Posts tagged sopa

CISPA = SOPA 2.0

Via The LA Times: “In spite of their hopes, Internet activists are finding that their efforts to keep the digital world free of further regulation did not end with SOPA’s defeat. The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act of 2011 is working its way through Congress, and is the latest proposed legislation to raise concerns among privacy activists. Introduced in November by Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) and Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-Md.), the stated goal of CISPA is to create new channels for communication between government intelligence entities and private firms regarding potential and emerging cyber-security threats…”.* The Young Turks host Cenk Uygur breaks it down.

*Read more from Morgan Little: http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-cispa-legislation-seen-by-many-as-…

Subscribe to The Young Turks: http://bit.ly/eWuu5i

Find out how to watch The Young Turks on Current by clicking here:http://www.current.com/gettyt 

The Largest Online New Show in the World.

Google+: http://www.gplus.to/TheYoungTurks

Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/tytnation

Twitter: http://twitter.com/theyoungturks


1 note 

CISPA Is the New SOPA
CISPA is the new SOPA. Today marks the opening of a week of action in opposition to the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, which would obliterate any semblance of online privacy in the United States. It’s up for a vote later this month.



CISPA demolishes existing barriers between the government and the private sector — and between government agencies, including the military — that restrict casual data sharing. It would effectively allow information about Americans’ use of the Internet to slosh back and forth uninhibited.



The Center for Democracy and Technology says, “CISPA has a very broad, almost unlimited definition of the information that can be shared with government agencies and it supersedes all other privacy laws.”



Corporations like Facebook could share information about their users with other corporations and the government, so long as it’s justified by a concern fitting the overly broad conception of cybersecurity threats: alleged piracy or the “degradation’ of a company’s network, for instance. That data could then be used towards nearly any end, from surveillance to hocking products to Internet users.



And according to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, CISPA would accomplish much of the job that Hollywood and other content owners couldn’t get done off via SOPA earlier this year:
An ISP could even interpret this bill as allowing them to block accounts believed to be infringing, block access to websites like The Pirate Bay believed to carry infringing content, or take other measures provided they claimed it was motivated by cybersecurity concerns.
You can join nearly 90,000 other Internet users by using Demand Progress’s action page to urge your lawmakers to oppose CISPA.
Does Facebook really care about Internet users’ rights?
.
CISPA represents the first notable rift within the coalition of organizations and businesses that helped lead the charge against Stop Online Piracy Act. SOPA’s opponents came together in a kumbaya moment, with almost anybody who cares about the Internet — as user, activist, or profiteer — lining up against the bill.



Facebook struck an aggressive posture in opposition to SOPA, and at the time Mark Zuckerberg asserted:
The internet is the most powerful tool we have for creating a more open and connected world. We can’t let poorly thought out laws get in the way of the internet’s development. Facebook opposes SOPA and PIPA, and we will continue to oppose any laws that will hurt the internet.
He was right, but it wasn’t hard for Facebook to oppose SOPA: Its passage would have hurt Facebook’s bottom line — and probably forced it to alter basic business practices — by forcing it to aggressively to police alleged piracy.



And now the profit motive is causing Facebook to support CISPA, at the expense of its users, because it would relieve certain regulatory burdens and provide attractive immunities for the company.



Internet users were able to push GoDaddy to withdraw its support of SOPA. Now it’s time to make sure Facebook knows we’re furious:



Over the last few days more than 150,000 people have signed Demand Progress’s open letter to Facebook, and called Mark Zuckerberg out on his hypocrisy — please join them by clicking here.



Courtesy of  David Segal RI State Representative, Former Congressional Candidate, Demand Progress Exec Director for The Huffington Post

CISPA Is the New SOPA

CISPA is the new SOPA. Today marks the opening of a week of action in opposition to the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, which would obliterate any semblance of online privacy in the United States. It’s up for a vote later this month.

CISPA demolishes existing barriers between the government and the private sector — and between government agencies, including the military — that restrict casual data sharing. It would effectively allow information about Americans’ use of the Internet to slosh back and forth uninhibited.

