Say good bye to the internet
joeturn
Banjo-man,...,digg View profile AlterNet / By Julianne Escobedo
Shepherd 59 COMMENTS Here Come Homeland Security Internet Police, and
They're Already Shutting Down Web Sites They Don't Like Murky new
Internet regulation laws could stomp out freedom of speech...and the
Department of Homeland Security has already begun. December 3, 2010
| LIKE THIS ARTICLE ? Join our mailing list: Sign up to stay up to
date on the latest headlines via email. Petitions by Change.org|Get
Widget|Start a Petition Last week, the Department of Homeland Security
seized 82 domain names for allegedly hawking counterfeit goods ranging
from knockoff Coach handbags to bootleg DVDs. Enacted under the
auspices of its Immigrations and Customs Enforcement arm, the sites
were wiped out and replaced with an ominous message from the DHS that
laid out the stakes, including the warning, “Intentionally and
knowingly trafficking in counterfeit goods is a federal crime that
carries penalties for first-time offenders of up to 10 years in
federal prison, a $2,000,000 fine, forfeiture and restitution.” Most
of the seized Web sites had names like thelouisvuittonoutlet.com and
getdvdset.com, and sold reproductions of designer goods and hard
copies of jacked movies. A few sites on the list, though, stuck out:
Onsmash.com, rapgodfathers.com and dajaz1.com are popular music blogs
that were generally involved in the promotion of artists, rather than
outright piracy. Well-known among rap fans for posting the latest
videos, singles and remixes (always hosted from third-party download
sites), their seizure was shocking, not just to the hip-hop
blogosphere, but to music sites everywhere. Their inclusion on a list
of sites that profit from manufacturing hard goods seemed arbitrary
and ignorant. Furthermore, these sites were directly involved with
artists, widely viewed as outlets that could help artists build buzz
and promote their upcoming albums. And in what ICE termed its “Cyber
Monday” crackdown, a statement on the official DHS site made it clear
that this was only the beginning: The coordinated federal law
enforcement operation targeted online retailers of a diverse array of
counterfeit goods, including sports equipment, shoes, handbags,
athletic apparel and sunglasses as well as illegal copies of
copyrighted DVD boxed sets, music and software. But these rap blogs
weren’t selling any music. They weren’t selling DVDs. In fact, the
only thing you could accuse them of selling was ads -- hardly big
income, definitely not enough to turn a profit. They aren’t even close
to the biggest music downloading sites out there. So why were they
targeted? The DHS seems to be tiptoeing in the music pool, testing its
boundaries and seeing what it can get away with. ICE began seizing
domain names mere days after Senator Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, blocked the
Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA), a bill
that would effectively allow the government to censor any Web site it
sees fit, and one that is widely viewed as an attack on our free
speech. When you type an address into a browser, the browser doesn’t
just know where to take you. For that it counts on the globally
distributed DNS system, which takes you to the specific IP address
where the site is hosted. The DNS system is built on a basic
foundation of trust -- a DNS provider can’t manipulate the results to
stop you from going where you want to go on the Web. COICA would
subject DNS operators to government and industry pressure to intercept
and block traffic to sites they don't like, and gives the Department
of Justice the power to sue DNS operators to effectively disappear a
site from one-click access on the Internet. There are some sites out
there that are devoted primarily to posting copyrighted material, like
torrent-tracking Web sites, but serious concerns have been raised the
dragnet could be extended to file-storage utilities like Dropbox or to
services like Facebook where large amounts of copyrighted material are
easily stored and posted by users. Moreover, DNS blocking inherently
targets entire Web sites, not just specific offending content, raising
the troubling possibility that legal content and protected political
speech on those websites would be censored in the United States.
