Timeline for How does SOPA threaten Stack Overflow / Stack Exchange?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 30, 2011 at 15:05 | comment | added | ChrisLively | The problem congress is trying to solve is that foreign sites and ISPs can (and routinely do) completely ignore DCMA notices. As our laws do not apply to them there is currently no fallback position. So, the best they can do is block US citizens from accessing those sites. Quite simple, and IMHO, completely understandable. | |
| Nov 30, 2011 at 15:03 | comment | added | ChrisLively | Kind of. If the Attorney General thinks that a foreign site is dedicated to IP theft, then the AG can petition the court to have access to the site blocked for US citizens. If approved US based ISPs have to comply quickly. The site can then petition the court to have a full review performed and access reinstated. The difference is that the DMCA allows an individual to send a takedown notice directly to the site and their ISP. If the site doesn't respond then the ISP can make the decision on whether to block access or not. | |
| Nov 30, 2011 at 15:00 | history | edited | Jesse Slicer | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 184 characters in body
|
| Nov 30, 2011 at 14:59 | comment | added | Jesse Slicer | @ChrisLively Thanks, I'll edit that. But the other thing you seem to be saying is that the utterly crappy DMCA is now going global? | |
| Nov 30, 2011 at 14:56 | comment | added | ChrisLively | @JesseSlicer The link you provided discusses the fact that a DMCA take down letter doesn't require judicial review. The problem is that DMCA can't do jack against a foreign internet site, hence SOPA. However SOPA still requires a court order to make it happen. | |
| Nov 29, 2011 at 20:40 | comment | added | Jesse Slicer | Got it: money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/gigaom/articles/… . | |
| Nov 29, 2011 at 20:31 | comment | added | Jesse Slicer | Let me find my source where I read that and let you know what I find. If I can't find it, I'll strike that from my text. | |
| Nov 29, 2011 at 20:05 | comment | added | Alessandro Vernet | Jesse, you're saying "All you have to do is show some sort of evidence to law enforcement". But just based what I read on the SOPA Wikipedia page, for action to be taken against a site under SOAP, the DOJ or copyright holder must first get a court order, like say for a retraining order, which is a completely different story. Am I missing something? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act | |
| Nov 29, 2011 at 16:23 | comment | added | jcolebrand | Unfortunately this is indeed precisely the case. And it's the reason for our #OWS and other similar movements. | |
| Nov 29, 2011 at 16:05 | history | answered | Jesse Slicer | CC BY-SA 3.0 |