The Center for Democracy and Technology says, “CISPA has a very broad, almost unlimited definition of the information that can be shared with government agencies and it supersedes all other privacy laws.”

Corporations like Facebook could share information about their users with other corporations and the government, so long as it’s justified by a concern fitting the overly broad conception of cybersecurity threats: alleged piracy or the “degradation’ of a company’s network, for instance. That data could then be used towards nearly any end, from surveillance to hocking products to Internet users.

And according to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, CISPA would accomplish much of the job that Hollywood and other content owners couldn’t get done off via SOPA earlier this year:

An ISP could even interpret this bill as allowing them to block accounts believed to be infringing, block access to websites like The Pirate Bay believed to carry infringing content, or take other measures provided they claimed it was motivated by cybersecurity concerns.

You can join nearly 90,000 other Internet users by using Demand Progress’s action page to urge your lawmakers to oppose CISPA.


Does Facebook really care about Internet users’ rights?

.

CISPA represents the first notable rift within the coalition of organizations and businesses that helped lead the charge against Stop Online Piracy Act. SOPA’s opponents came together in a kumbaya moment, with almost anybody who cares about the Internet — as user, activist, or profiteer — lining up against the bill.

Facebook struck an aggressive posture in opposition to SOPA, and at the time Mark Zuckerberg asserted:

The internet is the most powerful tool we have for creating a more open and connected world. We can’t let poorly thought out laws get in the way of the internet’s development. Facebook opposes SOPA and PIPA, and we will continue to oppose any laws that will hurt the internet.

He was right, but it wasn’t hard for Facebook to oppose SOPA: Its passage would have hurt Facebook’s bottom line — and probably forced it to alter basic business practices — by forcing it to aggressively to police alleged piracy.

And now the profit motive is causing Facebook to support CISPA, at the expense of its users, because it would relieve certain regulatory burdens and provide attractive immunities for the company.

Internet users were able to push GoDaddy to withdraw its support of SOPA. Now it’s time to make sure Facebook knows we’re furious:

Over the last few days more than 150,000 people have signed Demand Progress’s open letter to Facebook, and called Mark Zuckerberg out on his hypocrisy — please join them by clicking here.

Courtesy of   RI State Representative, Former Congressional Candidate, Demand Progress Exec Director for The Huffington Post

7 notes 

Arizona State University might need to change its name to Censorship U after deciding to block students’ access to popular petition site Change.org.

.

Change.org happens to be hosting a petition created by ASU student Eric Haywood that protests rising tuition costs at the school.

.

This blocking could be violating the First Amendment rights of ASU students to speak freely and petition government.

.

When challenged about the website blocking, ASU officials claimed that Change.org is a spam site, writing that the blocking was conducted “to protect the use of our limited and valuable network resources for legitimate academic, research and administrative uses.”

.

But Change.org is anything but spam. It’s a perfectly lawful website that has helped millions take action on a host of important issues (disclaimer: I worked there as managing editor from 2008-2009).

.

The fact is, disabling access to any lawful site violates the spirit and principles of Net Neutrality, chills academic freedom and possibly rises to the level of a First Amendment violation. It’s astonishing that ASU President Michael M. Crow would allow this to happen — and that’s why Free Press and Change.org are urging him to stop his school’s censorship immediately.

.

We’re at a moment when threats to online speech are peeking around every corner. Just last month, we beat back SOPA and PIPA, two bills in Congress that would have opened the door to online censorship from big corporations.

.

Now Arizona State University is going after free speech. If it gets away with this, other universities could be emboldened to follow suit. We must defend ASU students’ right to speak online.

.

1 note 

On December 1, 2011 a group of ASU students started the petition titled "Arizona State University: Reduce The Costs Of Education For Arizona State University Students." at the Change.org petition site.

This petition requested signatures to support the reduction in the cost of education for ASU students.

