House Kills SOPA 495
An anonymous reader writes "In a surprise move, Representative Eric Cantor (R-VA) announced that he will stop all action on SOPA, effectively killing the bill. This move was most likely due to the huge online protest and the White House threatening to veto the bill if it had passed. But don't celebrate yet. PIPA (the Senate's version of SOPA) is still up for consideration."
Internet wins (Score:5, Insightful)
Absolutely (Score:5, Funny)
All these posts on Slashdot about how bad the bill is really made a difference!
Re:Absolutely (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Noted (Score:5, Insightful)
sopa is delayed (Score:5, Informative)
SOPA IS DELAYED not cancelled they didn't kill it they are posturing and trying to figure out what to change about the bill before they have hearings on the bill
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120113/23560217407/sopa-delayed-cantor-promises-it-wont-be-brought-to-floor-until-issues-are-addressed.shtml [techdirt.com]
Re:sopa is delayed (Score:5, Insightful)
What scares me most is having this undead piece of rancid pig feces laying around, is that some time over the next year a special committee will convene and railroad this thing through in the dark of night while nobody is looking or can respond to it. Our legislature has in recent years done a number of dirty deeds in the middle of the night to avoid notice, prevent obstruction and make evil corporate masters happy.
I want a stake through this things heart, its head removed and a bucket of holy water dowsed on it.
Re:Making sure it stays dead (Score:5, Insightful)
The way to make sure this kind of law does not rise from the dead like a zombie in a bad horror movie is to punish the lawmakers who co-sponsored it. If you live in a state or district where your congressman/senator put his name on the respective bills (SOPA or PIPA), write them and tell them you will support/campaign for/contribute to their opponent, even if the bills are dead, just because they were stupid enough to ever think it was a good idea and put their name to it.
If there is one thing they fear more than their desire for campaign funds, it's getting voted out of office. So make this a "vote you out of office" issue, so the next time the entertainment industry comes knocking (and they will), the legislator will tell them to go away.
On the other hand, if you happen to live where your representative was opposed to the bill, thank them for doing it, and tell them you will to everything you can to support them in the next election.
To some degree, it does not matter if you actually do work for their opponent or them or the other stuff, cause likely some staffer will just tally your opinion in a spreadsheet, but you want to show up in the column of "very strongly against" the next time this shows up. They do pay attention to the aggregate opinions.
Re:Making sure it stays dead (Score:5, Interesting)
If there is one thing they fear more than their desire for campaign funds, it's getting voted out of office.
Unfortunately, they aren't as afraid of that as you would like to believe [opensecrets.org].
Re:Absolutely (Score:5, Insightful)
All these posts on Slashdot about how bad the bill is really made a difference!
True. This really is one of the major think-tanks of information science policy. You may have meant it as a joke, and gotten modded so, but when it comes to sober and deliberative analysis of the effects of information science law, I don't think it gets a whole lot better than this. We are clearly stronger on information science policy than Congress, the BSA, or most of the major think-tanks in D.C. When we forge opinions here, they are based not on the highest bidder but on the strongest position (with a bit of an anti-authoritarian bent, admittedly). If I post something that is emotional and not well-founded, I get kicked in the jewels pretty soundly (more often than I'd like to admit). When we take the resulting theories out to the world, they are treated with respect because they have been tempered in the heated debates that happen right here. This is not far off from the new-media Federalist Papers.
The fact that we joke and rant and argue does not mean we are not getting the job done. It is possible that American Democracy has no future -- corruption may be unstoppable -- but if it has a future, this is what it looks like.
Slashdot: Serious Business (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Absolutely (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Absolutely (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Absolutely (Score:4, Interesting)
I think you hit on some good points here.
Slashdot is a totally different environment than a professional setting: there are CEOs, engineers, high school kids, lawyers, etc.. all here posting their thoughts. They all get lumped into the same bin of comments and moderated without regard to those unseen traits (at least, in theory). One day I might mod someone +1 insightful and the next day -1 troll. I don't risk losing my job by doing so. No one opinion is higher than the others, so there's nobody to target with bribes (well, other than the people selecting the stories to comment on). I'm sure there are groups on /. that moderate certain opinions down which is an issue. Still, I think this site is pointed in the right direction at least.
Re:Absolutely (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Internet wins... (Score:5, Informative)
But not in the way many slashdotters might think.
Little appreciated here on Slashdot is the fact that SOPA was as unpopular on the right side of the spectrum as it was on the left. Many conservatives and libertarians rightly see SOPA has a HUGE power grab, and massive step towards an even more centralized government.
Eric Cantor is very tied in with the Conservative Blogosphere and with conservative internet "consciousness". As such he promised early on to do his best to kill SOPA.
It appears that he has kept his promise. Well Done Mr. Cantor. Well Done.
Re:Internet wins... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
SOPA was as unpopular on the right side of the spectrum as it was on the left
Really? It sure looks like the right wing politicians in our government -- which includes almost all the politicians in Washington (don't kid yourself; we live in a very right-wing age) -- were highly supportive of SOPA. Why would they not be? They give hand-outs to corporations all the time, and they rarely pause to think about the effect on our civil liberties. It was only because of the libertarian element of the Republican party that this bill was shelved; there are just enough libertarians to cre
Re:Internet wins... (Score:5, Informative)
You can blame both sides for this one - sure it was introduced by House Judiciary leader Lamar Smith, a Republican, but co-sponsors include Democrats Howard Berman, John Conyers, and Ted Deutch, amongst others. You would think someone on a Judiciary committee could write a bill that wouldn't trample all over first amendment rights, but Lamar Smith has that one down to an art. This is at least the third piece of legislation I know of that he has sponsored that has been tossed out over first amendment concerns.
Many businesses strongly supported SOPA, including Ford, Pfizer, the BSA, the ESA, NBC, Go Daddy, the MPAA, the RIAA... the list goes on. The problem is, it was business friendly to a fault, giving copyright holders unprecedented power to shut down sites, whether they were violating copyright or not and without requiring proof. There was no way this would ever pass a legal battle in court - it was killed as it needed to be. At least this one was killed before it got to court - congress has done a good job of passing these things and then having them immediately killed.
Now maybe we can wait for the China to bully us by threatening sanctions in the same way we bullied Spain...
Re:Internet wins... (Score:5, Insightful)
it was introduced by House Judiciary leader Lamar Smith, a Republican, but co-sponsors include Democrats Howard Berman, John Conyers, and Ted Deutch, amongst others
You are apparently operating under the assumption that the Democrats are not on the same side of the political spectrum as the Republicans. The Democrats have shifted so far to the right that by now the best you can get is a centrist. The few democrats that linger on the left side of the spectrum are on the fringe.
Re:Internet wins... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Internet wins... (Score:5, Insightful)
No.
We'd call it the Moderate Right. :-/
Re:Internet wins... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Internet wins... (Score:5, Informative)
SOPA Is very much a right-wing bill. What could be more right-wing than attacking a system where anyone can communicate equally, regardless of where they fit into the hierarchy of society? The point of SOPA is to curb the free and open nature of the Internet and to reinvigorate the power of established corporations and government agencies -- sounds very right-wing to me."
For some definition of "right-wing" that is so broad as to be mostly useless. (Unless your point is, "what's considered 'left' in the US would be viewed as center-right anywhere else".) It's a "corporatist" bill, and most American Senators and Representatives are in the pocket of corporations, including many of those who pass for "left-wing". The entertainment industry is the primary proponent of this bill. Among the sponsors of the (PIPA) bill in the Senate you'll find such "liberals" and proponents of 'net neutrality as Al Franken (who last year was keynote speaker at Netroots Nation, but I'll bet he has "schedule conflicts" that prevent going to it this year).
Virtually everybody in Washington ("right" or "left", Obama or Bush) wants to keep extending the power of the government, witness the recent vote to extend the "Patriot" act.
Re:Internet wins... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes I know that it is fashionable to describe everything that falls short of libertarianism "socialist," but there is nothing socialist about SOPA, and socialism is not the be-all and end-all of left wing politics.
Re:Internet wins... (Score:5, Insightful)
And I think it can be argued equally as strongly that the end game to capitalism is fascism. Especially when you have large corporations that more or less have reached critical mass, and are no longer accountable to the people.
Re:Internet wins... (Score:5, Insightful)
I know this will blow your mind, but maybe left vs. right isn't the appropriate fight here. Most of us Americans are hung up on it, but maybe it doesn't always apply as much as you would think it would.
The second axis of the political world is corpratism, and corporatism is heavily represnted in both parties. Look at the names of the people pushing this bill. It has nothing to do with party. It had to do with the hugest corporate consitutencies pushing dollars into politician's pockets.
The corporation patches on their suits may be slightly different, but BOTH parties are corporatist. Stop thinking everything is left vs. right or pretty soon there won't be any debate because there will be ONE group in charge and you'll be against the wall if you say you don't like it.
Corporatism aka right wing politics (Score:4, Interesting)
It is the difference between the Internet with its peer-to-peer nature, and the cable TV system with its hierarchy.
Re:Corporatism aka right wing politics (Score:5, Informative)
The mistake you are making is thinking that the Democrats are really left-wing. They are, at best, moderates, with left-leaning tendencies on certain social issues.
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Internet wins... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Internet wins... (Score:5, Informative)
or pretty soon there won't be any debate
What do you mean "pretty soon"?
There is currently no meaningful debate in American politics, only posturing on superficial or social issues and very strong bi-partisan agreement on:
- Less civil liberties, more state surveillance (NDAA, warrantless wiretapping etc.)
- Interventionist foreign policy, supported by an over-sized military-industrial complex
- Unconditional support for Wall Street (no meaningful regulation)
- Corporate interests always take precedence/outweigh individual citizens' rights and well being
- A political system with a high barrier of entry (unchecked campaign spending, no representation for small parties)
Re:Internet wins... (Score:4, Interesting)
So why don't We The People start labelling our "representatives" in government as either "Corporatists" or alternative stances? If enough people could start labelling groups of politicians I suspect it could redraw party lines and ditch what we call Democrat/Republican. Let's label them appropriately and make it stick.
Re:Internet wins... (Score:4, Insightful)
Then why did it have the support of MOST of the republicans?
Hell even many of the current republican presidential candidates have voiced their support for SOPA.
Re:Internet wins... (Score:5, Funny)
No. Just because you know a swearword, it does not fit in every situation.
According to your definition, Spain at the time of Charles V was socialist.
Re: (Score:3)
Political Compass (Score:5, Interesting)
But not in the way many slashdotters might think.
Little appreciated here on Slashdot is the fact that SOPA was as unpopular on the right side of the spectrum as it was on the left.
It's more accurate to model political affiliation in 2 dimensions [1], authoritarian/liberal vs. conservative/progressive. If you look at Congress, the problem is that most elected representatives on both sides of the spectrum are authoritarian despite whether they're conservative or progressive... meaning there are almost no true liberals (free love AND free trade, ie, left-libertarians) representing us (one could say they don't represent the people anymore).
By this measure, SOPA was a full-on authoritarian bill. It was popular in DC, because it catered to big business which loves authoritarian legislation (removes uncertainty and easy to game) and it was fully business friendly.
It also highlights the fact that the Internet as it currently stands is a true bastion of liberalism. For all it's warts and dangers, it is a bulwark against the 1984-style authoritarian singularity. We must defend it.
[1] http://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2 [politicalcompass.org]
Re:Internet wins... (Score:5, Informative)
How can a single representative kill the bill?
Because he's the House Majority Leader [wikipedia.org].
Why is a Jew in such a powerful position?
Because it's America, where even an Anonymous race-baiting Cracker such as your own fine self can get elected to Federal office.
Re:Internet wins... (Score:5, Funny)
Why is a Jew in such a powerful position?
Because the global zionist cryptarchy decided that he'd make a good frontman, obviously.
Well, either that or he managed to persuade more of the electorate to vote for him than anyone else in his constituency.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Not yet. TFA states "However, it isn't quite time yet to celebrate, as PIPA(the Senate's version of SOPA) is still up for consideration.
[...]
PIPA is less well known than SOPA, but the provisions are basicly the same. It still includes the same DNS blocking and censoring system that the original SOPA did, just without the SOPA name. There are around 40 co-sponsors of the bill in the Senate so far, with no word on how many senators support the bill in addition to that."
Which Senators co-sponsered PIPA?
Re:Internet wins (Score:5, Insightful)
True, but the War of Rights with never end.
Today a battle was won.
what's more, people from all different sides came together to make this happen.
Enjoy the moment.
Remember the day.
and yes, tomorrow it all starts all over again.
but we'll deal with that tomorrow.
Re:Internet wins (Score:5, Insightful)
"and yes, tomorrow it all starts all over again.
but we'll deal with that tomorrow."
It's already started. PIPA and STOP are both SOPA renamed. They are not "enjoying the moment", they are 2 steps ahead of us already.
Re:Internet wins (Score:5, Insightful)
Now you know why they want to shut down the Internet!
Let's even presume they shut down the Senate version.
How can we stop the "sneak it in later" effect?
Re: (Score:3)
Well, if the bill has been "tabled" that essentially stops that option. At least, that's my understanding of it. It COULD be brought back, but not quietly.
Of course, the best prescription for those attacks of late night bill passing that Congress occasionally has are frequent purges of sitting politicians and regular ingestion of fresh people committed to smaller, more limited government. And now I'll stop with the medical analogy because it's beginning to g
Re:It COULD be brought back (Score:5, Insightful)
In saner years you'd be right that it would be stopped. But there's something wrong this time - the push for the bill vs the content was so strong, the strongest I've seen in years. It's beyond "they got caught" - of course they knew they'd be hated for it. But they'd already stated "we want to pass this anyway despite your opposition". So if you'll allow me to go all Monty Python, "it's not dead, it's resting!" Let's assume the senate version rests too.
This situation reeks of a Meta-Campaign. So they'll either rename it, or worse, split the components among other bills so that there's nothing to rally against.
Try this - they're introducing it this time before this election round. Then once the people are re-elected "now they have nothing to lose" so they'll resurrect it next year. Or some such variations on a theme. The point is, just because it's sleeping, it's definitely going to wake up. Except for some surprise fallout, thousands of companies were drooling at how much fun power they stood to gain from this.
Re: (Score:3)
They'll dust this thing off and pass it during the lame duck session after the election.
Re:Internet wins (Score:5, Insightful)
Holy crap (Score:5, Funny)
Do you mean to tell me to tell me that in 2012 the government is actually listening to the will of the people? Man, the world really IS going to end!
Re:Holy crap (Score:5, Insightful)
[sarcasm]You wouldn't vote against kittens would you?[/sarcasm]
Re:Holy crap (Score:5, Funny)
I doubt our will has anything to do with it. They can always just tack on the junk that didn't go through this time on some spending bill for homeless shelters and kittens.
But those kittens NEED copyright protection NOW!
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Holy crap (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Holy crap (Score:5, Interesting)
The presidency, a third of the Senate and the entire House are all up for election this year... may have something to do with it.
Re:Holy crap (Score:4, Interesting)
Now, let's see what happens with PIPA.
Re:timing of this shelving is just perfect (Score:4, Insightful)
It's January 18 right? So they can still do the campaign, just replace the letters to read PIPA ... unless the Senate version gets pulled tomorrow, also in time to be ahead of the protests.
(Do we still do the protests? Or will people whine "well we already won, so why bother protesting?")
Re: (Score:3)
Most people still have no idea what SOPA is
49 out of 50 times, you're correct. However, this bill started receiving coverage in national news outlets, and not just tech-related ones. Granted, some of what was covered wasn't quite accurate, but at least it was getting some national media coverage on the "this is bad" side of things.
Nah (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Nah (Score:5, Insightful)
They just got caught. They'll try again when people are distracted by something else.
Exactly. Let's not declare victory yet- This is nothing but a strategic retreat.
The intent is still there, they just met enough resistance that they figured it was prudent to fall back and re-group.
With a number of high-volume sites going black on the 18th and growing media attention, public awareness might have approached a level that SOPA proponents weren't comfortable with- If they pull the target of the protest out of harm's way before the 18th, it will reduce the impact of the protest. Now, when the 18th rolls around, congress can say "Hey! We heard you, realized SOPA was a bad idea, and have pulled it from the docket, so there's really nothing to get upset about.".
We need to stay vigilant... It's likely that the bill will be reintroduced with subtler language, or that SOPA-like riders will be introduced into other legislation, or who knows what. The entertainment industry has invested too much cash in the Congressional vending machine to walk away from this without a return.
Re:Holy crap (Score:5, Insightful)
No, they're just listening to a different group of corporations for a while. If Google, Amazon, and Facebook were in favor of this, the people wouldn't stand a chance.
Re: (Score:3)
Don't cheer too quickly. They're probably going to resurrect SOPA under another name in a few months, but attach it to a big and critical military spending bill. Thus it will pass into law, because nobody wants to vote against it, and be accused of playing into the hands of terrorists.
Re:Holy crap (Score:5, Funny)
Don't your soldiers scream "FOR THE EMPRAH" already when they go into battle?
Used to, but that got dropped after Cheney left the White House.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
It's just that SOPA sounds like a disease. In six months this bill will be back named:
Just
Eliminate
Super
Underwhelming
Security
No politician is going want to be accused of voting to kill that bill.
Next election season: "My esteemed opponent, Senator Rothstein, a JEW, voted to kill Jesus."
Hurray. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Now just need to do something about PIPA, and we can breathe a nice sigh of relief (for a while)
I don't think it works that way. See, politicians are the masters of compromise. They gave up on SOPA because of pressure from the public and/or internet corporations, so they both are somewhat happy now and will support them for the elections, and now they almost have to appease big media by passing other laws.
When was the last time you've seen more that one politician take a serious stand on something? It's small concessions all around that keeps them in office.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Why would the US want to do something about Pipa? I mean, she was so hot at the royal wedding in that dress and... Oh... You meant the BILL..
Nevermind.
Holy Cats! (Score:3)
Keep it Up (Score:5, Informative)
CALL YOUR SENATORS!!
Re:Keep it Up (Score:5, Informative)
Official listing of contact info (mailing address, phone numbers, and web e-mail) for US Senators:
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm [senate.gov]
Since any bill would have to pass both houses, and since the Representatives from your state should also have some influence on the Senators from your state you may want to contact them too:
http://www.house.gov/representatives/ [house.gov]
Re:Keep it Up (Score:4, Funny)
The larger issue... (Score:5, Insightful)
The people who brought the bill in the first place, are still active; and still receiving funding. More fundamental provisions are called for, to ensure such bills are not tabled in the first place.
Re:The larger issue... (Score:4, Interesting)
Then How about a kickstarter campaign to fund lobbying against these kind of things?
So you're going to discourage politicians from taking money from the IP Barons to pass stupid laws by... giving them money?
If I was a a politician I'd think that was double-payday; I could take money from the IP Barons to put forward stupid laws and then take even more money from the anti-IP lobbyists to vote against it. In fact, I'd be pushing as many stupid laws as I possibly could, to increase the amount of money people would give me for voting against them.
It's like paying software developers based on the number of bugs they fix... while allowing them to introduce as many bugs as they want.
Re: (Score:3)
We would fix each others bugs.
You make is sound like gaming a system is unethical. If a system is broken the quickest way to get it fixed is to exploit the failure until someone with authority to change it cries.
How to do that with our current government is an exercise left to the reader.
I think we are currently waiting for leadership of China to start crying (about how screwed they have been by the currency peg).
Re: (Score:3)
Well if it's a remnant from British rule then there's a fair chance Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Pakistan, and half of Africa use that terminology too.
But out of interest, what is the reasoning behind the American interpretation of tabling? The British interpretation stems from the idea that tabling a bill, means you're putting it on the table for discussion.
They're using a different table? :)
Maybe Americans can only discuss bills if they're waving them around wildly and yelling at one another? Which, to be fair, sounds a lot like Canadian parliamentary 'discussions' as well...dignity and politics (in these two countries, anyway) seem to be on divergent courses in the last 50 years...
Source? (Score:5, Insightful)
Is anyone else reporting that SOPA is dead?
Re:Source? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Not really:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2012_01/putting_sopa_on_a_shelf034765.php [washingtonmonthly.com]
Counterattack. (Score:5, Insightful)
google, amazon, ebay et al - its their task. they need to start buying congressmen/senators, and start buying laws, now. Because thats how the capitalist democracies work.
Re:Counterattack. (Score:5, Insightful)
google, amazon, ebay et al - its their task. they need to start buying congressmen/senators, and start buying laws, now.
The fact that I can agree with you makes me hate our "democracy" even more.
Be Vigilant (Score:5, Informative)
Whats going on? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm curious whats actually going on? So, distract the populace with a ridiculous bill, meanwhile push thru and organize... what, the war on Iran, or prepare for the collapse and dissolution of Euroland, or maybe its time for the Argentine economy to collapse again, or ... My point is you ram thru an over the top #1 story to overshadow the #2 story, so what is currently the #2 story?
Re: (Score:3)
I think you expect a little too much organization on the part of our political masters. They do try to manage the news cycle, but they can't predict exactly what the stories will be. I think they're honestly astonished that people actually care about this issue.
Shelved, not killed (Score:4, Informative)
The blogger is a bit overenthusiastic at the bill behing shelved. It's far from dead.
In response... (Score:3)
I wonder if the entertainment industry will announce a pro-SOPA blackout in response.
Imagine the howls of anguish if The Hobbit was delayed for a few months :-)
Examiner article is misleading (Score:5, Informative)
I recommend an article [cnet.com] that has actual quotes from Darrell Issa (the person who is talking to the press about this). The bill is on hold until the wording is changed in the bill so more people agree with it.
Opening 2 paragraphs from the cnet article:
The latest string of setbacks for supporters of the bills came Saturday when Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), chairman of the Oversight committee in the U.S. House of Representatives, said that he was promised by Majority leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) that a vote on the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) will not occur "unless there is consensus on the bill."
"While I remain concerned about Senate action on the Protect IP Act [a similar bill to SOPA introduced into the Senate last year], I am confident that flawed legislation will not be taken up by this House," Issa said in a statement, according to the blog The Hill. "Majority Leader Cantor has assured me that we will continue to work to address outstanding concerns and work to build consensus prior to any antipiracy legislation coming before the House for a vote."
Obama's advisors came out against it (Score:4, Informative)
By the way, one of my former co-workers said that he did contact his representative in Congress. He did not say who his representative was (most likely it's a Republican) but he said that it was clear that his representative really did not understand the bill at all and was framing it in the simplistic "Let's stop evil job stealing piracy!" terms that the entertainment industry has used to sell it to Congress.
Internet enables Democracy? (Score:3)
Lamar Smith still needs to lose his job over this. (Score:5, Informative)
This is good. The next step is to keep Lamar Smith from getting re-elected. Right now he's running unopposed for the republican nomination in a district that includes parts of Austin, a very techie town. With the right amount of national support for "Anybody but Lamar Smith" he can and should lose his seat over this.
Re:Lamar Smith still needs to lose his job over th (Score:4, Interesting)
The lack of replies and tepid moderation for your comment is indicative of why the political system is broken: people barely care enough to complain, and when told the crisis is over they don't punish the politicians who are working against them.
Fun fact (Score:3)
Re:Sopa (Score:5, Informative)
was*
Re:Sopa (Score:5, Funny)
Sopa is a piece of shit!
Ha, I see what you did there:
SOPA reversed is APOS, which stands for A Piece Of Shit.
Clever, even if you didn't intend it to be.
Re:Sopa (Score:5, Informative)
SOPA reversed is APOS, which stands for A Piece Of Shit.
Even more clever, "Sopa" in Swedish means trash.
Re:Sopa (Score:5, Funny)
This is the story of two brand names for politicians. Republicans, and Democrats. These are the Republicans, and these are the Democrats.
In last week's episode, the Democratic President said he didn't want to sign it, but didn't want to veto it either, so he said he'd sign it with reservations, or with a sticky note saying he didn't like it but he'd sign it anyway. And the Republican guy who doesn't look like a turtle said he was going to stop all activity on the bill, effectively killing SOPA. Now it's the Senate's turn, with a Democrat from MPAA, and a Republican who looks like a turtle. Will they pass PIPA? Will it pass with a veto-proof majority? Does it have to get a veto-proof majority because the President never said anything about having problems with PIPA instead of SOPA? And aren't we all kinda surprised and relieved to find our elected representatives listening to us, even if only because it's an election year?
Confused yet? You won't be, after this week's episode of... Soap! [wikipedia.org]
Re:Sopa (Score:4, Insightful)
It doesn't matter if it passes with 100 votes in the Senate, if it's DOA in the House.
It won't see the President's desk.
They'll pass it later. (Score:4, Interesting)
It won't see the president's desk yet.
Criminalization of copyright has been expanding since 1982. (Well, earlier, but at a slower pace before that.)
1890s - Congress criminalizes copyright violations of dramatic works by travelling street performers.
There were also changes in 1908, 1982, 1992 (software companies push for broader criminalization), 1997 (NET act), 1998 (DMCA), etc...
This is on the back-burner because of mobilized opposition. They'll carve out a compromise between the ISPs and Search providers on the one hand and big media on the other, and we'll get more complex legislation that has a similar effect inside of two years.
Re:Sopa (Score:4, Funny)
SOPA is the Sons Of the Patriots Act. It's designed so that information damaging to the interests of the Patriots can be
expunged from the web. Soon only SOP-compliant computer equipment will be available.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Sopa (Score:5, Funny)
So... the same as Spanish.
Re: (Score:3)
something like 95% of all proposed laws never see the light of day and are killed in committee. there are all kinds of crazy laws proposed every day and this is what congress is for
Re:Got a reliable source? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Got a reliable source? (Score:5, Informative)
go to www.house.gov and see for yourself. almost everything congress does is public record and recorded