- Joined
- Feb 3, 2013
It's really funny because the red states are generally the ones that receive more federal funds than they give, while the blue states are the opposite.
Official Election 2020 Doomsday Thread
- Thread starter Null
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2019
@Null Bad null Bad Null stop prediciting the future of dystopia future 
Which DMCA & 230 being weaponized
Tillis Pushes Prison Time for Online Streamers After Pre-Election Hollywood Cash Blitz
Felony streaming legislation from Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) will be attached to an upcoming "must-pass" omnibus government funding bill.
PUBLISHED ONDEC 7, 2020 6:15PM EST
MEDIAPRIMARY CATEGORY IN WHICH BLOG POST IS PUBLISHED
Donald Shaw
@donnydonny
Money-in-politics reporter. Co-founder of Sludge.
Congress has once again put itself in a situation of having to pass a last-minute omnibus bill to fund the government and prevent a shutdown. These truly are must-pass bills since much of the government grinds to a halt without them, so they often get used as vehicles for controversial bills that can’t pass on their own. Senators and representatives work out backroom deals to attach their pet measures to funding for things like food inspections and airport safety and then dare their colleagues to object.
This time around, one of the measures being crammed into the omnibus is a proposal from Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) to turn unauthorized commercial streaming of copyrighted material like an album on YouTube, a video clip on Twitch, or a song in an Instagram story into a felony offense with a possible prison sentence rather than a misdemeanor, according to Protocol. The text of the measure has not been publicly released yet, but it is expected to be broadly similar to past entertainment industry-backed attempts to criminalize unauthorized streaming, such as the provisions of the SOPA/PIPA bills in 2012 that sparked an unprecedented internet “blackout” protest or the Commercial Felony Streaming Act, which prompted Justin Bieber to say that its sponsor, Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), should be “locked up.”
“A felony streaming bill would likely be a chill on expression,” said Katharine Trendacosta, associate director of policy and activism with the Electronic Frontier Foundation. “We already see that it’s hard enough in just civil copyright and the DMCA for people to feel comfortable asserting their rights. The chance of a felony would impact both expression and innovation.”
Tillis, the chairman of the Intellectual Properties Subcommittee, was recently re-elected for another six-year term by a margin of less than 2% over his Democratic opponent. In the final stretch of his campaign, Tillis received a surge of campaign contributions from PACs affiliated with entertainment companies and trade groups that lobby Congress for aggressive copyright enforcement against internet users, including prison time for unauthorized streaming.
In the third and fourth quarters of 2020, Tillis’ campaign and leadership PAC received donations from PACs affiliated with the Motion Picture Association, Sony Pictures, ASCAP, Universal Music Group, Comcast & NBC Universal, The Internet and Television Association, Salem Media Group, Warner Music, and others in the entertainment and cable industry that seek to suppress the unauthorized sharing of content. Many other entertainment industry PACs gave Tillis contributions earlier in the 2019-20 cycle, totaling well over $100,000, according to Federal Election Commission records. Executives of Fox Corporation, Sony Entertainment, Charter Communications, and CBS also made large donations to Tillis in the third quarter of this year.
“The Hollywood and entertainment groups…have an absolutely massive undue influence on copyright law in Congress,” said Electronic Frontier Foundation policy analyst Joe Mullin. “It’s really impossible to understate it.”
Many of these companies have executives on the board of an astroturf nonprofit called Creative Future that advocates for felony streaming legislation and other strict copyright measures opposed by internet freedom groups. Creative Future lists hundreds of small studios as coalition members on its website, but one would have to consult its 990 filing with the Internal Revenue Service to see who is really directing the group. Creative Future’s board of directors includes John Rogovin, executive vice president and general counsel of Warner Bros. Entertainment; Leah Weil, senior executive vice president and general counsel of Sony Pictures Entertainment; and Kimberley Harris, executive vice president of Comcast Corporation and general counsel of NBCUniversal, among several other Hollywood executives.
Creative Future, which called Tillis “our hero on the Hill” in a March 2020 interview, is a rebranding of a group called Creative America that was formed in 2011 to advocate for SOPA and PIPA. Creative America’s website now redirects to Creative Future’s website. Creative Future is listed as a “related organization” and a recipient of hundreds of thousands of dollars in financial transfers on the Motion Picture Association’s annual 990s.
In 2018, Tillis was one of three senators who benefited from a fundraiser hosted by Motion Picture Association CEO Charles Rivkin and major Hollywood studios.
“I was a professional musician for a decade and I don’t know of a single working artist who thinks of Tom Tillis as a champion,” said Evan Greer, deputy director at internet freedom group Fight for the Future. “He consistently pushes for draconian copyright policies that benefit big corporations, not independent creators, and threaten free expression and human rights in the process.”
“Pushing for more Internet censorship and threatening streamers with prison time doesn’t benefit artists, but it’s exactly what Tillis’ corporate donors seem to want,” Greer added.
The felony streaming measure is part of a package of three bills related to intellectual property rights that are being added to the omnibus, according to Protocol.
One, the CASE Act, would create a new court within the U.S. Copyright Office for expediting copyright claims that critics say could help copyright trolls and giant companies go after ordinary internet users. People found to have shared a copyrighted piece of content could be penalized with a fine of up to $30,000, according to the bill text. Creative Future supports this bill. The third, known as the Trademark Modernization Act, is supposed to crack down on fraudulent trademark filings from foreign countries. Each of these bills have small cohorts of backers in Congress, but Tillis is an original co-sponsor of the CASE Act and the primary sponsor of the trademark bill.
Tillis’ office did not respond to Sludge’s request for comment.
Which DMCA & 230 being weaponized
Tillis Pushes Prison Time for Online Streamers After Pre-Election Hollywood Cash Blitz
Felony streaming legislation from Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) will be attached to an upcoming "must-pass" omnibus government funding bill.
PUBLISHED ONDEC 7, 2020 6:15PM EST
MEDIAPRIMARY CATEGORY IN WHICH BLOG POST IS PUBLISHED
Donald Shaw
@donnydonny
Money-in-politics reporter. Co-founder of Sludge.
Congress has once again put itself in a situation of having to pass a last-minute omnibus bill to fund the government and prevent a shutdown. These truly are must-pass bills since much of the government grinds to a halt without them, so they often get used as vehicles for controversial bills that can’t pass on their own. Senators and representatives work out backroom deals to attach their pet measures to funding for things like food inspections and airport safety and then dare their colleagues to object.
This time around, one of the measures being crammed into the omnibus is a proposal from Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) to turn unauthorized commercial streaming of copyrighted material like an album on YouTube, a video clip on Twitch, or a song in an Instagram story into a felony offense with a possible prison sentence rather than a misdemeanor, according to Protocol. The text of the measure has not been publicly released yet, but it is expected to be broadly similar to past entertainment industry-backed attempts to criminalize unauthorized streaming, such as the provisions of the SOPA/PIPA bills in 2012 that sparked an unprecedented internet “blackout” protest or the Commercial Felony Streaming Act, which prompted Justin Bieber to say that its sponsor, Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), should be “locked up.”
“A felony streaming bill would likely be a chill on expression,” said Katharine Trendacosta, associate director of policy and activism with the Electronic Frontier Foundation. “We already see that it’s hard enough in just civil copyright and the DMCA for people to feel comfortable asserting their rights. The chance of a felony would impact both expression and innovation.”
Tillis, the chairman of the Intellectual Properties Subcommittee, was recently re-elected for another six-year term by a margin of less than 2% over his Democratic opponent. In the final stretch of his campaign, Tillis received a surge of campaign contributions from PACs affiliated with entertainment companies and trade groups that lobby Congress for aggressive copyright enforcement against internet users, including prison time for unauthorized streaming.