On the morning of December 7, 2011, Arizona State University BLOCKED ALL ACCESS to Change.org for ALL of it’s over 70,000 students and over 5,000 faculty and employees. 

As of this date, approximately TWO MONTHS later, Arizona State University continues it’s BLOCKADE of the Change.org petition website, in a blatant attempt to prevent it’s current ernollment of more than 70,000 students from viewing and/or signing the petition to reduce college costs.



Clearly, ASU does not want it’s students, faculty, or employees signing this petition and has resorted to BLATANT and UNLAWFUL Censorship in order to block the freedom of expression of it’s students and faculty.

As such, students living on ASU campus, using ASU computers or accessing the internet through ASU’s school WIFI are unable to access Change.org. 

As a result, Not only can’t ASU students sign the above petition but they are unable to sign ANY PETITION on the Change.org website.

In addition, emails sent from any “change.org” email address to any student or faculty email address ending in “asu.edu” are also being blocked by Arizona State University. That means that ASU refuses to allow Change.org or anyone using Change.org to send Arizona State University students or faculty emails regarding petitions facilitated by Change.org.

Not only is this outrageous, but it is a violation of the 1st Amendment rights of both ASU students as well the rights of Change.org and those with petitions hosted by Change.org to freely express itself.




Last time I checked this was America, not China, or Iran, or North Korea…..

What can be done about this?

Well. If you are an ASU Student, Professor, Instructor, or Employee you CAN sign the petition….You just can’t use any ASU computer or WIFI network to do so….

Just go to the  petition at the Change.org site from your computer using ANY WIFI connection that is NOT associated with ASU…..That’s it…..Easy.

.

Support Arizona State University Students.

Support Freedom Of Expression.

Support The 99%.

Sign The Petition.

.

http://www.change.org/petitions/arizona-state-board-of-regents-reduce-the-costs-of-education-for-arizona-state-university-students

.


This article is the first in a two-part series tracing the development of the amorphous online community known as Anonymous, pranksters who have become a force in global affairs.


Late in the afternoon of Jan. 19, the U.S. Department of Justice website vanished from the Internet. Anyone attempting to visit it to report a crime or submit a complaint received a message saying the site was unable to load. More websites disappeared in rapid succession. The Recording Industry Association of America. The Motion Picture Association of America. Universal Music. Warner Brothers. The FBI.

By nightfall, most of the sites had come back online, but the people responsible for the outages had made their point. They’d landed what they hailed as the biggest blow yet in an escalating war for control of the Internet, and in one of their online command centers, “Phoenix” and his associates were celebrating.

Phoenix, a college student, is a member of Anonymous, the loose coalition of hackers, pranksters and other creatures of the Internet who have made headlines over the last 13 months for attacks on the computer systems of a wide range of targets: MasterCard, Visa and PayPal; the San Francisco public transit system; a Texas think tank; Sony; a host of computer-security companies; authoritarian governments in Tunisia and Egypt.

Phoenix wouldn’t call himself a “member,” of course. Much like Occupy Wall Street, a movement with which it has many ties, Anonymous technically has no official membership, hierarchy or specific agenda. Some “anons” do wield more influence than others and the resulting resentments have led to bitter internecine feuds, but its overall lack of an official power structure is essential to its identity and perhaps its survival. As Anonymous put it in a taunting statement to NATO, another recent object of its unfriendly attentions, “You can’t cut off the head of a headless snake.”

The snake seems to have a certain sense of direction, however, as the Jan. 19 attacks suggested. The inciting incident took place earlier that day in the hills outside Auckland, New Zealand, when local police landed two helicopters on the lawn of a man who calls himself Kim Dotcom and owns Megaupload, a hugely popular online service that enables people to share and store movies and other media for free.

Authorities shut down the site and arrested Dotcom and six colleagues, accusing them in a 72-page indictment of engaging in acts of “massive worldwide online piracy” that inflicted $500 million in damages on copyright holders while bringing in more than $175 million in profits.

