Politics

Ron Paul Voices Opposition to SOPA

SOPA, which aims to protect intellectual property, is considered by Electronic Frontier Foundation and other civil liberties groups as a threat to human rights and whistleblowing. Ron Paul has joined others in opposing the bill.

Here at Death and Taxes, we have come out against the Stop Online Privacy Act (SOPA), agreeing with Electronic Frontier Foundation and the ACLU that the legislation presents a threat to human rights and whistleblowing. In the Senate, the bill is known as Protect IP Act, where Rep. Ron Wyden (D-OR) has put the bill on hold.

SOPA was originally intended to prohibit websites from hosting copyrighted material. The legislation has been backed by MPAA (Hollywood studios) and RIAA (music industry) lobbyists and is largely supported by the Republican and Democratic heads of the committees considering SOPA.

However, it does have some opponents in the House, including Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), who has stated SOPA “would mean the end of the Internet as we know it.”

SOPA might well severely restrict the work of human rights advocates and dissidents who use the internet anonymously.

For example, the Tor, an anonymous network used by activists and whistleblowers to communicate and send files that cannot be accessed by authorities could find its service shut down at the ISP level because there might be suspicion that the network is being used to transfer intellectual property, such as movies.

As the Washington Post notes, opposition to the bill is growing. Now Ron Paul, ever the Libertarian, has come out in opposition to SOPA, which is the sort of legislation that always stirs the Doctor into action.

Paul was part of a bi-partisan group that sent a letter to the House Judiciary Committee outlining their opposition to the bill. The group included Reps. Anna Eshoo (D), Doris Matsui (D), Mike Thompson (D), John Campbell (R), Zoe Lofgren (D), Mike Honda (D), George Miller (D), Jared Polis (D-Colo.), Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) and Mike Doyle (D- Penn.).

Ron Paul is correct to line up against SOPA. However, he and the other representatives are approaching the issue from the perspective of a business perspective—that is, do not damage the technology industry, “one of the few bright spots in our economy,” as the letter reads.

As I noted in a previous piece on SOPA, a strong case can be made that “SOPA will severely constrict the flow of information from people promoting freedom, civil liberty and free information. Only a portion of the site might contain copyrighted material, but if it does, the entire site could be hamstrung, as was the case with WikiLeaks through Senator Joe Lieberman’s efforts with Visa, Mastercard and PayPal.”

It is good to not restrict the internet for business purposes, but it is far better to ensure that those activists and dissidents who use the internet to facilitate change don’t find it impossible to do their work.

To send a message to your legislator urging them to reject SOPA, head to the EFF website and sign this petition to send a message directly to the White House.

  1. November 18, 2011 at 2:49 pm, NadePaulKuciGravMcKi said:

    Homeland Police State
    will not censor the net.

    Reply

  2. November 18, 2011 at 2:52 pm, Pat said:

    It’s interesting because I think the bill is well intentioned, but perhaps poorly written.  It’s great for the entertainment industry as it fights piracy and people will start paying for music and movies again.  This is good for everyone – trust me – as we don’t want to see these industry’s falter.  This would mean the end of music and movies as we know it.  No indie studio’s have the marketing, production, and promotional power that can be offered by these companies.  We would regress in these industries and it would be incredibly difficult to keep up with every little film/band coming out.  I’m not talking about just blockbusters, even the small “indie” studios are managed by the big boys in these industries.

    Now, to get back to the bill.  The downfall of this bill is that it could potentially shut down sites like youtube or facebook where people share songs they upload or videos.  If an artist or label decides that’s a no no, then the site get’s blocked.  Kind of dumb.  I can see where this is going, as most film and music companies want to block pirate bay and other torrent sites, but there needs to be a better way.  Perhaps, just the removal of certain videos/songs?  Prince has been issuing cease and desist letters for years now on all youtube videos that are posted of him, but he’s not shutting down the website.

    Just some ideas to think about, there are really positives on both sides.

    Reply

    • November 18, 2011 at 3:11 pm, Georgeq Tharby said:

      One small misconception, I’ll give you that the major labels are hurting because they can’t sell as many CDs (although artists, who get pennies at best on CD sales aren’t hurting, their revenue comes from concerts and merchandise, both of which aren’t really hurt by piracy), however the MPAA companies have had record profits each year for the past five years (google it if you don’t trust my word).  Record profits year after year is not the signs of a struggling industry who needs extreme measures, it’s the sign of a powerful industry who wants control over another industry.  There are also far more “indie” studios today then there have  been in the past, and these studios biggest problem is not piracy, but obscurity.

      Reply

    • November 19, 2011 at 1:11 am, balaji said:

      while you have understood the law better than others, your conclusion is probably not right. companies like youtube and facebook on not phony sites who’ll wait to be sued and shut down. once the law comes into force, they’ll ensure that their site is clear of pirated content. its far easier than you think. pornography, phishing and spam links are removed/moderated everyday by internet companies. removing pirated content is no different. currently internet companies don’t remove them becos lots of people want to watch pirated content and its profitable for google, facebook etc to cater to those customers.

      Reply

      • January 18, 2012 at 12:02 pm, STOPSOPA said:

        And if they don’t catch it? That means, without due process, the “internet police” or whatever committee put together will be able to shut the site down immediately, fine the owners for an extorted amount of money, and serve jail time for every person who had been able to see (JUST THE LINKS) to the copyrighted material. So, to change that, websites will have to get rid of all ability for users to post or do anything to their site in their forums, product reviews, and whatever!

        It’s another stance on American government using its sloppy ability to Big Brother for “the benefit of the people”.

        Reply

  3. November 18, 2011 at 2:59 pm, Anonymous said:

    The spokesman for our country’s Constitution, Liberty and Freedom. so it is no surprise.

    Reply

  4. November 18, 2011 at 3:28 pm, Ese said:

    No surprise that Ron Paul is supporting more freedom, again. Ron Paul 2012!

    Reply

  5. November 18, 2011 at 4:17 pm, reteo said:

    Does the reason it’s opposed really matter?  The important point is that it has opposition, and on censorship grounds.

    Reply

  6. November 18, 2011 at 7:17 pm, yonish said:

    “Legalize Freedom”
    –Ron Paul

    Reply

  7. November 18, 2011 at 9:09 pm, A11625839 said:

    FYI, the article refers to SOPA as the Stop Online ‘Privacy’ Act, rather than the Stop Online Piracy Act. Pretty big difference between the two.

    Reply

    • November 18, 2011 at 10:28 pm, Chadananda said:

      Haha, that’s a great slip. It’s pretty close to true anyway.

      Reply

  8. November 19, 2011 at 2:15 am, Jackson Baer said:

    Ron Paul is on his way!http://www.whatthehellbook.com/the-book/

    Reply

  9. November 19, 2011 at 6:47 am, nexmike said:

    The congress is full of old people who are out of there time.
    They do not understand how the internet works in any way shape or form.

    It is impossible to stop individuals loading copyright material and it is a sign of the times.

    98% of people have some kind of copyright material on there laptop or computer, information has changed in the way it can be accessed and the SPEED.

    As the speed of the internet increases as it will in time, a movie will be downloaded in seconds. Then it will be completely impossible to stop.

    The second point is that information has gone past downloading to streaming. When it gets to the point in which everyone has very fast broadband 300mb for instance.
    The internet will be the same as a local network and will be shared closer to real time.
    It is just a matter of time.

    Reply

  10. November 19, 2011 at 3:33 pm, Anonymous said:

    The internet is going to get jacked up if anyone other than Ron Paul gets elected. Hell, it’s basically the only reason any of us know who he is. Better shut it down. There’s too much unfiltered information here.

    Reply

  11. November 19, 2011 at 4:12 pm, Peter Coffin said:

    I made this video lightly approaching the subject. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mC6FH1Ldop4

    Reply

  12. December 07, 2011 at 11:23 am, Beruang Chan said:

    He should replace Obama

    Reply

  13. January 18, 2012 at 11:35 am, Amund Iversen Karlsen said:

    Again, the man who can restore America does something good!

    Reply

Add New Comment

Showing 17 comments
Subscribe by RSS