Via Reuters:
Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) continued a barrage of support for proposed online anti-piracy legislation Thursday, calling claims that such a law would threaten internet freedoms "blatantly false."
What sort of disingenuous arguments will Lamer Smith make today? Let's read on!
He also took a shot at Google, which has spoken out against the bill, calling its opposition "self-serving."
Could you care to explain how it's self-serving?
In a Thursday post on National Review Online, Smith said the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) would only target websites specifically “dedicated” to illegal activity -- such as distributing pirated films or selling bogus pharmaceuticals.
If SOPA was really meant to go after websites specifically "dedicated" to illegal activity, wouldn't the language be more specific?
Smith wrote that Congress could not sit back “while some of America’s most profitable and productive industries are under attack” to the tune of $100 billion a year.
Where did you get that statistic? From you ass?
The bill would authorize the attorney general to pursue a rogue website only after “a federal judge agrees that the website in question is dedicated to illegal and infringing activity.”
The judge would then issue court order “directing companies to sever ties with the illegal website,” Smith wrote.
Gee, that's not what I've read. Do you know how often the DMCA is abused? SOPA will be a thousand times worse.
He rejected claims that SOPA could shut down law-abiding websites because they inadvertently hosted an infringing link.
“Websites like Facebook and YouTube that host user content are not ‘dedicated to’ illegal activity, and they certainly do not make a business out of ‘facilitating’ the illegal sale and distribution of counterfeit or pirated goods,” Smith wrote.
How do we know we can trust you, hmm? How do we know if the movie and music industries will use their best interests when using this law? These are the same industries that have sued a little girl and a grandmother just for downloading a couple songs and movies. These are the same industries that tried to ban the VCR and the cassette tape, using almost the exact same arguments they're using now. There's a reason why a vast majority of internet users hate SOPA. Laws like this are far too easy to abuse.
Just in case you didn't hate Lamar Smith enough, he pulls shit like this:
Smith says the First Amendment does not protect illegal activity, and went on to compare online piracy to child pornography.
“Like online piracy, child pornography is a billion-dollar business operated online. It is also illegal. That’s why law enforcement officials are authorized to block access to child-porn sites,” he wrote.
Let me see if I can piece together his logic:
Piracy is illegal.
Child porn is illegal.
Therefore, people who download movies and music are as monstrous as pedophiles.
It would appear that the "piracy" card has become the new "protect the children" card.
“Unfortunately, there are some critics of this legislation who are not serious about helping to protect America’s intellectual property. That’s because they’ve made large profits by working with and promoting rogue sites to U.S. consumers. Google recently paid half a billion dollars to settle a criminal case because of the search-engine giant’s active promotion of rogue foreign pharmacies that sold counterfeit and illegal drugs to U.S. patients. Their opposition to this legislation is self-serving since they profit from doing business with rogue sites."
OK, Now he's just lying out his ass.
Spread the word, people. Don't let greedy corporate interests kill the internet!
http://stopcensorship.org/