Is Fluther considering a blackout on the 18th to protest SOPA/PIPA?

I am game to join the boycott.

I don’t know if it has been considered, but it should be. Seems like a good idea to me.

Oh wow!

http://ventura.craigslist.org/

For the lazy.

This could actually shut down Fluther if Viacom cared that you posted a clip to The Daily Show on here that was hosted on Youtube. The odds are slim of that happening but under the proposed law they could do it.

I didn’t know about the blackout plans, but I’ll pass it along to the guys. Seems like a decent idea to me!

I think it’s a good idea. It would raise awareness. There is a veto petition to the White House that I signed; maybe they could post a link to that on the 18th.

Crazy! Was this bill just announced? Why haven’t we heard more about it?

@dappled_leaves It’s been in the works and been discussed on Web sites for a while.

Here’s the response from the White House to the petition. Seems to me like they are hedging their bets.

I’m guessing that a blackout is meant to serve up a heaping pile of “WTF?” to the less-savvy users of Facebook, YouTube, and the like. But Fluther is a much smaller community, right? And I’m wondering if we have the same non-savvy quotient as some of the megasites like those, that everyone and their uncle uses.

What about just posting links to information on the front page rather than shutting down?

I think shutting it down will be much more effective. Everyone who closes “an appeal by Jimmy Wales” without reading it knows how easy it is to ignore terribly important information posted on the front page.

I know I would be fine with a shut down. If all the major sites did it, than advertisers would be forced to petition against it. Actually it would be awesome if there was a boycott on all internet use on that day. If no one bought or purchased anything for one whole day off the internet, that would send a clear message.
It is a very stupid idea. I’m not even tech suavy and I know it will be a problem. Its called censorship. It wasn’t a good idea years ago and it still isn’t.

I think that might have the same problem as all other buy-nothing days have. That is, it doesn’t cause anybody to actually buy less. They just buy their gas or books or whatever the day before, or the day after. (Snopes debunks the buy-no-gas day thing here.)

This is not so much about hurting profits as it is getting the word out and informing everyone that everything is going to change if they do not wake up.

The closing of sites with the message on the page is symbolic of what we might find if the bill passes.

I am behind the boycott 100%.

Part of the point is to get people to spend time contacting their representatives. If you can’t dork around here for a hour you might pick up the phone and call.

Also I just want to point out that policing the net and shutting down sites will end up as chaos. Many, many innocent sites will be shut down. (Yes- shut down. Without warning or a chance to defend itself first!)

Ultimately an algorithm will be created to automatically sense a perceived piracy.

We here at Fluther know firsthand how brutally incorrect a well-intended algorithm can be. ~ Thanks Google!

@laureth The Snopes articles is irrelevant. Most buy-nothing days aren’t attempts to lower prices, and neither is a one-day shutdown.

If the point is only feel-good revenge, I guess whatever makes you feel better, works.

Let me add that Yahoo uses a similar auto shut down which results in thousands of innocent accounts being shut down every month.

What are the big guys doing? Twitter? The blog worlds? Seems like they’re the ones who would generate some attention for the issue.

I heard back, and we are considering it. I’ll let you know as soon as I know more.

@laureth It’s not revenge either. An act of protest surely doesn’t need to harm anyone financially to be valuable or effective, right?

@SavoirFaire – Well, it doesn’t have to hit them in the pocketbook to make them take notice. They might just take notice and giggle. However, a good protest movement ought to consider providing an incentive for change, beyond just knowing that some people, somewhere, don’t like you. A financial incentive is one that most folks notice (and act upon) most reliably. It’s the difference between saying, “Uh, please change, ‘kay? Or I shall continue frowning at you!” and “Nice bottom line you have there. Pity if something happened to it, if you know what I mean.”

Otherwise, I’m not sure what the protest is designed to accomplish, except make the protester feel better. Especially if the object of protest can’t detect that there’s a protest going on.

I’d be happier if Facebook shut down for the day, with a notice to say why. Shutting down a tiny site like Fluther is pretty pointless. Shutting down something as huge as Facebook will draw global attention to the issue.

I’d love to see that, too, @downtide. I doubt it’ll happen, though. :(

@laureth The thing is, there are multiple actors in this scenario. We don’t have to hurt the RIAA or the MPAA to stop SOPA and PIPA. I’m not saying we shouldn’t hurt them financially. Those idiots make the same mistakes generation after generation and never learn. It’s bad capitalism to leave them unscathed. Regardless, the people we need to impress upon are those who trade in public approval as much as money—politicians. Convince them not to support SOPA and PIPA, and I guarantee the RIAA and the MPAA will take notice.

Just have to say that I do not think of Fluther as a “tiny site.” Nor do I think the impact would be insignificant it they participated. ;)

@johnpowell Do you know of any additional sites that will be closing for the 18th? I will close my personal web sites (which are “tiny” but it is a message- not volume)

In fact is it possible that my own personal web site could be closed by this legislature. I was once accused of piracy of MY OWN ART and locked out of a web site. I had to send my proof of copyright under the US Library of Congress to prove that MY WORK WAS MINE.