Normally, when a music site unwittingly posts a song that is not
cleared for release, it will receive a standard, cease-and-desist form
letter from the Recording Industry Association of America. If the site
then removes the link or song, which most do, it will generally have
no subsequent trouble. This most recent action, though, is an example
of RIAA’s ever-expanding involvement in legislation, and reflects its
consistently paranoid, regressive conception of the Internet. COIAA
is, of course, backed by the music industry. A November 18 statement
by RIAA CEO Mitch Bainwol regarding the bill: “We are proud to lend
our voice to the chorus of supporters of this important bipartisan
legislation. In a world where hackers and copyright thieves are able
to take down websites, rip off American consumers and rake in huge
profits operating rogue businesses built on the backs of the American
creative community, the committee has taken a strong step toward
fostering a more safe and secure online experience for consumers.
Bainwol’s language not only reeks of McCarthyist scare tactics, it’s
simply misleading. While “hackers” may be able to “take down
websites,” there have been no instances of a “copyright thief” -- or,
in more direct terms, music blogger -- doing this. By offering free
music, it’s unclear why he believes American consumers are getting
ripped off. And as established, the types of blogs shut down by ICE
last week do not rake in huge profits... most rake in barely enough to
pay for their Web domain names. Simply put, RIAA is vehemently against
music blogs (and, it sometimes seems, the Internet as a whole) because
it does not understand the music industry it purports to represent.
This was established back in 2003, when RIAA made aggressive efforts
to sue 261 individuals -- including, notoriously, a 12-year-old honors
student from the projects -- accused of downloading music from the
Internet on P2P services. But that was seven years ago, and it’s
astonishing that since then, RIAA has apparently made no effort to
understand how the Internet works, and how blogs such as OnSmash
ultimately help their artists’ buzz, posting videos based on their
personal tastes and those that reflect their vast audience of
potential hip-hop consumers. Or, perhaps, labels just really miss the
days when they had to pour cash into the proffers of radio stations to
get any airplay. RIAA’s continued support of Internet censorship is a
clear and desperate attempt to justify its existence in an ever-
altering information society. You could call it an effort to stop
time. Often, though, marketers and others employed by major labels
will send out mp3s to blogs under the radar, knowing that ultimately
having the music available will help their artists’ buzz and
contribute to their bottom line, as income comes decreasingly from
album sales and relies more on cross-promotion, marketing deals, tours
and merchandise. That’s because RIAA doesn’t support artists -- it
supports corporations. It's transparent about this; its mission
statement explicitly states that it "supports and promotes the
creative and financial vitality of the major music companies.” Casey
Rae-Hunter, a communications director and policy strategist for the
artist advocacy group Future of Music Coalition (FMC), illustrates why
an open Internet is, ultimately, much better for musicians in the long
run: “The two things that are most important to today’s musicians and
creative entrepreneurs are innovation and access... For a decade,
Future of Music Coalition has called for a straightforward Internet
framework that lets artists compete in a legitimate digital music
marketplace alongside the biggest companies. Open access to the
Internet has led to tremendous innovations in the marketplace and
inspired countless examples of creative enterprise.” Of course, with
COIAA, the music industry -- and the takedown of relatively small
sites like OnSmash and Rap Godfathers -- is just the tip of the
iceberg. According to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital
civil liberties group, widely used hosting sites could end up in the
government’s crosshairs as well; an act that would not only affect our
ability to disseminate information, but would target our very outlets
for free speech on the Internet. If this bill passes, the list of
targets could conceivably include hosting Web sites such as Dropbox,
MediaFire and Rapidshare; MP3 blogs and mashup/remix music sites like
SoundCloud, MashupTown and Hype Machine; and sites that discuss and
make the controversial political and intellectual case for piracy,
like pirate-party.us, p2pnet, InfoAnarchy, Slyck and ZeroPaid. Indeed,
had this bill been passed five or 10 years ago, YouTube might not
exist today. In other words, the collateral damage from this
legislation would be enormous. (Why would all these sites be targets?)
