Replies

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.

I have been reading a lot about this law. It would the end of the Internet as we know it.

I have already seen people team up politically and/or socially to make false copyright and community violation complaints against youtubers so they can get their channels closed down. I have seen some that I suspect orginate with politicans and government agencies like TSA and NASA who are offended by critics. Sometimes after you-tube is nagged enough, they will find the charges false and re-instate the channels but advertising income and reputations are lost in the process.

This law will make it too risky to continue community websites.

The copyright lawyers and other copyright special interests have bought the Congress and they are perfectly willing to violate the constitution to guarentee their money flow. How dishonest and disgusting that we even have to deal with a Congress so treasonous.

Review of the names, saw no surprises. Review of the information made me think of the confiscatory nature of (government), the TRUE unregulated beast.

No surprises regarding government seeking more and more and more. The film *More* (once viewed - approximately 12 minutes) comes to mind. The moral of the film / story was the people and government always cry out for more. Then eventually there is nobody left producing anything of valve and there is no more. Reminds me of government leaders of today. Not surprised by the government leaders cry for more via legislation, because they know there is something the people have they (government) wants. Seems to make government jealous, even though the government leaders have been taking *more* for longer than can be remembered and while government does not have it all, cry out for more. The belly of the beast ... Never satisfied. Saying no to *more* is not the beast's nature. Defeating the beast ... has been so long, unsure any*more* how it is done. The beast eats on, 24 / 7 with the demand of *more*, and the beast knows the people normally exert little or no control. May this time be different, the beast be defeated, and freedom be retained and supreme. Based on the calculations encountered throughout history ... am expecting the standard reply. Thanks, and will give my rep my thoughts.