Why Is Justin Bieber So Hackin Mad?
By Tim Karr, November 2, 2011
Justin Bieber says that anyone in Congress who supports SOPA "needs to be locked up."
Justin Bieber is pissed off and you should be, too.
What's made Bieber so angry? A bill in Congress that could rip apart the open fabric of the Internet and let corporations censor free speech.
The "Stop Online Piracy Act" or SOPA gives private entities the power to blacklist websites at will. And it violates the due process rights of the thousands of users who could see their sites disappear from the Internet. The crime? Doing something as innocent as posting videos of themselves singing along to their favorite songs.
Learning from China?
These are the sorts of heavy-handed Web controls you'd expect to see in China, not in the United States.
SOPA (HR 3261) not only lets companies silence websites but also allows banks to freeze financial deposits to the accounts of website owners, potentially forcing falsely accused Internet enterprises out of business.
The bill was intended to discourage illegal copyright violations, but it addresses this problem by giving corporations way too much authority over the way the Internet works. It deputizes the private sector with the power to disconnect the URLs of any websites corporations contend are behaving improperly.
It gives private entities unprecedented power to rewrite the Internet's domain name system (DNS), which translates your website request into an IP address to connect you to the correct location. After receiving a complaint from a company like Viacom or Sony Music, the government would force Internet providers and search engines to redirect users' attempts to reach the websites that they chose.
The idea that SOPA would protect against online piracy and other Web crimes is a Hollywood pipe dream. As a technical solution, redirecting DNS would be virtually useless in stopping sophisticated online piracy — but it would have a strong deterrent effect on casual producers and consumers of Internet content.
As such the consequences for free speech would be grave. Imagine your kid sister creates a "fansite" featuring videos of her singing Taylor Swift songs into a hairbrush. The bill not only gives Swift's record label the authority to "disappear" your sister's site from the Web but could also land her in jail, where she would face severe penalties and a long prison term.
Bieber: Throw Congress in Cuffs
In a radio interview last week Bieber called SOPA "ridiculous." He added that "people need to have the freedom ... to sing songs," and that any member of Congress who supports this bill "needs to be locked up — put away in cuffs."
At the very least Congress should wise up and kill this bill.
A Senate version of SOPA, called the Protect IP Act, passed committee approval in the spring following a massive push by brazen film and music industry lobbyists. These lobbyists are back, but now Silicon Valley companies and venture capitalists have joined forces with civil liberties groups, independent musicians and free speech advocates to stop the bill.
We can't let corporations become the Internet's judge, jury and executioner. If SOPA is allowed to stand, we could see the private sector's police powers expand to a point that undermines the fundamental openness of the Internet. And that's bad news for Justin Bieber, your kid sister and the rest of us.
Photo via (cc) by Kevin Kerosene
Free Press is a national, nonpartisan organization working to reform the media. Free Press does not support or oppose any candidate for public office. Through education, organizing and advocacy, we promote diverse and independent media ownership, strong public media and universal access to communications.
Tim Karr
Timothy Karr oversees all Free Press and Free Press Action Fund campaigns and online outreach efforts, including SavetheInternet.com and Free Press' work on public broadcasting, propaganda and journalism.
Read Tim's full bio »
Comments
hypocrites
The mega-media corps are fighting for the rights of the artists? Is THAT a fact? You're the ones who stole from the artists for 50 years (probably much longer, my scope of knowledge and understanding is only of the 2nd half of the 20th century and beginning of 21st century) before the internet! The hypocrisy here is blatant. All of this is B.S. and you should be ASHAMED of yourselves. Concerned for the artists after the internet made your way of doing business (ripping off the artists and public) obsolete?! Trying to get back in the game and can't innovate? YOUR PROBLEM, not ours! Go to school, learn something. Better still, get a real job n stop trying to buy govt legislature slanted towards your evil and greed! Oops too late for that! oh well, carry on. S&$t programming for all! Courtesy of Sony! Choke on it!
We already have a Patriot Act
We already have a Patriot Act that took almost all our rights under pretense that we are in danger.
Now, under pretense that government wants to protect copy rights it wants to censor internet so people cannot find the truth.
Americans, wake up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Stop this.
SOPA
The scariest part of this SOPA story is that it would allow outside tampering with Internet DNS information without the permission of the domain name owner.
The musicians and other artists are not going to benefit from this law. The only people who are going to benefit from this SOPA law are the lawyers who will be litigating over the rights of the domain name owners.
As an example, according to this Tim Karr article, if Disney.com had some content that I claimed belonged to me, on suspicion, I could have traffic going to Disney.com sent over to my web site!
Stick to the facts - Stop fear mongering.