The news spread quickly. A message went out on Anonymous Twitter accounts exhorting people to attack the Justice Department and several piracy-fighting trade groups. By clicking on a link, they could launch a page that asked them to identify a target. Thousands typed in the address of the Justice Department site and clicked enter, bombarding it with a fusillade of meaningless commands. Overwhelmed, the site froze and dropped offline.

In the chat network where Anonymous coordinated the attacks, the virtual warriors declared victory with a military phrase: “TANGO DOWN.”

Part war, part game. Given the culture of the Internet, it’s reasonable to assume that many of those who responded to Anonymous’ call were teenagers. The software used to fire these Internet missiles was the Low Orbit Ion Cannon, a name lifted from the video game “Command & Conquer.” Yet the consequences of firing it were real — a major law enforcement agency’s web site was temporarily crippled, leaving the agency to observe that there had been a “degradation in service.”

Last year, 14 anons were arrested in the United States for using the Ion Cannon to attack PayPal. Some now face the possibility of 15-year prison sentences.

Phoenix wasn’t around when the Jan. 19 attack went down, but later that night, I found him in an Anonymous chat room and asked him to explain the motivations behind it.

"You’ve heard Anons say before that this is a war," he said. "A full scale information war. That’s not mere propaganda, many regard that as a perfectly accurate description. And the stake at play is, simply, ‘Who will control access to information? Everyone or a small subset?’"

In case it wasn’t clear, he then labeled that subset: “The government.”

THE WAR


This struggle for control of the Internet goes back years, but it reached a crescendo just the day before the attack on the Justice Department, when Wikipedia went dark in protest of the Stop Online Piracy Act and the Protect Intellectual Property Act, the controversial anti-piracy bills that were working their way through Congress. Google collected 4.5 million signatures on a petition against the bills. Mozilla redirected traffic from its sites. And thousands of other protesters, from Tumblr and WordPress to Some Guy with a Blog, blacked out their sites, took to the streets and posted messages opposing the legislation, saying it would hurt their business and amounted to censorship.

Across the battle lines stood film studios, music labels, pharmaceutical companies and other businesses intent on defending their copyrighted property from illegal sharing at a time when the Internet has made it possible for, say, a digital copy of “V For Vendetta” — an anon fave and the source of their iconic grinning Guy Fawkes masks — to travel from an iPad in the United States to a piracy site in Brazil to another viewer’s laptop in Korea.

These companies have faced a tricky problem: How do you sue a piracy site when it’s based in another country, especially one with looser intellectual-property laws? The bills’ answer: You don’t. You go after their enablers — websites that drive traffic to the piracy sites by posting links to them, even if they only do so inadvertently. Critics argued that the cost of getting rid of these links would drive smaller sites out of business.

Two days after the protests, in the face of public outrage and lobbying efforts from the tech sector, Congress shelved SOPA indefinitely. But that doesn’t mean the war is over. As one Anonymous tweet warned about SOPA: “It can be brought back anytime. The bill must be KILLED.”

Like the web companies involved in the protests, anons tend to argue that anti-piracy legislation could send the Internet down an ever-tightening spiral of government control. Many anons go further, portraying such bills as deliberate assaults on the right to free speech. They say they oppose anti-piracy efforts on idealistic grounds, not that they don’t enjoy a bit of pirated entertainment from time to time. In general, obeying the law isn’t their priority. “The Internet is the Wild West,” Phoenix said on the night of the attacks, “and Anonymous will fight against any attempt to tame it.”

That conversation with Phoenix was not my first. All of our communications took place online, mostly in the networks of chat rooms where anons plan their attacks, and I had come to think of him a messenger from the Internet underworld: He had one foot in the world of “hax0rs” — hacker-speak for hackers — and one in the world of capital letters and correct spelling.

He was like a hacker Hermes, moving freely between the realms of the living and the dead, except that in this case the realm of the dead was a dominion of cyberspace in which the dead possessed an unusual degree of expertise in massively multiplayer online video games and porn.