With the recent firestorm surrounding Wikileaks, and the chorus of
voices calling for its elimination (not to mention Julian Assange’s
head) the state of COIAA is increasingly urgent. Wyden may have
stalled it for now, but if it’s reintroduced next year with the
conservative new Congress, it’s likely to pass. However, free-speech
advocates do have an ally in FCC Chairman Julian Genachowski. On
December 1, he announced an agenda for a meeting later this month that
would include conversations about an Open Internet Policy, preserving
the infrastructure and freedom that keeps the American Web from
mirroring that of China. Clearly, net neutrality and blocking COIAA go
hand in hand. Genachowski observed: The Internet has been an
unprecedented platform for speech and democratic engagement, and a
place where the American spirit of innovation has flourished. We’ve
seen new media tools like Twitter and YouTube used by democratic
movements around the world. Not only is the Internet becoming a
central part of the daily lives of Americans, the Internet has been a
strong engine of job creation and economic growth. Internet companies
have begun as small start-ups, some of them famously in dorm rooms and
garages with little more than a computer and access to the open
Internet. Many have become large businesses, providing high-paying,
high-tech jobs in communities across our country. It’s the American
dream at work.... Why has the Internet proved to be such a powerful
engine for innovation, creativity, and economic growth? A big part of
the answer traces back to one key decision by the Internet’s original
architects: to make the Internet an open platform. It is the
Internet’s openness and freedom -- the ability to speak, innovate, and
engage in commerce without having to ask anyone’s permission -- that
has enabled the Internet’s unparalleled success. Very important words.
Let’s hope his colleagues and Congress hear them. Julianne Escobedo
Shepherd is an associate editor at AlterNet and a Brooklyn-based
freelance writer and editor. Formerly the executive editor of The
FADER, her work has appeared in VIBE, SPIN, New York Times and various
other magazines and websites. Believe nothing , O monks, merely
because you have been told it....or because it is traditional,or
because you yourselves have imagined it. Do not believe what your
teachers tell you merely out of respect for the teacher. But
whatsoever, after due examination and analysis, you find to be
conducive to the good, the benefit, the welfare of all beings - that
doctrine believe and cling to, and take it as your
guide. Gautama Buddha
More options Dec 3, 1:41 pm
From: "Banjo-man,...,digg" <banjovia...@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2010 13:41:33 -0500 (EST)
Local: Fri, Dec 3 2010 1:41 pm
Subject: Homeland Sec. Internet Police?
Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this
message | Find messages by this author
AlterNet / By Julianne Escobedo Shepherd
59 COMMENTS
Here Come Homeland Security Internet Police, and They're Already
Shutting Down Web Sites They Don't Like
Murky new Internet regulation laws could stomp out freedom of
speech...and the Department of Homeland Security has already begun.
December 3, 2010 |
LIKE THIS ARTICLE ?
Join our mailing list:
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest headlines via email.
Petitions by Change.org|Get Widget|Start a Petition
Last week, the Department of Homeland Security seized 82 domain names
for allegedly hawking counterfeit goods ranging from knockoff Coach
handbags to bootleg DVDs. Enacted under the auspices of its
Immigrations and Customs Enforcement arm, the sites were wiped out and
replaced with an ominous message from the DHS that laid out the
stakes, including the warning, “Intentionally and knowingly
trafficking in counterfeit goods is a federal crime that carries
penalties for first-time offenders of up to 10 years in federal
prison, a $2,000,000 fine, forfeiture and restitution.”
Most of the seized Web sites had names like thelouisvuittonoutlet.com
and getdvdset.com, and sold reproductions of designer goods and hard
copies of jacked movies. A few sites on the list, though, stuck out:
Onsmash.com, rapgodfathers.com and dajaz1.com are popular music blogs
that were generally involved in the promotion of artists, rather than
outright piracy. Well-known among rap fans for posting the latest
videos, singles and remixes (always hosted from third-party download
sites), their seizure was shocking, not just to the hip-hop
blogosphere, but to music sites everywhere. Their inclusion on a list
of sites that profit from manufacturing hard goods seemed arbitrary
and ignorant. Furthermore, these sites were directly involved with
artists, widely viewed as outlets that could help artists build buzz
and promote their upcoming albums.
