Ruppersberger: ‘Stop Online Piracy Act’ Won’t See a Vote
The congressman from Baltimore County cites cybersecurity as his primary concern for not supporting the bill.
Rep. C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger is not in favor of the Stop Online Piracy Act, which has gained tremendous attention today as Internet giants protest the proposed legislation.
Ruppersberger, a Baltimore County Democrat, wrote in his blog Wednesday afternoon assuring constituents that the bill would not come to a vote amid an outcry of petitioning.
“The bill, if made law, would expand the ability of U.S. law enforcement and copyright holders to fight online trafficking in copyrighted intellectual property and counterfeit goods,” according to a Wikipedia entry. “Presented to the House Judiciary Committee, it builds on the similar PRO-IP Act of 2008 and the corresponding Senate bill, the PROTECT IP Act.”
Wikipedia is one of many Web giants (which includes Google, Wired, among others) “blacking out” at least part of their sites today, standing in opposition of the bill, which was introduced in October by Texas Republican Rep. Lamar S. Smith.
The bill has drawn criticism from more than 50,000 petitioners who claim that the broad, vague language of the bill could threaten Web properties like Facebook and Twitter with legal action, merely for allowing users to post links to questionable material.
But for Ruppersberger, the matter at hand comes down to cybersecurity—a field for which the ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence is passionate about.
“Stealing copyrighted material is a serious problem for American businesses and innovators,” Ruppersberger wrote in his blog. “The theft of movies, music and television content over the Internet costs the U.S. economy more than 373,000 jobs, $16 billion in lost earnings, and $3 billion in lost federal, state and local government tax revenue each year.
“However, I have serious reservations about this bill in its current form because of its potential impact on cybersecurity,” he continues. As Ranking Member of the House Intelligence Community, I believe cyber attacks are one of our nation’s top threats. Until we better understand the impact, I can not support this legislation.”
A video titled "Protect IP/SOPA Breaks The Internet" posted to Vimeo by "Fight for the Future" addresses cybersecurity concerns at around the 2:15 mark.
The Senate is expected to vote on the Protect IP Act on Jan. 24, according to a press release sent to reporters Wednesday.
"[Senate Majority Leader Harry] Reid has indicated there could be significant changes that would make the bill a 'winner for everyone, not just for the content people,'" writes Pamela Heisey of MapLight.
Sen. Ben Cardin (D-MD) said in a statement last week that he would not vote for the Senate version, which he co-sponsored, as written.
"As the remaining portions of PIPA progress, I will continue to seek out meaningful amendments and alternative proposals to address the bill’s current flaws," he said.
Bart
4:54 pm on Wednesday, January 18, 2012
I was seriously disappointed when I heard one of the Senators offering the bill bragged that he didn't really know much about the Internet. He wants to write laws controlling something he knows nothing about!
ralahinn1
6:06 pm on Wednesday, January 18, 2012
I am against Sopa and Pipa myself, while I understand the concept that people should get paid for their intellectual property,Sopa and Pipa are too constricting as written.
Paul Amirault
9:13 pm on Wednesday, January 18, 2012
Most of the old codgers in the Senate have overstayed their welcome and have no clue about technology today. If you don't understand the Internet, if you can't send a text message or if you don't know what an IP address is and you are in the Senate or House, the pasture awaits you. Just simply get out.
Sean Tully
12:53 am on Thursday, January 19, 2012
All the arguments I've heard against these bills are knee-jerk and mostly false. The fact is that huge new corporations like Google are fighting for their lives because they know their star baby, Youtube, violates copyright laws left and right and does very little to stop it. Congress, including Ruppersberger, are caving in because they are weak.
Michael Middleton
4:25 pm on Thursday, January 19, 2012
Sean - theft is definitely bad. It's a mindset, especially in the 30-and-below generation, that content should be available without having to pay for it. These bills however do nothing to control that. Talk about knee-jerk, similar to the war on drugs these bills do nothing to stem the source of the problem, only to punish those that publish the content. Publishing while actively knowing the content to be illegal is definitely a problem and should be dealt with. These bills provide an avenue to punish those that might be hosting content without knowledge of it's legality.
What this does then, amongst other things, is provide a de facto censorship as sites like Google, Boing Boing, Reddit, etc. will cease allowing content to be posted due to the inability to check every single link/comment/article/fact/opinion that comes across their pages. It puts the burden of proof on the "offender", and most small blogs/reporters/etc. can't afford to hire a lawyer. I've seen many cases throughout the Internet where small bloggers have been accused of libel, theft, etc. simply for putting something up that someone didn't like, or just not monitoring their sites 24/7 for "infringing" material posted by other users.
Check here for the valid complaints - and they are valid - https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/01/how-pipa-and-sopa-violate-white-house-principles-supporting-free-speech