Altogether, I spoke with more than 30 anons, and in some respects, their attitudes couldn’t have been more different, but one thing seemed to hold them together. They saw the Internet as their homeland, their home. Among them were Phoenix, Xyzzy and Gregg Housh. Together, their stories roughly trace the rise of Anonymous and the battles leading up to what Phoenix calls the war……..

.

Click Here to Continue Reading…….

.

Courtesy of  of the Huffington Post

2 notes 

The Day The LOLcats Died


SOPA and PIPA are two examples of recent legislation that is lethal to the internet as we know it. The internet rose up and is on its way to successfully fighting them off, but we need to stay vigilant. 

 

6 notes 

WASHINGTON — Google will join thousands of tech activists, entrepreneurs and corporations on Wednesday in protesting the proposed Stop Online Piracy Act, a controversial bill that has generated national outrage among Internet experts.

On Wednesday, more than 7,000 websites are expected to voluntarily “go dark,” by blocking access to their content to protest the bill, according to organizers of SOPAStrike.com. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid plans to bring the measure to a vote next week. Some of the biggest names on the Internet plan to participate in the blackout, including Wikipedia, Mozilla, Reddit and WordPress. On Tuesday, Google stopped short of vowing to take down its popular search engine, but said it would change its home page to show solidarity with protesters.

"Like many businesses, entrepreneurs and web users, we oppose these bills because there are smart, targeted ways to shut down foreign rogue websites without asking American companies to censor the Internet," said a Google spokeswoman in a written statement provided to HuffPost. "So tomorrow we will be joining many other tech companies to highlight this issue on our U.S. home page."

While Hollywood movie studios and major record labels have lauded the bill as a robust effort to crack down on online copyright violations, Internet experts maintain that the tools proposed for the legislation would hamper efforts to improve online security and threaten the basic functioning of the Internet.

Tech companies have been raising objections to the bill since the Senate version, Protect IP, was introduced last spring. Free speech experts also argue that the measure’s basic anti-piracy tool would risk seriously violating the First Amendment in allowing the government and private companies to shut down entire websites accused of piracy without a trial or even a traditional court hearing.

In addition to the Web protests, thousands of New York City tech activists and entrepreneurs are preparing for a Wednesday protest outside the Manhattan offices of Sens. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Kristin Gillibrand (D-N.Y.). Both Schumer and Gillibrand formally support Protect IP. Increasingly in recent years the Big Apple has become an active hub for tech firms, with many new companies and their venture capital supporters locating there rather than Silicon Valley.

The anti-SOPA event is being organized NY Tech Meetup, a trade group representing all aspects of the New York technology community. The group is expecting more than 1,500 members and speakers from leading tech companies to show up at the Wednesday protest, from 12:30 p.m. to 2 p.m, at the senators’ Manhattan offices, at 780 Third Ave.

"We’re gonna have people get on a soapbox with a bullhorn," NY Tech Meetup Chairman Andrew Rasiej told HuffPost. "We’re not in a theater; we’re in the street protesting."

The White House announced on Saturday its formal opposition to SOPA and Protect IP, setting off a legislative scramble on Capitol Hill as lawmakers on both sides of the issue sought to shore up support ahead of the Senate vote.

Courtesy Of Zach Carter Of HuffPost

7 notes 

The Scary Facts About The Stop Online Piracy Act

The truth behind the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) is explained by The Young Turks host Cenk Uygur. Be sure to sign the petition below.

http://www.stopcensorship.org/

 

6 notes 

Who’s officially on the record backing what could be the worst thing to ever happen to the internet? All of these companies listed below. Don’t take our word for it—this list comes straight from Congress. Just FYI.

If you want to get in touch, we’ve provided a contact list below. Maybe you want to let them know how you feel about SOPA.

