SOPA Gets Watered Down, But Not Enough for Critics

December 13, 2011 -

SOPA sponsor Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) seems to be getting some of the criticism that has fallen on his "rogue websites" bill. The Texas Congressmen has introduced several amendments to the bill that soften some of the more draconian measures it contained, and offers a clarification that web sites using U.S. domains wouldn't be subject to the law. Still, opponents of SOPA see these steps as not enough, and with Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) offering an alternative it's still a hard sell to anyone that cares about online rights. A hearing on SOPA is scheduled before the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday. That committee is chaired by Smith.

Under Smith's amended bill, a judge would now have to order ad networks to stop doing business with a site deemed "dedicated" to various infringing activities. The original bill gave power directly to rights holders, who could make those demands on an ad network or payment processor. The amendment still gives legal immunity to financial institutions and ad networks that choose cooperate and boycott "rogue" sites.

"That is pretty big," Sherwin Siy, a staff attorney with digital-rights group Public Knowledge tells Ars Technica.

Lamar’s amendments also clarify that sites ending in .com, .org, and .net are not covered by the bill. Only foreign sites fall under SOPA’s wrath. Smith's amendment also still gives the Justice Department the power to demand that Internet Service Providers block their customers from visiting infringing sites, but it won't require ISPs to alter DNS records. While they wouldn't be required to use that tactic, they would be forced into using some sort of method to keep users from visiting sites deemed as "rogue sites." Unfortunately the bill still doesn't define just what a rogue site is.

Source: Ars Technica


Comments

Re: SOPA Gets Watered Down, But Not Enough for Critics

THIS, is why the bill was born...

https://buy.louisck.net/statement

A new world is being born as we speak.
A world where regions are no more.
A world where the artists paid MORE.
A world where DRM is not needed.
A world where customers pay less and get MORE.

Publishers are being reduced to nothing more than "Money-lenders".
...of course they will fight tooth and nail to suppress the internet!


 

Re: SOPA Gets Watered Down, But Not Enough for Critics

I've got two questions about this.

1. How can the US dictate policy on things outside the US?

2. Why bother with the restrictions when things like The Pirate Bay are .org?

Re: SOPA Gets Watered Down, But Not Enough for Critics

"1. How can the US dictate policy on things outside the US?"

Because the US thinks it's judge, jury, and executioner for the world.

And if you don't believe that is truly the case, just read what's in the National Defense Authorization Act that Congress may be voting on any moment now, and Obama is likely to sign.

Re: SOPA Gets Watered Down, But Not Enough for Critics

Yes, see, that's the thing... USA is growing more and more into the classical villain part... If the US citizens are unable to bring their government in line, at some point, it will cross the line and basically trigger the ire of most countries on Earth. And I'm saying this as a Canadian, probably one of the country that will stand as the USA ally until no one else is...

Re: SOPA Gets Watered Down, But Not Enough for Critics

Would this affect rogue malware scanners?

Re: SOPA Gets Watered Down, But Not Enough for Critics

And what is (for my money anyway) the largest problem of all is still there: the ability to take down sites that are merely alleged to have infringed copyright.

 

Andrew Eisen

Re: SOPA Gets Watered Down, But Not Enough for Critics

Or you could, you know, withdraw the bill altogether, and start over from scratch with something that wasn't written to prop up a handful of major corporations.

Re: SOPA Gets Watered Down, But Not Enough for Critics

My theory is that SOPA was intended to be incredibly extreme so that any perceived watered down language would be viewed as a 'victory' compromise by the inevitable opposition.  Otherwise Smith would have to be incredibly naive and stupid to not believe this would draw heavy opposition (which I won't rule out altogether).

It's actually a pretty common ploy in politics.  Introduce something outrageous, then scale it back to what you originally wanted.  Thankfully nobody seems to be buying Smith's crap.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
ZippyDSMleeShout box sttasahhppppp!!05/22/2015 - 10:47am
Andrew EisenOh, here it is. I thought it was gone. Yeah, I'm experiencing the same issue. Sent a note to tech.05/22/2015 - 10:43am
E. Zachary KnightAnyone else have the shout box pushed down to the bottom of the site?05/22/2015 - 10:38am
MattsworknameAndrew and EZK help me pull back a bit , still working on it05/22/2015 - 7:06am
ConsterI think IP is the only person here who doesn't think IP needs to dial it back several levels.05/22/2015 - 6:14am
Mattsworknamehttp://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/05/22/fec-backs-off-flirtation-with-regulating-internet/05/22/2015 - 1:34am
MattsworknameWell, on another subject, Saw this, and while I know it's fox news, thuoght I should share it05/22/2015 - 1:34am
MechaCrashYeah, even I think IP needs to dial it back.05/22/2015 - 12:35am
Mattsworknamesays05/21/2015 - 11:17pm
MattsworknameRE doc, everyone has a tendancy to let emotion get ahead of them, especially in an annoymous forum like the web. We have have those moments. Ip however has nothing but those moments. it's why I stopped responding to him, regardless of what he thinks or05/21/2015 - 11:17pm
DocMelonheadNo offense, but I see your behaviors in the comment sections uncalled for.05/21/2015 - 8:51pm
DocMelonheadHell, I could use both Goth_Skunk and IronPatriot as an example of such behavior between the two.05/21/2015 - 8:43pm
Andrew EisenMock? Ridicule? No, we're talking about serious threats and abuse, not people being cheeky or mean. Big difference.05/21/2015 - 8:42pm
DocMelonheadIn fact I see both mocks and ridicule between both the GamerGate Supporters and GamerGate Critics.05/21/2015 - 8:41pm
DocMelonheadAs for the Harassment, well, this is the internet; people will mock and ridicule whoever they want, whenever they want, at all times.05/21/2015 - 8:40pm
Mattsworknamegoth I think all media news outlets have that disclaimer05/21/2015 - 8:39pm
Andrew EisenThat's an... interesting way to interpret that.05/21/2015 - 8:36pm
Goth_SkunkAnd re BBC vs Rockstar: Ahh. I missed that. Woops!05/21/2015 - 8:33pm
Goth_SkunkAE: The entire disclaimer is a valid reason why I don't take it seriously. Particularly the part where they say "the information contained herein may not be necessarily accurate or current." Because fact-checking, like math, is haaaaaaaaard!05/21/2015 - 8:32pm
MattsworknameI take all media reporting with huge skepticism. the Mary sue Included. that said, there not as bad Jezebel.05/21/2015 - 8:27pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician