Lawrence Dignan
Decidedly Yes
A Resounding No
Zack Whittaker
Best Argument: A Resounding No
Closing Statements
There needs to be a middle ground
Lawrence Dignan
The Internet should be open and free and all that wonderful stuff. But the reality is that piracy is out there and there has to be some common sense guidelines to prevent it. Why? If there are no incentives to create great content you'll be stuck with crap. Where the debate should really focus on is how some middle ground can be achieved. SOPA was a debacle that was created behind the scenes. Unfortunately, government and common sense are two things that often don't go together.
It's not the tool that needs fixing
Zack Whittaker
The Internet should be free and open. Tea tastes better with a dash of milk. Cows like water. It's a given, really. Instead of censorship and domain-name blocking, change needs to come from the very heart of who we are and what we do. Just because you hit your thumb with a hammer doesn’t mean you punish the nail. It’s not the tool that needs fixing. It’s us. Ultimately, our behaviour needs to change, and with that, the music and film industry needs to adapt first. Censorship is for the oppressive regimes. Let’s not bring China’s firewall to the United States, please.
Don't punish those who play by the rules
Jason Hiner
I'm really glad that we did this debate and brought some reasonable dialog to what is a highly-charged and often irrational subject. Ultimately, Larry is right that the Internet is badly in need of some common sense guidelines to help protect copyright holders in order to incent people to create, innovate, and market their products. But, as Larry also pointed out, getting today's governments to produce common sense guidelines is a rare if not impossible thing. As a result, giving up any freedoms to fight piracy usually ends up punishing the people who already play by the rules, while the pirates find new ways around the rules. For that reason, Zack is on the right side of this one.
Talkback
RE: Should any Internet freedom ever be sacrificed to fight piracy?
Three Impacts
After reading the debate and having followed this issue closely, while I do agree with Larry's points, he looks to be missing something critical.
The internet is comprised of what I call three buckets:
1. Economic
2. Social
3. Communication
There is a lot of overlap betwixt these depending on the specific use.
I am seeing almosy all of Larry's points factor in Economic.
Zack's spread more across all three (EU background?).
Then I have one last question: Why should the USA become the "policeman" of the internet?
I'm voting a resounding "No".
Nice debate :)
RE: Should any Internet freedom ever be sacrificed to fight piracy?
A Dose of Reality
This legislation is just a golden ticket for the media industry to get what it wants the way it did in the golden years.
RE: Should any Internet freedom ever be sacrificed to fight piracy?
RE: Should any Internet freedom ever be sacrificed to fight piracy?
Personally I'm keeping an open mind until the debate. No point going in headstrong.
RE: Should any Internet freedom ever be sacrificed to fight piracy?
There are thieves everywhere
[i]I know of one video store in my town which I would seriously question whether or not they actually pay such fees[/i]
And just as there are those who do illegally pirate stuff to pocket the savings, there will be stores like the one you mentione that will, too.
Just as there are alot of people who are honest and don't pirate, they pay their share, there are stores that are honest and pay their share.
RE: Should any Internet freedom ever be sacrificed to fight piracy?
So if you sell a used CD or DVD from your own personal collection on ebay and make a profit, are you going to write to the content creators and offer them a big cut?
lol... :D
RE: Should any Internet freedom ever be sacrificed to fight piracy?
Game, set, match!
They always seem to forget these things.