60 Plus Association: info@60plus.org

ABC: http://abc.go.com/site/contact-us

Alliance for Safe Online Pharmacies (ASOP): 703-539-ASOP (2767)

American Federation of Musicians (AFM): presoffice@afm.org

American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (AFTRA): (212) 532-0800

American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP): atoczylowski@ascap.com

Americans for Tax Reform: ideas@atr.org

Artists and Allied Crafts of the United States: iatsepac@iatse-intl.org

Association of American Publishers (AAP): asporkin@publishers.org

Association of State Criminal Investigative Agencies: bob@mcconnell.net

Association of Talent Agents (ATA): rnoval@agentassociation.com

Baker & Hostetler LLP: dholcombe@bakerlaw.com or rokada@bakerlaw.com

Beachbody, LLC: http://beachbody.custhelp.com/app/ask

BMI: newyork@bmi.com

BMG Chrysalis: info@bmg.com

Capitol Records Nashville: ann.inman@emimusic.com and brent.jones@emimusic.com

CBS: http://www.bctd.org/Contact-Us.aspx

Cengage Learning: (800) 354-9706

Christian Music Trade Association: 615-242-0303

Church Music Publishers’ Association: (615) 791-0273

Coalition Against Online Video Piracy (CAOVP): (212) 485-3452

Comcast/NBCUniversal: info@comcast.com

Concerned Women for America (CWA): (202) 488-7000

Congressional Fire Services Institute: update@cfsi.org

Copyhype: http://www.copyhype.com/contact/

Copyright Alliance: info@copyrightalliance.org

Coty, Inc.: http://www.coty.com/#/contact_us

Council of Better Business Bureaus (CBBB): (703) 276-0100

Council of State Governments: membership@csg.org

Country Music Association: communications@CMAworld.com

Country Music Television: info@cmt.com

Covington & Burling LLP: http://www.cov.com/contactus/

Cowan, DeBaets, Abrahams & Sheppard LLP: info@cdas.com

Cowan, Liebowitz & Latman, P.C.: law@cll.com

Directors Guild of America (DGA): (310) 289-2000 or (800) 421-4173

Disney Publishing Worldwide, Inc.: (212) 633-4400

Elsevier: T.Reller@elsevier.com

EMI Christian Music Group: (615) 371-4300

EMI Music Publishing: (212) 492-1200

ESPN: http://espn.go.com/espn/contact?lang=EN&country=united%20states

Estée Lauder Companies: (212) 572-4200

Fraternal Order of Police (FOP): pyoes@fop.net

Go Daddy: (480) 505-8800

Gospel Music Association: service@gospelmusic.org

Graphic Artists Guild: president@gag.org

Hachette Book Group: http://www.hachettebookgroup.com/customer_contact-us.aspx

HarperCollins Publishers Worldwide: feedback2@harpercollins.com or (212) 207-7000

Hyperion: http://www.hyperionbooks.com/contact-us/

Independent Film & Television Alliance (IFTA): http://www.ifta-online.org/contact

International Alliance of Theatrical and Stage Employees: See Artists and Allied Crafts

International AntiCounterfeiting Coalition (IACC): iacc@iacc.org

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW): (202) 833-7000

International Brotherhood of Teamsters: http://www.teamster.org/content/contact-us

International Trademark Association (INTA): customerservice@inta.org or
communications@inta.org

International Union of Police Associations: iupa@iupa.org

Irell & Manella LLP: info@irell.com

Jenner & Block LLP: (312) 222-9350

Kelley Drye & Warren LLP: http://www.kelleydrye.com/contacts/index

Kendall Brill & Klieger LLP: (310) 556-2700

Kinsella Weitzman Iser Kump & Aldisert LLP: info@kwikalaw.com

L’Oreal: (212) 818-1500

Lathrop & Gage LLP: http://www.lathropgage.com/contact.html

Loeb & Loeb LLP: http://www.loeb.com/Firm/Contact/

Lost Highway Records: (615) 524-7500

Macmillan: (646) 307-5151

Major County Sheriffs: jrwolfinger@mcsheriffs.com

Major League Baseball: http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/help/contact_us.jsp

