VISIT WEBSITE >>>>> http://gg.gg/y83ws?9869610 <<<<<<
Both are responses to the problem of enforcement of U. Bill or H. Smith R-TX and a bipartisan group of 12 initial co-sponsors. It is one of two bills being considered by congress today. The other is the Protect-IP Act. PIPA provides individuals with the right to request access to their own personal information while providing private sector organizations with a framework for conducting the collection, use and disclosure of personal information.
Its purpose, as stated in the text of the bill found in H. The pipa is a piriform lute with four strings. It has since evolved and now features thirty frets and four metal strings pinched with artificial tabs. PIPA enables private companies, such as SONY or Paramount, to sue search engines, directories or any website for hosting content that infringes on copyright. PIPA also provides for a DNS filtering system that basically allows the government, upon court order, to divert users from accused websites.
SOPA provides steep penalties for websites that knowingly distribute infringing content. Penalties range from fines to prison time, but the so called "blacklist" has received the most media attention.
While you won't find the word, "blacklist" in either SOPA or PIPA, the text of the bills essentially encourages the government to block the accused websites and encourage private companies to create target lists. These target lists are used to directly send notice to payment service providers -like Visa - demanding a cut off of payment to the accused websites. It is this threat of a blacklist that caused so much commotion that over a dozen tech companies participated in "blackout" protests on January 18, Under the current law, websites and ISPs are generally not liable for copyright infringement by others as long as they remove the content upon proper notification.
There are some provisions in SOPA that arguably remove that safe harbor in that they create liability even in the absence of actual notice. In other words, an innocent website or ISP could be found liable for third party infringement if this law is passed. Additionally, the bills would allow copyright holders to sue different level of websites i. Supporters of these bills argue that it enables the government and copyright holders to take a firm stance against copyright violations in the United States.
Websites will be forced to take a more proactive role to ensure compliance with the law or they face harsh consequences. While combating copyright infringement is a laudable goal, those opposed to the bills point out that the law goes too far.
The internet is supposed to be open medium of expression that is not controlled by the government or private company interests. SOPA changes this by allowing the government to essentially hack websites by rerouting users through the DNS filters provisions.
PIPA provides private companies with incentives to sue and maintain lists of websites that allow copyright violations. Broadly speaking, the language of these bills could impact free speech at every level and inhibit innovation. Supporters and opponents of the bill are not confined to one political party and many politicians have changed their position. SOPA is also making its way through the House, but was delayed from a scheduled hearing on January 18, , due to lack of consensus on proposed amendments.
Comments