...if you believe the ProtectIP bill is unconstitutional.
The ProtectIP says if you link to copyrighted material the author does not want on the Internet, the owner of the material can get your site banned.
Obviously the idea was,"If someone links to a RIAA song, they can ban your website."
But the reality is:
Google links to all sorts of things, and it might link to an RIAA song. So Google is illegal in this bill.
A forum like ChristianForums could get shut down too if for the wrong moment, someone links to an RIAA song.
Even more disturbing:
If you draw an image, and someone uploads it without your consent, you can ban the website hosting it and linking it to it. So you could draw a stick figure saying,"I don't want to be on Facebook", and your friend uploads it to Facebook without your permission. Technically Facebook should be shutdown under this law. They won't enforce it, but that is besides the point.
Basically every site on the internet that links to a site outside it's domain would be illegal. This means anyone can shut down any site at a whim, if they have legal representation.
To me, this is going against the first amendment and is unconstitutional. Also, who said,"Isn't it convienient when the entire nation are lawbreakers?"
Almost everyone would be breaking the law the instant this passes, but people would go on like nothing happened, and random websites would start going dark at the whims of anyone with power.
The ProtectIP says if you link to copyrighted material the author does not want on the Internet, the owner of the material can get your site banned.
Obviously the idea was,"If someone links to a RIAA song, they can ban your website."
But the reality is:
Google links to all sorts of things, and it might link to an RIAA song. So Google is illegal in this bill.
A forum like ChristianForums could get shut down too if for the wrong moment, someone links to an RIAA song.
Even more disturbing:
If you draw an image, and someone uploads it without your consent, you can ban the website hosting it and linking it to it. So you could draw a stick figure saying,"I don't want to be on Facebook", and your friend uploads it to Facebook without your permission. Technically Facebook should be shutdown under this law. They won't enforce it, but that is besides the point.
Basically every site on the internet that links to a site outside it's domain would be illegal. This means anyone can shut down any site at a whim, if they have legal representation.
To me, this is going against the first amendment and is unconstitutional. Also, who said,"Isn't it convienient when the entire nation are lawbreakers?"
Almost everyone would be breaking the law the instant this passes, but people would go on like nothing happened, and random websites would start going dark at the whims of anyone with power.
