Wikipedia?

The anti-SOPA blackout on Wikipedia is a protest against the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), a proposed legislation that would allow the government to censor and shut down websites suspected of hosting copyrighted material. The blackout is meant to raise awareness about the potential negative impact of this legislation on free speech and the internet as a whole.

2. When will the Wikipedia blackout take place?

The Wikipedia blackout will take place on January 18th, 2022. This date was chosen because it marks the 10th anniversary of the first SOPA blackout in 2012, which was also led by Wikipedia.

3. Will the entire Wikipedia site be unavailable during the blackout?

Yes, the entire English version of Wikipedia will be unavailable during the blackout. This means that users will not be able to access any articles or information on the site. However, other language versions of Wikipedia will still be accessible.

4. How can I still access information on Wikipedia during the blackout?

While the English version of Wikipedia will be unavailable, users can still access information through other language versions of the site, or by using a virtual private network (VPN) to bypass the blackout. Additionally, some articles on Wikipedia may still be accessible through search engine caches.

5. What can I do to support the anti-SOPA blackout on Wikipedia?

There are several ways to support the anti-SOPA blackout on Wikipedia. You can spread awareness by sharing information about the blackout on social media and encouraging others to join the protest. You can also contact your local representatives and voice your opposition to SOPA. Finally, you can donate to organizations that are actively fighting against SOPA and other forms of internet censorship.

Similar threads

Replies
10
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
65
Views
12K
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
65
Views
8K
  • General Discussion
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • MATLAB, Maple, Mathematica, LaTeX
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • MATLAB, Maple, Mathematica, LaTeX
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • MATLAB, Maple, Mathematica, LaTeX
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • MATLAB, Maple, Mathematica, LaTeX
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • MATLAB, Maple, Mathematica, LaTeX
Replies
9
Views
2K
Back
Top