And in what ICE termed its “Cyber Monday” crackdown, a statement on
the official DHS site made it clear that this was only the beginning:
The coordinated federal law enforcement operation targeted online
retailers of a diverse array of counterfeit goods, including sports
equipment, shoes, handbags, athletic apparel and sunglasses as well as
illegal copies of copyrighted DVD boxed sets, music and software.
But these rap blogs weren’t selling any music. They weren’t selling
DVDs. In fact, the only thing you could accuse them of selling was ads
-- hardly big income, definitely not enough to turn a profit. They
aren’t even close to the biggest music downloading sites out there. So
why were they targeted?
The DHS seems to be tiptoeing in the music pool, testing its
boundaries and seeing what it can get away with. ICE began seizing
domain names mere days after Senator Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, blocked the
Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA), a bill
that would effectively allow the government to censor any Web site it
sees fit, and one that is widely viewed as an attack on our free
speech.
When you type an address into a browser, the browser doesn’t just know
where to take you. For that it counts on the globally distributed DNS
system, which takes you to the specific IP address where the site is
hosted. The DNS system is built on a basic foundation of trust -- a
DNS provider can’t manipulate the results to stop you from going where
you want to go on the Web.
COICA would subject DNS operators to government and industry pressure
to intercept and block traffic to sites they don't like, and gives the
Department of Justice the power to sue DNS operators to effectively
disappear a site from one-click access on the Internet. There are some
sites out there that are devoted primarily to posting copyrighted
material, like torrent-tracking Web sites, but serious concerns have
been raised the dragnet could be extended to file-storage utilities
like Dropbox or to services like Facebook where large amounts of
copyrighted material are easily stored and posted by users. Moreover,
DNS blocking inherently targets entire Web sites, not just specific
offending content, raising the troubling possibility that legal
content and protected political speech on those websites would be
censored in the United States.
Normally, when a music site unwittingly posts a song that is not
cleared for release, it will receive a standard, cease-and-desist form
letter from the Recording Industry Association of America. If the site
then removes the link or song, which most do, it will generally have
no subsequent trouble. This most recent action, though, is an example
of RIAA’s ever-expanding involvement in legislation, and reflects its
consistently paranoid, regressive conception of the Internet. COIAA
is, of course, backed by the music industry. A November 18 statement
by RIAA CEO Mitch Bainwol regarding the bill:
“We are proud to lend our voice to the chorus of supporters of this
important bipartisan legislation. In a world where hackers and
copyright thieves are able to take down websites, rip off American
consumers and rake in huge profits operating rogue businesses built on
the backs of the American creative community, the committee has taken
a strong step toward fostering a more safe and secure online
experience for consumers.
Bainwol’s language not only reeks of McCarthyist scare tactics, it’s
simply misleading. While “hackers” may be able to “take down
websites,” there have been no instances of a “copyright thief” -- or,
in more direct terms, music blogger -- doing this. By offering free
music, it’s unclear why he believes American consumers are getting
ripped off. And as established, the types of blogs shut down by ICE
last week do not rake in huge profits... most rake in barely enough to
pay for their Web domain names.
Simply put, RIAA is vehemently against music blogs (and, it sometimes
seems, the Internet as a whole) because it does not understand the
music industry it purports to represent. This was established back in
2003, when RIAA made aggressive efforts to sue 261 individuals --
including, notoriously, a 12-year-old honors student from the projects
-- accused of downloading music from the Internet on P2P services. But
that was seven years ago, and it’s astonishing that since then, RIAA
has apparently made no effort to understand how the Internet works,
and how blogs such as OnSmash ultimately help their artists’ buzz,
posting videos based on their personal tastes and those that reflect
their vast audience of potential hip-hop consumers. Or, perhaps,
labels just really miss the days when they had to pour cash into the
proffers of radio stations to get any airplay.
RIAA’s continued support of Internet censorship is a clear and
desperate attempt to justify its existence in an ever-altering
information society. You could call it an effort to stop time. Often,
though, marketers and others employed by major labels will send out
mp3s to blogs under the radar, knowing that ultimately having the
music available will help their artists’ buzz and contribute to their
bottom line, as income comes decreasingly from album sales and relies
more on cross-promotion, marketing deals, tours and merchandise.
