SOPA and the Blogger: Potential for Censorship?

There has been a great deal of debate going on about the Stop Online Piracy Act.  Some think it’s a massive threat to on-line freedom, and others consider it much ado about nothing.

For the side critical SOPA, here are some points from the Heritage Foundation:

Lawsuits Authorized  

As it is currently drafted, this is how SOPA would work: First, it allows the U.S. Attorney General, as well as individual intellectual property holders, to sue allegedly infringing sites in court. The site would have to be proven to be a foreign site “directed towards” the U.S. and that it would be subject to seizure if it were U.S.-based. Alternatively, a suit could be brought by a private plaintiff, who would have to show that the site is “dedicated to theft of U.S. property.” That test, in turn, can be met if the site or a portion of the site is “primarily” designed, operated, or marketed to “enable or facilitate” infringement. The bill requires that attempts be made to notify the website operator of any such legal action, but legal proceedings would go forward even if no response is received.            

If the court finds in favor of the plaintiff, a range of third-party restrictions would go into effect. Specifically, in cases brought by the Attorney General, to the extent “technically feasible and reasonable,” a court order would:

1. Require Internet service providers to prevent subscribers from reaching the website in question. This would be done by severing the mechanism by which the domain name entered by Web users is connected (“resolved”) to the proper IP address;
2. Prohibit search engines such as Google from providing direct links to the foreign website in search results;
3. Prohibit payment network providers, such as PayPal or credit card firms, from completing financial transactions affecting the site; and
4. Bar Internet advertising firms from placing online ads from or to the affected website.

In cases brought by a private party, only the restrictions on payment networks and advertising firms would apply.

The current version of the legislation, offered as a manager’s amendment in committee, omits a number of controversial provisions that were included in prior versions of SOPA. Most notably, a process that allowed holders of intellectual property rights to trigger third-party obligations without a court order was dropped. This and other recent changes represent a real improvement in the legislation.

Liberals hate it too, and my perception is that they are upset with the crony Capitalism stench to it.  I happen to agree.  However, their focus is left of center, and they’re concentrating on the entertainment industry, rather than the government.  Yes, the MPAA and the RIAA are heavily involved, but they wouldn’t be at the trough had the government not empowered itself to create the trough in the first place.  No power-no cronies.  It’s that simple.  Don’t get me wrong, I think this legislation is bad news, and I’m glad that it’s nearly universally hated-it’s just that some of our “allies” have a bass akwards view of the cause, as well as the solution.

Also, some people see SOPA as an non-issue…

I swear some people ought not be allowed near a computer — much less drive! 

The conservative and liberal blogospheres are unifying behind opposition to Congress’s Stop Online Piracy Act, with right-leaning bloggers aruging their very existence could be wiped out if the anti-piracy bill passes.

“If either the U.S. Senate’s Protect IP Act (PIPA) & the U.S. House’s Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) become law, political blogs such as Red Mass Group [conservative] & Blue Mass Group [liberal] will cease to exist,” wrote a blogger at Red Mass Group.

Some have asserted that the controversial measures would criminalize pages and blogs that link to foreign websites dedicated to online piracy. In particular, this has concerned search engines like Google, which could face massive liability if some form of the bill passes, some say.

via SOPA is the end of us, say bloggers – Tim Mak – POLITICO.com.

Alright, allow me to be the resident idiot who happens to have a little common sense. Here is a novel idea:

DON’T LINK TO OVERSEAS SITES THAT ARE DEDICATED TO ONLINE PIRACY!

I hate to say this; but….duh! 

I must repectfully disagree, because I follow one “law” in looking at legislation…

Matt’s First Law of Legislation:  All legislation should be viewed through the prism of how it will, one day, be abused.  

The idea is simple:  when the government grants itself power of some sort, it is only a matter of time before it is abused.  As for SOPA, I can, one day, seeing it used against sites opposed to the government, or it’s current ideology.  I can see a liberal judge reading something into it that isn’t in the actual text of the legislation.  I can see it being expanded by future Congresses to encompass things that it was never intended to regulate.  In other words, if the government grants itself a power, it isn’t a question of if it will be abused, it is a question of when.

In the end, the state is the enemy, and we should never give it more bullets to fire at us.