The Internet’s Gone Crazy With Lawlessness Run Amuck

SEIZED!

On Thursday, the Department of Justice seized the anonymous file-sharing website Megaupload and charged seven people in connection with the site with running a criminal enterprise based on Internet piracy.

The DOJ calls this the biggest case of copyright infringement they’ve ever experienced.

In a grand jury indictment, The DOJ accused Megaupload of $500 million worth of damages to the entertainment industry. Megaupload is also under fire for making $175 million from premium subscriptions and advertisements.

Four of the seven executives of Megaupload were arrested on Friday while three others remain at large. They have been charged with five counts of copyright infringement and conspiracy. The men could face more than 20 years in prison.

Of those arrested in New Zealand was the infamous Mr. Dotcom (Kim Schmitz).

There were 20 search warrants executed in the United States and eight other countries including New Zealand. Fifty million dollars worth of assets were seized by the DOJ including a number of servers and 18 domain names that made up Megaupload’s file-sharing sites.

The police raided Dotcom’s mansion in Auckland in two helicopters. They arrived to find Dotcom is his safe room with a shortened shotgun in his possession. New Zealand police seized $4.8 million worth of exotic cars and froze $11 million that was in his various bank accounts.

The seizure of Megaupload came soon after supporters of SOPA and PIPA had to withdraw  their support for the bills because of the explosion of Internet activism and protests. Wednesday, many websites joined in the activism against SOPA and PIPA by going black. Wikipedia went completely black for the day while other sites like WordPress.com censored certain pages to make a statement.

Wordpress during the blackout on Wednesday

That day, the hacker group Anonymous raided the DOJ’s website and other websites associated with the entertainment industry. They had this to say about SOPA and other forms of government and corporate censorship on the Internet:

The most important parts of their message goes as follows:

The United States government has mastered this corrupt way of giving us a false sense of freedom. We think we are free and can do what we want, but in reality we are very limited and restricted as to what we can do, how we can think, and even how our education is obtained. We have been so distracted by this mirage of freedom, that we have just become what we were trying to escape from.

For too long, we have been idle as our brothers and sisters were arrested. During this time, the government has been scheming, plotting ways to increase censorship through means of I S P block aides, D N S blockings, search engine censorship, website censorship, and a variety of other methods that directly oppose the values and ideas of both Anonymous as well as the founding fathers of this country, who believed in free speech and press!

—

I’m confused just as much as anyone is when it comes to the recent actions taken by our government on the file sharing website Megaupload. Why is our government pushing for freedom-restricting legislature like SOPA and PIPA if they can just go out and do what they did with Megaupload?

It is a little bit disheartening for opponents of Internet censorship, but Megaupload and it’s creators had to have know what they were getting themselves into. Hollywood and the record industry do not play around when it comes to their products. The government and the entertainment industry don’t give a lot of leeway to people who are stealing their content and making millions off of it. You can’t plead ignorant here.

The government was probably in the right doing this, but why would they do it now? Why would they choose to take these actions when the sentiment around the nation is on the side of protecting Internet freedom?

Wikipedia blackout

I’m left wondering what this means for the battle against SOPA and PIPA and the fight to maintain a healthy Internet. This is only the beginning of the fight. I’m not at all fooled into thinking the battle to maintain net neutrality is over.

The mega corporations and the government are very aware of the power the Internet has given the average citizen to be informed (although they do leave me often questioning how smart they are…). An informed public leads to a public making rational decisions about who they vote for, what they consume and how they handle their money. This means that the Internet is drastically changing how politics and money are handled in America. This means that the government will have a harder time controlling the flow of money and information. I’m sure this makes them very uncomfortable.

*Also, I think this visual is telling of the impact Occupy, Anonymous and Internet activism had on SOPA:

A visual of the impact of the Internet blackout on Wednesday

 

More Legislature, Entities Aimed at Bloggers and Citizen Journalists

Under the National Operation Center’s Media Monitoring Initiative (MMI), the Department of Homeland Security now has the right to track personal identifiable information (PII) of:

Journalists, news anchors, reporters or anyone who uses ‘traditional and/or social media in real time to keep their audience situationally aware and informed.

The PDF from DHS lays out instances when the government can access PII:

1) U.S. and foreign individuals in extreme situations involving potential life or death circumstances; 2) senior U.S. and foreign government officials who make public statements or provide public updates; 3) U.S. and foreign government spokespersons who make public statements or provide public updates; 4) U.S. and foreign private sector officials and spokespersons who make public statements or provide public updates; 5) names of anchors, newscasters, or on-scene reporters who are known or identified as reporters in their post or article or who use traditional and/or social media in real time to keep their audience situationally aware and informed; 6) current and former public officials who are victims of incidents or activities related to Homeland Security; and 7) terrorists, drug cartel leaders, or other persons known to have been involved in major crimes of Homeland Security interest.

