Attention Gamers - Bill S.978 Discussion

2011-07-18 11:22:11 pm

ϟ

Found this out a few days.
I don't know the right thread to put this and i don't know the exact link of this bill so i'll post resources of it.
This could also mean fan art as well.
Apparently the government just wants to be an asshole and trolling us just get more money. I'm starting to hate this fucking country even more because its too overflowed with greed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_S.978
http://www.lordkat.com/bill-s978-criminalizing-streaming.html

Thread title:

nate

2011-07-18 11:34:38 pm

http://forum.speeddemosarchive.com/post/antistreaming_bill_s.978_could_jail_individuals_for_streaming_videogames..html

Super KB

2011-07-18 11:46:51 pm

ϟ

oh! didn't know this forum was alerted already. haven't been at SDA for awhile sorry! haha

tomatobob

2011-07-19 12:00:34 am

One shall stand, one shall ball.

The horrors of making a felony a felony!

Poision Envy

2011-07-19 12:21:05 am

Club 27 Goals

Quote from Super KB:

I'm starting to hate this fucking country even more because its too overflowed with greed.

dohoho, good luck finding anyplace else that isn't.

But related to the streaming thing: this would seriously just shut down youtube. If it goes as well as they want it to, jails would end up filling up with a bunch of youtube kids/people, and it'll be hilarious.

you'd think the government could spend their time doing something a little more productive.

tomatobob

2011-07-19 12:27:03 am

One shall stand, one shall ball.

It would not shut down youtube, it would not shut down streams. It's the same song and dance we've always done with looking tough on pirates to appease the corporate overlords and will be about as effective as it always is.

It's dumb but not as internet destroying as literally every internet nerd wants you to think because Oh God my Family Guy streams.

Poision Envy

2011-07-19 02:02:00 am

Club 27 Goals

Quote from tomatobob:

It would not shut down youtube, it would not shut down streams. It's the same song and dance we've always done with looking tough on pirates to appease the corporate overlords and will be about as effective as it always is.

It's dumb but not as internet destroying as literally every internet nerd wants you to think because Oh God my Family Guy streams.

If you were recording your friend doing a magic trick at a party, and another one of your friends were doing a karoke of a copyrighted song off camera, but the audio still picked it up, this would apply. Yes, it would kill youtube if they actually enforced it.

tomatobob

2011-07-19 02:22:42 am

One shall stand, one shall ball.

What? No. I'm sure there's someone somewhere who'd try for that, but it'd be near impossible to make it stick. If it were used as actual audio for the video it might but that's how it is now. Incidental bits of music floating in from another room is safe, youtube is safe. Plenty of companies use youtube for advertising or to share their product, that alone may well be enough to save it, and there are plenty of shitty original works that pop up all over it. Nerd's would still get to see their dumb cat videos and make videos themselves without going to jail.

And if they enforce is a big if, honestly, look how much shit that legally speaking should not be is out on the internet, and most potential "infractions" will not be worth the money to pursue. It'll live.

There are plenty of legitimate issues to take with the bill but "Youtube/the internet/my videogames will die!" is not one of them. It's silly and reactionary and helps nothing.

Ntsc

2011-07-19 11:12:44 pm

I'm pretty certain this bill is just trying to shut down streaming movie sites. I wish they were a bit more specific about the possible content and usage. Oh and it might be a ploy by the porn industry to shut down tube sites.

Under what I'm reading simply streaming the same song from my PC to my PS3 more than 10 times in a half year would be illegal. Not like anyone would know but the law is to vague and would probably be abused by copyright holders to limit usage of material. I would also need to see more details about what defines streaming. Is downloading streaming? Is streaming downloading? What about a downloaded stream?

Also is the content provider responsible - youtube - or is the uploader? Technically the uploader isn't streaming anything because lets face it most people don't have that kind of connection and yet Youtube or others shouldn't be responsible for their content.

Sigh, I wish we had people in Washington who actually used the internet instead of them voting on bills based on their biggest lobbyist donation.

I'm pretty certain this bill is just trying to shut down streaming movie sites. I wish they were a bit more specific about the possible content and usage. Oh and it might be a ploy by the porn industry to shut down tube sites.

Under what I'm reading simply streaming the same song from my PC to my PS3 more than 10 times in a half year would be illegal. Not like anyone would know but the law is to vague and would probably be abused by copyright holders to limit usage of material.  I would also need to see more details about what defines streaming. Is downloading streaming? Is streaming downloading? What about a downloaded stream?

Also is the content provider responsible - youtube - or is the uploader? Technically the uploader isn't streaming anything because lets face it most people don't have that kind of connection and yet Youtube or others shouldn't be responsible for their content.

Sigh, I wish we had people in Washington who actually used the internet instead of them voting on bills based on their biggest lobbyist donation.

Zknight7126

(user is banned)

2011-07-19 11:18:18 pm

Every day is a happy day! :)

It has great intentions, it is worded poorly, it has bad side affects that would kill many industries and mysteriously make most of YouTube's LPers suddenly in Canada.