Protesting anti-piracy bill

Premium ContentMouse over Home then click on Premium Content for information.

PHOTO SHOWCASE: Websites change up design to protest SOPA and PIPA

* * * * *

Until today, you may not have kept close tabs on the intense battle over how to curb the piracy of movies, music and other materials over the Internet.

But the opposition has become hard to miss as Internet companies ramped up their protests today by going dark or plastering their sites with pleas like “Tell Congress: don't censor the web.”

The dark sites include the English language version of Wikipedia and Mozilla, Wordpress, Reddit and TwitPic. The home page of Google features a link protesting the bills, and a black box over the site's banner. A handful of Nebraska and Iowa companies also have turned out site lights, including the Omaha-based advertising and public relations firm Bozell.

They're all protesting the House of Representatives' Stop Online Piracy Act, or SOPA, and the Senate's version, the Protect Intellectual Property Act, or PIPA.

The blackouts have been denounced by bill supporters, including the chairman of the Motion Picture Association of America. “It's a dangerous and troubling development when the platforms that serve as gateways to information intentionally skew the facts to incite their users in order to further their corporate interests,” said former Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn.

So, you might be wondering, what's in these bills and how might they affect me? The World-Herald spoke with opponents and supporters of the bills to find out.

Q: What are SOPA and PIPA?

A: The bills are intended to make sure that the next time you illegally download a bootlegged version of your favorite Harry Potter movie or Justin Bieber album (admit it, you're a fan), or buy a knockoff jersey for your favorite sports team, the federal government would be able to crack down on you and the person, company or website that you got the pirated material from.

In some cases, the Justice Department would be able to make search engines — like Google, Yahoo or Microsoft's Bing — domain name services and social networks like Facebook cut off all advertising for the infringing sites and block access to the sites. Search engines that don't do enough to prevent piracy could be held liable for infringement.

In extreme situations, sites might be blocked before the infringing company or website could make its case in court.

Additionally, payment processors like PayPal, which has major operations in Omaha and is owned by the online auction site eBay, wouldn't be allowed to transmit payments for the blocked sites.

Q: How do the bills define piracy?

A: Basically, if you didn't hold the copyright for a song or movie and didn't pay for it, you couldn't use it. That also would mean no more remixes or movie mash-ups on YouTube. And any product sold by an overseas retailer that was indistinguishable from the original would breach copyright and trademark law.

Q: What is the status of these bills?

A: The fate of PIPA may be decided first, with an initial Senate vote coming as early as next week. But the future of SOPA remains unclear. Reports over the weekend indicated that the bill had been shelved.

Q: What people, companies and organizations want to see the bills passed and why?

A: The primary supporters are the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the corporate entities that own broadcast and print news outlets, groups and associations representing artists, musicians, filmmakers, actors and actresses, such as the Motion Picture Association of America, professional sports leagues, and other major companies. They include Ford Motor Co., Walmart, Visa, the Walt Disney Co., Nike and Netflix, according to a list compiled by the U.S. chamber.

Proponents say online pirates and people selling counterfeit goods — fake tennis shoes, bootlegged movies and music, knockoff football jerseys and electronics, for example — rob the U.S. economy of jobs and money.

"Through the more than 53 billion visits that rogue sites attract each year, more than 19 million American jobs are put on the chopping block as rogue sites illegally take a bite of the $7.7 trillion in output that these industries contribute to the U.S. economy," Steve Tepp of the U.S. chamber wrote in a recent blog post.

Locally, Jamie Karl of the Nebraska chamber said the organization signed a support letter. And companies with Nebraska ties that support the legislation include American Grammaphone Records — the parent company of Mannheim Steamroller — 3M, Merck & Co. and Pfizer, he said.

The truth is, Karl said, "There are very few (local) players that are going to be affected by the legislation. We have not heard from one member directly on that issue."

Q: What people, companies and organizations are fighting the proposals and why?

A: The biggest, and most visible are technology giants, like Google, Facebook, Wikipedia and Twitter, and Internet-based companies that rely on users being able to share information — some of it copyrighted — freely, said Chris Augeri, a former senior research fellow at the Peter Kiewit Institute who is in the process of launching an Omaha-based technology startup.

But that doesn't mean the likes of Google are against fighting piracy. In a statement to Bloomberg News, Google spokeswoman Samantha Smith said: "Last year we took down 5 million infringing Web pages from our search results and invested more than $60 million in the fight against bad ads."

Civil liberties, human rights and free speech groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union and the American Society of News Editors, also are opponents.

Technology companies say the laws go too far and would cap online innovation and investment in startups. The next Facebook would have a hard time finding funds, Augeri said.

Q: What is the Obama administration's position?

A: The White House is opposed to the bills as written but wants a solution for piracy. A spokesman said President Barack Obama wouldn't support legislation that "reduces freedom of expression, increases cybersecurity risk or undermines the dynamic, innovative global Internet."

Q: In what ways would passage of the bills affect the Internet as we know it?

A: The bills would force online intermediaries, such as Facebook, Reddit, Twitter and Flickr, to police their content and, critics say, suppress free expression. Augeri said that would fundamentally alter the current state of the Web. "People would see less original content that wasn't behind a pay wall."

Q: What are some ideas for tailoring the bill so that it doesn't interfere with Web companies or the Internet but still deters piracy?

A: One option, Augeri said, is to work from another current bill: the Online Protection & Enforcement of Digital Trade Act, or OPEN. That, he said, is more of a blank canvas and broadly written to deter unfair imports that infringe U.S. intellectual property rights.

The Better Business Bureau is considered a supporter of the controversial bills, but Jim Hegarty, BBB president for the office representing Nebraska, Iowa and South Dakota, said legislators need to come together with members of the technology and business community, lawyers and independent consumers to tailor a bill that works without risking the future of the Internet.

The bottom line, however, is that the rogue overseas websites that steal identities and scam Midlanders through fraudulent emails and physical mailings need to be curtailed, Hegarty said.

"From my vantage point ... something has to be done."

Contact the writer:

402-444-1414, ross.boettcher@owh.com

twitter.com/rossboettcher

« Money

Share