This bill is being introduced to help COPYRIGHT HOLDERS, the people who create all those songs and videos that everyone else seems to feel a right to use however they wish. Online copyright infringement has resulted in huge losses to artist and the companies who support them. Publishers have been severely damaged by professional and casual copyright abuse.
The fact is, we're already like China in many ways. We take music and videos, make copies, "share" them with our friends and in some cases, we even re-sell them for profit. Like it or not, agree with this position or not, all this behavior is a form of stealing. Just because you have the ability to copy or use digital media, doesn't give you the right to do it. Using someone else's work, even for casual purposes, is against the law. There's nothing at all wrong with enforcing existing copyright law, which is all this law is attempting to do. Personally, I would love to see artists and publishers get the income they deserve. Think about how you might react if someone could simply copy and give away your work or even re-sell it without paying you anything.
Let's do the right thing and help protect the right of the people we admire for their talent and willingness to share their work with us. Let's make sure artists get paid.
Make sure artists get paid
I have the feeling that artists are overpaid and the executives steal the money from us. This may sound like socialism but way too many people are being left out. I cannot afford to buy anything. I am not taking anything illegally either. What you are saying it is only for the rich who can afford it. I don't trust corporations ay all. They will take everything they can get and keep it for themselves. However, I would block porn from the internet. There is no way that is doing anyone any good. I would bet that the number of people taking songs or whatever is very small. This is just a move by corporations to sell more stuff to us. Can't watch a video...buy it! $9.95 free shipping.
Check your facts. “The bill
Check your facts.
“The bill harmonizes the penalties for large-scale infringement with modern methods of piracy, i.e. online streaming,” said Sandra Aisters, Executive Director of the Copyright Alliance, a non-partisan group ”dedicated to the value of copyright as an agent for creativity, jobs and growth.”
Aisters, a copyright lawyer, explained to TheDC that the bill targets streaming content online. Uploading music samples to YouTube, for example, wouldn’t be criminalized by the legislation.
“Music licensing law is a dense topic and the freebieber campaign is full of false information,” said Aisters. “Justin Bieber and aspiring artists doing covers of hit songs in their bedrooms have nothing to worry about. One, YouTube, not the uploader of the cover, is doing the streaming. All of the major professionals and music publishers have licensed public performances of musical works on YouTube.”
Check Sandra's background.
"Prior to joining the Alliance, Sandra served as Vice President and Associate General Counsel at Time Warner Inc. In her role at Time Warner Aistars coordinated the company’s intellectual property strategies; served as an expert to the U.S. Congress, the Copyright Office, and various departments and agencies; and represented the company in cross-industry coalitions and technology standards efforts."
Non-partisan, my ass. "We are non-partisan. We'll support whichever group helps us make our money."
Please...
Bieber
This story has nothing to do with Bieber but the main thing is that Congress is going crazy. Let's just shut down the whole internet instead, so we don't need to censor it.
Welcome to China!
The irony is that China isn't
The irony is that China isn't this radical. It's keeping to it's own country. The internet is global. Shut down a page in America the page is shut down globally. Albiet the domain exists as an IP, but this unlike china affects the global level and isnt just a nationwide censorship act like a firewall is
Grammar Police says: This
Grammar Police says: This should read: "It's keeping to its own country." (It's simple. If the contraction doesn't make sense when you insert "it is" in its place, there should be no apostrophe.)
The Grammar-Police Police say . . .
The Grammar-Police Police say that "Grammar Police" is plural and therefore they don't "says" anything. The Punctuation Police have chimed in to contend, "You should not follow a colon with a colon."
The Grammar-Police Police say . . .
The Grammar-Police Police say that "Grammar Police" is plural and therefore they don't "says" anything. The Punctuation Police have chimed in to contend, "You should not follow a colon with a colon."
The word "police" is a
The word "police" is a collective noun. Examples are faculty, team, and department. When referring to the police as a single group, it is singular and takes "is". When referring to the individuals that make up the group, it is plural and takes "are". Thus, whether "police" is singular or plural depends on context.
Bieber
This story has nothing to do with Bieber but the main thing is that Congress is going crazy. Let's just shut down the whole internet instead, so we don't need to censor it.
Welcome to China!
I can see why Justin Bieber is mad
I'm very angry as well. Justin is mad because this bill could take down Youtube which is the place where he became famous. It's the place where MANY people started and became famous. This bill is ridiculous! We might as well burn the rest of the amendments if the first one won't be honored.
Not sure why, but Justin
Not sure why, but Justin Bieber being p.o.'ed is rather humorous. For this alone, the Bill has merit. And Chinese food is preferable to American cuisine. Joking aside, sign .....& put the 'u' back in 'color' also.
nervous
if stuff starts turning for the worse who can you tell?
my parents are set in their ways and wouldnt understand until they were forced. the U.S. will fall. Its the modern day roman empire. history doesnt repeat itself but it does rhyme.
the titanic wasnt supposed to sink and no one believed it was until they were drowning. hoq do we alert people about crisis and man made armageddon? the internet. SOPS knows that and they are gonna take it away soon enough. thats why i sit on the computer everynight for 3=4 hours roughly. soak it up. because in the end its gonna be on YOU.
