Jump to content

Congress is to pass a bill that will make Let's Plays a felony.


Tentacruel

Recommended Posts

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-s978/show

That might not be the best source, but google around and see for yourself. Congress is actually going to pass a law that will make posting copyrighted content on the internet for any purpose a felony, punishable by up to 5 years in prison. This will include LP's, AMV's, Abridged Series and all the other crap we love wasting our time watching. I don't know how they plan to enforce it, but they're serious.


Discuss.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 89
  • Created
  • Last Reply
[quote name='Okami - Shiranui' timestamp='1309737276' post='5331507']
The game companies themselves would sue over this. It generates too much money for them.
There is no f*cking way in hell that this will pass.
[/quote]

Don't underestimate the stupidity and/or greed of the American government.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Hinagiku Katsura' timestamp='1309721101' post='5330936']
I'm absolutely disregarding Dark's post.

Let me see if Canada falls low enough to imitate.
[/quote]

Nobody asked you to regard my post. In fact, it is quite clear that even if you chose to reply to it, you wouldn't have been able to muster enough intelligence to contradict my claim. I'm still right, and you can't say I'm not right because it's as clear as day.

[quote name='ADHD-Guitar' timestamp='1309723229' post='5331021']
Agh, forgot to check in Video Games. To be fair, this isn't entirely about video games though.
[/quote]

The fact that your title only refers to "Let's Playing" means that, if anything, this thread [b]should[/b] be in Video Games. The thread in Video Games has a broader title and refers to the bill, not just the ban on "Let's Playing", and should be in General. The point still stands that it's about the same topic, and I'm sure nobody would be opposed to bringing up non-video gaming aspects of this bill in the thread in Video Games. You can't say "to be fair" because your logic doesn't make sense. You didn't defend yourself.

[quote name='ADHD-Guitar' timestamp='1309743472' post='5331746']
Don't underestimate the stupidity and/or greed of the American government.
[/quote]

Tell me, how does the American government gain money by passing this bill? Can you explain me that, darling?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Dark' timestamp='1309745082' post='5331806']
Nobody asked you to regard my post. In fact, it is quite clear that even if you chose to reply to it, you wouldn't have been able to muster enough intelligence to contradict my claim. I'm still right, and you can't say I'm not right because it's as clear as day.[/quote]

Glad to entertain you. <3

You're definitely one to assume that. You're right that this topic is redundant, though. I wasn't attempting to contradict you.

Of course, somebody with such little experience with me [i]does [/i]have such little credibility in realizing how intelligent I, or anybody in the given situation can be.
Most unintelligent presumption, Dark. Most unintelligent presumption.

Still right on this topic, though. But if they were mindlessly posting, take the time to realize that, because you implied they were mindless, then of course they wouldn't pay attention to a topic that already exists.

Bored out of my mind, though. Today has been completely monotonous. This is the most fun to come up with...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[i]Of course, somebody with such little experience with me does have such little credibility in realizing how intelligent I, or anybody in the given situation can be.
Most unintelligent presumption, Dark. Most unintelligent presumption.

Still right on this topic, though. But if they were mindlessly posting, take the time to realize that, because you implied they were mindless, then of course they wouldn't pay attention to a topic that already exists. [/i]

I didn't say that you weren't intelligent in general; even I know that's an erroneous claim to make, especially when I've replied to maybe five of your posts (at most). I said that you would not be able to muster enough intelligence to [i]contradict[/i] my claim, which you have so gracefully proven by acknowledging that I am correct to state that this is topic is redundant and unnecessary.

Also, posting mindlessly has nothing to do with checking other forums to see if a similar thread exists. I understand that while posting, the majority of people in this thread are retarded, but can you really extend that to before this thread was even created? It takes a lot more intelligence to formulate a sensible post than it does to check other forums for titles to threads, and all we know is that the TC does not have enough intelligence for the former. That could mean he has enough (or he doesn't have enough) intelligence for the latter, but which is more probable?

The fact that you disregarded my post just shows that you felt it was out-of-place or not needed, when in fact it was.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Dark' timestamp='1309746437' post='5331856']
[i]Of course, somebody with such little experience with me does have such little credibility in realizing how intelligent I, or anybody in the given situation can be.
Most unintelligent presumption, Dark. Most unintelligent presumption.

Still right on this topic, though. But if they were mindlessly posting, take the time to realize that, because you implied they were mindless, then of course they wouldn't pay attention to a topic that already exists. [/i]

I didn't say that you weren't intelligent in general; even I know that's an erroneous claim to make, especially when I've replied to maybe five of your posts (at most). I said that you would not be able to muster enough intelligence to [i]contradict[/i] my claim, which you have so gracefully proven by acknowledging that I am correct to state that this is topic is redundant and unnecessary.[/quote]

You've replied to a number definitely greater than five. You possibly simply don't care enough to memorize those moments. I don't definitely care enough to get out of my way to remember a definite amount, but I do estimate said number surpassing five.

