3 ms·
MPAA forgot the other half of the gun argument. Guns can kill people but we don't prevent law enforcement from having guns? OK, but U.S. citizens have the right
by delinka 15y ago
MPAA forgot the other half of the gun argument. Guns can kill people but we don't prevent law enforcement from having guns? OK, but U.S. citizens have the right to own guns also, kind of a balance of power so to speak.
So where is my balance of power with respect to SOPA/PIPA? When someone improperly targets my website (intentionally or not) and it's offline due to a simple accusation, what's my recourse?
- Joakal 15y agoIf a company abuses DMCA, they are liable for perjury. The police prosecutor is meant to charge them. However, that hasn't happened. Alternatively, if a person suffered monetary damages (current and future), they can sue the abuser for damages. This is what protects big companies from potential DMCA abusers because they have a lot to lose. Since free content creators can't sue for damages but only counternotice and accept liability if they're not scared from the notice; but people sharing the content will be more afraid of the legalese in counternotices. The bill's intent was to stop freely infringing copyright content, it also consequently kills free content sharing due to the unchecked abuse. It's brilliant bill for the anti-Internet activists. MPAA are anti-Internet activists by the way.