Posts tagged censorship
Posts tagged censorship
"Hey! Let’s piss off the internet by threatening to nuke the internet via a censorship bill! It’ll be hilarious, you guys!"
No one in their right mind would say that, right?
We Anonymous are launching our largest attack ever on government and music industry sites. Lulz. The FBI didn’t think they would get away with this did they? They should have expected us.
The following sites were taken down in response to the FBI shutting down megaupload.com
:) TANGO DOWN
justice.gov universalmusic.com riaa.org mpaa.org copyright.gov hadopi.fr wmg.com usdoj.gov bmi.com fbi.gov Anti-piracy.be/nl/ ChrisDodd.com Vivendi.fr Whitehouse.gov
EVERYBODY DANCE NOW!
Conclusion: Threatening to nuke the internet = bad, bad idea.
Anonymous’ hijinks may be amusing, but censorship is real. Stay vigilant and stay informed, folks. You never know what shit they’ll say next.
Ron Paul’s supporters were burning up Twitter yesterday to emphasize he’s the only presidential candidate to not support SOPA or PIPA. Their claims are false - Buddy Roemer blacked out his site in support of the protest - but that’s beside the point. If you make a video in support of Ron Paul, and he doesn’t like your message, he’ll take your ass to federal court.
How does this jive with his image as a defender of liberty again? Isn’t the right to speak out on the internet anonymously - no matter how vile the message - something a defender of liberty should protect? In this case, a supporter of Ron Paul uploaded a racist, offensive video which questioned Jon Huntsman’s values based on his speaking Chinese, and slammed him for adopting two daughters from China and India.
The Ron Paul campaign condemned the video quickly. However, this lawsuit brings the video to the forefront again, though Huntsman has left the race, and the suit itself seems to contradict several principles for which Paul claims to champion.
#OccupyWallStreetMovies is a tag mostly mocking the Occupy Wall Street movement. It’s trending, yet #OccupyWallStreet is generating quite a bit more traffic. So, who’s shocked Twitter is censoring the #OccupyWallStreet hashtag from trending?
If you are legitimately shocked, you haven’t been paying attention.
JP Morgan Chase has invested over $400 million in Twitter this year, and $4.6 million in the NYPD just a few months ago. Interesting coincidence, no?
A man will appear before magistrates next month for allegedly trying to organise a mass water fight via his mobile phone.
The prime minister said last week that the government would investigate whether social networking platforms should be shut down if they helped to “plot” crime in the wake of the riots.
The unnamed man has been charged with “encouraging or assisting in the commission of an offence” under the 2007 Serious Crime Act, police said.
He was arrested with another 20-year-old man the day the water fight was allegedly due to take place, and has been bailed to appear before Colchester magistrates on 1 September. The second man was released without charge.
In 2008 there was a spate of mass water fights in British towns and cities that were organised through social networks. Most remained peaceful. This month a water fight attended by thousands of young Iranians attracted the attention of Tehran’s morality police and led to a series of arrests.
A water fight? Seriously? Really? Anyone else scared of the brave new world of communications monitoring and censorship?
I wonder how this would play out in the U.S. - if Blackberry messaging is closed, would the evidence be considered unlawfully seized? It’s difficult for police to monitor, say, a forum like Stormfront because of Fourth Amendment concerns. I’m curious if this would be possible in the U.S. - a public Facebook event is different from a closed, invite-only Facebook event. Would the same go for messaging?
Because censorship disconnection of social media has been totally effective before, amirite guys?!
Wikileaks updates Mastercard’s ads and it’s priceless. Thanks to Mastercard and other corporations, they’re operating under a financial blockade:
For six months now, five major US financial institutions, VISA, MasterCard, PayPal, Western Union and the Bank of America have tried to economically strangle WikiLeaks as a result of political pressure from Washington. The attack has blocked over 90% of the non-profit organization’s donations, costing some $15M in lost revenue. The attack is entirely outside of any due process or rule of law. In fact, in the only formal review to occur, the US Secretary of the Treasury, Timothy C. Geithner found, on January 12, that there were no lawful grounds to add WikiLeaks to a financial blockade.
The fact is, the blockade is not just against WikiLeaks. It is against the associative rights and economic rights of every VISA, MasterCard, PayPal and Bank of America account holder, who have been prevented from supporting the organization of their choice. We call on regulators around the world to investigate and de-license these banking institutions. They are not politically neutral and are not obeying the rule of law. When VISA and MasterCard will happily provide services to the Klu Klux Klan, but not to WikiLeaks, it is time to act.
Find out more here.
My website is censored in much of China. How about yours?
The US is really ramping up its war on intellectual property infringement, a war which I’m sure will be just as successful, cheap and supported by the people as the wars on drugs and terrorism. The US has started seizing the domain names of various websites through ICANN - not because owners of these sites were convicted of anything, but merely because complaints have been filed against them. Anyone want to take a guess how long it will be before the US government blocks WikiLeaks? Update: The blocks function outside of the US too. In other words, the US is forcing its views upon the rest of the world once again.
The current seizures of domains did not even use the recently passed censorship law. The seizures come from the US Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, and cover about 70 websites relating to potential copyright infringement and counterfeit goods, among which is Torrent-Finder.com, a mere torrent search engine which does not host or even link to torrents; it displays content hosted elsewhere through embedded iframes.
“My domain has been seized without any previous complaint or notice from any court!” the owner of Torrent-Finder explained TorrentFreak, “I firstly had DNS downtime. While I was contacting GoDaddy I noticed the DNS had changed. Godaddy had no idea what was going on and until now they do not understand the situation and they say it was totally from ICANN.”
This is equivalent to having your house seized for pointing out to someone you can buy weed in the college district. The craziness goes even further - ordinary search engines are really effective at finding unauthorised copyrighted content as well. You can use Google to find the latest Parenthood episode in 720p, and Bing, too, is pretty good at it. Why aren’t we seeing notices for these domains as well?
In the great words of Jack Black, the government totally you motherfucker, the government totally sucks.
Um, this is not the land of the free, home of the brave behavior, but I’m pretty sure we gave up on that a long time ago.
(Source: , via the-fibonacci-sequence)
I understand this quote more than I ever thought I would