pwaldo
12-22-2011, 05:05 PM
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1211/70554.html
Listen to Google, Facebook, PayPal and other Web companies, and you’ll hear that an online Armageddon is near: Bills now pending in Congress to thwart online piracy would violate free speech, destroy the technological underpinnings of the Web and hinder the user-generated innovation like the next YouTube or Twitter.
Listen to Walt Disney, the NFL, Eli Lilly and a slew of entertainment and manufacturing companies, and you’ll hear that the Internet is a lawless Wild West: Congress is only trying to be the sheriff and save American jobs, make sure writers and artists are paid and protect the public from fake Viagra and Coach bags peddled online.
Backers include a bipartisan array of lawmakers, unions and companies; they reject the comparison to Internet censorship tools the likes of which were used by repressive governments in China or during the Arab Spring.
But, at the same time, critics argue that the legislation could be implemented in ways that fulfill their Doomsday prophesies, such as taking down legitimate websites and silencing free speech. Silicon Valley sees this as an effort to get tech companies to police copyrighted content as Hollywood has tried to do in the past. It also worries that the entertainment industry — backed now by the Justice Department — will pursue offenders abroad with the overly aggressive gusto they used against college students who illegally downloaded tunes through Napster and other sites.
“Anything that threatens other organizations beyond our borders is also a threat to us given how Wikipedia works,” said Jay Walsh, communications director for the Wikimedia Foundation, which owns and operates Wikipedia. Wikipedia members are discussing whether to go dark in protest of the bills. “It could impact folks who are part of our effort to bring free information to the net.”
Listen to Google, Facebook, PayPal and other Web companies, and you’ll hear that an online Armageddon is near: Bills now pending in Congress to thwart online piracy would violate free speech, destroy the technological underpinnings of the Web and hinder the user-generated innovation like the next YouTube or Twitter.
Listen to Walt Disney, the NFL, Eli Lilly and a slew of entertainment and manufacturing companies, and you’ll hear that the Internet is a lawless Wild West: Congress is only trying to be the sheriff and save American jobs, make sure writers and artists are paid and protect the public from fake Viagra and Coach bags peddled online.
Backers include a bipartisan array of lawmakers, unions and companies; they reject the comparison to Internet censorship tools the likes of which were used by repressive governments in China or during the Arab Spring.
But, at the same time, critics argue that the legislation could be implemented in ways that fulfill their Doomsday prophesies, such as taking down legitimate websites and silencing free speech. Silicon Valley sees this as an effort to get tech companies to police copyrighted content as Hollywood has tried to do in the past. It also worries that the entertainment industry — backed now by the Justice Department — will pursue offenders abroad with the overly aggressive gusto they used against college students who illegally downloaded tunes through Napster and other sites.
“Anything that threatens other organizations beyond our borders is also a threat to us given how Wikipedia works,” said Jay Walsh, communications director for the Wikimedia Foundation, which owns and operates Wikipedia. Wikipedia members are discussing whether to go dark in protest of the bills. “It could impact folks who are part of our effort to bring free information to the net.”