White House Responds To SOPA Critics, Says Administration Will Not Support Censorship
The White House has responded to two anti-SOPA petitions at the White House blog today. “While we believe that online piracy by foreign websites is a serious problem that requires a serious legislative response,” the post said, “we will not support legislation that reduces freedom of expression, increases cybersecurity risk, or undermines the dynamic, innovative global Internet.
“Any effort to combat online piracy must guard against the risk of online censorship of lawful activity and must not inhibit innovation by our dynamic businesses large and small. Across the globe, the openness of the Internet is increasingly central to innovation in business, government, and society and it must be protected. To minimize this risk, new legislation must be narrowly targeted only at sites beyond the reach of current U.S. law, cover activity clearly prohibited under existing U.S. laws, and be effectively tailored, with strong due process and focused on criminal activity. Any provision covering Internet intermediaries such as online advertising networks, payment processors, or search engines must be transparent and designed to prevent overly broad private rights of action that could encourage unjustified litigation that could discourage startup businesses and innovative firms from growing.
more:http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/01/14/white-house-responds-to-sopa-critics-says-administration-will-not-support-censorship/
= new reply since forum marked as read
On Edit: Full rip-off copies are already illegal under current laws. SOPA sort of brings "fair use" into question.
I'm really pissed off about that, and hope they start enforcing the rules they already have, but a clean bill rule would be a far greater leap forward. Did you vote FOR or AGAINST this ONE thing? Fuck 200 page bills that nobody bothers to read. Think about the Constitution and its amendments. They're clean, to the point, concise, and while the Constitution wasn't intended to last more than about 20 years, it has survived throughout time and had the mechanism to change installed from the beginning. You can read the whole thing in less than an hour. I have, many times. I've got a copy within arm's reach right now. If the GOP really wants to "take us back", how about taking us back to clean legislation that is just as clear as the Constitution they claim to support.
and criminalize incidental or unintentional streaming of copyrighted material running in the background.
Despite--or because of--the standard disclaimer clause which reads, "Nothing in this law will be construed as a prior restraint....", there is no doubt SOPA is intended to censor the Internet a la China, Iran, or Syria.
Something else nefarious can happen if this piece of crap legislation is passed. Right-wing and/or corporate trolls can, and will, intrude on DU, post links and/or materials that clearly infringe on copyright, and turn around and snitch to the government, causing DU to be shut down just because the admins and/or MIRT wasn't quick enough to kick out the trolls and remove the offending post(s). 
keep in mind that most will not need it, or may not see need for It, as a student I submit work on the internet such and so forth and i really don't care if anybody takes my work and uses it.
this is a safeguard for those musicians, video producers, Universities, etc. who wish that their work is protected from more than just kids who don't know any better, 10 year olds don't know what plagiarism is 
, and they are willing to pay a little extra for it, and they get a greater income from more people who are going through legal channels. so its a win win for the most part, and if the employers are not satisfied they can always fire the protection company.
keep in mind this would create a whole new industry and thus more jobs.
- ''Will Not Support Censorship'' Good, good. In Amuriku they give you a lot of rights, but you only get to use some of them.......
