U.S. Congress Introduces 'The Stop Online Piracy Act'

October 27, 2011 -

On Wednesday Lawmakers in the United States introduced "The Stop Online Piracy Act," a bill that would give the government the ability to block web sites in the United States and abroad who traffic in counterfeit goods, illegal software, and other copyrighted goods.

The bill has managed to garner bipartisan support in the House of Representatives and is a tweaked version of a bill introduced in the Senate in May called the "Theft of Intellectual Property Act" or "Protect IP Act." Naturally the bill has the support of movie studios, the music industry, the Business Software Alliance, the National Association of Manufacturers, the US Chamber of Commerce and many other lobbyists groups.

It does not have the support of digital rights and free speech advocacy groups because it allows law enforcement agencies in the U.S. to unilaterally shut down access to website here and abroad, without due process.

House Judiciary Committee chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) thinks the bill is important. He claims that it "helps stop the flow of revenue to rogue websites and ensures that the profits from American innovations go to American innovators.

"Rogue websites that steal and sell American innovations have operated with impunity," Smith said in a statement. "The online thieves who run these foreign websites are out of the reach of US law enforcement agencies and profit from selling pirated goods without any legal consequences. The bill prevents online thieves from selling counterfeit goods in the US, expands international protections for intellectual property, and protects American consumers from dangerous counterfeit products.

Bill co-sponsor Howard Berman (D-California) says it is "an important next step in the fight against digital theft and sends a strong message that the United States will not waiver in our battle to protect America's creators and innovators."

The Center for Democracy and Technology said the House bill "raises serious red flags" because it contains "the most controversial parts of the Senate's Protect IP Act, but radically expands the scope. They claim that "any website that features user-generated content or that enables cloud-based data storage could end up in its crosshairs."

"Internet Service Providers would face new and open-ended obligations to monitor and police user behavior," the CDT said in a statement. "Payment processors and ad networks would be required to cut off business with any website that rightsholders allege hasn't done enough to police infringement. The bill represents a serious threat to online innovation and to legitimate online communications tools."

The House Judiciary Committee is to hold a hearing on the bill November 16.

Source: Breitbart

Image provided by Shutterstock.com. All rights reserved.

 


Comments

Re: U.S. Congress Introduces 'The Stop Online Piracy Act'

America, police of the world!

America, everything is ours (and our lobbyist!)

What I want to know is why when they made three branches of government, they never took under consideration that they could all be bought at the same time...

Re: U.S. Congress Introduces 'The Stop Online Piracy Act'

Well that is it lets pack up and go back to the cave!


Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Let's renegotiate them.

---

Patreon

Deviantart

Re: U.S. Congress Introduces 'The Stop Online Piracy Act'

Yes so where is the bill that lets them shut down the entire shopping mall because one guy decides to sell burned CDs out back? 

This gives plenty of ways to just destroy online businesses in general.  I mean find one person out of thousands selling the wrong thing, or posting the wrong thing, and there goes the site.  You know larger companies would hire someone just to scan competitors sites for things like that.


Re: U.S. Congress Introduces 'The Stop Online Piracy Act'

They already have that power. It is called civil forfeiture and it is abused regularly. Just ask this motel owner:

http://www.lowellsun.com/todaysheadlines/ci_19181168

The government is attempting to seize his motel because some people decided to hold a drug deal there. He was not a party to it, but because it happened there, he is on the hook.

The government is not above taking the property of people who do no crime.

Re: U.S. Congress Introduces 'The Stop Online Piracy Act'

I could see someone taking these transcripts to a judge when the law is challenged by pointing to block of non-commercial sites and saying 'see, lawmakers intended this to be used against people SELLING counterfit goods, so use on free sites is not intended!'

Grr... the spell check in this box is rapidly making it annoying to post on GP....

Re: U.S. Congress Introduces 'The Stop Online Piracy Act'

Do you feel that your speech is discriminated against by the little red lines? lol

-Austin from Oregon

Feel free to check out my blog.

Re: U.S. Congress Introduces 'The Stop Online Piracy Act'

so basically they'd need to shut down the entire web, especially art, social, and news sites that repeatedly post and repost copyrighted materials..

this would also make amazon and ebay illegal wouldn't it?