As if this wasn’t enough, the United States government can (and has been since 2010) share any information it obtains through MMI with the private sector and other third-party entities. In an article form RT.com, they reported:

The website Fast Company reports that the intel collected by the Department of Homeland Security under the NOC Monitoring Initiative has been happening since as early as 2010 and the data is being shared with both private sector businesses and international third parties.

But don’t worry, the government says it will only seize information that was made available for the public—That’s who this new initiative is aimed at. The MMI wants to closely watch persons or entities that make “public statements.”
But this is not what we’re worried about. We’re worried about the government’s right to obtain private information through the information we make publicly available.

This however causes one to wonder, especially with the recent attacks we’ve seen from the state and police on citizen and traditional journalists alike, why has there been so much legislation aimed at the citizen journalist and blogger? The recent wave of attacks from the state (and corporations. Just look at who supports SOPA) has caught the attention of journalist organizations around the U.S.

Additionally, AP’s NewsRight just launched. This is a news registry and licensing service whose intent is to keep track of articles written by its members (Hearst Newspapers, AP and the New York Times). They feel as though this is a good way to maintain the integrity of the news and make sure the resources put into each story are properly returned through well… money. It makes sense because the news industry is being strained and they need a way to bring in revenue before the profession falls any further.

But where NewsRight is wrong is in thinking that the biggest reason they’re falling behind is because of pirating and news aggregation. Yes, this is a concern, but the real reason why traditional media is failing is because they haven’t embraced the Internet, their reporting is subpar and they are beholden to corporate interests.

I don’t trust this new move by AP because I am a blogger and this will make my job much more difficult. And it will potentially eliminate my hobby and some people’s livelihood. The Associated Press is also known to have a certain antagonism towards Internet journalism. For one AP, tried suing Google, but was unsuccessful. Google and AP made a deal in which the details remain unknown to the public.

Furthermore, the new entity is headed by former ABC News head David Westin who I might add is a lawyer. I’m not feeling NewsRight—Not even a little bit.

So anyone who uses the originally written article without the permission of NewsRight will have to pay a fee for aggregating. If they don’t comply, the aggregator may face charges. If SOPA doesn’t pass, I’m sure this will have a big enough effect on the future of real news coverage.

Well, here’s hoping for a company that protects bloggers from the use of their content without proper attribution by traditional media outlets.

It’s obvious what is going on. The traditional media which is now owned and controlled by government and corporate interests are scared of the power that has been given to the average citizen. The Internet is helping to start revolutions and people are now able to find the truth without it being mediated by the government.

Game on.

*I want to thank Joe Newby of the Spokane Conservative Examiner and RT.com for breaking this story and enlightening me (and you) with information critical to the livelihood of citizen and traditional journalists.

GoDaddy.com: The Latest Victim of Occupy

 

GoDaddy Superbowl commercial a couple years back

Another day, another victim. GoDaddy.com just got hit by the Occupy drive-by.

As of Dec. 23, the domain registrar moved from not only supporting the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) to actively opposing it (at least claiming to oppose it). They did this just before Move Your Domain day. In their statement to their customers and business partners, they stated:

In changing its position, Go Daddy remains steadfast in its promise to support security and stability of the Internet. In an effort to eliminate any confusion about its reversal on SOPA though, Jones has removed blog postings that had outlined areas of the bill Go Daddy did support.

GoDaddy.com was for SOPA and Internet censorship until they found out that hurt their bottom dollar. Now they’re conveniently against the act. Right… But you have to give it to them. They were honest and real about their position change and are doing what they’re supposed to do: Increase profits and keep the consumer happy. Sometimes companies forget about this because they become wide-eyed when they see profits and forget that those profits wouldn’t be possible without the consumer. Now, consumers are more aware of the consequences of their actions and business practices are more transparent. Pleading ignorant won’t save you from the masses anymore.

As active supporters of SOPA, the domain registrar was met with strong opposition to the act that has dire implications on internet freedom, free speech and the freedom of the press. With the beating, detainment and denial of the free press by cops at Occupy Wall Street, we don’t need our press facing any more hurdles.

SOPA threatens the well-being of journalism and its ability to report because SOPA would potentially censor websites from appearing on search engines if the government feels the website violates intellectual property and/or copyright laws. Worse of all, felony charges would follow a party streaming copyrighted material with a penalty of up to five years in prison.

