Because US copyright holders generally can't drag a foreign web site into US courts to get them to stop stealing and distributing their work, SOPA allows them to go after the ISPs, ad networks, and payment processors that are in the United States. It is a law borne of the blind logic of revenge: the movie studios can't punish the real pirates, so they are attacking the network instead. SOPA's proponents argue that the bill will protect US citizens and corporations from the ongoing theft of property outside our borders; that the law is narrowly tailored to only punish those who profit from illegal content.
Indeed, it's possible the notice-and-takedown system for payment providers could potentially resist abuse: unlike YouTube's reflexive takedowns, it's hard to see a credit card processor turning off a paying account just because it gets an angry letter in the mail. But that's just one piece of the puzzle, and the deep concerns about tinkering with the DNS system have never been adequately addressed by any of SOPA's sponsors or supporters.
Last week saw a flurry of activity around SOPA as the House Judiciary Committee opened "markup" hearings, during which amendments are debated and the committee votes whether to bring the bill to the full House of Representatives.
Lamar Smith R-Texas would breeze through the markup process and hold an easy vote, but SOPA opponents demanded that the committee first bring in technical experts to testify about the impact of the law on the internet — the committee has only heard from content industry representatives until now.
The hearings lasted for nearly 12 hours on Thursday and for several more on Friday until they were abruptly adjourned, with Smith promising that they would re-open as soon as possible. That now looks like it'll happen in early January , but don't expect the controversy to die down in the meantime — SOPA has been deeply criticized by nearly every company that does serious business online, but I'd expect the content industry to push back just as hard as we get closer to the second set of hearings.
Darrell Issa R-Ca. Once a court order has been served, there are three main tools these bills give the DOJ and copyright holders for blocking websites. Authors of both bills have wavered on their stance when it comes to DNS blocking. The second method of blocking involves mandating that major search engines Google, Bing, Yahoo de-index an accused site from their search results.
And finally, the third way prohibits any site accused of piracy from doing business with other services, such as PayPal or any advertising platform. The same is true for ad networks.
That ambiguity alone has many Internet companies concerned. This is a dangerous precedent, even though the proposed legislation is only trying to de-index sites that commit acts of piracy. Google has already faced legal opposition overseas — for instance, China places restrictions on what content Google can present in search results — and a U.
That may be the case. SOPA tackles that by moving up the chain. If you can't force overseas sites to take down copyrighted work, you can at least stop U. You can also make it harder for U. Internet users to find and access the sites. The proposed bill's text says that a site could be deemed a SOPA scofflaw if it "facilitates" copyright infringement. Sites like YouTube, which publishes millions of user-uploaded videos each week, are worried that they would be forced to more closely police that content to avoid running afoul of the new rules.
The bill requires every payment or advertising network operator to set up a process through which outside parties can notify the company that one of its customers is an "Internet site is dedicated to theft of U. Filing false notifications is a crime, but the process would put the burden of proof -- and the legal cost of fighting a false allegation -- on the accused.
As the anti-SOPA trade group NetCoalition put it in their analysis of the bill: "The legislation systematically favors a copyright owner's intellectual property rights and strips the owners of accused websites of their rights.
Who supports SOPA, and who's against it? In general, media companies have united in favor of them, while tech's big names are throwing their might into opposing them. The bill's supporters dismiss accusations of censorship, saying that the legislation is meant to revamp a broken system that doesn't adequately prevent criminal behavior. But SOPA's critics say the bill's backers don't understand the Internet's architecture, and therefore don't appreciate the implications of the legislation they're considering.
In November, tech behemoths including Google GOOG , Fortune and Facebook lodged a formal complaint letter to lawmakers, saying: "We support the bills' stated goals.
Unfortunately, the bills as drafted would expose law-abiding U. Account icon An icon in the shape of a person's head and shoulders. It often indicates a user profile. Log out. US Markets Loading H M S In the news. Alyson Shontell. Sign up for notifications from Insider!
Stay up to date with what you want to know. Loading Something is loading.
0コメント