SOPA
As a long time professional songwriter--you may now commence villifying me-- I'm glad there is finally some attempt to stop these crooks. Here's a little exercise; Google any hit song, the artist, followed by 'mp3' or 'download' and see what comes up. In the case of any of my songs, there are 100k+ results, 8 of the top ten are illegal, most Russian, most with ads for anything from Princess cruises to Lysol to Verizon. Everyone is making $ with every click of the mouse except me (and the rest of the people who brought song to life). Stopping this will 'break the Internet' right? Wreck free speech? Come on.
When I started doing this a long time ago, I bet my life and livelihood on the protections in article 1, section 8 of the Constitution (read it sometime). If anyone had told me when illegal P2P first reared it's ugly head that in 2011 the law would be protecting thieves and I would be shouted down as a RIAA lackey by big tech corporate stooges, my head would have exploded.
Good luck with whatever you do for a living. Hope your work isn't given away free in every household in the free world. Attack away!!!!
SOPA
I agree w/you, 'write-em'; I don't listen to Justin Beiber but if he ever wrote a song worth listening to, then every hack in the world sang it and put it up on the internet, how would he feel? I can guess: "WAAAAAAHHHH!!"
I'm otherwise not for protecting companies w/huge profit margins - nor should all of us 'change jobs' just because we are exploited, as some below have suggested. Songs = content = value. It's plain and simple - you can steal or you can buy it. Unless it's given away, then that should be up to the artist.
And once they control what we
And once they control what we see and hear on the Internet, they will control what you are able to write songs about. I hope you like making catchy propaganda tunes.
SOPA, RIAA, Music industry..
I have studied and gone into the sound recording industry and I know all about the theft that plagues it, however is an open-ended invitation for the government to control whatever they deem "offensive" an end solution to the problem?
Yes it is an unfortunate turn of events that music, movies, media in general has been something that has filtered out for free, but at the same time how many decades did the recording industry and labels reap the rewards and clean up by overpricing these medium? How long has clearchannel specifically had a monopoly on advertisement via any medium with little-to-no actions taken there?
Do these concerns need addressing? Yes. If you are that concerned over your livelihood it sounds like you should probably have changed professions about 10 years ago. There will always be something that will come along and change an industry forever, and in the internet in this case, was that for the music industry.
Call it what you will and demand what you will but when photography changed digital what happened to all of the film development companies or workers? Should they have demanded digital cameras be stopped since it doesn't require people to buy prints at their local retailer stores?
If my employer decides it is better for the company I work for to outsource my job to another company that does the work for less than they pay me and I get fired, do I blame them? People are always going to find a way to do things in a less expensive way and unfortunately music has ALWAYS had a huge price tag on it by recording labels. They have created this need to "illegally pirate" this content. Your beef in the end really needs to be with the RIAA, clearchannel, and all of the major labels that have dominated the music industry and overcharged us for our music for the last 60? years.
Example of music industry greed...
In 1983 Philips and Sony graced us with Compact Digital Audio Discs. Why were they never supplied in a caddy (with players that accommodate them - so as to protect against damage)? Record industry greed! The industry HAD to squeeze every last dime out of the consumer in the form of purchasing the same title again due to inevitable damage to the disc. Just one example of why the record industry is where it's at today!!
"Overpricing"?
"how many decades did the recording industry and labels reap the rewards and clean up by overpricing these medium?"
Who is to say what is "overpricing"? Music is a luxury good, not a necessity, and thus can be priced at will at whatever its creators and distributors determine its worth. Just like designer fashions, luxury cars, etc. Just because I think a Ferrari is "overpriced" does not justify its theft.
Furthermore, as a listener, I never thought music was overpriced. Even $20 for an album which gives me years of enjoyment is a great deal. If you think the music is not worth its price (usually far less than $20; the entire Pink Floyd "Dark Side of the Moon" extended remastered release could be had for sale on Amazon for $2!), then don't buy it, and find music that you believe in instead.
- Staid
U.S. Senate: Free Justin Bieber (Strike Down “felony streaming”
I have a petition on this at Change.org.
U.S. Senate: Free Justin Bieber (Strike Down “felony streaming” bill S. 978). Please head over there and add your name.
Are We Going Communist
I feel like moving to China is the right thing to do. There economy is better so I am not sure why not I am loosing my freedom a little bit everyday.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbDeS_mXMnM
Their economy is a huge bubble.