End result: SOPA 2.0 contains a crazy scary clause that’s going to make it crazy easy to cut off websites with no recourse whatsoever. And this part isn’t just limited to payment providers/ad networks — but to service providers, search engines and domain registrars/registries as well. Yes. Search engines. So you can send a notice to a search engine, and if they want to keep their immunity, they have to take the actions in either Section 102(c)(2) or 103(c)(2), which are basically all of the “cut ‘em off, block ‘em” remedies. That’s crazy. This basically encourages search engines to disappear sites upon a single notice. It encourages domain registries to kill domains based on notices. With no recourse at all, because the providers have broad immunity.
Oh no, this isn’t crazy at all, it’s authoritarian. Imagine how long Goldman666 or Matt Taibbi or Karl Denninger or yours truly would be around with this rule. Wikileaks demonstrates that even Swedish domiciled sites are not safe.
Read it at Naked Capitalism
by Yves Smith
Posts
1 comments:
If we applied these SOPA principles to banks, if they acted like pirates or stole property from a single citizen we could remove them from any participation in electeonic payments systems and prohibit their interaction with another member of the financial system. Radical ideologues like goeorge bush or obama have demonstrated they will use any power granted to achieve political goals rather than the public good and intended purpose of the power, how could anyone without narrow financial interest support this crap?
Post a Comment