Majority City Chiefs: dstephens@carolina.rr.com

Marvel Entertainment: (212) 576-4000

MasterCard Worldwide: (800) 622-7747

MCA Records: communications@umusic.com

McGraw-Hill Education: customer.service@mcgraw-hill.com

Minor League Baseball (MiLB): customerservice@website.milb.com or
webmaster@minorleaguebaseball.com

Minority Media & Telecom Council (MMTC): info@mmtconline.org

Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP: http://www.msk.com/contact/

Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA): contactus@mpaa.org

Moving Picture Technicians: See Artists and Allied Crafts

MPA – The Association of Magazine Media: mpa@magazine.org

National Association of Manufacturers (NAM): manufacturing@nam.org

National Association of Prosecutor Coordinators: (518) 432-1100

National Association of State Chief Information Officers: svaughn@AMRms.com

National Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA): webmaster@ncta.com

National Center for Victims of Crime: http://www.ncvc.org/ncvc/main.aspx?
dbID=DB_Contact764

National Crime Justice Association: info@ncja.org

National District Attorneys Association: (703) 549-9222

National Domestic Preparedness Coalition: info@ndpci.us

National Football League: http://www.nfl.com/contact-us

National Governors Association, Economic Development and Commerce Committee:
webmaster@nga.org

National League of Cities: http://www.nlc.org/about-nlc/contact-nlc

National Narcotics Offers’ Associations’ Coalition: rmsloan626@verizon.net orhttp://www.natlnarc.org/default.aspx?page=1011

National Sheriffs’ Association (NSA): http://sheriffs.org/content/contact-us

National Songwriters Association: http://members.nashvillesongwriters.com/
webform.php?ViewForm=1

National Troopers Coalition: info@ntctroopers.com

News Corporation: web.queries@computershare.com

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP: http://www.pbwt.com/contact/

Pearson Education: http://www.pearsoned.com/contacts

Penguin Group (USA), Inc.: ecommerce@us.penguingroup.com

Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America: newsroom@phrma.org

Phillips Nizer, LLP: http://www.phillipsnizer.com/about/contact.cfm

Pfizer, Inc.: https://www.pfizer.com/contact/mail_general.jsp

Proskauer Rose LLP: info@proskauer.com

Provident Music Group: (615) 261-6500

Random House: ecustomerservice@randomhouse.com

Raulet Property Partners: http://www.raulet.com/HTM%20Stuff/ContactUs.htm

Revlon: http://www.revlon.com/Revlon-Home/Revlon-General/Contact.aspx

Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi LLP: http://www.rkmc.com/Contact.aspx

Scholastic, Inc.: http://scholastic.custhelp.com/app/ask

Screen Actors Guild (SAG): saginfo@sag.org

Shearman & Sterling LLP: website.administration@shearman.com

Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP: (212) 455-2000

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP: info@skadden.com

Sony/ATV Music Publishing: info@sonyatv.com

Sony Music Entertainment: http://hub.sonymusic.com/about/feedback.php or http://
www.sonyatv.com/index.php/contact

Sony Music Nashville: http://www.sonyatv.com/index.php/contact

State International Development Organization (SIDO): sido@csg.org

The National Association of Theatre Owners (NATO): nato@natodc.com

The Perseus Books Groups: (800) 343-4499

The United States Conference of Mayors: info@usmayors.org

Tiffany & Co.: http://press.tiffany.com/Customer/Request/ContactUs.aspx

Time Warner: http://www.timewarner.com/contact-us/

Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC): info@ufc.com

UMG Publishing Group Nashville: (615) 340-5400

United States Chamber of Commerce: http://www.uschamber.com/about/contact/submit-
question

United States Tennis Association: https://forms.usta.com/usta/form325815541/
secure_index.html
 or memberservices@usta.com

