Contemporary Controversies- Online Piracy 4

http://www.mysanantonio.com/opinion/columnists/victor_landa/article/Pending-anti-piracy-bill-already-outdated-2651702.php

Victor Landa presents a different rationale that explains why SOPA would be inappropriate for it's intended purpose. Instead of arguing the ethics behind the act, or whether or not it allocates too much power to the media moguls or the government, he argues about why the structure of the acts themselves set them up for failure. Landa argues that SOPA is too broad to be useful to combat piracy. He explains that the act requires service providers to shut down any website under their control that are linked to piracy or any redistribution of personal materials. This, in affect, leaves a grey area of what crosses the line of what is pirated and what is not. Landa gives the example of a boy posting a video and using his favorite song as background music, would that fall under the SOPA umbrella of piracy? Would Facebook then have to disable the boy's account in order to avoid legal persecution? Landa also presents a fact that is quite interesting, the representative from texas that initially pushed SOPA, Lamar Smith, receives most of his financial backing from the Motion Picture Association of America, an organization that would theoretically have the most to gain from an act like SOPA passing due to the countless finances they lose when consumers can easily download they films as opposed to buying them. Overall, Landa explains that he does not necessarily support with either those who push nor those who appose SOPA, because he agrees with the ideas of both sides. However, he believes the act itself inadequately addresses the problem that it is trying to fix. He says, "SOPA is using a 20th century idea to combat a 21st century problem."

Contemporary Controversies- Online Piracy 3

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20120119/OPINION01/301190099/Guest-columnists-Sweeping-new-web-piracy-law-could-squash-startups

Columnists Christian Renaud and Tej Dhawan address this issue in a far more personal way. They explain the legislation, SOPA and PIPA, from the perspective of those who don't want to see the government have this much power over our "free" internet. They believe that allowing these bills to pass only gives the government an inappropriate amount of power unlike anything they have had before. Additionally, they write about what these impositions could bring about in the economic world of the internet. These acts give websites the power to dismantle their competitors without just cause. They make it possible for one website to cause another to be completely destroyed, and to do so without warning. This sort of power will make it nearly impossible for new websites to begin functioning because they would not be able to prepare themselves for the countless lawsuit possibilities that could come with running a website. This would stifle the new and upcoming websites, and only give more power to the big media moguls that already exist.  Renaud and Dhawan assert that the big websites that lead internet usage today, began as small websites that wouldn't have been able to cover the costs of the promised law suits these acts would bring. Websites like Facebook and Google needed their initial time to grow before they could become what they are, and new websites deserve that same opportunity.

Contemporary Controversies- Online Piracy 2

http://northernstar.info/dekalb_scene/columns/article_2a7752ea-425b-11e1-b8e4-001a4bcf6878.html

Shelby Devitt sheds some light on the protests surrounding the passing of the proposed legislation to regulate online piracy. She also analyzes some of the pitfalls that occur with the acts. These acts, SOPA and PIPA, are intended to shut down websites that feature content with copyright infringement readily available. However, Devitt explains that many of these websites are not operated out of the United States, so passing the legislation would not affect them. The main victims of the bills are advertisers who chose to post their advertisements on such websites, and the bills provide a means for the government to legally pursue these advertisers and force them to pull off of the sites. The other suggested plan the bills feature is to block the URLs of the sites that are featured abroad. The problem with this is that the URLs may be blocked, but the IP addresses would remain intact and fully functioning, and that would allow for them to be accessible despite the blocked URL, and users would still have the ability to download blocked content from them. Devitt quotes the perspective of student, Steven Polak to explain the downfalls of the acts. He asserts that these acts do not stop illegal downloading, but the government enforcing this type of legislation "gives censorship power." In protest, many internet sites temporarily shut down in black outs, explains Devitt. Others featured a page that informed the user of the acts and encouraged them to take action in protest. Users had to pass this page before they could enter the site. Polak believed that websites taking action this way was a particularly good idea because it generated public awareness of what was going on in Congress.

