Stop American Censorship
Internet censorship is going to a vote in the Senate on January 24th (known as PIPA in the Senate and SOPA in the House). While Senators are in their home states for the January recess, we need to flood their public meetings and offices with our concerns about the bill. Learn More
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- All Categories 51
- Individual State Discussions 50
Comments
@KokopelliMia Well, if this bill does nothing else, it seems *very* likely to stifle innovation: small sites based on user-contributions cannot possibly hope to undertake the kind of exhaustive self-monitoring required to fully protect themselves from the threat of being pulled off-line by one angry (and/or unscrupulous) content holders, and so many may decide that it's not worth setting up shop to begin with. And since, as you say, the world economy is becoming increasingly information-based... yup, I'd say this bill could have a pretty nasty economic impact.
ear Senator
i have already sent an automated email but feel a more personal letter is in order , as a natural born us citizen and resident of Texas i urge you to speak out against the following bills for the following reasons
There are several reasons that SOPA, PIPA, and S.978 should not get passed:
1) It should not be a felony to upload anyone singing a pop song on YouTube.
2) MANY innocent people could be going to jail.
3) A lot of popular websites could get taken down. (e.g. YouTube, Google, Facebook, Flickr, etc.)
4) We need our Internet freedom! After all, this IS America, not China.
5) The bills are TOO broad and too vague.
6) People deem them “the worst piece(s) of IP legislation.”
there are many more reasons that for times sake i wont list here but there are a lot of people and company's speaking out against this bill , the most important objection i have to this bill is that it follows No due process that i can see , the language is so broad and vague that its left open for abuse of power, if a bill like this was created in accordance of the constitution and bill of rights id gladly support it as long as it is clear and concise in its objectives and implementation one more important objection which is why i put the topic under labor is that it would kill jobs in many sectors ,with our economy as it has been we as a country cannot afford that , in closing i thank you for you taking the time to read this and wish you well
God Bless
Patrick Emry
i cant get anywhere to a meeting but would be glad to put a statement together that will expand upon the letter a little bit with the help of a writer and be glad to take the time to deliver it via phone at the meeting email me at emry.patrick@gmail.com if your interested
For what it's worth, I went to UT and have an MBA, so if someone has the numbers of the SXSW we could put together a very compelling case of how much the city/state/country would lose from this one conference alone. SOPA supporters keep citing that the internet is killing American jobs. We all know that it's also one of the main ways we create them.
So, numbers on SXSW would be concrete evidence that this bill would wipe out a lot of the progress we've made.
Let me know if you guys can use the help. I can be there for sure if you want me along.
Patrick
I'm sure that it would be pretty easy to set up a telecon; in fact, most of the Internet based teleconferencing companies stand to lose a lot of business from start-ups that won't happen if the PIPA goes through.
I was just at a Joomla! website creation software user's group meeting in North Dallas, and everyone there is concerned that small businesses trying to use the internet will be at grave risk if this bill goes through.
One company, who provide an Internet domain name service, could be shut down completely if one user of one subdomain is accused of having a link to a potentially infringing site.
Dear Friend:
Thank you
for contacting me regarding S. 968, the PROTECT IP Act. I welcome your
thoughts and comments.
Senator
Patrick Leahy (D-VT) introduced the PROTECT IP Act on May 12, 2011. The
legislation is in response to concerns about online copyright infringement and
sale of counterfeit goods. The bill would allow the Justice Department to
seek federal court injunctions to halt online promotion of illegal activities.
I believe
copyright protection is a foundation for innovation. Intellectual
property is the creative core of the information age. Patent and
intellectual property ownership laws offer needed protection for the economic
and other interests of inventors, entrepreneurs, performers, and other creative
thinkers. These protections are also important to future growth and
employment in important U.S. industries.
Protecting intellectual property is more challenging than ever before.
Among other things, high speed broadband enables access to the entire
catalog of movies, music, books, television, and technology.
Online
promotion of counterfeit goods by foreign entities is also a growing concern.
How to protect copyright, patent, and intellectual property rights — and
do so without infringing on consumers’ legitimate interests — requires dealing
with a complex series of problems.