It isn't a lack of intelligence if I'd agreed with you in the first place. Which, in this case, is not only hypothetical but true, as well. I do agree that this topic is not needed. Because I agree, I would not put any effort into contradicting your claim, because the only area that effort would be used for would be to fortify said claim.

I am flattered to realize at least a slightly eloquent lexicon, according to yourself, however.


[quote name='Dark' timestamp='1309746437' post='5331856']
Also, posting mindlessly has nothing to do with checking other forums to see if a similar thread exists. I understand that while posting, the majority of people in this thread are retarded, but can you really extend that to before this thread was even created? It takes a lot more intelligence to formulate a sensible post than it does to check other forums for titles to threads, and all we know is that the TC does not have enough intelligence for the former. That could mean he has enough (or he doesn't have enough) intelligence for the latter, but which is more probable?

The fact that you disregarded my post just shows that you felt it was out-of-place or not needed, when in fact it was.
[/quote]

Even more presumptions, even if they're superficial. Why must you be condescending? Do you have a lack of security?
Absolutely not offensively, note, but really. The people here are equal to you; especially the topic creator.

Onto the real point at hand...

The TC has exampled the ability to create coherent and competent retorts. It isn't that he isn't intelligent enough to make such a post. Stop being condescending.
It was possibly a spur of the moment, however. He wasn't thinking because he was thinking with a single-minded mindset at the time. Everybody does it. Nor do we all agree with your claim that he only has the intelligence, between those two, to analyze a topic's name.

In addition, your post was absolutely not required at all. Perhaps it was not out-of-place, but to say we needed the post is absurd. Only to a small degree, though. Whether or not you posted that would have only changed the posts in which yours pertains to and the existence of this conversation we're having. Of course, that is only to say that it is not needed.

I reiterate, it was not out-of-place, simply not needed.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='ADHD-Guitar' timestamp='1309716622' post='5330779']
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-s978/show

That might not be the best source, but google around and see for yourself. Congress is actually going to pass a law that will make posting copyrighted content on the internet for any purpose a felony, punishable by up to 5 years in prison. This will include LP's, AMV's, Abridged Series and all the other crap we love wasting our time watching. I don't know how they plan to enforce it, but they're serious.


Discuss.
[/quote]

But this will totally make the internet useless!

I mean the main purpose of the internet is to post Copyrighted stuff that we love wasting our time on! xD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Saturn of Elemia' timestamp='1309751255' post='5332057']
Seriously, these guys are complete idiots and I would LOVE to see how they're going to enforce this.
[/quote]

They can't. Notch made a comment about it on his Tumblr and said that it basically has a massive loophole that would make this bill ineffective.

1) All they would have to do is update their ToS to allow it to happen amongst the community.
2) They would need time to update the company ToS for ALL games, making this invalid as it is due to the sheer amount of time it would take. [And companies can do with that how they want, it's THEIR liscense].
3) Revenue from the game reviews/lets plays would make sure the above 2 always happen.

Frankly, I actually rely more on Lets Plays and Video Reviews over Journalistic Reviews any day. Why? Because I get to see a casual player HAVE FUN with it. Not a structured review about things like how many pixels are in the texture file of Duke Nukem's Left Shoulder. I don't even DL PS3 Demos anymore. And if they're trying to discourage pirating by not letting us see it? Most of us end up paying for the real game and services at one point or another. Hell its the reason why Ive spent about $300 on PWI, despite playing Primarily on a private server.

It's the new form of Demoing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Icyblue' timestamp='1309980598' post='5332533']
They can't. Notch made a comment about it on his Tumblr and said that it basically has a massive loophole that would make this bill ineffective.

1) All they would have to do is update their ToS to allow it to happen amongst the community.
2) They would need time to update the company ToS for ALL games, making this invalid as it is due to the sheer amount of time it would take. [And companies can do with that how they want, it's THEIR liscense].
3) Revenue from the game reviews/lets plays would make sure the above 2 always happen.

Frankly, I actually rely more on Lets Plays and Video Reviews over Journalistic Reviews any day. Why? Because I get to see a casual player HAVE FUN with it. Not a structured review about things like how many pixels are in the texture file of Duke Nukem's Left Shoulder. I don't even DL PS3 Demos anymore. And if they're trying to discourage pirating by not letting us see it? Most of us end up paying for the real game and services at one point or another. Hell its the reason why Ive spent about $300 on PWI, despite playing Primarily on a private server.

It's the new form of Demoing.
[/quote]

Notch wins again.

I also want to see what a game is like before I spend money on renting it or buying it

<_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...