Universal Music: communications@umusic.com

Universal Music Publishing Group: umpg.newmedia@umusic.com

Viacom: http://www.viacom.com/contact/Pages/default.aspx

Visa, Inc.: https://corporate.visa.com/utility/contactus.jsp

W.W. Norton & Company: (212) 354-5500

Warner Music Group: http://www.wmg.com/contact

Warner Music Nashville: http://www.warnermusicnashville.com/contact

White & Case LLP: http://www.whitecase.com/ContactUs.aspx

Wolters Kluewer Health: customerservice@lww.com

Word Entertainment: wordtech@wbr.com

15 notes 

Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales announced that domain names belonging to Wikipedia and Wikia would be transferred off of GoDaddy, an Internet domain registrar, to protest GoDaddy’s support for the proposed Stop Online Piracy Act, a controversial anti-piracy bill under consideration by Congress.

"I am proud to announce that the Wikipedia domain names will move away from GoDaddy. Their position on #sopa is unacceptable to us," Wales wrote in a tweet. He later added, “Wikia is also moving several hundred domains from godaddy. Which registrar has quality and price right?”

GoDaddy has been hemorrhaging domains in a backlash against the company’s endorsement of SOPA. Though GoDaddy said in a blog published December 20 that it was withdrawing its support for SOPA, GoDaddy CEO Warren Adelman acknowledged in a subsequent interview with TechCrunch that the company had not yet officially registered with Congress its plans to switch sides.

According to VentureBeat, GoDaddy has lost more than 37,000 domains in total. Other companies that have joined in the exodus include the Cheezburger Network, which runs popular sites such as FAIL Blog, Failbook and I Can Has Cheezburger. Cheezburger Network CEO Ben Huh tweeted, ”Not happy with @godaddy. Emailed CEO, asking for clear, unequivocal dropping of SOPA support. Still planning on moving off.” Commenters on Reddit have also called for a GoDaddy boycott and one Reddit user suggested December 29 should be “move your domain away from GoDaddy day.”

The Next Web writes that GoDaddy has been “calling customers, begging them to stay,” noting that one customer shared an anecdote about a conversation with a GoDaddy representative in which the company’s rep attempted to clarify GoDaddy’s stance on SOPA.

Wales previously contemplated protesting SOPA with a Wikipedia blackout 
that would have seen many or all English-language Wikipedia pages taken offline.

"A few months ago, the Italian Wikipedia community made a decision to blank all of Italian Wikipedia for a short period in order to protest a law which would infringe on their editorial independence. The Italian Parliament backed down immediately. As Wikipedians may or may not be aware, a much worse law going under the misleading title of ‘Stop Online Piracy Act’ is working its way through Congress on a bit of a fast track," Wales wrote on Wikipedia. “My own view is that a community strike was very powerful and successful in Italy and could be even more powerful in this case.”

The Huffington Post    

10 notes 

Surprise! GoDaddy has just recanted their support of SOPA, issuing a press release and blasting out a massive mountainof tweets on the matter. This comes just hours after they were seemingly cementing their position, shrugging off the boycotts as something that had yet to cause “any impact to [their] business”.

For those who somehow missed it: after GoDaddy publicly stated their support for SOPA yesterday morning, a colossal chunk of the Internet (read: the chunk that understands how the Internet works) began to rally. There were no torches or pitchforks here; the only weapons here were wallets, all being carried off in another direction.

The mob got loud, quick: Cheezburger CEO Ben Huh publicly announced that he’d be taking his 1,000+ domains (I Can Has Cheezburger, FAIL Blog, Know Your Meme, etc.) elsewhere if GoDaddy continued to support the act. Meanwhile, thousands of Redditors pledged to transfer their domains, with December 29th set as the mass-move day.

While it’s nice that they changed their stance (publicly, at least), you’ve got to ask yourself: do you want to continue throwing money at a company blind enough to support SOPA in the first place?

Top searched domains still with GoDaddy

  1. twitch.tv
  2. wikipedia.org
  3. xkcd.com
  4. imgur.com
  5. stackoverflow.com
  6. ruby-doc.org
  7. digg.com
  8. github.com
  9. wordpress.org
  10. wordpress.com

38 notes