House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) announced on Friday that he will postpone consideration of his Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) until there is wider agreement on the controversial legislation.
"I have heard from the critics and I take seriously their concerns regarding proposed legislation to address the problem of online piracy," Smith said. "It is clear that we need to revisit the approach on how best to address the problem of foreign thieves that steal and sell American inventions and products."
Smith's announcement came just minutes after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) announced he would shelve the Senate's version of the anti-piracy legislation, the Protect IP Act.
The move is a stunning acknowledgment of failure for the powerful chairman.
Smith was the author of SOPA and its most vocal proponent. He had repeatedly said the bill did not need to be changed and accused the critics of "spreading lies."
But support for the bill collapsed after a massive Web protest on Wednesday. Major sites including Google and Wikipedia either shut down in protest or displayed messages opposing the legislation.
Here are the choices folks. Either no regulation except at the actual local enterprise level or we can kiss the internet goodbye in anything even vaguely resembling it’s present free state. There is NO WAY to regulate cyberSPACE without granting utterly unacceptable levels of control to bureaucrats.
That’s why I say “local enterprise level”. If a web concern trafficking in illegal content can be located to the building then shut them down there. Trying to filter and control content in the wild is a hellish technology nightmare on one hand and an eventual guaranteed free speech one on the other.
The internet mirrors exactly the real world HEARTS of men and women. Every form of twisted sickness, perversion and thievery found in real life is also found all over the web because those same people can parade their depravity before the whole earth in the comfort of shadowy anonymity.
Likewise very much that is good and even godly can also be found online just like in the physical world.
Any attempt to stop the bad once it’s left the nest of it’s server is a disaster on the way that in my view would be worse than doing nothing. At least at present.
“In Section 103, the provision providing that people may obtain injunctive relief against websites with infringing content, the law explicitly states that preliminary injunctions can only be obtained pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 65, which are the procedural rules governing how anyone can get a temporary restraining order. (This is clear in the portion of Section 103(b)(5) quoted in Bruceâ??s third “Son of SOPA” blog posting linked to above). This includes the requirement of a hearing (FRCP 65(a)) and that the plaintiff post a bond to pay for damages in case the preliminary injunction issues incorrectly (FRCP 65(c)). In the case of someone threatening to shut down an innocent site like Google or Facebook, with revenues in the billions, these bonds would be valued in the tens of millions of dollars, if not hundreds of millions of dollars. This is a tremendous limitation on the ability of someone to obtain a TRO, or to even threaten a website with a TRO. It is just patently false that an innocent website with the snap of some media mogulâ??s fingers can be just taken down under Section 103 of SOPA without notice, due process, or the other legal protections afforded under federal law.”
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I was speaking generally and you should know a slippery slope by now when you see one.[/quote]
And by slippery slope I assume you mean a brass pole covered in pig grease?[/quote]I tentatively feel a bit gratified that I have no idea what this means.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I was speaking generally and you should know a slippery slope by now when you see one.[/quote]
And by slippery slope I assume you mean a brass pole covered in pig grease?[/quote]I tentatively feel a bit gratified that I have no idea what this means.
[/quote]
Alright…
Imagine a ginormously long brass pole that was all slathered with pig grease and Joe Biden in a stripper costume sliding down like there was no tomorrow…
[quote]orion wrote:<<< So sorry for the mental image…[/quote]No… I’M sorry. And I’m wondering how you got into Barney Frank’s Christmas party.
[/quote]
My Atheist Jihadist credentials got me in.
I swear that I denied JC 5 times before I got close to the main entrance…
[quote]orion wrote:<<< So sorry for the mental image…[/quote]No… I’M sorry. And I’m wondering how you got into Barney Frank’s Christmas party.
[/quote]
My Atheist Jihadist credentials got me in.
I swear that I denied JC 5 times before I got close to the main entrance…[/quote]Ahhhh… that explains it. I gotcha now.
[quote]dk44 wrote: read this somewhere, not my own thinking
The bill will show back up in a few months and will be called the “Stop Child Porn Law” and will pass with flying colors. [/quote]
It’s sad that this is true.[/quote]
I can’t stand the fact that this is most probably true.[/quote]
Here you go:
This was the plan all along - flush out the anti-SOPA crowd, then paste the offending parts of the SOPA legislation into this Act. Who would protest against an act that PROTECTS CHILDREN?