The fact is that this legislation will give OUTRAGEOUS power without oversight that will deem web sites GUILTY without TRIAL and condemn them to DEATH, mired in red tape. While they are down thousands will lose business and have their reputations slandered unjustly.

If my site was closed due to alleged piracy I could lose my client base. They trust that I am creating my work, because I am.

Laureth- so many people are unaware of this legislation. It is being swept under the carpet and needs to be shown to those WHO USE THE INTERNET in a way that lets them know what is going on.

We need to stop this from happening. As written this will change the internet forever and destroy innocent livelihoods.

Please Spread the Word! Please Join The Boycott!

@SavoirFaire and @Dog – I’m with you on the “this is bad legislation” position. And I agree that it’s politicians who must take notice. That said, do we think a blackout on Fluther will be effective? This is to say, do Congresscritters or the FBI ;) use Fluther, and will a blackout on Fluther make them think twice about passing this legislation in a way that not getting to Facebook or Google wouldn’t? Same question, if it’s just average everyday, non-governmental Jellies that we want to be motivated to do…something… about it (like write to their Congressdude?) – will they be moved more by Fluther blacking out than by the bigger sites? From what I’ve read here, Jellies seem savvy, and already know that the legislation is bad. I can say that I, for one, will not be more, or less, motivated to write my Congressmensch by Fluther darkening for a day. Would any of you?

THAT is what I’m trying to get across. I understand the wish to protest. I understand the wish to spread the word so that people will write to Congresskittens (which is essentially ALL we can really do about this, eh?). My basic question is, how does this accomplish the goal of effecting legislative change, exactly?

@laureth The more sites that do it the best. I’d rather read “100,000 websites—including Google, Facebook, and Twitter—are planning a blackout to protest SOPA” than “50,000 websites—including Google, Facebook, and Twitter—are planning a blackout to protest SOPA.” Strength in numbers. When large and small sites ban together, it is more impressive than when only a few larger sites do it. Fluther doesn’t need to be a headliner to be helpful. More sites = more people affected in more ways = more awareness and opposition = more effective.

Fair enough. Thanks. :)

Apparently Obama has announced his opposition to SOPA and the House has indefinitely shelved it.

AWESOME! I hope this is truly the end of it!

Now if they would just regulate medical marijuana so that those who NEED it will not be denied access. It is insane that law-abiding, tax paying citizens for whom the medication is the only option for quality of life are having to resort to behaving like criminals in order to get what they have been legally prescribed.

Sorry- I digress…

Let’s have a SOPA IS DEAD party!!!

WAIT…. @johnpowell mentioned to me that this might not be resolved.

Please clarify @johnpowell! I still have my pitchfork….

Sharpen that bitch. I am not done fighting. Here is what I see happening. They will just add the fucktarderey that is SOPA into another bill, Like a bill to fund the troops. You can’t veto that and it helps your corporate masters.

Honestly. As a owner of a few sites that could get screwed if this passes I want to start burning peoples houses.

I’m normally a nice calm guy. That we a looking at China for Internet policy hints makes me want to beat the fucking shit out of pretty much everything except my mom.

Lisa has a great write-up here.

We must still fight.

I’d love to see that blog post spread far and wide. Fuck my copyright… repost it liberally! :)

This reminds me of when one of the public schools where I worked first got Internet acces. The administrators had NO clue how the net worked and made these outrageously stupid rules about what links I was allowed to give the students access too.

I had to check every link on a website and make sure it didn’t connect to pornography. Then on each page the original page was linked to, I had to check for porn on those pages as well. I was supposed to guarantee there were no porn links for 4 “generations” of links.

I couldn’t explain to the administrators that this was a ludicrous waste of time and it basically made the Internet completely useless and unusable in the school. It wasn’t until 4 or 5 years later, when teachers and administrators actually used the internet themselves at home and understood how things worked did they take away these stupid rules.

I know for a fact that many folk in the House and Senate have little clue about how the real world works. I wouldn’t be surprised if many of the folk who started writing this law had never actually been online and still have someone print out and file their email for them.

I wouldn’t say this is over yet either. The White House’s statement is a bit lackluster, and it wasn’t even characterized as a statement of opposition to SOPA when first released. That came later when it seemed to be popular. The protest does seem to be gaining some ground, though, so that’s something about which we can be happy.

I posted my response to this on the newest thread.

I am glad Fluther participated in this. I will admit that I saw this question before and had no idea what it was about. Thanks to @augustlan‘s blog post, though, everything became clearer. I couldn’t help but notice it because something in the Community Feed looked different and alarming. It definitely caught my eye more than even a mention of it on the news would have. Good on you for posting this thread, @johnpowell! :)

Here’s a list of which senators oppose, support, or are undecided about PIPA.

Thought it was brillliantly done!

Which is position that is on one extreme or the other on this topic?