The author of sopa is a copyright violator

http://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1053381

This article adds to the lulz.

http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/lamar...right-violator

They are trying to use a screen capture of an archive that is no longer live as proof he is a hypocrite? This is reaching. The image was taken down months ago. If anything, it supports why there is a law like this in the works; for the sites that refuse to take things down that shouldn't be there. I don't support it, but this hardly proves anything.

The fact that infringed in the past does prove his is a hypocrite

until he goes to the photographer, and PAYS that artist the price for an uncredited use of the photo

it doesn't matter that he stopped infringing NOW.

Read the link that I posted. As soon as the news hit, started changing things and also modified robots.txt to disallow anyone from viewing archived versions of the site.

Actually it does, at least to me. If everyone stopped stealing my content and posting it today, I would be very happy over that and probably not feel the need to seek restitution for past infringements.

I do not speak for this artist, though. Does the artist want to be paid? He seems to just want credit, I am sure something could've been worked out but it was pulled.

Lamar is also really mostly likely NOT the webdesigner. That is who is actually guilty of the infringement. Lamar owns the site, yes...but an infringement happens, and it was pulled. Isn't that how things should work?

I did read that. He changed his links for what, though? To hide things OR to just make sure the archive or copies of the infringed work were taken down, as well? It seems like they were just being thorough.

I wish on a daily basis that is how things happened. I understand people want to get a "gotcha" moment on this guy because of the SOPA thing, but the comparison is silly.

That the question that Mr. smith should have asked

Whatever the artist wants that what he should give him. Period.