Radio News Bulletin
- Latest Bulletin
Fri 17th May 2013 6:45AM - Featured Stories
Wed 30th Nov -0001 12:00AM - Labor's numbers can't be trusted, says Abbott
Fri 17th May 2013 12:00AM - Mainland excision move condemned
Fri 17th May 2013 12:00AM - More calls for asylum seeker work rights
Fri 17th May 2013 12:00AM
Promote Advertisement
Factbox: The 'Stop Online Piracy Act' explained
Supporters of the bill say it protects the intellectual property market but critics say it would enable internet censorship and threaten free speech. (Getty Images)
SBS takes a closer look at why draft US anti-online piracy laws have attracted so much criticism.
The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) is a US bill that aims to tighten anti-piracy legislation by forcing internet companies to block access to foreign sites offering material in breach of US copyright laws.
RELATED: Read The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) bill
The bill was introduced to the House of Representatives on October 26, 2011, and while voting on it has been delayed until consensus can be reached, the Senate version of the bill, the Protect IP Act (PIPA), is expected to face a vote on January 24.
UP TO FIVE YEARS IN JAIL
The Stop Online Piracy Act bill would make unauthorised streaming of copyrighted content a crime, with a maximum penalty of five years in jail for 10 infringements within six months.
The bill would also allow the US government and copyright holders to seek court orders against websites accused of enabling or facilitating copyright infringement.
BUSINESS WITH 'INFRINGING SITES' BANNED
The SOPA legislation also requires US-based payment services, like PayPal, or American advertisers, to stop doing business with foreign sites that are found to be “dedicated to infringing activities.”
DNS BLOCKING CLAUSE TO BE REMOVED
In addition, the bill requires internet service providers to block users from accessing specific websites using DNS (Domain Name System) blocking.
However, because of an outcry from a large number of technical experts who says that DNS blocking could cause damage to the underlying infrastructure of the internet, the sponsors of the bill have agreed to delete the DNS-blocking provision, Digital Trends reports.
SUPPORTERS AND CRITICS
Supporters of the bill say it protects the intellectual property market and corresponding industry.
The bill has the support of companies that had an interest in preventing file-sharing films, music, and software.
This week, for example, News Corp. Chairman Rupert Murdoch accused Google of profiting from advertisements sold against pirated materials.
FEARS FOR WEBSITES 'HOSTING' CONTENT
But critics say such legislation would enable internet censorship and threaten free speech.
Mashable says, if enacted, The Stop Online Piracy Act and Protect IP Act would give the US government and copyright holders excessive and far-reaching powers to take down sites they deem to be hosting protected content with little regard for the definition of “hosting”.
"If a user of a news site leaves a comment with offending material, that could be grounds for a takedown. And YouTube could be in hot water should it fail to promptly detect a user who uploads copyrighted material," Mashable says.
The same problem exists for all community-based websites, the online magazine says.
The bill has been opposed by Facebook, Twitter and Google, among others.
ANTI-CIRCUMVENTION PROVISION
Also included in the SOPA and PIPA bills is an anti-circumvention provision, which would make it illegal to inform users how to access blocked sites.
First Amendment expert Marvin Ammori, told Digital Trends this provision could mean that any website that features user-generated content (like Facebook or YouTube) could risk legal action if circumvention information was posted on their site.
VOLUNTARY ACTION
The bill also gives immunity to internet services that voluntarily block certain websites if they have “credible evidence” that these sites are devoted to illegally distributing copyrighted material.
Critics say that because under the proposed laws immunity is given even when the blocked websites are believed - but not proven - to be dedicated to the illegal distribution of intellectual property, there's potential for abuse of such immunity.
Watch this video by The Guardian explaining the proposed laws:
Your Comments
SOPA won't help anyway they try it.
Just say they managed to block every site with illegal content (including one US Senator's site), the ability to download songs, television shows, movies and copy them will still be there on the internet. There are literally hundreds of programs that can rip music from digital radio stations etc., . Even some of the content providers also make and sell equipment to easily copy whatever you want at a small cost, such as Sony. SOPA is just the media barons wanting to control the internet.
Lost opportunity for viral marketing of Intellectual Property
The bill may also make it illegal to spread video clips that could get people to buy music, discs or go watch a movie. It is the way a lot of things get popular these days, and I guess copyright owners would have the right to go after facebook users, tweeters, people sharing on Youtube and more... First we had the great firewall of China... now we will have the great "US corporate internet shield"
Doesnt bode well
After reading this page the first thing to come to mind is it'll start out about property rights... and then in a blink they will use it as a basis to allow the US government to deny access to any site that is critical to their political views with the threat of jail and/or other punishments so we all might as well get up and move to China Though that's just my initial oppinion, I haven't attempted to read the actual bill yet
It wont work
There is no way they will be able to successfully stop "pirated" content from being downloaded off the internet. There are thousands of proxy sites out there that are designed to circumvent this sort of site blocking, all this legislation is going to do is increase their use.
Hate Jail? Don't Steal
Let the whining begin. Pirates will try will phrase every apeal to sound as if they are reasonable victims while at all times resisting accountability for their criminal acts. This is nothing new only the scope is expamded to match the expansion criminals have been using to excape prosecution. If you want to be safe from prosecution for stealing other people's work the solution will now change from "steal through a country that doesn't respect property rights" to "Don't Steal". As it should be.
VideoNEW
Podcasts
Blogs



Previous 10 |