I just stumbled upon this bill to censor the Internet in America. My fellow simmers. Don't let this happen. It starts like this then they take away more and more basic freedoms.

American censorship.

Video
Vimeo clip about the bill.

is this the USA created internet so we can moderate it as well thing ? i heard it a few years ago,this will pass too many lobbyst behind....controling it though will be dificult, sure,remove a blog from the net,but soon enough you will have users advertising piracy and #%&*$# on legit sites like newspaper and the like,are you gonna cut them too ?

is this part of the net neutrality legislation, or something different?

To put it simply this bill passing would mean anyone here posting a video of their simulators or games on Youtube and them playing them would face felony charges for copyright infringement for posting that video.

Basically Youtube would have no say and the government would decide what is and is not copyright material whether Youtube or anyone says it is ok to post or not.

No, this is aimed at intellectual property protection. From what I've read this bill is a poorly constructed effort.

The primary security concerns appear to hinge on enforcing DNS filtering/blacklisting, which may lead many to use untrustworthy DNS servers geographically outside US jurisdiction. Or at bare minimum, users can just type in the direct IP address and bypass DNS filtering/blacklisting altogether. It's not an unlikely risk scenario. Consider a family where a child wanting to download some music or movies illegally gets some "bootleg" DNS addresses from IRC or other sources, and with minimal skill plugs them into the household router. The parents could easily be unaware of this change, and would unknowingly face some risks using these DNS servers while doing banking or or taxes through them.

As a solution to intellectual property theft in general, I'm not certain there's much that can be actively done to combat this today. It would seem an entire generation has come to believe that free access to any commercial media is somehow a human right. Pretty much anything aimed at protecting IP is going to be opposed.

With this bill, it's easy to see why companies like Google are opposed. By making website owners responsible for policing user uploads, sites like Youtube become essentially unmanageable as they currently operate.

I can fully understand what they are trying to do but the wording of the bill is a bit to broad of a brush.

It does not distinguish enough of what it is actually trying to combat and in turn effects more than it needs to.

The "music publishing industry" is behind much of this. I am trying hard to figure out just what it is they do that requires restricting freedom of information by the government, to protect.

In exchange for fronting the cash to record performers and distribute those recordings, they get the biggest slice of the income stream of the product forever. But now, digital recording is much cheaper and more accessible, artists make most of their income from touring, and the internet has eliminated the barriers to reaching the market. Which is what brings us right back here.

The business model for the music industry is obsolete. And instead of adapting or going away, they are trying to restrict technology and information flow.


Feature films, complex video games for instance the publisher adds a good deal of value to bring the finished product together. But, recorded music not so much.

the music publishing industry attempts to enact filtering for copyright protection purposes is going to result in the loss of US centralization of the internet

those of you in the US, if you value your country being at the center of internet technology you'll oppose this bill vehemently - otherwise you'll lose an invaluable technological asset soon.

While I do not claim this bill is anything good, I would like a solid argument on why the above statement is actually true.

In the USA, property rights are held in very high regard. Yet, if I allow other people to store stolen property in my home, I will be open to criminal proceedings. How does a website which allows users to store "stolen goods" facing the same reality threaten freedom?

Within the great civic freedom the USA, if I serve as a contact man directing others where to go to trade in stolen property I may face criminal proceedings. How does a search engine facing risks for directing users to websites where they can trade in "stolen property" threaten freedom?