In the third and fourth quarters of 2020, Tillis’ campaign and leadership PAC received donations from PACs affiliated with the Motion Picture Association, Sony Pictures, ASCAP, Universal Music Group, Comcast & NBC Universal, The Internet and Television Association, Salem Media Group, Warner Music, and others in the entertainment and cable industry that seek to suppress the unauthorized sharing of content. Many other entertainment industry PACs gave Tillis contributions earlier in the 2019-20 cycle, totaling well over $100,000, according to Federal Election Commission records. Executives of Fox Corporation, Sony Entertainment, Charter Communications, and CBS also made large donations to Tillis in the third quarter of this year.
“The Hollywood and entertainment groups…have an absolutely massive undue influence on copyright law in Congress,” said Electronic Frontier Foundation policy analyst Joe Mullin. “It’s really impossible to understate it.”
Many of these companies have executives on the board of an astroturf nonprofit called Creative Future that advocates for felony streaming legislation and other strict copyright measures opposed by internet freedom groups. Creative Future lists hundreds of small studios as coalition members on its website, but one would have to consult its 990 filing with the Internal Revenue Service to see who is really directing the group. Creative Future’s board of directors includes John Rogovin, executive vice president and general counsel of Warner Bros. Entertainment; Leah Weil, senior executive vice president and general counsel of Sony Pictures Entertainment; and Kimberley Harris, executive vice president of Comcast Corporation and general counsel of NBCUniversal, among several other Hollywood executives.
Creative Future, which called Tillis “our hero on the Hill” in a March 2020 interview, is a rebranding of a group called Creative America that was formed in 2011 to advocate for SOPA and PIPA. Creative America’s website now redirects to Creative Future’s website. Creative Future is listed as a “related organization” and a recipient of hundreds of thousands of dollars in financial transfers on the Motion Picture Association’s annual 990s.
In 2018, Tillis was one of three senators who benefited from a fundraiser hosted by Motion Picture Association CEO Charles Rivkin and major Hollywood studios.
“I was a professional musician for a decade and I don’t know of a single working artist who thinks of Tom Tillis as a champion,” said Evan Greer, deputy director at internet freedom group Fight for the Future. “He consistently pushes for draconian copyright policies that benefit big corporations, not independent creators, and threaten free expression and human rights in the process.”
“Pushing for more Internet censorship and threatening streamers with prison time doesn’t benefit artists, but it’s exactly what Tillis’ corporate donors seem to want,” Greer added.
The felony streaming measure is part of a package of three bills related to intellectual property rights that are being added to the omnibus, according to Protocol.
One, the CASE Act, would create a new court within the U.S. Copyright Office for expediting copyright claims that critics say could help copyright trolls and giant companies go after ordinary internet users. People found to have shared a copyrighted piece of content could be penalized with a fine of up to $30,000, according to the bill text. Creative Future supports this bill. The third, known as the Trademark Modernization Act, is supposed to crack down on fraudulent trademark filings from foreign countries. Each of these bills have small cohorts of backers in Congress, but Tillis is an original co-sponsor of the CASE Act and the primary sponsor of the trademark bill.
Tillis’ office did not respond to Sludge’s request for comment.
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2019
So how much longer for this Nothing Burger to spew forth?
PS1gamenwatch
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2015
Not sure if this was already brought up or posted yet. And not sure if it is legitimate so take what you will from this. Archive it if you feel like or not.
- Joined
- May 25, 2020
The response has to be put in by tomorrow. If they accept it somehow, I've really got no idea - it's already in a dubious realm with safe harbor to begin with, and arranging for arguments would take a whole lot of fucking time for something filed so dramatically late.
If they reject it, that's it.
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2019
People don't realise SCOTUS is infamously slow.
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2019
lol I had a dream that Trump's recount shit went through and gave him a crazy fucking lead of 206 to Biden's 116.
Could this be the remaining copium in my body manifesting itself via a hallucinated scenario played out by my sleeping brain?
Could this be the remaining copium in my body manifesting itself via a hallucinated scenario played out by my sleeping brain?
Maradontia
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2016
Which one? Texas and a bunch of other states trying to interfere in states that went for Biden? I lost count.
