Reply to comment

I would just repeat the author's request for Californians to contact our two Senators...who have no business (and I have applauded so many of Sen. Boxer's positions in the past) supporting, let along sponsoring, this bill (which could threaten sites like the Progress Report).

Here's a clip from what CALPIRG (also opposed by Consumer Federation of America and Consumers Union)recently wrote in opposition to PIPA:

"The bill is designed to punish websites that post or even link to copyrighted content, and goes way too far.

PIPA (or PROTECT IP Act , S. 968) would dramatically alter how we use, share and create content on the internet, ultimately curbing the free flow of information Americans enjoy today. Under its broad language, users could go to jail for up to five years for as little as uploading a video from last night’s karaoke party if it featured a copyrighted song. [2]

We agree that stopping online piracy is a worthy goal. Unfortunately, PIPA (the Senate version of SOPA) simply goes too far and would hurt consumers’ interests.

Under PIPA, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube would need to proactively censor their services or risk lawsuits.

PIPA, if passed, could result in the end of lawful sites that allow online goods exchange, including Craigslist, eBay and student textbook swapping — simply because of a few users who do not use them appropriately.

And PIPA would enable an internet service provider like Comcast to block consumers’ access to competitive services like Skype, all in the name of alleged copyright infringement."

The American Civil Liberties Union, also right opposed, stated, “By instituting this practice in the United States, SOPA sends an unequivocal message to other nations that it is acceptable to censor speech on the global Internet.”

We've got until Jan 24th to let them hear from us.