Quote:
Originally Posted by u-Bob
The problem is that under SOPA, that host could indeed be sued. Under SOPA, that hosting company would be taking a serious risk if it kept that content online after the period of 5 days has passed. The automatic reaction for a lot of hosting companies, billers, registrars etc would be to automatically or in most cases cut off the customer as it would in most cases be the most cost effective / least risky thing to do.Even if your host, biller, registrar,... doesn't cut you off, handling SOPA notices would create an extra cost that would undoubtedly be passed on to you, the customer.
Not directly under SOPA no, but the falsely accused could later always sue for damages. The problem here is that you can only do that when the harm has already been done.
|
U-bob, i appreciate your comments & concern. The part i highlighted though...you are saying that a biller, or a processor, or an ISP, will decide to terminate their business
with a paying client over a third party complaint, that may not be valid, because they fear getting sued under SOPA. I personally don't think this will happen. If their customer has the facts behind them, & has done nothing wrong, i see no cause that a biller is going to terminate business over the fear of a suit from a third party. Its expensive for complaintants to litigate so i dont think petty complaints are going to make websites disappear. it is also bad business for any company to dispose of its customers so cavalierly.
its hard to pass judgement on this shit. This bill reminds me of the patriot act. All this handwringing by liberrtarians about the loss of liberties & government spying on the public. However i see no people in jail, or my personal life, effected in any way by the law.
DAMIAN J - can you provide something inciteful, other then everyone is an idiot. thanks.