Stop Online Piracy Act
The Stop Online Piracy Act ( SOPA ), also known by the abbreviation HR 3261, is a bill that was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives by Representative Lamar S. Smith (Republican of Texas ) and a group of twelve supporters on 26 October 2011. After the entry into force should allow American copyright holders to effectively prevent the unauthorized distribution of copyrighted content. The consultations on the legislation in the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee provoked strong international, controversial reactions which led to a stop the adoption process ultimately.
SOPA built on laws and draft laws (PRO - IP act and PROTECT IP act ( PIPA ) ) to the years 2008 and 2011.
Content
The law would have allowed the U.S. Department of Justice and copyright holders to seek court injunctions against the operators of Internet sites that constitute a violation of the U.S. copyright law. The purpose of the measure should select the applicant. For example, an available advertising agencies and pay services would prohibit cooperation with owners of affected websites and so can prevent the making of further transactions.
Also view the web page in search engines could be blocked. By the law downloading protected content would become a serious crime. Those ISPs that would be taken against probably illegal websites, impunity would have been granted. At the same time would have any copyright holder, which is knowingly false, that an Internet site is penalized corresponding violations of the law, this can be prosecuted.
Positions
Supporters of the bill said it serves to protect copyrights ( "Intellectual Property" ) and the related businesses and jobs. Also, it was necessary to equip authorities with means that allow them to enforce the copyright in relation to foreign websites. As a supporter particularly excelled big media companies and their representative organizations, such as the Motion Picture Association of America ( MPAA ) and the Recording Industry Association of America ( RIAA ). The pharmaceutical company Pfizer stated during the hearing that patients could not even recognize websites always that specify either a false mark or complete forgeries.
Opponents declared that it was a censorship that would gag the Internet. Furthermore, the law was incompatible with the fundamental right of freedom of expression, as it complicates the whistleblower substantially or practically impossible to do. There was criticism of the proposed legislation, among other things potentially affected companies such as Google, Yahoo, Facebook, eBay and of civil rights activists and journalists. The European Parliament also underlined in a resolution on the EU-US Summit in November 2011 that "the integrity of the global Internet and freedom of communication must be protected by refraining from unilateral measures to withdrawal of IP addresses or domain names."
A group of politicians of both major parties suggested as an alternative to SOPA the Online Protection and Enforcement of Digital Trade Act (OPEN Act ), which should be taken against copyright infringement as well, but to endanger the freedom of the Internet without.
On 14 January 2012, an official statement from three employees of the White House was published, who speak out against the bill. Victoria Espinel, Aneesh Chopra, and Howard Schmidt told is also aware of the dangers of online piracy, they could not support a law that restricts the freedom of expression, which increases security risks and undermines the dynamism and innovation in the network.
Protests
According to press reports covered Internet companies such as Google, Facebook and Amazon late 2011 to consider the possibility, at times completely disable their websites in protest.
Avaaz collected over 3.4 million online signatures against the project, threatening the freedom of expression and freedom of the press; it is his most successful campaign. In the U.S., the protests are justified, inter alia, the fact that the major American broadcasting groups have been reported as a supporter of the law not as good as it.
Legislative process and output
After the bill was introduced on 26 October 2011 at the U.S. House of Representatives, the Judiciary Committee held a hearing on 16 November 2011. A speaker of the House said that the Committee Chairman Smith was planning to leave debating the law on 15 December 2011 in Congress. The matter is still being negotiated, and that he was open to change. The committee chairman submitted December 12, 2011 before an altered SOPA bill for hearing on December 15.
After a long debate in the Judiciary Committee, the hearing was adjourned on 16 December first to the earliest possible date after the midterm holiday in mid-January 2012, however, shortly afterwards instead on Wednesday, 21 December 2011, stated.
The chairman of the Judiciary Committee in the House of Representatives, Lamar Smith, made on January 20, 2012, four days before the originally scheduled vote on SOPA known that the SOPA bill would be for the time being not further pursued because of violent criticism. A willingness to compromise on the part of the U.S. government with respect to the change of SOPA and PIPA has been clearly emphasized by Senator Harry Reid, as he pointed end of January 2012 that in the coming weeks to secure a solution could be found which is acceptable to both parties. As part of these efforts, the discussion on the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act ( CISPA ) can be considered, the politician Mike J. Rogers had already published in November 2011. The bill, which was end of April 2012 adopted by the U.S. House of Representatives, although is also controversial, but is supported by companies such as AT & T, Facebook, Intel, Microsoft, Oracle, Symantec and Verizon certainly.