While I do believe Mr. Sherman isn't coming from the best of places, I think that there was quite a large amount of misinformation coming from various interested parties, and I have always felt comparing SOPA with China or even censorship is nothing more than alarmist rhetoric.
If that kind of abuse can happen now, it is most certainly not hyperbole that we will see a LOT more of these injustices happen by taking due process out of the courts and putting it into the hands of the copyright industry.
Slippery slopes usually are, except when lawyers get involved. I wish I still had the link, but I once read an extremely informative essay on the impact of lawyering on the erosion of civil liberties, especially when corporate law is involved. There is simply too much money supporting the time and effort of corporate law to the benefit of companies and detriment of citizens, civil liberties and the commons. Heck, copyright terms now extend beyond the life of the author. If that's not proof of a slippery slope, I don't know what is.
Cary H. Sherman is chief executive of the Recording
Industry Association of America, which represents
music labels.
"The following guest piece was contributed by Cary H. Sherman, who chief executive of the Recording Industry Association of America, which represents music labels."
This is exactly wrong. It shouldn't be the responsibility of companies to write laws. On of the big issues that the SOPA/PIPA debacle brought to light is that if companies are allowed to write laws, they will write them in ways that fouces on benefiting them instead of the general public.
Perhaps this is naïve, but I’d like to believe that the companies that proposed SOPA and PIPA will now feel some responsibility to stay away from law making.
If we the public can somehow band together, the total lobbying power gained is actually higher, but obviously, people dont give a shit until it personally affects them. Hence, if the encumbants can slowly tweak the law, one painless step at a time, they will win.
Also, see previous whining here: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/12/opinion/fighting-online-pi...
Really after seeing what the DoJ did to MegaUpload, it raises the question of why they need more powers seeing as how they are able to take down domains regardless.
In that context, the focus on "censorship" is a bit misleading. It's a good way to get people's attention when you don't have the time to explain the DNS and why it's not an appropriate tool for combating piracy. Indeed, "censorship" is probably too weak a concept for the damage that SOPA would have caused to the internet, since it implies a selective redaction instead of the complete and indiscriminate excommunication of every blacklisted domain. I wouldn't call it "misinformation," but did people who knew better (so to speak) choose a "loaded and inflammatory term"? Absolutely.
It is marvelous how the victim of this "digital tsunami" can spin the case in his favor. Still, it's probably accurate to say that most people didn't understand what they were opposing.
That is utter bullshit. This piece is full of such falsehoods.
Sorry I don't have more to contribute. I'm just really disgusted by this.