Every high school student and bored office worker in the world:
Your time spent idly browsing youtube videos is nearing an end, due to a 79-page piece of legislation referred to as SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act).
I finally got around to reading the bill this morning; here’s the piece that’s most troubling. (Don’t let the legalese scare you; it’s important that you wander through it to realize the truism that our system of governance is equivalent to a monkey becoming amorous with a bowling ball. I’ll summarize after the big block quote.)
(5) RELIEF- On application of a qualifying plaintiff following the commencement of an action under this section with respect to an Internet site dedicated to theft of U.S. property, the court may issue a temporary restraining order, a preliminary injunction, or an injunction, in accordance with rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, against a registrant of a domain name used by the Internet site, or against an owner or operator of the Internet site, or, in an action brought in rem under paragraph (2), against the Internet site, or against the domain name used by the Internet site, to cease and desist from undertaking any further activity as an Internet site dedicated to theft of U.S. property.
In actual human English, that says when a “qualifying plaintiff” asserts that a website contains material for which it does not hold the copyright, the court can shut down THE ENTIRE SITE. This means that YouTube’s entire revenue stream is threatened if they allow one “pirated” video on their site. If you don’t like YouTube, fill in whatever large site you use; the principle remains.
Worse, since the injunction can be ordered before a trial even begins, massive sites could be compromised for millions of legitimate users on the mere accusation that someone’s mashup of Nirvana and Destiny’s Child violates copyright law. (For the record, that mashup should be placed in the Smithsonian AND the Ark of the Covenant in perpetuity.)
Further making online services the hand puppet of the mainstream media is a clause granting immunity to DNS registrars, site owners, and site operators for “voluntarily actions” undertaken in a “reasonable belief” that something on their site violates copyright (which the bill maddeningly, repeatedly refers to as “US Property.”)
If I understand this correctly, that means that the good people at WordPress or GoDaddy can shut me down tomorrow with NO FEAR OF LEGAL REPERCUSSION simply by making the case that they thought I had somehow violated copyright. No trial, and no chance for me to fight back.
If I understand this incorrectly, someone please correct me.
Given that copyright infringement is ALREADY ILLEGAL, a metaphor occurs to me.
Car theft is also already illegal, but it’s a pain in the butt to do the legwork to catch each individual criminal, so the AG needs the power to shut down entire interstates anytime a Ford thinks a stolen car is traveling on them. And if the accusation is false, everyone who made the accusation and / or blew up the interstate is immune from consequence.
That about right?
If so, it’s a rock-solid method for propping up horse & buggy stock prices…
Perhaps we should take a cue from the way we regulated banking, in which lots and lots of rules have worked out so well and no one was ever able to figure out how to game the system to their advantage.
**For more about how we got here, check out this article that my extremely loud brother pointed out to me while I was writing.**
Cory Doctorow is also doing a fair amount of twitterizing the melee.
You have no idea what is at stake. Who will hold parents accountable for making out with their children in public if YouTube goes away?
Discussion
No comments yet.