Sopa and Pipa protests not over, says Wikipedia..

 

Wikipedia's blacked-out message of  protest was replaced with a white "thank you"
 

After a 24-hour blackout, Wikipedia has returned to full working order but declared: "We're not done yet."

The site had blocked its content for 24 hours in protest at proposed anti-piracy legislation in the US.
The encyclopaedia said the site had been viewed 162 million times, with eight million people following instructions to contact politicians.
The protest led to eight US lawmakers withdrawing their support for the proposed bills.
Two of the bill's co-sponsors, Marco Rubio from Florida and Roy Blunt from Missouri, are among those who have withdrawn their support after "legitimate concerns".
But backers of the legislation, led by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), described the action as an "irresponsible" publicity "stunt".
The Stop Online Piracy Act (Sopa) and Protect Intellectual Property Act (Pipa) have caused considerable controversy among internet users and businesses since the plans were proposed in October last year.
'Melted servers'
Wednesday's co-ordinated action was intended to raise the profile of the debate to those outside of the tight-knit technology community - an objective Wikipedia said had been met.
"More than 162 million people saw our message asking if you could imagine a world without free knowledge," the site said.
 
Elsewhere, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg deemed the occasion worthy enough to post his first tweet in almost three years.
"Tell your congressmen you want them to be pro-internet," he wrote, linking to a longer statement on Facebook.
He continued: "We can't let poorly thought out laws get in the way of the internet's development.
"Facebook opposes Sopa and Pipa, and we will continue to oppose any laws that will hurt the internet."
Google, which urged its US visitors to sign a petition against the bills, said more than 4.5 million signatures had been gathered.
Advertising campaign
Supporters of the bill were quick to condemn the actions of the websites. Ex-Senator Chris Dodd, MPAA's chief executive, described the blackouts as an "abuse of power".
 

• Wikipedia - after the blackout

Meanwhile, Creative America - a group which represents many big names in the movie business including Disney and Warner Bros - has launched an advertising campaign in the US.
A banner advertisement was shown in New York's Times Square offering advice on "what to do during an internet blackout". It suggested reading books, listening to music or watching a movie.
News Corporation chairman Rupert Murdoch, a vocal supporter of Sopa, continued to spar with users on Twitter.
He tweeted: "Seems blogsphere has succeeded in terrorising many senators and congressmen who previously committed. Politicians all the same."
Watching closely
In the UK, the plans around Sopa and Pipa have been keenly watched, particularly by those worried about the effect the measures could have on internet companies in the country.
Peter Bradwell, a campaigner with the Open Rights Group, told the BBC: "It's explicit that [Sopa advocates] want to tackle foreign websites.
 


A television advertising campaign supporting the anti-piracy plans has been launched
"We're concerned about the jurisdiction that gives over the kind of things you or I do on the internet in the UK - and the power that gives US copyright holders over the things that we do here."
Mr Bradwell recounted the comments made by Ed Vaizey, Minister for Culture, Communications and Creative Industries, who in July last year said he was looking at some anti-piracy measures being discussed in the US.
"Hopefully, what the storm around this has helped do is highlight why we are so concerned about proposals for new website blocking powers.
"I hope it really helps them understand how they shouldn't make policy, and really should drive home some of the complaints that we've been making."
'Startling'
The Department for Culture, Media and Sport said it did not wish to comment on the protests, nor on the details of Sopa and Pipa.
In pictures: Sopa protests

• View a gallery of protest action taken by some of the web's highest profile websites

Eric Van Der Kleij, chief executive of the Tech City Investment Organisation, told the BBC: "We know that it is important for UK companies but it is definitely something for the US government. I am watching the situation closely.
"Regarding UK regulation, our position is that we are completely committed to an appropriate regulatory environment that protects rights but does not stifle innovation."
The UK's "digital champion" Martha Lane Fox said the blackout technique was surprising.
"Neutrality and equality of access is one of the fundamental principles of the internet," she told the BBC.
"So (while) I understand the concern that many US companies have about the restrictive Sopa law, blackouts are a startling way to show their frustration."
Constructive debate
Echoing the statements of rights holders in the US, Richard Mollet, chairman of the Publishers Association, criticised the blacked-out websites for not engaging "constructively" in the piracy debate.
"They should say: 'OK, there's a problem with copyright infringement. We, as internet companies, have a role here. What can we do to fulfil that role and help rights holders reduce infringement?'"
 


