Stop the "Stop Internet Piracy" Act

Now I'm all for people not stealing from each other, and I am even generally in favor of people not stealing from companies and governments (I say "even" because I've met a surprising number of people who think one or the other of these is just fine). However, I am also a fan of the free exchange of ideas, and the concept, often sited as the basis for our (the American) legal system, that everyone is innocent until proven guilty, and the Stop Internet Piracy Act does not respect either of these ideals.

The gist of the Act, for those of you who may not have heard about it, is that if someone posts copyrighted material on the internet, the owner of the copyright can have that website and any website linking to it shut down. In those broad strokes, it may not sound that bad.  In fact, you may be thinking "This gal just likes illegal downloads! I bet she used to go crazy on Napster!" Well I don't, and I didn't.  Let's get more specific and use examples. Let's use me.

One of my early posts was a review of the new Muppet movie. If the owners of the copyrights on that movie or the Muppet name wanted to, under the Stop Internet Piracy Act, they could have my blog taken down. No trial, no "wait, a movie review is not copyright infringement", my blog would just be gone. And how could I get it back? I would have to sue.  Even though most newspapers in the country publish book and movie reviews every week, under this Act, I would have to file a lawsuit to clear my name. And you know what else? Any site on the internet linking to my blog could be taken down too.
Now, it was a positive review, so it's unlikely that they would want my site taken down if they read it.  Let's try another example.

My husband was showing me pictures on line the other day of giant clams.  They have vivid multi-colored mantels (seriously, google it, they're wild).  I thought that would be a great inspirations post. However, under the Stop Internet Piracy Act, if I posted someone else's photos without permission, I could be shut down. Alright, I won't import other people's pictures to my blog, fine. How about I post links to some of the really cool pictures? Well, if even one of those pictures was posted by someone who didn't have the permission of the copyright holder, the Act would let the copyright holder shut them down, and shut me down for linking to it. Again, no trial, no forum where I could say "he said on the site that he had permission" or "the caption said he took the picture himself", my blog would just be gone until we filed and won a lawsuit.

Speaking of Google, they are opposed to the Stop Internet Piracy Act.  Why? What is Google but a way to get links to the rest of the internet; search a book or movie title, and under the Act, Google should be shut down for the links that come up. Wikipedia is also against the act, and took their site down for a day this past week in protest.

Anything like Wikipedia that allows people to post is vulnerable to this Act. Think of your favorite discussion board getting shut down because of something one person posted. And think of the abuse; don't like what a website is saying? Post a link to something with a militant copyright holder as a comment, and they shall be silenced. It would be censorship run rampant under the guise of protecting intellectual property.