Congress moving to Censor Internet in the Name of Creativity

The Internet Death Penalty 

PROTECT IP is a bill introduced in the Senate and House of Representatives waiting to pass through Congress. It gives the government and companies power to censor the Internet in the name of protecting "creativity". The law would allow censorship of all sites "dedicated to copyright infringement." 

Sites like YouTube and Twitter which share video regardless of copyright would be considered unlawful conduct under this bill. According to CBO, this bill would cost $ 47 million in tax each year.

Many fear Protect IP could potentially grant overwhelming power to the government, allowing it to essentially shut down sites at will, regardless of whether or not copyright infringement took place. 

PROTECT IP Act Breaks The Internet from Fight for the Future on Vimeo.

According to provisions in the Protect IP Act bill, that was just passed in the Senate Judiciary Committee while Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) put the bill on hold in the committee, Attorney General Eric Holder would have the right to go after any website he wishes as the plaintiff all to stop copyright infringement which would include blogs such as Infowars, FederalJack, USWGO and many others across the internet. Doesn't it strike you as strange that these are all alternative news blogs which question the agenda, policies and decisions of governments. 

Google’s Executive Chairman, Erik Schmidt, warned last week that combating an issue as complex as piracy with a one size fits all response would do more harm than good. Schmidt stated that a decision to “whack off DNS” would “set a very bad precedent” and could potentially result in internet censorship like the one controlling China's Internet today. Schmidt went as far as promising to fight any passed law which restricts or disallows free speech.

For PROTECT IP

Many trade organizations spoke in favor of the bill, including the Music Publishers Association and the National Copyright Alliance, which includes a variety of music-related organizations.

On the one hand, I have no doubt that the right holders feel deserve protection and that the cases drag on for years in the yard is quite absurd, especially from small copyright holders do not have the time money to pursue these cases. In addition, this bill appears to be a new attack on a bipartite regular procedure not only goes too far, but creates an environment that is restrictive and punitive against the extremely productive for the art and business in a society of democratic theory.

Sure, it seems to have just learned the trade unions, who supported the sanctions outrageous for filesharers who sometimes do not properly understand the implications of what they are doing, and caused the destruction, regardless of the remaining public good was in possession of large stickers, and more generally, that the musicians.

Against PROTECT IP

Here are a variety of responses from writers and groups that feel the bill goes too far and errs in eliminating due process. Please see their articles for further clarification:

• CNET's Declan McCullah describes this bill as an "Internet death penalty".
• Techdirt points out that "the bill claims it includes 'safeguards, but those 'safeguards' are that after the court order has been issued and all the third party service providers (payment process, ad networks, ISPs, search engines) have been required to block service to the site, the site can 'petition the court to suspend or vacate the order.'"
• Abigail Phillips of the Electronic Frontier Foundation feels that "on balance, it's clear PROTECT IP is no improvement on COICA."
• Sherwin Siy, Deputy Legal Director and the Kahle/Austin Promise Fellow at Public Knowledge, reminds us that: 

"We've seen in the past how many rightsholders have abused similar processes, issuing takedown notices regarding public domain works, mothers filming home videos or documentary filmmakers criticizing their work. The same trade organizations pushing for the passage of this bill have yet to admit that users should be able to space-shift works that they have already bought and paid for onto their own devices. How can we expect this new found power to be wielded by those same interests?"

Though this writer os normally against intimidation and any other actions even remotely outside of the law, in this case I applaud the hacker group Anonymous' vow to fight PROTECT IP. 

Though some question the group’s efficacy combating something as large as the Protect IP bill, considering the group temporarily knocked out service to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s official website with a DDoS attack recently shows that our government might want to think twice before dismissing Anonymous as a frivolous threat. Particularly when you figure that in this case, the majority of Internet users everywhere are with Anonymous on this one.

Tell Congress not to censor the Internet by signing the fightforthefuture.org petition, today... better yet, NOW!

Censorship Watch readers would love to read your comment about this important issue. Are you for or against PROTECT IP?  Particularly if you are for the bill, we would love to read your arguments as to why...


Written By: Tom Retterbush

.