If you critique SOPA, read the text. If you read the text, read it right. Earlier this week Eriq Gardner speculated in a tweet that less than one tenth of one percent of folks have actually read the SOPA legislation. I bet he’s right. It’s good to read the statute. But what might be worse than not reading it is reading it wrongly and thereafter propagating misunderstanding. One of the motifs that has permeated the SOPA discussion is this idea that evil (usually corporate) interests could shut down entire, innocent sites based on one piece of user generated content on that site that is, or links to, infringing material. Some commentators, such as the usually astute Khan Academy in the video embedded below, have gone so far as to say that one little transgression by one user could bring down all of Facebook, YouTube, or Vimeo. We are fortunate to have the means and motivation to rally around an issue like SOPA and make it a topic of worldwide discussion. If that federal judge were to so conclude, then he would likely be smoking dope.
SOPA hearing delayed, likely until early next year News By Grant Gross December 20, 2011 03:46 PM ET IDG News Service - A hearing to debate and amend the controversial Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the U.S. House of Representatives has been delayed, likely until early next year. The House Judiciary Committee had planned to continue with a third day of markup hearings on SOPA on Wednesday, if the House was still in session. The continued markup has been "postponed until the House is again in session," the spokeswoman said Tuesday. The Judiciary Committee held a 10-hour bill markup session last Thursday, then met again for a short time Friday before being interrupted by votes on the House floor. So far, the committee has voted down about 20 amendments designed to address concerns by Web-based companies, Web security experts and digital rights groups. SOPA would allow the U.S. Also on Tuesday, the White House Office of U.S. The list shows the need for Congress to pass SOPA or the similar Protect IP Act (PIPA), the U.S.
House subcommittee approves amendment modifying whistle-blower reporting rules by Staff Writer on December 20, 2011 Republicans members of a House subcommittee have approved a bill that would modify the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act requirement that whistle-blowers to report potential misconduct to their company before going to the Securities and Exchange Commission. Despite vigorous company lobbying before its passage, Dodd-Frank permits workers to go to the SEC first rather than their own firms. The primary sponsor of H.R. 2483, the Whistleblower Improvement Act of 2011, is Rep. Michael G. Grimm, R-N.Y. The bill, which now goes to the full House Finance Services Committee, was approved last week on a 19-14 party-line vote by the House Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises, with Republicans supporting the measure. Click link to view full article at Business Insurance
Consent of the Networked Part Three of the book is titled “Democracy’s Challenges.” At the end of Chapter 7, dealing with copyright enforcement and free speech, I conclude: It is a moral imperative for democracies to find new and innovative ways to protect copyright in the Internet age without stifling the ability of citizens around the world to exercise their right to freedom of speech, access information they need to make intelligent voting decisions, and use the Internet and mobile technologies to organize for political change. Balanced, citizen-centric solutions will require innovation, creativity, and compromise. This weekend, the Washington Post is running a piece by me about the clash between Washington culture and Internet culture in the wake of last week’s battle in Washington over copyright law. In late 2010, on the eve of the Arab Spring uprisings, a Tunisian blogger asked Egyptian activist Alaa Abdel Fattah what democratic nations should do to help cyberactivists in the Middle East. I conclude:
Public Opposition Accelerates As Latest Anti-SOPA Petition Hits Goal In Two Days One of the tactics deployed by supporters of SOPA is that there is no real concern from the public regarding the legislation. They like to claim that only those who profit from piracy really want to block this bill. Yet, we see time and time again this is not true. With letter writing campaigns from groups such as the EFF, Public Knowledge and Demand Progress having generated hundreds of thousands of letters, emails and phone calls from concerned citizens, the pro-SOPA groups have had to resort to drastic inflation to defend their side. The first of these petitions, titled "Stop the E-PARASITE Act", was created back on October 31 when SOPA was known as E-PARASITES. Fast forward to December 18. If there is no real public concern over SOPA, as supporters of the bill claim, who are these people?
Council of Ministers backs EU signing of ACTA In a Council of Ministers meeting held last week ministers voted to allow the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) to be signed on behalf of EU member countries. The EU had helped finalise the terms of ACTA last year. "The Council adopted a decision authorising the signing of an anti-counterfeiting trade agreement (ACTA) with Australia, Canada, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland and the United States," a Council of Ministers statement said. "ACTA is aimed at establishing an international framework to improve the enforcement of intellectual property right laws and create improved international standards for actions against large-scale infringements of intellectual property. In October the US, Japan, Australia, Canada, Republic of Korea, Morocco, New Zealand and Singapore "committed" to ACTA at a signing ceremony in Japan. The EU has until 1 May 2013 to sign the agreement, the Japanese Government has previously said.
SOPA explained: What it is and why it matters - Jan. 17 SOPA's backers say the sweeping anti-piracy bill is needed to squash sites like The Pirate Bay (left), but the tech industry says the bill is rife with unintended consequences. NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- The tech industry is abuzz about SOPA and PIPA, a pair of anti-piracy bills. Here's why they're controversial, and how they would change the digital landscape if they became law. What is SOPA? SOPA is an acronym for the Stop Online Piracy Act. SOPA's main targets are "rogue" overseas sites like torrent hub The Pirate Bay, which are a trove for illegal downloads. Content creators have battled against piracy for years -- remember Napster? That means sites like Google wouldn't show flagged sites in their search results, and payment processors like eBay's (EBAY, Fortune 500) PayPal couldn't transmit funds to them. Both sides say they agree that protecting content is a worthy goal. Isn't copyright infringement already illegal? Let's say a YouTube user uploads a copyrighted song.
Boehner’s office cuts off C-SPAN cameras as GOP takes verbal beating By Stephen C. WebsterWednesday, December 21, 2011 13:36 EDT A strange thing happened Wednesday morning on Capitol Hill. As Rep. Moments later, C-SPAN took to the Internet to explain that it wasn’t their doing, but someone working for House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH). The incident occurred mere moments after the House went into session. “As you walk off the floor, Mr. “We regret, Mr. And that’s when the audio cut out. Moments later, someone at C-SPAN took to Twitter and explained: “C-SPAN has no control over the U.S. It’s for reasons just like this, one might infer, that Boehner told C-SPAN back in February it would not be allowed control its own cameras. The non-partisan political network, produced as a courtesy by the nation’s cable operators, had said it wanted to offer a more “journalistic product,” but the speaker denied their request to place and operate more cameras. This video is from C-SPAN, broadcast Dec. 21, 2011. (H/T: ThinkProgress) Stephen C. Stephen C.
Appeals Court reaffirms DMCA protection for user-generated content Universal Music Group was dealt a heavy loss today in its long-running copyright lawsuit against Veoh, a now-defunct video hosting site, with a federal judge upholding a previous ruling that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's safe harbor provision protected Veoh from liability when users uploaded videos that infringed on UMG's intellectual property. The Electronic Frontier Foundation, which filed an amicus brief on behalf of Veoh, called it "a bittersweet and crucial victory" for the Internet as a whole. Veoh went out of business from the cost of defending the case, but the ruling by the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco rejects UMG's reasoning for filing takedown notices. The question of whether user-generated content on video hosting sites qualify for DMCA safe harbor protection was also crucial in Viacom's similar $1 billion lawsuit against YouTube, in which a judge ruled against Viacom last year.
PIPA/SOPA and Why You Should Care | Mitchell Congress is considering the most talked-about copyright legislation in a decade, known as Protect IP (PIPA) in the Senate and Stop Online Piracy (SOPA) in the House. Today, Mozilla announced that we’ll join with other sites in a virtual strike to protest PIPA/SOPA. SOPA makes all of us potential criminals if we don’t become the enforcement arm of a new government regulatory and policing structure. Assume there’s a corner store in your neighborhood that rents movies. SOPA/PIPA don’t aim at the people trying to get to the store. The solution under the proposed bills is to make it as difficult as possible to find or interact with the store. This is what SOPA and PIPA would impose in the online world. Supporters say they are only targeting foreign websites outside US jurisdiction. Despite their over-reaching nature, PIPA and SOPA may not even be effective at stopping online piracy. SOPA and PIPA are dangerous. Legislatively: Protecting content at all costs is a disaster. Footnotes
It’s Time Hollywood Faced the Music Over Internet Piracy: View After the payroll tax cut, the hottest issue animating Washington these days is online piracy. Legislation to curb overseas Internet sites that purvey pirated copies of movies, television shows and other creative content is steadily advancing. Arms are being twisted, campaign checks written and competing experts trotted out in a Titanic struggle between the film industry (in favor of cracking down on the pirates) and technology companies (against anything that blocks the free flow of information over the Internet). Under existing law, television networks and film studios can simply request that websites remove pirated videos. Sites must quickly take down the content to avoid a lawsuit. But because some overseas websites exist solely to distribute bootleg content, and are beyond the reach of U.S. law, Hollywood is seeking stronger protections. There are two legislative approaches, both claiming broad support -- and both flawed. Financial Lifelines Obliterated Sales
US lobbying against draft Data Protection Regulation By EDRi Right at the end of the inter-service consultation process in the European Commission (the almost final step before a legislative proposal is launched), the United States Department of Commerce launched a significant lobbying campaign against the leaked draft proposal for a Data Protection Regulation. The campaign included high-level phone calls from senior figures in the US Department of Commerce to top level staff in the European Commission covering topics such as US business, multilateral and bilateral treaty organizations, PNR, national security, law enforcement, trade and innovation. A somewhat less critical, but nonetheless alarming, “informal note” was also circulated (pdf). In general, the US complained about the draft proposal arguing that it will break with international standards and might even end up being counterproductive for data protection. Section 1: Interoperability Data breach requirements Right to be forgotten Definition of “child” Adequacy
PIPA, SOPA and OPEN Act Quick Reference Guide The last month or so has seen a flurry of anti-piracy, online infringing, copyright-related bills. The latest newcomer is the Online Protection and Enforcement of Digital Trade Act or OPEN Act ( S. 2029 ). Introduced on December 17, 2011 by Sen. Wyden (D-OR), along with Senators Moran (R-KS) and Cantwell (D-WA), the OPEN Act is being heralded as a more palatable alternative to existing anti-piracy bills – The Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act of 2011 or PIPA ( S. 968 ), and The Stop Online Piracy Act or SOPA ( H.R. 3261 ). All three bills take aim at any website beyond U.S. borders that distribute counterfeit or copyright infringing products. What you’ll see (hopefully at a glance), is unlike PIPA or SOPA, the OPEN Act focuses solely on curbing online infringement by cutting off websites’ payment processing and ad networks. Also, the guide captures the status of the bills as of today, January 10.
Dear Congressman Posey, SOPA is both dangerous and un-American Image courtesy Flickr user joewcampbell. I live in Brevard County, Florida, Florida's 15th District, represented by Bill Posey, a graduate of Brevard Community College and former real estate agent. He is, in his own way, then, a perfect representation of my lovely Brevard County. In any case, one of his constituents, one of your fellow ZDNet Government readers, forwarded my recent article on the proposed Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and its sister in legislative stupidity, PROTECT-IP, to our esteemed representative. See also: New House of Representatives bill may strangle the Internet or nerf the First Amendment Congressman Posey responded to her with a very carefully worded form letter, which she then forwarded on to me, with the request that I undertake setting Representative Bill to rights over his little bill. Now, as a matter of disclosure, I've encountered members of Mr. I beg your indulgence for a moment, Dear Reader, for I must now directly address our elected representative.