That’s because RIAA doesn’t support artists -- it supports
corporations. It's transparent about this; its mission statement
explicitly states that it "supports and promotes the creative and
financial vitality of the major music companies.”
Casey Rae-Hunter, a communications director and policy strategist for
the artist advocacy group Future of Music Coalition (FMC), illustrates
why an open Internet is, ultimately, much better for musicians in the
long run:
“The two things that are most important to today’s musicians and
creative entrepreneurs are innovation and access... For a decade,
Future of Music Coalition has called for a straightforward Internet
framework that lets artists compete in a legitimate digital music
marketplace alongside the biggest companies. Open access to the
Internet has led to tremendous innovations in the marketplace and
inspired countless examples of creative enterprise.”
Of course, with COIAA, the music industry -- and the takedown of
relatively small sites like OnSmash and Rap Godfathers -- is just the
tip of the iceberg. According to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a
digital civil liberties group, widely used hosting sites could end up
in the government’s crosshairs as well; an act that would not only
affect our ability to disseminate information, but would target our
very outlets for free speech on the Internet.
If this bill passes, the list of targets could conceivably include
hosting Web sites such as Dropbox, MediaFire and Rapidshare; MP3 blogs
and mashup/remix music sites like SoundCloud, MashupTown and Hype
Machine; and sites that discuss and make the controversial political
and intellectual case for piracy, like pirate-party.us, p2pnet,
InfoAnarchy, Slyck and ZeroPaid. Indeed, had this bill been passed
five or 10 years ago, YouTube might not exist today. In other words,
the collateral damage from this legislation would be enormous. (Why
would all these sites be targets?)
With the recent firestorm surrounding Wikileaks, and the chorus of
voices calling for its elimination (not to mention Julian Assange’s
head) the state of COIAA is increasingly urgent. Wyden may have
stalled it for now, but if it’s reintroduced next year with the
conservative new Congress, it’s likely to pass. However, free-speech
advocates do have an ally in FCC Chairman Julian Genachowski. On
December 1, he announced an agenda for a meeting later this month that
would include conversations about an Open Internet Policy, preserving
the infrastructure and freedom that keeps the American Web from
mirroring that of China. Clearly, net neutrality and blocking COIAA go
hand in hand. Genachowski observed:
The Internet has been an unprecedented platform for speech and
democratic engagement, and a place where the American spirit of
innovation has flourished. We’ve seen new media tools like Twitter and
YouTube used by democratic movements around the world.
Not only is the Internet becoming a central part of the daily lives of
Americans, the Internet has been a strong engine of job creation and
economic growth.
Internet companies have begun as small start-ups, some of them
famously in dorm rooms and garages with little more than a computer
and access to the open Internet. Many have become large businesses,
providing high-paying, high-tech jobs in communities across our
country. It’s the American dream at work....
Why has the Internet proved to be such a powerful engine for
innovation, creativity, and economic growth? A big part of the answer
traces back to one key decision by the Internet’s original architects:
to make the Internet an open platform.
It is the Internet’s openness and freedom -- the ability to speak,
innovate, and engage in commerce without having to ask anyone’s
permission -- that has enabled the Internet’s unparalleled success.
Very important words. Let’s hope his colleagues and Congress hear
them.
Julianne Escobedo Shepherd is an associate editor at AlterNet and a
Brooklyn-based freelance writer and editor. Formerly the executive
editor of The FADER, her work has appeared in VIBE, SPIN, New York
Times and various other magazines and websites.
Believe nothing , O monks, merely because you have been told it....or
because it is traditional,or because you yourselves have imagined it.
Do not believe what your teachers tell you merely out of respect for
the teacher. But whatsoever, after due examination and analysis, you
find to be conducive to the good, the benefit, the welfare of all
beings - that doctrine believe and cling to, and take it as your
guide.
Gautama Buddha
And you thought wikileaks was a leak instead of a way for our solvern
Jesuits to bring back the Iron Curtain