The leading supporters of legislation to attack overseas web sites that traffic in pirated entertainment say that they’re prepared to address some legislators’ concerns about potential threats to legitimate Internet businesses. “I think you’ll see some movement,” says Michael O’Leary, MPAA’s Senior Executive Vice President for Global Policy and External Affairs. But he adds that it probably won’t be enough to stop tech companies from opposing the bill — known in the House as the Stop Online Piracy Act and in the Senate as Protect IP Act. Some of them “have no intention of agreeing” to a compromise, he says, because they “want the current state of play to continue.” The comments came in a briefing that included the Directors Guild of America and the International Alliance of Theatrical and Stage Employee’s Union. They’re eager to communicate the industry’s reasons for supporting the legislation that would give federal officials the authority to block overseas web sites that sell copyrighted work without the owners’ permission. “Our opposition does not feel constrained by a need to tell the truth,” says Kathy Garmezy, DGA’s Associate Executive Director for Goverment and International Affairs. Tech companies who say that SOPA might violate civil liberties, she adds, are merely trying “to gin people up into a frenzy.”
That appears to be working. The bill has “a lot of hurdles” to overcome, O’Leary says — although he adds that “we will win this argument on the merits.” He blasted an alternative idea, which Google supports, to just police transactions that involve pirated content. “There are no (concrete) proposals,” O’Leary says. “It’s a pretext for running out the clock.” He also challenged Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) who has threatened to filibuster the legislation. “We don’t believe he has the votes” needed to keep that going, O’Leary says. The Obama administration has not officially taken a position on SOPA, but O’Leary says that Vice President Joe Biden and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have made “encouraging statements.” Garmezy says that the bill would save jobs by protecting home video sales of movies and TV shows. “That’s what digital theft destroys,” she says.


Since when do lobbyists get to “compromise?” They are not lawmakers, just the people who bribe them.
I don’t know how it is in the US, but in other countries, lobbyists do create the laws by having their lawyers draw up drafts of the legislation, that is then presented to the governments of the day. They incorporate all the changes and suggestions at their cost and hand the completed package to the rep who is bird dogging the legislation.Lots of horse trading in the changes, so having them “compromise” is maybe not big a stretch.
Without a due process court mechanism then these laws are the Digital Millennium Copyright Act on steroids where the mere whiff of infringement would cause a website to be shutdown. We know how well DMCA has helped preserve jobs. *Not*
And it would tamp down new start-ups who might not be able to afford the legal fees such a law would bring up.
It would also force internet payment systems to move off shore just like the pirate websites and casino sites previously banned.
I agree that protecting copyright is important but due process is MORE important.
Doug, you’re a perfect example of the online hysteria that erupted after blogs fear-baited the bill.
There is ZERO evidence to support what you’re saying. You’re just another Chicken Little who (probably) would rather nothing be done about piracy. It doesn’t bother you that people steal huge percentages of the content created by hard-working professionals.
The MPAA needs to be clear from this point forward. Google is Big Business here, and Google is happy to continue to support IP theft. Google any e-book title, and scores of “Free PDF” sites pop up. It’s proliferating, and Big Tech is happy to Fiddle while Content Burns.
Right, and the USA PATRIOT Act has only been used to counter terrorism. (Spoiler alert: it hasn’t).
Studios cannot continue to use the “IP theft kills jobs!” argument when they have accounts on their payroll whose sole job is to ensure that properties always appear in the red to prevent the payment of royalties to the very people they claim are losing their jobs.
“It doesn’t bother you that people steal huge percentages of the content created by hard-working professionals.”
There is no theft. It is a fallacy that media consumed this way represents a lost paying customer. Because what you are talking here is legions of media hungry, tech savvy, and most importantly POOR teenagers. They are sampling media they have no intention of ever buying (or affording). Think of it as free PR and advertising. Worked for radio: give content away for free, attract fans, capitalize on that.
So hire all the goons and lawyers and politicians you want, you can’t win this game of whack-a-mole. Be satisfied with the revenues you earn in theatres. Worked for Hollywood for decades in the Silver era. What? That’s a dead business model? One of the most expensive, and most profitable movies, ever made, made all it’s money back in theatres, and then some: “Avatar,” 2009. Piracy has and had no effect on that simple truth.
Give up media dinosaurs. The Internet is the genie out of the bottle, the game is over. You can accept the inevitable obvious truth gracefully, or you can thrash your horrible tail and gnash your reptile’s teeth… and your understanding of how the media business works circa 1988 is still headed for extinction.
Doesn’t matter how many laws you pass. It’s millions of teenagers worldwide each with the distribution reach of Bertelsmann and Time Warner circa 1988 x10,000.
You lose.
Star, you want proof of why people fear the new rules? How about Warner Bros. admitting in court that they submitted DMCA takedown notices for material they didn’t own. http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111110/10135116708/glimpse-future-under-sopa-warner-bros-admits-it-filed-many-false-takedown-notices.shtml So why should we trust them with even more power?
I agree 100%.
There is no reason for this “law” to be enacted. These criminals are dealt with for the crimes they commit. Giving a ridiculous carte blanche do ridiculous organizations like the MPAA can just by proxy steal someone’s website from them is an absolutely horrific idea. Even much more serious crimes that might actual endanger lives as opposed to IP would not deserve this sort of action.
The whole thing is absolutely absurd.
I am not sure these idiot lobbyists and lawmakers know what they are doing anyways. The foundation of the Internet is for it to be mutating so it can avoid being shut down. All these unconstitutional laws would is change the game with no beneficial result.
In terms of nefarious behavior on the Internet I would say ip theft ranks down the list way below more serious issues like Nigerian scams, identity and credit theft, child predators and many others.
That are lawmakers would put ip protection above all the rest of the issues is insane.
You are wrong. This law is akin to allowing grocery stores to blow up the street in front of someone’s house because they feel they might have shoplifted. It is insane.