Quote:
Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam
Would it not be simpler to just amend (update/rewrite) the DMCA laws rather than to mess with altering the web's DNS and creating new restrictive liabilities to protect an industry with an antiquated business model?
If you want to severely restrict the availability of both web advertising and payment processing SOPA is a sure way to do this. The "voluntary" actions of both advertising networks and payment processors will create a burden on Internet business in general.
If 'it' is digitalized and distributed it will get pirated at some point -- this is the new reality. If it can be downloaded it can be pirated -- this is fact. Using policing authority will not work -- I cite the continual *War on Drugs* in example; same idea, same behavior and laws will not change it.
Also, see the Digital Millennium Copyright Act § 512. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act would need to be either rewritten or repealed as not to create a conflict at law if the SOPA is signed into law (doubtful at his point -- election year "showboating" for ?)
|
What you have said is exactly why you really need to take some time and read the
actual bill.
What you said about DMCA is part of the problem. It is an
US law.
That means nothing in China!
So faced with foreign sites not acting properly when getting a DMCA, SOPA was proposed.
When you read SOPA the focus is on "foreign websites" and "sites dedicated to theft".
See the only way to get the foreign websites to comply is to cut them off.
The DMCA will work for American sites, but that's not what SOPA is about.
Section 101 is just definitions of the terms used in the bill.
The next section in the bill is section 102 :
Quote:
|
SEC. 102. ACTION BY ATTORNEY GENERAL TO PROTECT U.S. CUSTOMERS AND PREVENT U.S. SUPPORT OF FOREIGN INFRINGING SITES.
|
After section 102 is section 103 :
Quote:
|
SEC. 103. MARKET-BASED SYSTEM TO PROTECT U.S. CUSTOMERS AND PREVENT U.S. FUNDING OF SITES DEDICATED TO THEFT OF U.S. PROPERTY.
|
Youtube, facebook and twitter are not foreign nor are they dedicated to theft.
The rest of the bill deals with basic copyright law that is already legal and has been
for a long time such as streaming copyrighted material without authorization.
This is not new law!!!!!!
Other than that the bill grants immunity to sites like facebook, youtube, google etc...
for "voluntarily cutting off infringing sites".
Google cutting off a site with impunity is not something new! See thread :
My site banned by google, need advise
