While your post appeared on another thread, it is very appropriate and important to bring *this* issue to your attention.
This article actually speaks to your points even better.
I am not a ‘serial pinger’ on FR, but I wanted to share this memo written by Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/75153093/Tribe-Legis-Memo-on-SOPA-12-6-11-1
Some excerpts that will be used by political activists to shut down opposing viewpoints and shutdown FR eventually:
• The notice-and-termination procedure of Section 103(a) runs afoul of the “prior
restraint” doctrine, because it delegates to a private party the power to suppress speech without
prior notice and a judicial hearing. This provision of the bill would give complaining parties the
power to stop online advertisers and credit card processors from doing business with a website,
merely by filing a unilateral notice accusing the site of being “dedicated to theft of U.S.
property” – even if no court has actually found any infringement.
(IMAGINE HOW THAT WILL BE ABUSED BY MARXIST AGITPROP ORGANIZERS)
• To compound the problem, SOPA provides that a complaining party can file a notice
alleging that it is harmed by the activities occurring on the site “
or portion thereof
.”
Conceivably, an entire website containing tens of thousands of pages could be targeted if only a
single page were accused of infringement. Such an approach would create severe practical
problems for sites with substantial user-generated content, such as Facebook, Twitter, and
YouTube, and for blogs that allow users to post videos, photos, and other materials.
(IMAGINE HOW THAT WILL BE ABUSED BY MARXIST AGITPROP ORGANIZERS AND MSM NEWSHACKS LOOKING TO MAKE A NAME FOR THEMSELVES *cough* Chris Parry of The Vancouver Sun *cough*)
• The bill’s harmful impact is aggravated by the fact that the definition of websites
“dedicated to theft of U.S. property” includes sites that take actions to “avoid confirming a high
probability of … use” for infringement. Absence of knowledge of specific infringing acts would
not be a defense. Thus, the definition would effectively require sites actively to police
themselves to ensure that infringement does not occur. In effect, the bill would impose the very
monitoring obligation that existing law (in the form of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of
1998) expressly does
not
require. SOPA would undo the statutory framework that has created
the foundation for many web-based businesses.
(IMAGINE HOW THAT WILL BE ABUSED BY MARXIST AGITPROP ORGANIZERS AND MSM LAWYER HACKS LOOKING TO MAKE A NAME FOR THEMSELVES and/or to acquire/steal prime URL addresses.)
Please read the whole memo, it’s worth your time.
So that’s where we’re at as a society.
Americans have forgotten one very important point....we are under what “W” designated a Declared State of Emergency and have been since 9-11-01. http://constitutionally.blogspot.com/
Our Constitutional rights were weakened after 9-11 and reaffirmed later by Obama. This is about a government and the political elite of both Parties that enjoy having more power (not less) over the people.
Read about the Declared State of Emergency that was put into effect after 9-11-01 by Bush and the Continuity of Government. We’ll likely have an annual declared terrorist event, just to keep the rationale for the emergency in place. So when those of you want events declared as terrorism, you might wish to think the implications of it. With every such event the power of government grows and the power of the people is reduced.