Stop the Censorship
Why SOPA and PIPA bills don’t work
The past few days have seen tremendous anger and rage amongst the Internet fraternity against two bills presented before the congress Protect IP Act (PIPA) in the Senate and the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), which are due to be voted on by the Senate on January 24 th 2012. The common view point is that though the intentions of the bills aimed at fighting copyright infringement and trademark counterfeiting may be good, they are probably ineffective. The regulations related to censorship mentioned in these bills can’t bring down pirate sites, because these sites would the just change their IP addresses and continue their criminal activities. In the process the law-abiding companies run the risk of suffering high penalties for implementing breaches that for one is not only difficult to control, but also extremely high maintenance.
In a recent announcement the White house issued statements that it would not support the bills. The New York Times reports, the Obama administration categorically stating that it “will not support” any bill “that reduces freedom of expression, increases cyber security risk, or undermines the dynamic, innovative global Internet.” The Shah Peerally Law Firm joins the fraternity of 110 prominent law professors, who have expressed grave concerns about the bills and voices its strong protest against the censor the Web and imposing of harmful regulations on American business, affecting millions of citizens.
Reasons why SOPA and PIPA don’t work
- A quite dangerous provision in the PIPA and SOPA bills, that hasn’t been highlighted much, is the “Vigilante” Provision. This provision is aimed at granting broad immunity to all service providers who overblock innocent users. This is also applicable to block sites voluntarily with no judicial oversight. While the bill makes it mandatory that the action is taken in good faith, the blocked site now has to prove either that it is innocent or that its accuser has bad faith in order to be unblocked. Measures such as judging sites based “in good faith” and “on credible evidence” have low immunity and have the potential to be misused as they may be used without any legal oversight. Not only can this provision be misused for false copyright claims protected by fair use, but in fact large corporations can take advantage of it to stamp out emerging competitors and skip anti-trust laws too.
- The Anti-Circumvention Provision in SOPA allows the government to target sites that simply provide information helping help users get around the bills’ censorship mechanisms. Such rules amount to an unconstitutional restraint against protected speech, prior to what it might be and severely damages online innovation. Contrary to claims this provision is applicable to all websites, including those in the U.S.
- Vaguely it would mean that Social media sites like Facebook or YouTube—would have to police their own sites, which is a huge liability cost that most companies can ill afford. This would have the effect of venture capitalists shying away from investing in online startups if these bills are passed.
- The Corporate Right of Action in these bills allows copyright holders to get an unopposed court order to cut off foreign websites from payment processors and advertisers. While copyright holders can already remove infringing material from the web under the DMCA notice-and-takedown procedure, the proposals in PIPA and SOPA want to give right holders even more power, by allowing them to shut down full sites instead of removing the specific content in question.
- The PIPA and SOPA bills propose to expand Attorney General power that enhances the authority to block domain name services. This would also mean that the Attorney General would be empowered to de-list websites from search engines.
These are some of the highlights of the disastrous provisions in PIPA and SOPA. Keeping in mind that the Shah Peerally Law Group is against any form of suppression of free speech, we think passing of these laws could have the effect of changing the very way the Internet is used, leading to punishing millions of innocent users who might not have ever thought of copyright infringement.
If you like this article, please click on the LIKE button below
Shah Peerally is an attorney licensed in California practicing immigration law and debt settlement. He has featured as an expert legal analyst for many TV networks such as NDTV, Times Now and Sitarree TV. Articles about Shah Peerally and his work have appeared on newspapers such as San Jose Mercury News, Oakland Tribune, US Fiji Times, Mauritius Le Quotidien, Movers & Shakers and other prominent international newspapers. His work has been commended by Congress women Nancy Pelosi and Barbara Lee. He has a weekly radio show on KLOK 1170AM and frequently participates in legal clinics in churches, temples and mosques. To learn more about Shah Peerally, visit his personal blog on www.ShahPeerally.com.
Information provided above is for educational purposes only. One should not act or refrain to act solely based on the information provided. You should consult an attorney to assess your case before proceeding.
For updates follow us on Radio, Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn. Our law firm also deals in immigration law. Visit www.peerallylaw.com and www.immigrationlegalblog.com. You can reach us 510.742.5887.
Listen to our radio shows on KLOK 1170 AM Radio on Tuesday from 11am to 12pm and Friday from 11pm to 1am (Saturday)
February 22nd, 2012 
Shah Peerally 
Youtube
LinkedIn
Twitter
Facebook
