Do you have a blog or website? Concerned about SOPA/PIPA?

[RKDauph]

Do you have a blog or website? Pay attention to SOPA/PIPA - This is a short article that seems to fairly balance the issues.

http://wordpress.org/news/​2012/01/help-stop-sopa-pipa/

Message Congress: PROTECT IP Act Breaks the Internet

This thing will/could affect any photographer's website that posts videos for their clients.

[Nikonfan]

Thanks for sharing!

[danchez]

I already contacted my representatives and told them that I am opposed to SOPA and PIPA.

[brewercm]

Not sure how that article fairly balanced the issue, although i'm against it until it can better figure out a way to fight piracy which i'm against without overstepping.

[Patti Edens]

Originally Posted by RKDauph

... This thing will/could affect any photographer's website that posts videos for their clients.

I guess I don't understand why many photographers are against this. I've listened and I've read, but I don't fully understand the implications. How can it affect websites where videos are posted?

[ptrd]

^there are many examples (some plausible some extreme) but i'll take a crack at it.

At it's very base a rogue user could post a copyrighted video or parts of it to youtube and post that link here on pixtus. Someone could complain and this whole forum could be shut down for any length of time. That's just one widely used example I've seen.

[Patti Edens]

Okay. I understand that one. But, how can it affect a photographer that posts his/her own videos of his/her clients on his/her own website? That's what I don't understand.

[brewercm]

It was a badly written bill which is why it was sent back to committee to be rewritten. The intent was not to shut down every site that had some idiot link like that. It was to shut down sites that cater to piracy or do nothing about it (key word nothing) when they know its going on. This site is very well maintained and alt ways being monitored for that type of activity along with others.

It's the extremists on both sides that start yelling any time something like this comes up. Just a bad bill that was rushed into and needs work but has some merits to look at.

[Howard Barlow]

Originally Posted by Patti Edens

Okay. I understand that one. But, how can it affect a photographer that posts his/her own videos of his/her clients on his/her own website? That's what I don't understand.

In most cases, I would bet, photographers use unlicensed music on their web site. And, they use it on DVDs they sell to their clients.

[tukaniray]

Aside from the unlicensed music, if you have bought music from royalty free places, then you should be in the clear ... correct.

I honestly don't see a huge panic by the bill at the moment. I do have favorite music on my current site, but I can easily just take it down.

So, I guess with my confusion of this and not really knowing the full pros and cons, I am neutral on it passing or not.

-Ray-

[kayumangi]

The problem with SOPA/PIPA is the ambiguity about what is legal or not and who decides what. Music misuse is just a tip of the iceberg. And because it's too broad it will be prone for abuse. That's the main contention. Heck one of the authors (a Texas rep no less) couldn't even abide by the laws he is pushing.

[Phisch]

Lemme answer with a question: how is it going to help copyrights to write more laws instead of enforce existing ones?

Or is that too basic? Not being snarky but why do we need more?

I know I'm a pollyanna but I think that enough folks have been shaken by recent events to keep illegal use of music on their professional sites to a minimum if at all.

If you need music, there are places you can license it but there ought to be a thread for that.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by Howard Barlow

In most cases, I would bet, photographers use unlicensed music on their web site. And, they use it on DVDs they sell to their clients.

Good. Then shut them down for stealing and let the artists they are stealing from go after them. Set up a hotline or anonymous tip line to turn in people stealing. It would end real quick.

[Howard Barlow]

But, we are thinking locally. The bigger picture is such as Google, etc. They would have to be certain every search result showed only 'legal' web sites, or they, Google, could be shut down. They could go to Visa, PayPal, etc and tell them to be sure they are not processing any unlawful transactions, or risk being shut down. It ain't about simply protecting intellectual property rights. It ain't about stopping foreign piracy. It's about gov.org control. Pure and simple.

[Phisch]

Well, that's the thing though. Big government is many-tentacled. I don't think it needs more arms.

If they really want to work to protect intellectual property, at the risk of a tangential issue, they should make it easier to set up patents for instance. The system they have in place is ridiculously slow.

Copyrights, on the other hand, are very easy to set up. In fact, you own a copyright to something as soon as you make it; the paperwork is a formality to make legal issues easier to navigate in case someone steals your work.

Why bother with anonymous tip lines? If you see someone stealing, why should the government have to step in always? Email them, tell them the problem.

Bah. Now I've got to do exactly that. Irks me when I see photogs use others' work for self-promotion.