US Senate tries to take us back to the Dark Ages

Apparently you don't understand (or more likely, in this particular case don't want to understand) the difference between 'inventing,' and 'taking the initiative in creating.'

In the 1950,s, President Eisenhower took the initiative in creating the interstate freeway system in this country. He's the one who popularized the concept, pushed for financial support from Congress, and helped turn it into a reality. Oddly enough, I've never heard anyone claim that Eisenhower 'invented' the freeway....

Al Gore was instrumental in creating government support for the internet and the technology involved, and in popularizing concepts such as the 'information superhighway' with the general public. So yes, he deserves some credit for the intenet's existence. But it's obviously nonsense to say he claims to have 'invented' it.

 

If the US DoJ can already take down an internet site in this manner why is SOPA/PIPA needed? The tools evidently already exist to do the job . . .

 

President Eisenhower was fortunate enough to take the initiative in creating the interstate freeway system before the system was created.

The Internet’s predecessor, ARPANET was first deployed in 1969 and underwent continual develoment from that time on. Gore won a seat in Congress in 1976 and “took the initiative to create the internet” during his time as a US Senator. Apparently that initiative was taken retroactively. Now THAT's a first!

initiate: begin, start, commence, originate, get underway
initiative: act of starting, first step

(my own words: not dictionary copyright was violated during the creation of these definitions)

 

Yes. As you point out, ARPANET was the predecessor of the internet. But it most certainly wasn't the internet as we know it today -- the creation of today's internet was most definitely still an ongoing process, when Gore was elected and started championing it. To quote good old Wikipedia, ARPANET was just 'the core network of a set that came to compose the global Internet.'

Was Gore engaging in a little political hyperbole during that interview, and inflating his importance in the scheme of things? Could be.... but he most certainly was not saying he 'invented' the internet.

edit: the Pasadena (Arroyo Seco) Freeway was built in 1940 -- 12 years before Eisenhower became President. And its predecessors reach back at least to the Long Island Motor Parkway, built in 1908...Does that mean that since he didn't invent the original controlled acces highways, we can't give Eisenhower any credit for the interstate freeway system?

 

You are correct. the US wild west was much more cilivized. We are attempting to limit the destructive powers of criminals in the lawess countries of Russia, China, and Canada.

 

By criminalizing countless Americans? Sure. That'll work.....

 

You left out India and a couple of continents.
It seems the USA is the only law-abiding country in the whole wide world (TM).

 

Nope. Nobody obeys US law. Least of all the US govt. :?:

 

Whoever "we" happens to be, perhaps you should finish dealing with the criminals in Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq and Pakistan first . . . although I'd personally prefer you find and deal with the ones on Wall Street.

Seriously though, a bunch of hackers were able to take down the DoJ site more or less at will today. These aren't criminals, they believe they are freedom fighters defending their territory. Although it's worth a bet that many, perhaps most of them are in the US. For the record, I think that sort of activity is stupid and an attack on society, but if not overdone it serves to illustrate the amount of opposition these measures face.

It's incredibly naive to create internet sites vulnerable to such attacks, with IP accessible to hackers and criminals without security proportional to the risk. That's like having a bank without a safe or strongroom.

As for piracy of video and audio works, I have some sympathy for the artists whose livelihood is threatened by pirated copies of their work, but they will not benefit significantly from these acts, which were initiated by the distribution industry that has been making billions from their creativity for over a century. Your legislators are pandering to the demands of industries that have failed to adjust to the realities of the modern World. Let them take the trouble to come up with a new business model and use the internet instead of trying to geld it.

 

It's mind-boggling to think of how much money is spent on lawyers to squabble
over IP, and how many resources are devoted to that non-productive
enterprise. Maybe China can lend the US a bit more to help them out.

 

There's one thing in the USA's favour: they are certainly not unique in treating many international laws and determinations as optional.

 

Can you imagine what Einstein, or Newton, or Fleming, or Currie or even Watson and Crick inter alia think of IP. (Well Watson has stated it should all be free...much to the chagrin of those multinationals).

Those that wish to stand behind IP and fight for it and claim it to be ever so important, would never be in the position they are if those that created/invented/discovered all the many wonderful theories/items that went before them and took the same stance. We would still be in the Dark ages.

What's your favourite colour...???

IP is all about money, nothing to do with knowledge and the progression and sharing of knowledge.

 

IP laws have had a fair run over the last couple of hundred years, but
attitudes are changing quickly. I'd guess that most net-connected kids today
share files, and that it's mainly old men who don't use the internet much who
are keen on legislating to control it.

 

Well said, govt. people are breaking the law that they passed themselves. Pricks.
Ask your senator if his son hasn't ever download sth from TPB (or any other tracker), not to mention rapidshare or megaupload (R.I.P). Bet he did

 

Eisenhower didn't invent the Interstate Highway System?