[governance] FW: This just in: Obama puts SOPA on pause

[Narine Khachatryan]

Dear all,
Please find the following article on Mashable: *The White House and SOPA:
reading between the lines'. *
It seems that U.S. legislation aimed at curbing online piracy is likely to
be scaled back or rejected.



Here is the entire article:
http://mashable.com/2012/01/16/obama-sopa-position/

The White House has finally
given<http://mashable.com/2012/01/16/white-house-sopa-petition/> a
detailed explanation of its stance on the Stop Online Piracy Act
(SOPA<http://mashable.com/follow/topics/stop-online-piracy-act/>)
and Protect IP Act (PIPA).

In a blog post<https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petition-tool/response/combating-online-piracy-while-protecting-open-and-innovative-internet>
responding
to a petition<https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions/!/petition/veto-sopa-bill-and-any-other-future-bills-threaten-diminish-free-flow-information/g3W1BscR>
posted
on the White House’s website, the Obama Administration clearly laid out
what it would – and would not – support in any new legislation designed to
combat online piracy.

“While we believe that online piracy by foreign websites is a serious
problem that requires a serious legislative response,” said the note, “we
will not support legislation that reduces freedom of expression, increases
cybersecurity risk, or undermines the dynamic, innovative global Internet.”

Taken at face value, that sounds like a check in the “win” column for the
opponents of SOPA/PIPA. But if the White House agrees that online piracy is
a significant problem, what *will* they support to fix it?

The White House’s post was chock-full of little details on what the
administration wants from any future legislation on the issue.
------------------------------
No Excessive Censorship or Curtailing of American Innovation
------------------------------

“Any effort to combat online piracy,” read the post, “must guard against
the risk of online censorship of lawful activity and must not inhibit
innovation by our dynamic businesses large and small.”

Given the importance of the tech industry to the overall American economy,
it’s no surprise that the Obama administration wants to be careful not to
stifle digital innovation happening in the U.S.

Later, the post goes on to say that any provision dealing with online
businesses such as advertising companies, payment processors or search
engines “must be transparent and designed to prevent overly broad private
rights of action that could encourage unjustified litigation that could
discourage startup businesses and innovative firms from growing.”

On one hand, this language could help assuage the fears of the tech
industry, which has coalesced together around its near-unanimous
disapproval of SOPA/PIPA. On the other, the White House is not suggesting
that online businesses (like the payment processors or search engines
mentioned above) should be exempt from digital piracy legislation. Owners
of those kind of businesses may find that unsettling.
------------------------------
Scope of Legislation
------------------------------

The Obama administration said it will only accept a law which solely
targets websites operating “beyond the reach of current U.S. law.”

On first pass, that could be read in two ways:

*1.* Current law can’t target websites operating out of the U.S., so a new
law should address foreign websites only.

*2.* A new law should address domestic websites which aren’t targeted by
current American law.

However, the White House goes on to explain that a new law should only
cover “activity clearly prohibited under existing U.S. laws.” That means
the language about sites outside the reach of current U.S. law is more
likely a call for legislation to combat infringement on foreign sites, not
for sweeping new legislation to replace currently existing laws like the
Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA).
------------------------------
Precision & Understanding
------------------------------

The White House doesn’t want a legislative sledgehammer that could be used
to play “whack-a-mole” with reckless abandon against potentially infringing
websites.

Instead, it calls for a law that is “effectively tailored,” has regard for
due process and is focused solely on outright criminal activity. That
suggests a desire for more precise punishment mechanisms than those called
for in SOPA/PIPA. It also demands of Congress a more intimate understanding
of the Internet in general.

That echoes a major complaint of the anti-SOPA crowd, who have found
Congress to be less than adequately knowledgable about technology issues.
------------------------------
Internet Security & Stability
------------------------------

The White House is adamantly against interfering with the Doman Name System
(DNS), a sort of “phone book” for the Internet. It cites cybersecurity as a
major concern, while noting that attempts to stop piracy through DNS
mechanisms would fail outright.

“We must avoid creating new cybersecurity risks or disrupting the
underlying architecture of the Internet,” reads the post. “Our analysis of
the DNS filtering provisions in some proposed legislation suggests that
they pose a real risk to cybersecurity and yet leave contraband goods and
services accessible online.”