Contemporary Controversy- Online Piracy 1

http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20120122/WIRE/120129914

In this column, Jaron Lanier discusses the consequences and evaluates the new bills being pushed to stop Online piracy. Lanier acknowledges the widespread resistance in the internet-world to the new bills, referencing Wikipedia's staged black out and Google's blackened banner. Lanier asserts that even those who support the SOPA (stop online piracy act) should recognize the huge drama that it's creating. So much so that companies that openly support the act seem to be ostracized from the media- universe. Lanier then asses the controversy from a personal perspective, emphasizing the many websites affected by the acts to ban online piracy by reflecting that even the seemingly harmless blogging forums could be shut done merely because of their operating servers if they're found to be linked to piracy. Lanier presents that piracy and copyright infringement was inevitable with the internet's constant growth and becoming an ultimate free resource. The idea of free content was an idea that continued to expand, and with the manipulation of resources to post copyrighted materials also came a flood of other issues, such as advertisement and the tyranny of internet media moguls, such as google.

Columnists Ahoy 4

David Lazarus has proved to be a columnist that primarily deals with evaluating businesses. From his post accusing Chase bank of creating a new policy to ensure an increase in the debt of the public, to the post in which he evaluates the efficiency of the tablets on the market as, "the perfect marriage of power and portability, enabling on-the-go access to books, magazines, newspapers, music, video and the Net, all in a slick, look-how-cool-I-am package" Lazarus makes his economic voice heard. Lazarus also comments on the importance of giving around the times of the holidays, saying, "There are food pantries throughout the region that would be grateful for a spare bag of groceries, or even just a little of your time." As far as economic policies are concerned, Lazarus seems to be leaning towards the political left side of the spectrum. With his emphasis on public philanthropy and his evaluation of the central banks as, "making it easier for people to run up balances on their credit cards"it seems as though his perspectives are more liberal than conservative. However, Lazarus seems to evaluate the topics he posts about very fairly, with minimal political bias.

Columnists Ahoy 3

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-lazarus-20111206,0,1228881.column?page=1

In a far more social article, Lazarus addresses the popularity of the many new kinds of gadgets that have found their way into numerous households in recent years. Lazarus talks about the many ways the gadgets can function, for families, children, or adults. They serve as tools and resources to new worlds of applications, games, and other productive outlets. Lazarus, however, plans not to invest his money this season on the new technologies we're so infatuated with. Lazarus explains many of the very tempting prospects he's considered, but also explains why it isn't the time to invest. He is particularly interested in the gadgets for portable reading. However, after experimenting with a few of the items on the market, he is unsatisfied. The Kindle, he believes, lacks powered processing. On the other hand, the Nook is not as versatile and does't have the same access to the many applications offered in the iPad and the Kindle. Lazarus plans to wait until something more ideal is developed, he believes it shouldn't have all of the unnecessary features that drive up the prices of the iPad, but will combine the positive elements of the Kindle and the Nook. Until then, Lazarus believes that the tablet craze just isn't worth the hype.

Columnists Ahoy 2

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-lazarus-20111202,0,966733.column

David Lazarus addresses a very interesting new policy created by Chase for credit card users. The new policy changes the traditional Credit Card limit to an "access line." This line increases the availability of money to the credit card user and features a more "adjustable" limit. Lazarus' perspective on the policy is that its a tool to manipulate the credit card users. As the economic conditions take higher and higher tolls on consumers, they become more cautious in their spending. With so many more people reigning in their debt, the banks are taking a hit. Lazarus believes that this new "access line" is Chase's way of trying to make spending more "attractive" to consumers. By removing some of the penalties that come with overcharging, people are more likely to throw themselves further into debt. Although Chase's spokesperson, Paul Hartwick, denies the claims and states that this new policy is not intended to be an incentive for consumers to come into more debt, but merely to encourage consumers to bank with Chase, Lazarus asserts that if that were true than there were other, more logical, ways to do that, such as lowering interest rates.

Lazarus outlines his argument by first putting the policy in an economic context. He explains that with the constant economic strains on consumers, they have "become savvier at managing their money." Then, Lazarus clearly states his opinion that banks are "making it easier for people to run up balances on their credit cards." Because Lazarus began by explaining the pressures put on the banks to compensate for the losses due to the consumer's digging themselves out of debt, his assessment seems fairly logical. Lazarus continues to develop his point by explaining the policy and the trouble it can cause spenders, saying that people are more willing to overspend because "a credit access line probably would allow you to do so without any difficulty or penalty." By using two sources in his opinion, David Robertson and Paul Hartwick, each supporting either side of the argument, Lazarus' argument gains credibility. Lazarus addressed Chase's obsequious intentions by quoting Hartwick's claim that, "'We simply want customers to choose to do more of their spending with us'," and then refuted his argument claiming that "If that were the case, though, the bank could have offered other incentives, such as lower interest rates.''