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.

---

http://zippydsm.deviantart.com/

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.
Cheater87Look what FINALLY came to Australia uncut! http://www.gamespot.com/articles/left-4-dead-2-gets-reclassified-in-australia/1100-6422038/09/02/2014 - 6:49am
Andrew EisenHence the "Uh, yeah. Obviously."09/02/2014 - 12:53am
SleakerI think Nintendo has proven over the last 2 years that it doesn't.09/02/2014 - 12:31am
Andrew EisenSleaker - Uh, yeah. Obviously.09/01/2014 - 8:20pm
Sleaker@AE - exclusives do not a console business make.09/01/2014 - 8:03pm
Papa MidnightI find it disappointing that, despite the presence of a snopes article and multiple articles countering it, people are still spreading a fake news story about a "SWATter" being sentenced to X (because the number seems to keep changing) years in prison.09/01/2014 - 5:08pm
Papa MidnightAnd resulting in PC gaming continuing to be held back by developer habits09/01/2014 - 5:07pm
Papa MidnightI find it disappointing that the current gen of consoles is representative of 2009-2010 in PC gaming, and will be the bar by which games are released over the next 8 years - resulting in more years of poor PC ports (if they're ever ported)09/01/2014 - 5:06pm
Andrew EisenMeanwhile, 6 of Wii U's top 12 are exclusive: Mario 3D World, Nintendo Land, Pikmin 3, Mario Kart 8, Wonderful 101, and ZombiU. (Wind Waker HD is on the list too but I didn't count it.)09/01/2014 - 4:36pm
Andrew EisenLikewise, only two of Xbox One's top 12 are exclusive: Dead Rising 3 and Ryse: Son of Rome (if you ignore a PC release later this year).09/01/2014 - 4:34pm
Andrew EisenNot to disrespect the current gen of consoles but I find it telling that of the "12 Best Games For The PS4" (per Kotaku), only two are exclusive to the system: Infamous: Second Son and Resogun.09/01/2014 - 4:30pm
MaskedPixelantehttp://www.joystiq.com/2014/09/01/beyond-two-souls-ps4-trophies-emerge-directors-cut-reported/ MMM MMM, nothing quire like reheated last gen games to make you appreciate the 400 bucks you spent on a new console.09/01/2014 - 4:24pm
Andrew EisenThat's actually a super depressing thought, that a bunch of retweeters are taking that pic as an illustration of the actual issue instead of an example of a complete misunderstanding of it.09/01/2014 - 4:20pm
Andrew EisenObviously, the picture was created by someone who doesn't understand what the issue actually is (or, possibly, someone trying to satire said misunderstanding).09/01/2014 - 4:10pm
Papa MidnightPeople fear and attack what they do not understand.09/01/2014 - 4:04pm
Papa MidnightWell, let's not forget. Someone held their hand in a peace sign a few weeks ago and people started claiming it was a gang sign. Or a police chief displayed the hand signal of their fraternity and was accused of the same.09/01/2014 - 4:04pm
SleakerEither people don't understand that what the picture is saying is true, or the picture was created out of a misunderstanding of what sexism is.09/01/2014 - 3:52pm
Sleaker@AE ok yah that's where the kind of confusion I'm getting. Your tweet can be taken to mean two different things.09/01/2014 - 3:51pm
Andrew EisenSleaker - No. No, not even remotely. The pic attached to my tweet was not made by me; it's not a statement I'm making. It's an illustration of the complete misunderstanding of the issue my tweet is referring to.09/01/2014 - 3:13pm
Papa MidnightIn other news, Netflix states why it paid Comcast: http://money.cnn.com/2014/08/29/technology/netflix-comcast/index.html?hpt=hp_t209/01/2014 - 3:10pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician