I found some facts about it.
Arguments for and Against SOPA and PIPA
Opponents
of SOPA and PIPA believe that neither piece of legislation does enough
to protect against false accusations. As the Electronic Frontier
Foundation argues,
provisions in the bill grant immunity to payment processors and ad
networks that cut off sites based on a reasonable belief of
infringement, so even if claims turn out to be false, only the site
suffers. "The standard for immunity is incredibly low and the potential
for abuse is off the charts," says the EFF.
Meanwhile,
sites that host user-generated content will be under pressure to
closely monitor users' behavior. That monitoring already happens on
larger sites such as YouTube, but it could be a huge liability for
startups, the EFF argues.
Some progressive
pundits have argued that media companies are trying to legislate their
way out of what's really a business-model problem. "As we've seen over
and over again, the most successful (by far) 'attack' against piracy is
awesome new platforms that give customers what they want, such as
Spotify and Netflix," TechDirt's Mike Masnick writes.
SOPA
and PIPA supporters argue that prophecies of a broken Internet are
overblown. Cary Sherman, CEO of the Recording Industry Association of
America, writes that SOPA clearly defines infringing sites
based on Supreme Court holdings and the Digital Millenium Copyright
Act, and requires rights holders to follow a strict set of rules when
trying to get payment cut off to an infringing site. False claims,
Sherman argues, "can result in damages, including costs and attorneys'
fees."
Sherman also points out that previous actions against infringing sites, such as the MGM vs. Grokster case in 2005, triggered similar doomsday predictions from the tech industry, yet digital music innovation has flourished since then.
Who's for SOPA and PIPA, and Who's Against?
Representative Lamar Smith (R-Texas) is the author of SOPA, which is backed by 31 cosponsors in the House. Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) wrote PIPA, which has 40 cosponsors in the Senate. ProPublica has a visualized list of supporters in both the House and Senate.
The White House has expressed concerns
about the bills in their current state, writing in a statement that
"any effective legislation should reflect a wide range of stakeholders,
including everyone from content creators to the engineers that build and
maintain the infrastructure of the Internet."
As for outside parties, the list of SOPA supporters
consists mostly of media companies, including record labels, TV
networks, movie studios, and book publishers. Some companies with an
interest in fighting sales of other counterfeit goods, such as
beauty-product maker Revlon and pharmaceutical company Pfizer, also
appear on the list.
Opposition to SOPA and PIPA is strong in the tech sector. An open letter to Washington
speaking out against the legislation was signed by founders of
Craigslist, eBay, Google, Mozilla, Twitter, and Wikipedia, among others.
In
the middle are companies at the intersection of media and technology.
Many video game publishers have stayed silent on the matter while their
trade group, the Entertainment Software Association, supports the bills.
The Business Software Alliance originally supported the bill, but withdrew its support
after deciding that the legislation went too far. As for Apple and
Microsoft, which are both BSA members, the former has not come out
publicly for or against SOPA or PIPA, while the latter now says that it opposes SOPA "as currently drafted."
Lets wait till we will be informed, or if you are willing to help resistance, join the movements such as Kim Dotcom created.
No comments:
Post a Comment