Creative America posted an image on Facebook of its advertisement on display in New York's Times Square
He argued that while Wikipedia was a valued resource, it would be more noticeable to the world if rights holders were to switch off their content for a day.
"Think what you would lose.
"If you walked around the streets of America or Britain with no creative content available to you, because rights holders had decided to shut up shop, you would be deprived of the BBC, cinemas, radio, bookstores and so on.
"What's at stake when rogue internet sites are available to people and revenues are deprived is a great deal more than the excellent but nevertheless more limited Wikipedia."

What Are SOPA and PIPA And Why All The Fuss?

Knowing that Wikipedia would go dark for 24 hours in protest to SOPA and PIPA, I took the precaution of printing it out last night. Just kidding. Wikipedia is huge. I wanted to say just how big it is, but when I went to Googleto look up “size of Wikipedia,” most of the relevant results directed me to articles on Wikipedia which, of course, is dark for the day.

Google didn’t go dark but it did black out its logo and has a link to “Tell Congress: Please don’t censor the web!” with a link to an online petition.

What are SOPA and PIPA and why are people upset?

This is all because of two pieces of legislation: the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the House and its Senate companion bill, the Protect IP Act (PIPA).  The purpose of these bills is to make it harder for sites — especially those located outside the United States — to sell or distribute pirated copyrighted material such as movies and music as well as physical goods such as counterfeit purses and watches. Even most of SOPA and PIPA’s strongest opponents applaud the intentions of the legislation while deploring what it might actually accomplish.

Although its sponsors have said that they would amend the bill, as currently written, SOPA would enable the U.S. Attorney General to seek a court order to require “a service provider (to) take technically feasible and reasonable measures designed to prevent access by its subscribers located within the United States to the foreign infringing site.” Until this weekend, one of the ways to do that would have been to cut the DNS (domain name server) records that point to the site, but that provision is likely to be removed after the Obama administration weighed in on the issue over the weekend, saying “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.” The administration also echoed concerns raised by a number of security experts, including some anti-malware companies that the bill could disrupt the underlying architecture of the Internet.

The White House statement coincided with sponsors agreeing to remove the DNS blocking provisions. Still, the bill could require search engines like Google to delete any links to the sites.

These are not partisan bills. SOPA and PIPA have proponents and opponents on both sides of the aisle.

The bill would require sites to refrain from linking to any sites “dedicated to the theft of U.S. property.” It would also prevent companies from placing on the sites and block payment companies like Visa, Mastercard and Paypal from transmitting funds to the site. For more, see this blog post on Reddit.

The problem with this is that the entire site would be affected, not just that portion that is promoting the distribution of illegal material. It would be a bit like requiring the manager of a flea market to shut down the entire market because some of the merchants were selling counterfeit goods.

The bill would also cut off funding by prohibiting payment services from cooperating with infringing sites.

Opponents say it would create an “internet blacklist.”

As CBSNews.com said in its analysis, there are existing laws, including the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DCMA) that require operators to remove specific infringing content. SOPA and PIPA would go after entire domains. Also see Declan McCullagh’s How SOPA would affect you:FAQ on CNET News.

Hollywood vs. Silicon Valley

These bills have pitted the entertainment industry against the technology industry. “Hollywood” has a legitimate interest in protecting its intellectual property. Not only are profits at stake but so are jobs. Thousands of Americans make their living by dreaming up content and selling it to the world and piracy does in fact take money out of their pockets.  Silicon Valley has invested billions in creating companies that freely distribute information. While Google and every other Silicon Valley company must respect copyrights, they thrive on helping people find what they want. If, suddenly, every web site that had links to other sites had to worry that they could be in violation of the law by linking to a “banned” site, it could put undo pressure on these companies. There is also worry that SOPA and PIPA could be abused and lead to censorship for purposes other than intellectual property protection.

Are the protests having any effect?

Shutting down Wikipedia for a day or blacking out the Google logo won’t stop these bills in their tracks, but they have raised an enormous amount of awareness about the issue. As a result, it is likely that these bills will continue to be amended and, though they may pass in some fashion, they are likely to be quite different than they were when first proposed.