Lofgren’s bill would impose site-blocking requirements on broadband providers with at least 100,000 subscribers and providers of public domain name resolution services with annual revenue of over $100 million. The bill has exemptions for VPN services and “similar services that encrypt and route user traffic through intermediary servers”; DNS providers that offer service “exclusively through encrypted DNS protocols”; and operators of premises that provide Internet access, like coffee shops, bookstores, airlines, and universities.

Invest in VPN providers.

  • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    24 minutes ago

    its uh, definitely one of the feelings of all time reading through threads like this, assuming these are actual real people, spending their actually real time, talking about these actually real things.

  • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    Why would you not quote the first paragraph that explains everything about the law?

    US Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) today proposed a law that would let copyright owners obtain court orders requiring Internet service providers to block access to foreign piracy websites. The bill would also force DNS providers to block sites.

    TBH it’s not that bad since it doesn’t affect VPNs or domestic piracy sites, ironically. It’s bad but it’s not the apocalypse like some other commenters suggest.

    • Yokozuna@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Just a step in the direction towards that, though. They’ll pass it, and people will still pirate. Then, they’ll claim the legislation wasn’t enough and pass another bill further encroaching on our freedom on the internet.

        • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          The fact that this dumb bitch is trying to do this, a blatant violation of open internet ideas btw, as the technocracy makes its opening moves is the real problem.

          • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            41 minutes ago

            I’m not sure where you’ve been hiding but Net Neutrality got struck down when we voted Fascists into power, so maybe cool it with blaming the dems for that one, pal.

  • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Democrats: why won’t anyone vote for us?

    Also Democrats: let’s be like the Republicans, they get so many votes! Let’s miss the entire point of democracy and just support large companies!

    • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Because they want the big money donors more than they want to win. Their campaigns are above all designed to bring in money for the high-priced consultants.

  • kreskin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    18 hours ago

    Even out of power they still find a way to give hand jobs for industry donations and casually screw the public. I admire their energy.

  • coolmojo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    20 hours ago

    If they are not blocking the access to the WHO.is servers you can get the IP address of the site and add it to your local hosts file.

      • coolmojo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        14 hours ago

        Some do and some don’t. Even if the IP changes, the actual IP address will be shown on the WHOIS site. Alternatively, I am sure that the actual IP address of these sites is shared by non-American users on forums and other sites.