miércoles, 18 de enero de 2012

SOPA: algunas claves

Con motivo de la SOPA Strike, enlazo algunos artículos y vídeos que explican en qué consiste la Stop Online Piracy Act y cuáles serían los principales perjuicios que conllevaría su aprobación:

¿Qué es y cómo funciona la Ley SOPA?, en términos simples y sencillos (ALT1040)

The Stop Online Piracy Act: A Blacklist by Any Other Name Is Still a Blacklist (EFF)

Before Solving a Problem, Make Sure You've Got the Right Problem (Tim O'Reilly)
"There's no question in my mind that piracy exists, that people around the world are enjoying creative content without paying for it, and even that some criminals are profiting by redistributing it. But is there actual economic harm?
In my experience at O'Reilly, the losses due to piracy are far outweighed by the benefits of the free flow of information, which makes the world richer, and develops new markets for legitimate content. Most of the people who are downloading unauthorized copies of O'Reilly books would never have paid us for them anyway; meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of others are buying content from us, many of them in countries that we were never able to do business with when our products were not available in digital form. [...] British publishers could have come to America in the 19th century; they chose not to, and as a result, we grew our own indigenous publishing industry, which relied at first, in no small part, on pirating British and European works."

#SOPA: por qué no sirve saltarse las restricciones (Nación Red)
" [...] en caso de aprobarse la SOPA, los programadores de las extensiones MAFIAAFire, DeSOPA, e incluso BoycottSOPA (que no cambia de DNS si no que te dice quién apoya la nueva ley), The PirateBay Dancing o similares serán convertidos en criminales.Pero no sólo ellos. También los programadores de software para proxies, redes privadas virtuales y cualquier tipo de anonimizador o enmascarador como puede ser Tor, así como los proveedores de dichos servicios, que aún cuando no se puedan cerrar sus webs, si que se puede ordenar el bloqueo de los medios de pago, provocando así su ruina económica y obligandoles a cerrar."

What is SOPA and how does it work? (The Verge)
"There's no such balance of interests for the payment processors or ad networks under SOPA or PIPA: they simply have to block their accounts within five days of getting a letter, unless their accused customer writes back with a letter promising to come to a US court .[...] Oh, but it gets worse. Much worse. SOPA section 105 offers legal immunity to ISPs that independently block websites that host illegally copied material without any prompting from the government. That's a major conflict of interest for a huge ISP like Comcast, which also owns NBC — there would be nothing stopping Comcast from blocking a foreign video service that competes with NBC if it could claim it had a "reasonable belief" it was "dedicated to the theft of US property." And indeed, Comcast is among the companies that support SOPA.
Now, you may have noticed that while all these rules are totally insane, they're all at least theoretically restricted to foreign sites — defined by SOPA as sites with servers located outside the US. That's important to know: at its simplest level, SOPA is a kneejerk reaction to the fundamental nature of the internet, which was explicitly designed to ignore outmoded and inconvenient concepts like the continuing existence of the United States. Because US copyright holders generally can't drag a foreign web site into US courts to get them to stop stealing and distributing their work, SOPA allows them to go after the ISPs, ad networks, and payment processors that are in the United States. It is a law borne of the blind logic of revenge: the movie studios can't punish the real pirates, so they are attacking the network instead"

What is Wrong with SOPA? (Open Culture)

How SOPA Will Be (Ab)Used (Techdirt)
"They will effectively control which foreign domains the Justice Department chooses to block directly, and shop around for friendly judges amenable to rubber-stamping orders in civil litigation that require payment providers and ad networks to cut off disfavored sites. The likely targets are their competitors, whether the copyright claims are valid or not. Sites like YouTube that provide entertaining user-generated videos are one less reason to pony up for the next lackluster Adam Sandler movie. Sites that give musicians a way to gain exposure to fans and market their albums without giving a cut to the increasingly redundant middleman threaten to make the labels obsolete. And if open platforms invariably end up hosting some infringing content uploaded by users? Well, that's as good a pretext as any for shutting down the competition."

Edito: La selección de Juan Varela es bastante más completa y su texto muy recomendable:
"Este blog tiene actualmente 388 artículos bloqueados por la Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). Google los ha retirado para no sufrir el castigo de esa ley de defensa del copyright. [...] Quienes soy lectores del blog sabéis de sobra que aquí no hay enlaces comerciales ni material que viole ningún derecho de autor o comercial. ¿Cuál es el pecado de esos 388 artículos? Enlazar sitios sospechosos, entendiendo por tales sólo los que pueda alojar la mente de un paranoico, reproducir algún vídeo de YouTube o citar marcas comerciales sin permiso.
De la libertad de información y opinión y el derecho de cita, ni las autoridades norteamericanas ni Google (de rodillas débiles ante el abuso) quieren saber nada. Los defiendo con argumentos y las leyes españolas y europeas que garantizan los derechos citados. Por ahora, sordo Google, sorda la justicia norteamericana.
Es un ejemplo sencillo de todo lo que puede empeorar si las leyes Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) y Protect Intellectual Property Act (PIPA) son aprobadas."

No hay comentarios:

Publicar un comentario