Oregon Senator Wyden freezes second Internet censorship bill

Source: Raw Story



A U.S. Senator from Oregon has once again taken a stand against his own party to defend what he sees as the inherent right to free speech on the Internet, placing a hold on a bill that could force search engines and Internet service providers to block websites deemed to be "infringing" on copyrights.

The Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act -- or "PROTECT IP" for short was part of a second attempt to pass provisions of the Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA), which failed to clear Congress during its last session thanks to a parliamentary maneuver by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR).

And once again, Wyden has stepped forward to ensure those measures do not pass.

"In December of last year I placed a hold on similar legislation, commonly called COICA, because I felt the costs of the legislation far outweighed the benefits," he said in a prepared statement. "After careful analysis of the Protect IP Act, or PIPA, I am compelled to draw the same conclusion."

Read more: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/05/27/oregon-senator-wyden-freezes-second-internet-censorship-bill/

---

http://wyden.senate.gov/newsroom/press/release/?id=33a39533-1b25-437b-ad1d-9039b44cde92

I could see something like this damaging fan sites, for instance, who make tribute pages for their favorite shows, bands, actors, etc. Fans are the greatest promoters in the world of what they love, and cancelling their freedom of expression hurts everyone.

:P

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

government small enough to get into our homes. Government small enough to get into every facet of our lives. But not one that is able to really do anything helpful for us.

Government that can tell us what to do in our private lives and what women can do with their uteri, and that can snoop into our every telephone call, email, or internet post just in case we might be "terrorists," that can virtually strip search us and feel us up just so we can travel on an airplane.......but not a government that can afford to help the poor, the elderly, the disabled, those struggling to pay their bills and their mortgages, those out of work, and on and on. And in fact, the government that, little as it helps those in need, wants to help them even less because we supposedly "can't afford it." Yet we can afford to bail out the banks and we refuse to ask those who have benefited the most from living in this country, to pay their fair share.

But you know what we CAN afford? Endless wars in Afghanistan. But wait... Afghanistan is winding down, you say? They don't want us there any more? Well, then, looks like things are starting to heat up in _________ (name your country. iran, north korea, venezuela)

And isn't that our biggest shame? We can afford to make war and help the wealthy who do not need the help, but we cannot seem to help those who truly need help. Very, very sad.

is going to have insurance. I'm only 30 days away from getting to see a doctor for the first time in 2 years! I can finally get some meds for this headache that has gone on for about 3 weeks

that's all.

:woohoo:

Proud to have Wyden as my senior senator.

It would be my residency state-of-choice if I could choose.

Pray tell.

tenacious, specifically.

And, damn, I've got to get some cash to his campaign coffers. Twice in one week he's doin the right thing.

for a civic event in my small town. He's been a busy baby, not only changing the world in Washington, but being gracious and friendly in a small town on the Left Coast.

It makes as much sense as "The Patriot Act".

Congress has found the way to do it yet. The internet regulations could actually hurt artists' ability to disseminate their creative production and cost them money.

I have heard of artists who could not get a chance with the corporate-controlled art or music business, but who were able to sell their own music on the internet. It would be hard to shut down sites that infringe on copyright interests while protecting those that help artists outside the corporate system. It would be hard to differentiate.

The investment in government regulation that would be necessary would not be justified by the results. Individual corporations can afford to protect their interests without blocking websites on the internet or putting the burden for enforcing the corporations' rights on the taxpayers or those of us who use the internet in ways that protect artists' interests.

Seems to me that at this point, until we get a way to differentiate, it's too big a risk to try to control the theft that goes on with a broad regulation. For the moment, corporations themselves will have to continue to go after those who violate their rights.

K&R

is an internet that is "safe for investors". :smoke:

And the reason I can do this, is because the government and big business haven't yet fucked up the internet.

Beautiful.