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2020
I'm gonna make a prediction: 2020's going to shit on the world again in the last minute with a civil war in the U.S. It wouldn't surprise me at this point.
introvertedobserver
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2020
That's true if you're a fucking idiot and don't understand the statistics. They aren't actually directly comparable because they're measuring two different things.
States don't pay taxes to the Federal Government directly , the population does (well, not in a significant amount, there's a couple of areas where the Feds do tax states, but it's an insignificant amount in the grand scheme). Red states tend to have a lower population size while blue states tend to have a higher population size.
So of course the citizens of higher population states are collectively paying more in taxes to the feds than those of lower population states. There's millions more of them. It doesn't mean, in any way, shape, or form that the politics of the state have any impact on that (spoiler alert, they don't).
Not only that but "blue states" also tend to have higher wage earners due to a concentration of wealth in a few cities (New York, Seattle, San Fran, LA, etc...) which skews things as well.
Receiving federal funds is a separate statistic and not nearly as correlated to population as taxes, and blue states receive way more than red states there as well.
Trying to directly compare those things to imply anything other than "bigger population = more taxes received and spent" is fucking stupid.
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2020
The Pennsylvania was called "the big one" and it was also called a "slam dunk" win. The Republicans were denied by the Supreme Court in a one sentence response.
Now the Texas lawsuit is "the big one". This one also won't be heard by the Supreme Court as Texas doesn't have standing. The Republicans, attempting a last second hailmary, have tried to string together a reason as to why they have standing but it's thinner than the top of Donald Trump's head.
The hard truth is that Donald Trump lost in a landslide. Enough States have certified their results and have chosen enough pro-Biden electors to make him President of the United States.
Trump Supporters, don't worry! You will have the pleasure of paying $14.99 a month to watch Trump on the Trump News Network. He'll be running for 2024 right out of the gate, so there will be plenty of entertainment.
Tl;Dr: Trump lost. Biden won. Enough States have certified their results and choose Pro-Biden electors to make Joe Biden President of the United States.
Now the Texas lawsuit is "the big one". This one also won't be heard by the Supreme Court as Texas doesn't have standing. The Republicans, attempting a last second hailmary, have tried to string together a reason as to why they have standing but it's thinner than the top of Donald Trump's head.
The hard truth is that Donald Trump lost in a landslide. Enough States have certified their results and have chosen enough pro-Biden electors to make him President of the United States.
Trump Supporters, don't worry! You will have the pleasure of paying $14.99 a month to watch Trump on the Trump News Network. He'll be running for 2024 right out of the gate, so there will be plenty of entertainment.
Tl;Dr: Trump lost. Biden won. Enough States have certified their results and choose Pro-Biden electors to make Joe Biden President of the United States.
Maradontia
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2016
Hippopatumus
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2020
I thought they were denied an immediate injunction not that the case was denied. Has something new been announced, or do facts just not matter to you?
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2015
Oy. They haven't even filed for a writ of cert. The injunction was the whole thing, literally the only motion the plaintiffs have filed in the suit so far. The case that originally spawned this is a dispute about how the state runs its elections, hinging on the interpretation of the PA state constitution. The federal justification for this suit is painfully contrived and almost certain to fail. The plaintiffs know that, they were just fishing for the supreme court to delay the conclusion of the election.
Maradontia
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2016
Extra! Extra! Read all about it! Trump is fucktarded grifter and everyone who supports him is a cuck!
Hippopatumus
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2020
No, the suit has TWO claims in it. Read: https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-...rgency-Application-for-Writ-of-Injunction.pdf
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2015
Whut? The motion is literally called "EMERGENCY APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF INJUNCTION PENDING THE FILING AND DISPOSITION OF A PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI"
They have yet to file the motion for the writ.
Hippopatumus
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2020
Hey what does 'and' mean?
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2015
Maradontia
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2016
Hey Trumptards! aren't you embarrassed to be supporting this? Aren't you ashamed?
- Status