Removing or rerouting infringing sites’ DNS requests was originally one the
main punishment mechanisms in SOPA/PIPA, and the part of the bills
considered most onerous by many in the tech community. However, the authors
of both bills announced <http://mashable.com/2012/01/13/sopa-dns/> late
last week that they would remove any provisions related to DNS.
------------------------------
Non-Legislative Solutions
------------------------------

The White House believes that online piracy isn’t just a matter to be dealt
with in Congress. Instead, it feels that content creators and Internet
businesses should figure out methods to deal with the problem on their own.

“We expect and encourage,” said the post, “all private parties, including
both content creators and Internet platform providers working together, to
adopt voluntary measures and best practices to reduce online piracy.”

What “voluntary measures” and “best practices,” exactly? That’s left up to
those with a stake in the issue to decide amongst themselves.
------------------------------
Into The Future
------------------------------

The White House rounds out the post by calling for public and open dialogue
between the public and Congress on the issue of digital piracy. They
invited the organizer of the petition and a few of its signees to a
conference about online piracy.

“Rather than just look at how legislation can be stopped, ask yourself:
Where do we go from here? Don’t limit your opinion to what’s the wrong
thing to do, ask yourself what’s right.” And later in the post, “Washington
needs to hear your best ideas about how to clamp down on rogue websites and
other criminals who make money off the creative efforts of American artists
and rights holders.”

The administration also calls for any future legislation to have vast
bipartisan support.
------------------------------
Where is SOPA now?
------------------------------

Currently, SOPA sits on the legislative sidelines. The House resumes
session this week, but according to *The
Guardian<http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/jan/16/sopa-shelved-obama-piracy-legislation>
*, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) told an anti-SOPA colleague
that there would be no vote on the matter “unless there is consensus on the
bill.”

An anti-SOPA rally in New York is still being planned for Wednesday. Many
popular websites, including Reddit and Wikipedia, will join in with a
blackout in protest of SOPA. *Mashable* will be reporting from the scene.

The MPAA, Hollywood’s lobbying organization, released a
statement<https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mpaa.org%2Fresources%2Ff430be40-c1b0-4119-ba40-b9391bb275c2.pdf>
Friday
in which it reaffirms its belief that neither SOPA nor PIPA infringe upon
Americans’ freedom of speech.

The White House
statement<http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/01/14/obama-administration-responds-we-people-petitions-sopa-and-online-piracy>
was
signed by Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator at Office of
Management and Budget Victoria Espinel, U.S. Chief Technology Officer
Aneesh Chopra and Special Assistant to the President and Cybersecurity
Coordinator for National Security Staff Howard Schmidt.

Do you agree with the White House’s requirements for digital piracy
legislation? Let us know in the comments below.

On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 6:11 AM, michael gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com>wrote:

>
>
> http://ct.techrepublic.com/clicks?t=1116143197-6d0bee25f1f62d049a797cfceaf73
> 1f3-bf&brand=TECHREPUBLIC&s=5
>
> [snip]
>
> "Below are 4 passages that the White House has emphasized with bold text
> in the response:
>
>     Any effort to combat online piracy must guard against the risk of
> online censorship of lawful activity and must not inhibit innovation by
> our dynamic businesses large and small.
>
>     We must avoid creating new cybersecurity risks or disrupting the
> underlying architecture of the Internet.
>
>     That is why the Administration calls on all sides to work together
> to pass sound legislation this year that provides prosecutors and rights
> holders new legal tools to combat online piracy originating beyond U.S.
> borders while staying true to the principles outlined above in this
> response.
>
>     This is not just a matter for legislation. We expect and encourage
> all private parties, including both content creators and Internet
> platform providers working together, to adopt voluntary measures and
> best practices to reduce online piracy."
>
> [big snip]
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
-- 

Nariné Khachatryan
Media Education Center
Yerevan, Armenia
http://www.immasin.am  <http://www.immasin.am>
http://www.safe.am/
http://www.mediaeducation.am/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20120117/0d4a8b07/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t