What's clear now thanks to this whole affair is that PIPA and SOPA are completely unnecessary. Megaupload is the stated target of those bills. Here we are, with no new laws passed, seeing infringers charged and domains taken offline.
Why isn't the media playing up this angle more? It writes itself.
Yes, people will start claiming PIPA and SOPA are unnecessary, and they may be taken of the table. Hurray!
Of course, this now means that much of the evil stuff in PIPA and SOPA is already reality, but instead of being angry about it, we're now breathing a sigh of relief.
In the mean time, the feds will start taking down sites left, right and center, and across the globe, without any form of due process. And we'll be cool with it, because things could have been so much worse with PIPA and SOPA...
We're not seeing "infringers charged" here. Megaupload is gone. The entertainment industry has been playing judge and jury, with the feds as their executioners, and the justice department giving it a thin veneer of legal process.
PIPA and SOPA are more of less a reality without the laws actually being passed. That in itself is way scarier than the actual content of those laws. And thanks to this wonderful sleight of hand, it will now be perceived as if it were a good thing.
While MegaUpload has indeed been destroyed, it is not obvious that the judge will agree with those actions - after the ICE domain seizures, Rojadirecta brought suit against the US government, apparently thinking it can win (see e.g. http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110613/12021514673/rojadi...). The DoJ would like PIPA/SOPA to be reality, but that doesn't mean that it is.
That is why everyone point at victory in the SOPA fight, I say that there won't be victory unless a constitutional amendment protects our rights and we don't have to take arms against a new law every year.
"The Congress shall have Power (1)... To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts (2), by securing for limited Times (3) to Authors and Inventors (4) the exclusive Right (5) to their respective Writings and Discoveries (6)" (Article I, Section 8)
(1) This is a grant of power, not a mandate. Congress may exercise it, but is not compelled to do so.
(2) The goal is for the public benefit, not for private gain. It is meant to advance our knowledge and culture, not provide a permanent rent-seeking scheme.
(3) There is nothing "limited" about "life of author + 70 years"; the life of the author is technically indefinite, and furthermore 70 years is on the order of a person's life expectancy. The original term of copyright in this country was 14 years from date of publication.
(4) In no way is this protection afforded to publishers, producers, distributors, or other people whose contribution to the work is laborious but not novel. Novelty is subject to protection, not labor.
(5) Nowhere is there a requirement for violations of this "exclusive Right" to be crimes; nor is the government charged with enforcement of it. Copyright was meant to be a civil, not criminal, matter.
(6) The recording of a musical production or motion picture is not a "writing or discovery" and is thus not technically subject to these protections to begin with.
As I understand it, all of these limitations have been overridden by various treaties signed by the United States. Nevertheless, if you're going to use the Constitution as the source of your argument, it's best to know that what we have and what was intended are two drastically different things.
In that regard, the play has been a lot like the NDAA. In reality, we're already detaining Americans indefinitely without charge - and those are the 'lucky' ones. With others, we simply dispatch drones to assassinate them.
"All this bill does is codify existing practice" was the same argument used in that case. "And anyway, there are rigorous procedures in place."
Rigorous secret procedures, that is. Kind of like the rigorous procedures that pertained to water-boarding.
Wow, I didn't even connect the two. That's a great point. Now that I think about it, I see it as proof of two things:
1. It just takes enforcement of current laws, not passing of new ones, to fight piracy.
2. This really proves that SOPA is the result of heavy lobbying by companies that think passing a bill fixes their problems, because if the US government saw piracy as such a problem, there would be way more takedowns of companies like Mega Conspiracy and way less censorship bill-passing.
What's clear is that, under current laws, you can generate 150M+ before current laws can stop you. Again, not saying SOPA is the answer, but let's not ignore that these guys operated for years like this. If they're proven innocent, it says one thing. If not, it proves that the burden of proof and the procees takes far too long to be effective.
What's clear is that, under current laws, you can generate 18000M+ before current laws can stop you. Again, not saying revamping the SEC is the answer, but let's not ignore that Bernie Madoff operated for years like this. If he had been proven innocent, it would have said one thing. Since he was not, it proves that the burden of proof and the process takes far too long to be effective.
Given the connections between Megaupload and major celebrities affiliated with the recording industry, and between the industry and government officials, it'll be very hard to draw conclusions from any of this until far more facts come out, if ever.
This is no different than many other criminal enterprises. If we took your logic and applied it everywhere SOPA style then we all would not be able to leave the house or have computers. Look at where your logic has gotten us with the war on drugs.
The process has to be balanced between catching the criminals and public good. Right now there are laws in place and due process to stop pirating. Megaupload showed they worked.
Because the media are amongst those behind it remember.
The target of those bills is greater than just online piracy, I think you'll find they are capable of being used for all sorts of counterfeiting and unorthodox competition. For example theres a site that has been a buzz with some of my friends, selling knock off games workshop models. Those laws can be used to block those sites as well.
Its all about maximising profits, and protecting markets. Hence the current methods eat into said profits to enforce and are unacceptable for profit creation.
The end of the article seems to say that Megaupload is US-based. As I understood it, many of the provisions in SOPA were designed for use against non-US sites. I suppose that if Megaupload had operated purely on foreign soil the US may not have been able to bring this case.
"And it only took almost two years of investigations."
Yep well I consider it a small price to pay, if the alternative is handing some of my liberty along with internet security over to the government and/or the entertainment industry.
Now obviously I'm not the one paying the price, so I do understand why "content owners" are not satisfied with the status-quo..
Why isn't the media playing up this angle more? It writes itself.