ACTA and Internet Censorship

[Otohiko]

We're talking about copyright and intellectual property, which is just another extension to the list of artificial commodities within capitalism. It has everything to do with the matter at hand.

Well, mind you, you don't have to convince me (some might know where I stand on socialism). I'm not attacking the concern with regulation of culture and the obvious hypocrisy that we sometimes see with these things. But that's where my concern is - fighting tyranny with tyranny creates more tyranny. Fighting hypocrisy with hypocrisy creates more hypocrisy. This is precisely an example of that, and let's not fool ourselves with the fact that attacking treatment of Schmitz through fallacious means - hardly a shining example of someone deeply concerned with the wrongs of capitalism (and possibly a shining example of everything that's wrong about them) - is anything but hypocritical.

If there's ever a good cause to start talking about social justice and capitalist wrongs, this case is not one of them. Likewise, if anyone thinks that the only thing that happened here was just "shared music" and that this is about private property being protected at the expense of social justice - well where do you even get that here? You've got a company here that has obviously made tens of millions on doing something that obviously takes advantage of the work of many without providing compensation. Sorry, but all I'm seeing here is not a concern with social justice, but a bunch of people being had by idiotic hyperbole connecting an issue they don't understand to situations where it's irrelevant. But hey, it makes for a good slogan to circulate on facebook!

[Emong]

^ Oh, then we sort of agree since I was saying similar things on another thread. I couldn't really care less about defending Schmitz and I certainly don't want to turn the spotlight on him as if he's some kind of a martyr. I'm merely waving the leftist flag here and saying that all these concerns with PIPA/SOPA/ACTA can be formulated in terms of privatization of commons and integrated to the leftist agenda.

[Otohiko]

Alright, no problem there then!

Like I say, I'm completely on the same page otherwise, and I agree that what's going on here is very unjust and can indeed be formulated in terms of very big macro-economic issues. In fact, the unfortunate thing is that SOPA/PIPA/ACTA is the tip of the iceberg on the actual injustices, and it's kind of sad that it takes the internet being under threat for people to get nervous, when in fact worse injustices are done legally and on a daily basis, in the name of the right to own property.

[Emong]

^ which is why I'd rather choose Occupy than all these anti-PIPA/SOPA/ACTA movements

[Otohiko]

...I should point out that I have my share of issues with Occupy also. Although most of them are the same issues as that poster that I jumped on - a lot of sloganization and hyperbole as opposed to addressing the central issues. The '99%' slogan, if anything, probably cost the Occupy movement my support (not that anyone is crying over it, I guess). I'm still sympathetic, but I would be more so if it was aimed at the consumer lifestyle lived by far, far more than 1% of people which is the real problem.

[Emong]

Not to get offtopic too much so I'll just say:

pfff..such a puritan

[KingRoyMustang]

...I should point out that I have my share of issues with Occupy also. Although most of them are the same issues as that poster that I jumped on - a lot of sloganization and hyperbole as opposed to addressing the central issues. The '99%' slogan, if anything, probably cost the Occupy movement my support (not that anyone is crying over it, I guess). I'm still sympathetic, but I would be more so if it was aimed at the consumer lifestyle lived by far, far more than 1% of people which is the real problem.

A good man tried to do that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbJ-GpE_EEQ
But the American people didn't like it and elected greedy Ronald Reagan.

[Otohiko]

pfff..such a puritan

Heeeey, don't go pfffing me.

What's the point of having principles if you're not gonna follow through with them, anyway? Good critical thinking cuts both ways, and using it selectively is what politicians do well. What politicians also do well is sloganize, and that is something I'm hypersensitive to, regardless of where it comes from. Bourdieu's perspective on sloganization and what it does in terms of delegation of power might be useful here. When you sell out to slogans - particularly those based on misleading premises - you're delegating your right to think and speak to other people, and falling into terministic screens that put the world into convenient boxes that reflect little of the messy, inconvenient reality of things.

But back to topic, what happened with ACTA is a huge shame. I just wish that the whole Megaupload thing - which is messy, problematic, and only tangentially related here - didn't enter the discussion. IMO that's a great decoy to keep the debate away from the real issues here.

[NotFound404]

^ I don't think its wrong that company's want what they are legally entitled too. If I was an artist with my work being put out all over the place I would want it stopped too.

I don't think so, if you are an artist you don't have more rights about your work than others, because that's what exactly censorship is. I could use your stuff to say that it's good or it's bad, I could use it to create something different, Andy Warhol did not pay Coca Cola nor Mao Tse-Tung however it cannot be denied that he is the original creator of his works.

If you agree that the Internet is a mean to spread information, whatever they may be, you should also accept the fact that someone can use your material in a way that you do not like.
Obviously you should be the only one who earns money with it, but this is false too. The only one who really earns money with your art is your publisher, often imposing clear limits to it. If you want my opinion, what they're trying to do with all SOPA, PIPA, ACTA etc is bring back people where they can control them, if you want news read my newspaper or watch my Tv, if you want a book go to a bookstore and buy what I'll make you find on the shelves and so on, for movies and other stuff. What we're really seeing is a corporation that breaks the competitors taking advantage of the legal limits of copyright laws, no one would accuse the owner of a car-rent, because some of his cars have been used in a robbery, but it's acceptable that they can close the file-hosting sites because the way users make use of them.

[Emong]

I certainly did not say that