STOP CENSORSHIP

Dec. 31, 2011 at 5:11pm with 9 notes View comments

If you’re a Linker, You Might be a Stinker

A few things that are ~~alarming beyond comparison~~ striking about the SOPA bill. Of course, this is saying that it’s needed - that it’s not redundant to existing law, that existing law (DCMA) doesn’t do anything.

Here are a few things that get me - beyond the fact that both SOPA and PIPA are not needed - in fact they make things worse for common folk…

Misbranding and Adulteration leverages existing FDA Guidelines instead of existing copyright law (DMCA)

Misleading Language: The Senate Bill leverages misbranding and adulteration language from FDA regulations (Sec 21 U.S.C. 352) instead of from prior copyright language. Obviously, the FDA language has more teeth and with good reason. You don’t want to consume any drugs which are adulterated version of the real thing or mislabeled. I suppose you don’t want to watch a mislabeled movie either; however, aren’t we talking about IP here? What about previous language relating to IP - already in law? What about the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) for example.

The Senate bill creates collusion between the Attorney General and IP Holders:

Sec 7, 2: The Attorney General provide guidance to intellectual property rights holders about how to supplement an ongoing investigation initiated pursuant to this Act.

It’s typical for law enforcement to work with victims - but it is generally not legislated to this extent.

If you’re a linker, you might be a stinker.

Both PIPA and SOPA have provisions for organizations that provide links. You can be directed to remove them - after you have been given notice to do so. Unfortunately, if you are part of a supply chain of linkers (a situation out of your control, let’s say an Ad-Serving network), your payments can be suspended until the offending parties have provided some form of redress (removing the offending links, shutting down a site, etc.) Care to take a gamble on your next commission check?

Which Plaintiffs Get Priority?

Sec 7, 3: The Attorney General shall provide establish standards for prioritization of actions brought under this Act.

Again, this is typical; however, what does this really mean? Who gets first dibs on a strained government authority? What about defendant priorities? Probably not a factor to them.

Now, when you combine SOPA (from the House) and PIPA (from the Senate), you get:

A lack of due process for defendants and priority given to rights holders. Those priorities might be for certain types of media but we don’t know because the law doesn’t address it.
Linkers might be stinkers - or you might be painted with the same brush if you’re in the link supply chain to an offending party (or a suspected offending party.)
A tool to block accused pirates (DNSSEC changes).
An absolutely no specific wording on redress or due process.

Ultimately, the accused put their fates in the hands of the Attorney General. They’ll determine who gets blocked, how long they’re blocked, what the damages are, when sites might get released, what constitutes pirating (copying, adulteration, and/or mislabeling). BTW, they will also have the power to tie up the payment systems of the accused.

Go ahead, link away! Watch television this week, buy or rent all the movies you can, giving SOPA supporters the right kind of war chest to get these bills passed.

OR:

Stop renting and watching SOPA-suporter media (sorry, that includes Disney), television, some books, etc. Change your habits for a week so that they don’t get changed for you!

#STOPSOPAWEEK - January 1 - 7.

An excellent substitute term: Get closer to your kids week.