Congressional SOPA hearings: no opponents of the bill allowed

Discuss

19 Responses to “Congressional SOPA hearings: no opponents of the bill allowed”

  1. jameslosey says:

    Witness list includes representative from Google but a voice on human rights is noticeably absent for such dangerous legislation. http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/hear_11162011.html

  2. tempo says:

    Google is considered an opponent to SOPA.

  3. JM Solé says:

    Being from Chile, I wonder what kind of impact this law will have on other countries.

  4. Mordicai says:

    Probably because they’d pirate the congressional hearing!  Hackers!  Y2K!  The Matrix!

  5. Thad Boyd says:

    “Irony Alert: The House is holding hearings on sweeping Internet censorship legislation this week — and it’s censoring the opposition!”

    That’s actually the exact opposite of irony.

  6. Kodiang says:

    Funny USA supposedly the most democratic country in the USA but almost all their lawmakers are in the pockets of big corporations.
    Hell Americans, just vote those idiots out of office or better still make a law that says all corporate contributions to be treated as bribery and then start jailing all those congressmen and those billion dollar CEOs

  7. Kaibaman says:

    So Congress is willing to make this a One Sided Deal! WHAT THE FUCK!? IF THIS DOESN’T PROOF OUR POLITICIANS ARE BOUGHT I DON’T KNOW WHAT WILL!

  8. Prokofy says:

    What, Google’s a struggling scrappy nonprofit that can’t lobby, Cory? Really?

    As for “human rights,” that’s silly. There isn’t any censorship involved in protecting intellectual property, which is the basis for the fulfillment of many rights.

    thank God for Andrew Keen, he’s truly done a public service here:

    http://techcrunch.com/2011/11/14/death-internet-exaggerated/

    • Baldhead says:

      You seem to have failed to notice that the language of the bill, while apparently intended to protect intellectual property, could easily be used for censorship purposes. After all, if you can get a website blocked on merely an accusation of IP violation, then all you need to do is accuse someone who disagrees with you of posting a Harry Potter Torrent on their site, and goodbye opposition site. There is nothing in the bill that would stop or even discourage that sort of behaviour.

    • Star Jonestown says:

      You’re absolutely correct, Prokofy.  

      This is just more hysteria.  No one has been “censored”.  Why are 90% of the articles written about this law such panic-instilling bullsh*t?  

      I recently asked that of a different tech blog, who admitted, “Hyperbole is effective.”  

  9. Silver Fang says:

    Isn’t it unconstitutional for them to pass this bill without opponents being able to testify against it?

  10. Note that no country in the world and no coalition of countries (like the EU) will accept SOPA.

    The US is claiming jurisdiction over things that are not theirs. Doing what the US does with SOPA is a direct challenge to the sovereignty of everybody else.

    There are only two possible outcomes of this:
    1) They do not go ahead with SOPA
    2) The world will fracture the DNS system and the routing working group and the US will be cut off, left to regulate their remaining splinter of what used to be the common internet. Dismayed with the regional splinters technologists, enterpreneteurs and netizens will create a variety of ad-hoc darknets one of which will eventually be favored by most and the last traces of what used to be the old, attackable, regulated internet will be gone and will be replaced by a unregulatable termite-mound of protocols, p2p communication and networks.

Leave a Reply