Dead On Arrival: SOPA Shelved Indefinitely, Obama Succumbs to Pressure, Issues Official Veto Threat
Amid significant pressure from tens of thousands of internet users and major web behemoths like Google, Facebook, and Reddit, the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) is, in its current form, Dead on Arrival:
Misguided efforts to combat online privacy have been threatening to stifle innovation, suppress free speech, and even, in some cases, undermine national security. As of yesterday, though, there’s a lot less to worry about.
The first sign that the bills’ prospects were dwindling came Friday, when SOPA sponsors agreed to drop a key provision that would have required service providers to block access to international sites accused of piracy.
The legislation ran into an even more significant problem yesterday when the White House announced its opposition to the bills. Though the administration’s chief technology officials officials acknowledged the problem of online privacy, the White House statement presented a fairly detailed critique of the measures and concluded, “We will not support legislation that reduces freedom of expression, increases cybersecurity risk or undermines the dynamic, innovative global Internet.” It added that any proposed legislation “must not tamper with the technical architecture of the Internet.”
…
Though the administration did issue a formal veto threat, the White House’s opposition signaled the end of these bills, at least in their current form.
A few hours later, Congress shelved SOPA, putting off action on the bill indefinitely.
Sourced From Washington Monthly via The Daily Sheeple
Sponsored primarily by purported free speech advocates that include democrats and republicans alike, the SOPA would have fundamentally transformed the internet as we know it today. As Daisy Luther writes at Inalienably Yours, the bill was nothing short of a direct attack against the first Amendment and the right to free speech:
On closer inspection, the legalese in the bill has the potential to eviscerate free speech….and like NDAA, without proof…only with suspicion of “wrong-doing”. It’s all about copyright infringement. If you tick off the powers that be, and you’ve quoted someone, somewhere, saying something, you may have infringed on their copyright. As a defendant, you are not even present at the legal proceeding allowing “them” to shut you down until you prove yourself innocent.
How do they shut you down? Search engines are required to remove you from their listings. Internet Service Providers can be ordered to block access to your site. Advertising networks and payment providers can also be forced to cease doing business with you. This continues until you are proven INNOCENT. Wait – I thought it was innocent until proven guilty….oh….that was “before” the NDAA.
Read the complete article : Click Here
Please donate and support Oath Keepers mission, every little bit helps!
SUPPORT OUR BILLBOARD CAMPAIGN
Placing billboards outside of military bases to remind service members of their oath
SUPPORT OUR NASCAR CAMPAIGN
SUPPORT OUR LIBERTY TOUR
Free music concerts for the troops, with direct outreach to them about their oath
January 16th, 2012 at 10:52 am
We must be wary of any attempt of government to “protect” the Internet from “cybercrime”. It’s hardly a crime if all I have to do to gain access to inforation is to use a connection that is freely available, and without physicall violating actual property rights. Of course, the problem with government doing it, is that it’s designed to protect actual rights, and monitoring even publicly accessible information about citizens is beyond its purview.
These attempts, like the Fairness Doctrine, are designed to restrict freedom, under the guise of protection.
The computers and networks, apart from public utility lines – and we should privatize all utilities as quickly as possible – are private property, and the government has no business trying to protect us from ourselves.
Please do not give government more tools with which to restrict free speech and free trade. It’s up to us to secure our own information; In fact, cyber.
And please start setting up private networks.
February 13th, 2012 at 2:08 pm
We don’t want to forget, the president swore or affirmed an oath ” I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United Sates, and will to the best of my Ability, PRESERVE, PROTECT and DEFEND the Constitution of the United States.” Is he? OR is he attacking it, saying in the State of the Union address, and other interviews, we need a different economic system (socialism?), a different Government (Constitution), and that he will take us to a place the “Republicans” can’t take us? Both parties stink to high heaven, but that was said to further fragment and polarize Americans. One would think the worshipful media reporter could have asked,” where might that place be Mr. President? I would have thought that saying one wants to replace the document you swore allegiance to defend, would be Treason or something? Of course I would have thought the Legislators would have gotten a few million letters asking for impeachment also.
Jim
February 16th, 2012 at 1:22 pm
Please be aware Obama stated he would not sign NDAA.. How did that work out for us??