Skip to main content

Wikipedia’s ‘pro-piracy’ 24hr shutdown. Good or Bad.



Wikipedia has taken its English-language site offline as part of protests against proposed anti-piracy laws in the US.

Users attempting to access the site see a black screen and a political statement: "Imagine a world without free knowledge."

The site's founder, Jimmy Wales, told the BBC: "Proponents of Sopa have characterised the opposition as being people who want to enable piracy or defend piracy".

"But that's not really the point. The point is the bill is so over broad and so badly written that it's going to impact all kinds of things that, you know, don't have anything to do with stopping piracy." - bbc

"But that's not really the point. The point is the bill is so over broad and so badly written that it's going to impact all kinds of things that, you know, don't have anything to do with stopping piracy."

Yes, but Wikipedia et al’s move, if it works, is still going to leave the door open to piracy isn’t it.  Their approach basically lets off 10 guilty for the sake of 90 innocents.  Well, not bad.  I’d go for that. 

But let’s think about it a little further. 

the existence of non-corporate piracy serves to supply the global populace the stimulus to question the terms and conditions of piracy lest its absence only serve to enable a few to monopolise it and render it virtuous.Imagine if the u.s. - the champion of capitalism and ‘democracy’, aka, global exploitation and the freedom to do unto others what they wouldn’t want others to do unto them - was to have its way.  What then.  Piracy sites would be blocked.  Good thing.  Certainly.  For those who want their profits uncompromised, and their greed unquestioned. 

For instance, think about ‘wave’ music files being made available by pirates out there for free, whilst Amazon provides low quality mp3 files for purchase and download.  My point is, piracy out there basically keeps alive one’s incredulity in the face of corporate piracy.  Without the existence of black, white can put itself across as black.  Without piracy, corporate piracy will never be appreciated for what it is. 

For instance, i’ve seen, on the net, people stating, ‘hey! if piracy is affecting industries big time, then why is it that corporations can still rake in millions and billions?!’ 

or,

‘What the &%$#! Why the hell is a bimbo like ‘Lady Gaga, singing shit songs making millions and millions whilst people are dying worldwide from hunger and disease.’

or,

‘Should these musicians, actors, movie directors, etc, be paid so much when all they’re providing is entertainment’? 

or, as the ed stated some time back....

“what’s all this bollocks about IP?  When members of a ‘work improvement team’ or other staff in a company get fired, do they get paid royalties for their past efforts which is still producing wealth for the company and its elite?  This basically implies that o be honest where other’s have a legal right to be unjust, basically makes honesty an abettor of the latter.”

and it goes on and on and on.....

It’s the same ole thing.  ‘Let him who has not sinned cast the first stone’, said JC a couple of thousand years ago.  In this context, it is tantamount to defining sin in terms of whom is doing it, and not in terms of the sin itself. 

In a nutshell, the existence of non-corporate piracy, whatever the intentions and aims of the pirates out there, serves to supply the global populace the stimulus to question the terms and conditions of piracy lest its absence only serve to enable a few to monopolise it and render it virtuous.


ed



Comments

  1. All this b***s*** about anti-piracy laws has nothing to do with protecting these "poor" artists, its about big business trying to make money out of us

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

The Inquisitive venture is a collaborative one. Let's collaborate.

Ad hominem is fine so long as it is accompanied with an argument, as opposed to being confused for an argument. In the latter case, deletion will follow.

Popular posts from this blog

ed racially harassed by police at Changi Airport

Well, V (singaporean chinese girl working in the UK....and now back for the holidays) kept bugging the crap out of me to write about this experience....so here goes.

I arrived in singapore on the 15th of Jan in the evening via SQ with V.  I got to the baggage retrieval belt first and quite immediately got the attention of the customs police standing at the checkpoint near the entrance to the arrival hall.  Well, never mind. 

The Story

Is singapore a tyranny, or are people to dumbed down to feel it?

The following is a consideration of the perspective posted at the site, 'article14'. The site, in discussing the so-called 'Black Sunday movement' whose members wear black and congregate at Starbucks - perhaps they have an unstated desire to boost Starbucks sales of overpriced beverages, or perhaps Starbucks is paying for their black garments...silly people - to express their support for the freedom of expression - brought up certain points that seem to be commonly held by the 'singaporeans' of today.