The American Flag: A Quick Lesson

The American Flag is a symbol of the struggles and triumphs of this great nation. I have always had the deepest respect for the flag and have been raised to respect strict adherence to the Flag Code. No I did not make this up, and as with many thing that I respect, I find myself annoyed with the individuals who create a false culture around something that is well established.

The flag is wildly misused by both liberal and conservatives. Extreme liberals, feeling they are protesting, burn it or display it backwards or upside-down. Of course this is improper, but not for the reason conservatives believe. Some conservatives call for banning of flag burning. Idiocy and knee-jerk reactions such as this rarely add to the debate. This brings us to our first lessons (quoting the Flag Code):

United States Code Title 4, Chapter 1, Section 8k. - The flag, when it is in such condition that it is no longer a fitting emblem for display, should be destroyed in a dignified way, preferably by burning

This is why, again, both sides are moronic. Protesting liberals believe they're sticking it to the man when in-fact they are just disposing of a flag that probably is still fit for display. And Conservatives want to take away a respectable means of disposal.

Second lesson, a pretty obvious one but I felt it should be noted as I mentioned it earlier:

United States Code Title 4, Chapter 1, Section 8k. - The flag should never be displayed with the union down, except as a signal of dire distress in instances of extreme danger to life or property.

I won't sit here and site the entire Code to you, but I did want to discuss a couple more sections:

United States Code Title 4, Chapter 1, Section 8d. - The flag should never be used as wearing apparel, bedding, or drapery. It should never be festooned, drawn back, nor up, in folds, but always allowed to fall free. Bunting of blue, white, and red, always arranged with the blue above, the white in the middle, and the red below, should be used for covering a speaker's desk, draping the front of the platform, and for decoration in general.

United States Code Title 4, Chapter 1, Section 8e. The flag should never be fastened, displayed, used, or stored in such a manner as to permit it to be easily torn, soiled, or damaged in any way.

You hear that you misguided “patriots”. You are not showing respect and admiration by displaying the American flag all over your clothes, you are breaking with the proper tradition you claim to admire. As somehow because you have an American flag bandana, shirt, or thong you are better than the people who disagree with you. I would ask respectfully. Stop. Do you honestly think it's proper for something that displays the flag be thrown in a washing machine? Get dirty as you get dirty?

To section 8e (stated above), I say if you are someone who has a dozens of flags around your house, car, or office that proper care is not being taken, and they are being damaged.

Honestly, if you pride yourself as someone who loves this country and constantly finds yourself surrounded by American flags as a symbol of your patriotism, read the entire flag code. I guarantee you've broken more rules than I have listed here. Better get your fire pits ready, you have some authorized flag disposal to get to.

http://www.ushistory.org/betsy/flagcode.htm

Protect IP Act: Who is it Protecting?

The Internet. I personally cannot think of a single friend or family member who doesn't use it, and even those who don't still find their lives affected. It has changed the world in both measurable in immeasurable ways. As such, it comes as no surprise that governments all around the world respond to this ever growing tool as they do most everything else, they want the power of control.

Enter the Protect IP Act, introduced on May 12, 2011 by Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT). The main purpose of the proposed bill is said to curb access to "rogue websites dedicated to infringing or counterfeit goods". How long will this debate rage on? Yes, I understand that pirating is an issue, but it has been handled horribly since the inception of the internet. No, lets not spend money researching and investing into technology utilized by Napster, rather let force shutdown and disenfranchise consumers. Those lawsuits the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) brought against consumers were a joke. Ultimately they were attempting to fight an unstoppable technological curve instead of being on the cutting edge. This mistake has cost them dearly, and they still do not see their fault.

I could write an entire paper on the RIAA's failure, but I simply wish to use them as an example of the foolishness of this bill. But the bill's intent is not even the problem, Congress passes worthless bills all the time, the problem will be all the other effects this bill will have on the internet. It may begin with shutting down sites that are clearly intended for piracy, but what about the sites that fall into the gray area? Which in my view, is about 90% of every website out there.

Whatever your political affiliation, if you're reading this, you should be wildly against this bill. A bit cliché, but the road to hell is paved with good intentions. If you read this bill, it is wildly generic and encompassing. For example, what do you think of when you hear the term “Internet Site”? I would imagine the answer is different for just about everyone, however this bill defines it as “the collection of digital assets, including links, indexes, or pointers to digital assets, accessible through the internet that are addressed relative to a common domain name”. Forgive my lack of eloquence, but what the hell is that? The problem with bills such as these is that they seek to define and solve problems that the government doesn't really understand.

Obviously this statement is suffixed with “within reason”, but ultimately I believe the responsibility to control and combat piracy of non-physical good should be left up to the copyright owners themselves. Where is this “freemarket” concept we hold so dear? Media companies, especially, have failed to provide incentives to consumers to have them view piracy as the lesser option.

Things might be improving, but it is too slow. The fact that it took so long for sites like Hulu and other legitimate streaming sites to come forth is sad. The RIAA made a grave mistake thinking it could stop the digital age, and the MPAA (Motion Picture Association of America) continues to make that mistake as well. They both have argued that “purchasing a physical CD or DVD simply grants one a license to use the product rather than ownership of the content”. These organizations do not live in the real world. They're demonizing consumers that buy their products legally, not a very good business model.

Internet piracy is and always will be too easy for millions of consumers to stop, government intervention is dangerous and not the answer. It could change the very scope of search engines, entertainment sites, and a wide variety of other institutions that make up the internet that we know. Innovation should be left up to the companies responsible for distribution of the product. Sadly though, it seems the answer of these companies' and organizations' lack of innovation it to funnel money into a bill that could damage an outlet in which they should be thriving.