Re: U.S. Congress Introduces 'The Stop Online Piracy Act'

...allows law enforcement agencies in the U.S. unilaterally shut down access to website here and abroad, without due process.

Not that they have not been doing this already, of course, what with arbitrarily shutting down websites with .com, .net, and .org domains - regardless of whether or not they infringed or were deemed legal in their host countries such as España. We'll also ignore the broad-reach that it employs. No, sir, I cannot support this bill. Strike it down hard.

----
Papa Midnight

Re: U.S. Congress Introduces 'The Stop Online Piracy Act'

Good thing we've got Ron Wyden in our corner.  Come on Ron, block this one too!

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
ZippyDSMleeBefor I publish I plan on having a pro editor clean it up as best it can be without a total re write.08/04/2015 - 1:28am
Andrew EisenIP - It's more complicated than a hard yes or no. It took me half an hour to explain GamerGate to someone in person. Obviously, I don't have the space to do that here. So, rather than make sweeping generalizations (which I'm generally loathe to do)...08/04/2015 - 1:27am
Andrew EisenI have no idea who that is or what McIntosh said about him so I can't comment.08/04/2015 - 1:25am
IronPatriotAndrew, you are right. So since NONE of gamergate's founding targets had ethics breaches, those who claim gamergate was founded for "ethics" are wrong. Right?08/04/2015 - 1:25am
MattsworknameAndrw: normally i'd not have the energy to hate, but with him, one thing set me off. His actions regarding Chris hitchens following his death. I found them deplorable and an example of the most vile kind of ideaogical hate in exsistance08/04/2015 - 1:24am
ZippyDSMleeMattsworkname: I been chipping away at the 17k story for over 5-6 years LOL The 40K one 4 times that. But I only started to take heavy notes around 06 or so.08/04/2015 - 1:23am
MattsworknameAndrew: huh, il have to double check that. sorry for the mix up08/04/2015 - 1:23am
Andrew EisenMcIntosh doesn't deserve hate either. Disagree with him? Sure. Find his opinions and Twitter comments laughable? Sure. Hate him for it? That's absurd.08/04/2015 - 1:23am
Andrew EisenAre you talking about the Sargon video? No, she didn't. I explained this to you the other day.08/04/2015 - 1:22am
MattsworknameAlso, I think the hate for anita is acctually misplaced, it shoudl realyl go to Mcintsoh .08/04/2015 - 1:21am
MattsworknameAndrew: didn't alexander get most of her articel from like another study or some such, i thought I saw a video about it08/04/2015 - 1:18am
Andrew EisenDepends on which "original targets" you mean. Sarkeesian? Absolutely. Quinn and Grayson? Absolutely. Alexander? Not a lie but her opinion piece certainly wasn't an example of an ethics violation.08/04/2015 - 1:17am
MattsworknameZippie: best of luck, I'd never have teh patience to write a full book so long as I have to work full time08/04/2015 - 1:14am
ZippyDSMleeNot story,word block of details, story,ect08/04/2015 - 1:14am
ZippyDSMleeMy main book proejct is about 40K words and maybe 30% or so complete , I started to edit it for dialog formatting and other simple things and found some fo the exposition to be to long I guess. I prefer story,details,story.08/04/2015 - 1:14am
MattsworknameIP: what do you have that shows the charges against kotkau , ploygon, et all were lies, given that almost ALL of them had to change there ethics polices in resposne to gamegate?08/04/2015 - 1:13am
IronPatriotSo what was Gamergate created to be about? In your opinion, Andrew.08/04/2015 - 1:12am
IronPatriotTherefore, Gamergate was NOT created to be about "ethics" and "ethics" itself is a lie. Right?08/04/2015 - 1:09am
IronPatriotAndrew, that is hardly my point. Not only is Gamergate's ethics charge against Sarkeesian a lie, but ethics charges against ALL its original targets were lies. Right?08/04/2015 - 1:09am
ZippyDSMleenormal publishers anyway. Witht hat said my main book project has a narrator less native style, a type of exposition. I dunno if I am goign to change it or not dose not seem to flow as well as the one I finished.08/04/2015 - 1:06am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician