Leahy praises Obama administration for censorship

Quantum Windbag

Gold Member
May 9, 2010
58,308
5,099
245
It really would be kind of funny to watch the US government congratulate itself for censorship of websites if it wasn't just kind of sad. At a Senate Judiciary committee hearing on intellectual property issues, Senator Patrick Leahy (top 3 campaign contribution sources: lawyers, entertainment industry, lobbyists -- you can't make this stuff up) praised administration officials for censoring websites based on questionable accusations from an entertainment industry who seems to think that their own content creators are running "pirate" websites.

Of course, Leahy apparently doesn't recognize the irony of condemning internet censorship in other countries while praising it at home when it benefits his biggest campaign contributors.

The same hearing gave ICE assistant director Erik Barnett one more chance to declare victory, though I note with some amusement that the text of Barnett's speech this time leaves out the bogus claim that no sites are challenging the seizures. Apparently he's realized that some people might call him on it when he blatantly misrepresents reality.

Either way, none of this dog and pony show is much of a surprise. You certainly wouldn't expect Senator Leahy to call one of the people who had their sites illegally seized to hear their side of the story. I mean, that might be embarrassing to actually hear that there's more than one side to this. He might have to hear about how the content creators themselves sent the content in question to these sites, and how the ICE affidavit to seize them misstated the facts of whether or not the content was infringing. He might have to hear how ICE didn't even ask the actual copyright holders, in most cases. He might have to hear how ICE doesn't seem to understand the technology, and doesn't seem to understand the difference between linking and distribution. He doesn't have to hear about how hardworking people who helped promote new artists and build their careers now live in fear of their own government. He doesn't have to hear about how these people are afraid to speak out, because the Justice Department has told them that if they do, they may face criminal charges.

Senator Leahy Praises US Gov't Censorship Of Websites As ICE Takes Another Victory Lap | Techdirt
 
Here is a more objective and accurate summary of the issue than the hysterical opinion piece found in the OP. The bill in question is currently on hold pending consideration of possible civil rights issues.

Wyden blocks online copyright bill
By Gautham Nagesh - 05/26/11 05:10 PM ET

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) said he is placing a hold on the controversial online piracy bill passed by the Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday that would expand the government's authority to seize websites that link to pirated or counterfeit content.

"I understand and agree with the goal of the legislation, to protect intellectual property and combat commerce in counterfeit goods, but I am not willing to muzzle speech and stifle innovation and economic growth to achieve this objective," Wyden said, arguing the bill takes an "overreaching approach to policing the Internet when a more balanced and targeted approach would be more effective."

"The collateral damage of this approach is speech, innovation and the very integrity of the Internet."

The Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act, or PROTECT IP Act, is strongly supported by the music, film, software, gaming and publishing industries, which lose billions of dollars in revenue each year to online piracy.

It authorizes the Justice Department to file a civil action against the registrant or owner of a domain names dedicated to infringing activities. If the court issues a cease-and-desist order against the rogue website, the Justice Department can serve that court order on third parties, including Internet service providers, payment processors, online advertising network providers and search engines.

Those firms would have to take appropriate action to either prevent access to the infringing site (in the case of an Internet service provider or search engine), or cease doing business with the Internet site (in the case of a payment processor or advertising network).

Rights holders who are the victim of infringement can bring a similar action against a rogue site, whether domestic or foreign. That court order can be served on payment processors and online advertising networks to cut off the financial viability of the criminal activity.

“Copyright infringement and the sale of counterfeit goods can cost American businesses billions of dollars, and result in hundreds of thousands of lost jobs,” said Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), who authored the bill and a predecessor that passed the committee last year, upon the bill's passage.

“Protecting intellectual property is not uniquely a Democratic or Republican priority — it is a bipartisan priority.”

“Today the Judiciary Committee took an important step in protecting online intellectual property rights. The Internet is not a lawless free-for-all where anything goes,” said Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah). “The Constitution protects both property and speech, both online and off.”

But free speech advocates argue the bill gives the government too much power to take down sites and could amount to censorship of the Internet, as well as do little to deter piracy.

"At a time when U.S. businesses are increasingly confronted with barriers to Internet trade and censorship abroad, a government committed to Internet openness should not be in the business of blacklisting Internet sites," said Computer and Communications Industry Association President and CEO Ed Black.

"We are disappointed that the Senate Judiciary Committee today approved legislation that will threaten the security and global functioning of the Internet, and opens the door to nuisance lawsuits while doing little if anything to curb the issues of international source of illegal downloads the bill seeks to address," said Public Knowledge deputy legal director Sherwin Siy.

The bill also encourages voluntary action by Internet firms that have evidence a rogue website is trafficking in counterfeit prescription drugs. In order for it to reach the floor Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) would have to call for cloture, which requires 60 votes.

Wyden blocks online copyright bill - The Hill's Hillicon Valley

The bill has yet to reach the Senate floor, to call it ‘censorship’ is misleading at best.
 
Here is a more objective and accurate summary of the issue than the hysterical opinion piece found in the OP. The bill in question is currently on hold pending consideration of possible civil rights issues.

Wyden blocks online copyright bill
By Gautham Nagesh - 05/26/11 05:10 PM ET

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) said he is placing a hold on the controversial online piracy bill passed by the Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday that would expand the government's authority to seize websites that link to pirated or counterfeit content.

"I understand and agree with the goal of the legislation, to protect intellectual property and combat commerce in counterfeit goods, but I am not willing to muzzle speech and stifle innovation and economic growth to achieve this objective," Wyden said, arguing the bill takes an "overreaching approach to policing the Internet when a more balanced and targeted approach would be more effective."

"The collateral damage of this approach is speech, innovation and the very integrity of the Internet."

The Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act, or PROTECT IP Act, is strongly supported by the music, film, software, gaming and publishing industries, which lose billions of dollars in revenue each year to online piracy.

It authorizes the Justice Department to file a civil action against the registrant or owner of a domain names dedicated to infringing activities. If the court issues a cease-and-desist order against the rogue website, the Justice Department can serve that court order on third parties, including Internet service providers, payment processors, online advertising network providers and search engines.

Those firms would have to take appropriate action to either prevent access to the infringing site (in the case of an Internet service provider or search engine), or cease doing business with the Internet site (in the case of a payment processor or advertising network).

Rights holders who are the victim of infringement can bring a similar action against a rogue site, whether domestic or foreign. That court order can be served on payment processors and online advertising networks to cut off the financial viability of the criminal activity.

“Copyright infringement and the sale of counterfeit goods can cost American businesses billions of dollars, and result in hundreds of thousands of lost jobs,” said Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), who authored the bill and a predecessor that passed the committee last year, upon the bill's passage.

“Protecting intellectual property is not uniquely a Democratic or Republican priority — it is a bipartisan priority.”

“Today the Judiciary Committee took an important step in protecting online intellectual property rights. The Internet is not a lawless free-for-all where anything goes,” said Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah). “The Constitution protects both property and speech, both online and off.”

But free speech advocates argue the bill gives the government too much power to take down sites and could amount to censorship of the Internet, as well as do little to deter piracy.

"At a time when U.S. businesses are increasingly confronted with barriers to Internet trade and censorship abroad, a government committed to Internet openness should not be in the business of blacklisting Internet sites," said Computer and Communications Industry Association President and CEO Ed Black.

"We are disappointed that the Senate Judiciary Committee today approved legislation that will threaten the security and global functioning of the Internet, and opens the door to nuisance lawsuits while doing little if anything to curb the issues of international source of illegal downloads the bill seeks to address," said Public Knowledge deputy legal director Sherwin Siy.

The bill also encourages voluntary action by Internet firms that have evidence a rogue website is trafficking in counterfeit prescription drugs. In order for it to reach the floor Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) would have to call for cloture, which requires 60 votes.

Wyden blocks online copyright bill - The Hill's Hillicon Valley
The bill has yet to reach the Senate floor, to call it ‘censorship’ is misleading at best.

I did not post about the bill, I posted about an idiot Senator who takes donations from corporations and then praises the government for pulling down sites put up by artists. If you want to address that, feel free. If you want to talk about an ill conceived and possibly unconstitutional bill I can destroy you there also.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top