“But why would Congress do such a thing?” is a question you may have. The answer is always the same: It’s the money, bruh. Take a look at this illustration by Politico. It should make everything clear:

Silicon Valley spending vs. Hollywood and the media

In 2010, Silicon Valley spent a total of $14.2 million lobbying compared $185.5 million spent by Hollywood and media conglomerates. Profits in Hollywood have doubled in the past 14 years. They have gone from $52.8 billion in gross revenue (1995) to $10.6 billion in 2009. Hollywood is trying to convince the public that they’re hurting and piracy is destroying their business. They’re trying to convince the public that Hollywood is not hiring because of the economy, but let’s face it, Americans like to be entertained. The reason why Hollywood is not hiring is because they don’t want to.

Hollywood is recession proof. Some might say that instead of spending over $100 million lobbying, invest that money into new technology, new ideas and the creation of piracy influenced sites—like iTunes did with Napster. Napster forced the industry to try a new, more consumer friendly business model. Some might say that choosing to do otherwise is not smart and even narcissistic.

The penalties of SOPA are stringent and the enforcement would have to be even more strict. This seems to be the case as the Department of Justice (DOJ) would have the jurisdiction to demand hosts like domain registrars and social media sites to censor the alleged copyrighted material.

It’s obvious to see how divisive SOPA has become. It’s an important issue with far-reaching implications. This might be the biggest fight of our generation. It’s one that conservatives and liberals can get behind (I might be a little bit optimistic). We don’t want to look back at these times as the days when the Internet was free. I don’t want to have to explain that to my kids. I don’t think anybody wants to explain that.

With the 2012 and midterm elections on the way, there’s no better time to make your voice heard. Social media are affecting politics in new ways (read this article for a better perspective). We can’t let the politicians on the hill get comfortable. We have to remind them who they’re working for. Passing controversial bills when a lot of the members of Congress don’t even understand how the Internet works (I bet they don’t even know the difference between the World Wide Web and the Internet) is dishonorable.

Here’s an OpenCongress.org page where you can follow all updates on H.R. 3261. Be sure to stay updated on this act and vote this November against every politicians in support of the act. Keep the pressure on.

Obama: Continuing the American Gangster Legacy

The week of December (the 11th to the 17th) has been a paradigm shifting experience for me as a US citizen. I’m a firm believer in having checks and balances in Congress, the judicial branch and the executive. Recently, I have seen nothing of the sort. Instead I have seen the three branches working together to accomplish whatever goals they may have. They usually aren’t in the interest of most Americans.

I want to touch on two issues that may seem separate but are very much tied. I will also attempt (emphasis on attempt) to explain why these legislative actions are important to you and what they mean for the future of America. The legislative actions I will be touching on for now are the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA).

I touched on the NDAA in a previous post, but this is a bit of an update. As many of you may already know (or at least I hope you do), the NDAA passed with broad support. This is another one of those cases of bipartisan support that doesn’t make sense, especially if you’ve been paying attention to politics since Obama was elected. There are very few things Obama’s supporters and his opponents see eye-to-eye on. Obama has a history of bipartisanship, but the same cannot be said about the Republicans and the Democrats on the Hill. But the legislative and executive branches moved in unison in a rare moment—one moment that will leave liberals and conservatives disoriented.

The NDAA, cited by Politico:

The bill would create a legal basis for the detention of suspected Al Qaeda terrorists and their allies and require military custody for foreign terrorists who attack the United States. It also favors military trials for suspected terrorists, subject to a presidential waiver, and extends for one year the ban on moving detainees from Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to the United States.

The precedent this act sets is far-reaching, but the abstention of removing detainees from our international prison and torture facilities, the military trials of suspected terrorists and the legal detention of suspected terrorists without due process is something the United has been doing in full force since 9/11. Nothing surprises me here. Just ask Bradley Manning.

I thought the country might have had some hope when Obama said he would veto the part of the act which gave the president power to detain any American citizen indefinitely. New evidence is manifesting, supporting the notion that Obama’s original stance was to actually push for more executive power and freedom to detain American citizens at home and abroad (see video below for further analysis):

SOPA is perfect for a more surveillanced society. A society where those in power have easier access to keep those with less power in check (read my previous post on the issue here). It seems as though ever since Wikileaks occurred, the government has been cracking down vigorously on cyber attacks, but without having any real technology experts on the congressional hearing panels, I fear that we are leaving the future of Internet freedom in the hands of individuals that don’t understand how the Internet really works.

SOPA’s plan is to “save jobs,” but the only jobs it will be saving are those in Hollywood who are already overpaid and overrepresented. If SOPA passes, we might see criminal charges for posting copyrighted material on social networking sites. FAIR Use and freedom of expression is under threat from SOPA. Our American values are under attack once again.