The
PROTECT IP Act has been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Although I am not a member of that committee, please be assured that I
will keep your views in mind should this bill or related legislation be
reported for action by the full Senate.
I
appreciate hearing from you, and I hope that you will not hesitate to contact
me on any issue that is important to you.
Sincerely,
Kay Bailey Hutchison
United States Senator
284 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
202-224-5922 (tel)
202-224-0776 (fax)
http://hutchison.senate.gov
PLEASE DO NOT REPLY to this
message as this mailbox is only for the delivery of outbound messages, and is
not monitored for replies. Due to the volume of mail Senator Hutchison
receives, she requests that all email messages be sent through the contact form
found on her website at http://hutchison.senate.gov/?p=email_kay
.
If you would like more information
about issues pending before the Senate, please visit the Senator's website at http://hutchison.senate.gov . You
will find articles, floor statements, press releases, and weekly columns on
current events.
Thank you.Thank you for contacting me with your concerns about the Stop Online Piracy Act. I appreciate hearing your thoughts about online intellectual property, and I am honored to be your Representative in Congress.
As you may know, H.R. 3261 the Stop Online Piracy Act was recently introduced by Rep. Lamar Smith, where it was referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. Companion legislation in the Senate, S. 968, the Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act of 2011 (PROTECT-IP) was introduced by Senator Patrick Leahy and is pending a vote on the Senate floor.
This legislation would give the federal government expanded authority to pursue websites which are registered and operate in foreign countries that provide pirated or counterfeit content. These foreign "rouge sites" sell or distribute subject matter protected by federal Intellectual Property (IP) laws, causing businesses to lose billions of dollars in annual lost revenue. Industries supported by intellectual property laws generate as much as 6% of the U.S. gross national product and provide a significant amount of jobs for Americans.
It is important to note that this legislation would only affect websites that operate from foreign servers, not U.S. based websites, as there are already laws in place to address this issue domestically. The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is the agency charged with monitoring copyright infringement on the Internet domestically. Between June 30, 2010 and February 14, 2011 ICE seized 112 domain names associated with Internet piracy. Domain name registrars redirect traffic from the seized domain to a government website explaining that the domain name has been seized by ICE pursuant to a warrant issued by a federal court; however, the sites remain accessible through their IP addresses.
Concerns have been raised about the impact of this legislation on free speech and the technical integrity of the Internet. These are legitimate concerns, and I look forward to working with my colleagues on the House Committee on the Judiciary to ensure that the needs of copyright protection are balanced with the First Amendment Rights of Americans.
Although this legislation is still pending in the House Committee on the Judiciary, you can rest assured that I will keep your concerns in mind should this legislation arrive on the House floor. Thank you again for your concern about this important issue, and please do not hesitate to let me know if I may be of additional assistance in the future.
...Carter is a Co-Sponsor with Lamar Smith.
No Meeting but I did get an email from Cornyn's Office:
Nice speaking with you, Deyadira. Below is the statement the Senator issued yesterday.
Thanks!
Jessica Sandlin
Texas Press Secretary
U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas
Cornyn: PIPA Deserves a More Thoughtful Process
“Texans Have Soundly Rejected the ‘Pass Now, Learn Later’ Approach”
AUSTIN — U.S. Senator John Cornyn (R-TX), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, released the following statement today on S. 968, the PROTECT IP Act (PIPA):
“Texans have soundly rejected the ‘pass now, learn later’ approach that we saw with Obamacare, and the potential impact of this legislation is too far-reaching to ram it through Congress in such an abrupt way.
“Stealing content is theft, plain and simple, but concerns about the internet and free speech necessitate a more thoughtful, deliberative process.”
Last week Sen. Cornyn joined Republicans on the Judiciary Committee in sending a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) requesting him to delay consideration of S. 968 so that concerns with the proposed legislation can be addressed.
Senator Cornyn serves on the Finance, Judiciary, Armed Services and Budget Committees. He serves as the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee’s Immigration, Refugees and Border Security subcommittee. He served previously as Texas Attorney General, Texas Supreme Court Justice, and Bexar County District Judge.