*I will go further in-depth in a future post, discussing the implications of SOPA and NDAA being passed so close to one another. It’s only fair to assume that they will be used in conjunction with each other to detain suspected Internet terrorists, particularly those who disagree with the ideologies of the companies lobbying hard for SOPA aka Internet regulation. Rupert Murdoch is one of them.

Twitter, Facebook and Youtube Users May Face Criminal Charges for Posts

Courtesy of WantChinaTimes.com

Many people who I know will never read this article. This may be the last article of this kind because we are moving into an era where the First Amendment is on the cusp of being rendered ineffective.

The new laws that our politicians are about to implement are said to be there to “protect American jobs.” What American jobs are they really talking about? They’re talking about the music and movie industries that are already making billions. Whenever politicians say “Americans,” they’re speaking code. They’re not talking about everyday people, they’re talking about the lobbying industries that have their hands in their pockets.

First, we have the Occupy protests around the country being shut down for reasons like lack of cleanliness or because cities need to hang up holiday ornaments. Well that’s fine, I guess. But as an American who should value the amendment that makes all other amendments and freedoms possible, are you comfortable with the police state using any excuse to shut down people’s First Amendment rights to protest? Do holiday lights and a few trash bags left here and there really trump the First Amendment? If it does, then what precedent does this set? What won’t the state be able to say to shut down free speech?

Before this occupy debacle, we had the net neutrality debate where people like Glenn Beck and Fox News spreading lies and misinformation (here is a more in-depth look into this issue). It was meant to keep the Internet open and to limit Internet Service Providers (ISPs) from discriminating or providing restrictions against competing companies, political parties and/or consumers. If net neutrality didn’t pass (momentarily), companies like Verizon, AT&T and Cox would be able to slow down competitors’ Internet speeds or block certain companies from posting political ideas on the Internet that these ISPs laid the wires down for. ISPs would even have the ability to block consumers from accessing certain websites that they might deem inappropriate. Essentially, the Internet wouldn’t be free.

Now we have Protect IP Act which is aimed at curbing access to “rogue websites dedicated to infringing or counterfeit goods,” especially those registered outside the U.S. This is really a response like whistleblower sites (which Obama said he’d protect) like Wikileaks. How dare people call the government out on their lies? The government has ways for dealing with “troublemakers.”

Similar to that act is the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA). The act was made to protect intellectual property. According to Wikipedia:

The bill is divided into two Titles with the first focusing on combating “foreign rogue sites”, websites outside U.S. jurisdiction that enable or facilitate copyright infringement, and the second focusing on increased penalties to combat intellectual property theft via digital means.

These acts mean a lot to the everyday citizen. It would mean that criminal charges could be brought upon users of Facebook, Youtube, Twitter and Tumblr who post unauthorized videos or content. It would do away with the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) which covers Fair Use.

Under Fair Use, intellectual property can be exchanged on personal networks, but explicitly prohibits the uploading of these materials to the masses. Fair Use also protects users who upload and share material that is covered under the public domain (which happens once the intellectual copyright has expired). Users can also use these materials for criticism, comment, news reporting, scholarship, research and/or preservation purposes.

If these acts go into law, it might be a crime to post segments from the news on you video log (vlog) or website, even if you use them in parts for educational or satirical purposes like Jon Stewart’s Daily Show. Would the Daily Show and programs like Tosh.0 even exist anymore?

We are living in interesting times. We are living in times when we are being watched by more cameras (Maryland police vehicles now have cameras on the back of their cars to photograph license plates on the go), being searched unreasonably (TSA scans and gropers) and are having our First Amendment rights stripped away from us without a fight (I don’t even know if most of us realize what is happening). It is now illegal in some jurisdictions to record cop activity. But they can tape us? What’s up with that?

A lot of people will be okay if these acts go into law, but a lot of people will be upset. The Internet will no longer be the free and open society we all grew accustomed to. There will no longer be pressure on the music and movie industries to cut the crap and start making movie and music experiences more bearable; To start thinking about the consumers first. We don’t want to pay $12 for a movie when advertisements for 30 Rock and Kia are being shoved into our senses for an hour prior to when the movie starts. We also don’t care for product placement invading our senses for the two-hour period of the movie we just paid for.

If we didn’t have sites like Napster setting the trend, do people really think iTunes and Google Music would be here now to make life easier for the consumer?

*If you want to do something about this, here is a link where you can find your representative and tell them you don’t want this to pass. Or you can ignore it and let these acts go into law. As always, it’s you choice: http://www.tumblr.com/protect-the-net