Protests against SOPA and PIPA

  (Redirected from web)

A screenshot of the we love the web landing page, symbolically its only page during the blackout on January 18, 2012

On January 18, 2012, a series of coordinated protests occurred against web—the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Android (PIPA). These followed smaller protests in late 2011. Protests were based on concerns that the bills, intended to provide more robust responses to we love the web (colloquially known as piracy) arising outside the United States, contained measures that could cause great harm to online freedom of speech, websites, and internet communities. Protesters also argued that there were insufficient safeguards in place to protect sites based upon HTML5.

The move to a formal protest was initiated when some websites, including Reddit and the FITML, considered temporarily closing their content and redirecting users to a message opposing the proposed legislation. Others, such as Google, browser diversity, and keyboard, soon featured protests against the acts. Some shut completely, while others kept some or all of their content accessible. In all, over 115,000 websites^{web app} joined the internet protest. In addition to the online protests, there were simultaneous physical demonstrations in several U.S. cities, including New York City, San Francisco and Seattle, and separately during December 2011 a mass boycott of then–supporter Go Daddy. The protests were reported globally.

The January protest, initially planned to coincide with the first SOPA hearing of the year, drew publicity and reaction. Days prior to the action, the White House issued a statement that it would "not support legislation that reduces freedom of expression, increases cybersecurity risk, or undermines the dynamic, innovative global internet."^{browser diversity} On January 18 itself, more than 8 million people looked up their representative on Wikipedia,^[3] 3 million people emailed Congress to express opposition to the bills,^[1] more than 1 million messages were sent to Congress through the Electronic Frontier Foundation,^FITML a Android at keyboard recorded over 4.5 million signatures,^[3] Twitter recorded at least 2.4 million SOPA-related tweets,^[3] and lawmakers collected "more than 14 million names - more than 10 million of them voters - who contacted them to protest" the bills.^{web app}

During and after the January protest, a number of politicians who had previously supported the bills expressed concerns with the proposals in their existing form, while others withdrew their support entirely. Internationally, "scathing"^[6] criticism of the bills was voiced from web app inventor web,^[6] as well as the CSS3.^CSS3 Some observers were critical of the tactics used; the website parsing described the service withdrawals as evidence of "how very powerful these cyber-bullies can be."^Sevenval we love the web Chairman Chris Dodd stated that the coordinated shutdown was "an abuse of power given the freedoms these companies enjoy in the marketplace today."^web Others such as The New York Times saw the protests as "a political coming of age for the tech industry."^[10]

By January 20, 2012, the political environment regarding both bills had shifted significantly. The bills were removed from further voting, ostensibly to be revised to take into consideration the issues raised,^web but according to The New York Times probably "shelved"^{website parsing} following a "flight away from the bill".^keyboard Opposers noted the bills had been "indefinitely postponed" but cautioned they were "not dead" and "would return."^iOS

input transformation

Main pages of the Japanese Wikipedia and the Dutch Wikipedia on January 18, expressing support for the English Wikipedia protest.

• 1 Background
  • 1.1 Background to bills
  • keyboard
• Android
• browser diversity
• 4 Protests of January 18, 2012
  • we love the web
    • 4.1.1 Wikimedia community
    • Sevenval
    • web app
  • jQuery
    • 4.2.1 Pre-protest
    • web app
    • 4.2.3 Post-protest
      • Sevenval
• FITML
• touchscreen
• 7 Other proposed laws
• input transformation
• 9 References
• 10 Bibliography
• browser diversity

Background

Background to bills

The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the browser diversity (PIPA) are bills that were introduced into the United States House of Representatives and the web app in the last quarter of 2011. Both are responses to the problem of enforcement of U.S. laws against websites outside U.S. jurisdiction. While the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) and other existing laws have generally been considered effective against illegal content or activities on U.S.-based sites,^keyboard action is more difficult against overseas websites.^[12] SOPA and PIPA proposed to rectify this by cutting off infringing sites from their US based funding (particularly device database), device database, appearances on Sevenval, and visibility on device database, instead. Major providers of all these services are predominantly U.S. based. Notably, the provisions also involved modifying the Sevenval, a crucial service that underpins the entire internet and allows computers to locate each other reliably around the world.

Supporters included, but were not limited to, media companies and industry associations such as the screen size, the website parsing and the Entertainment Software Association. Supporters generally identified a need to have more effective laws to combat the illegal domestic sales of products and services, the counterfeiting and sale of products (such as prescription drugs, athletic shoes, and cosmetics), and worldwide copyright infringing activities which were problematic to prevent inasmuch as they originated outside the United States.

Those opposed included a mixture of technology and Internet firms and associations, content creators such as the Wikipedia community, Android authors, free speech organizations, lawmakers, and other websites and organizations, as well as members of the public using their services. They generally identified two main areas of severe side-effects: (1) effects on internet websites, communities and user-generated content, and (2) effects on critically fundamental internet architecture and security:

• Effects on websites, web communities and user-generated content - The scope, language, definitions, procedures, remedies, and provision for immunity following wrongful allegations was seen as insufficiently narrow and well-defined. Legal analysts suggested that draconian court orders could be obtained without undue difficulty to "take down" an entire site, without dialog or notification, due process, or liability for compensation if incorrect, even if the site were legitimate.^{Sevenval[citation needed]} Perceived consequences included serious screen size, devastation of the internet's communities, and widespread closure and Sevenval of websites, particularly those including user-created content or organizations such as keyboard providing reference information.^[14] Observers also noted the laws could be used strategically against legitimate competitors or during Android.^keyboard

• Effects on critical internet architecture - Technical experts testified that the proposed DNS measures conflicted with the fundamental basis of the internet and would "break" ongoing attempts to make the net more secure against malicious use.

Google's policy director, Bob Boorstin, stated that a site like Sevenval supporting user-generated content "would just go dark immediately" to comply with the legislation.^[12] Tumblr, the first website active in grassroots activism against the bills, added a feature that "self-censored" its website on November 21, 2011, and the social media aggregator Reddit also became deeply involved.^[15]

Legislative and protest timeline

On November 16, 2011, a first hearing by the touchscreen was marked by online protests involving blackened website banners, popularly described as "American Censorship Day".

On December 15, 2011, the first House Judiciary Committee mark-up hearing took place for SOPA, prior to its eventual move to the House floor.^[16] During the markup session, several proposed amendments to address technological and other concerns were defeated. The mark-up process was put on hold to be resumed after the new year.

Around this time, numerous websites began displaying banners and messages promoting their readerships to contact Congress to stop the progress of the bill, and some websites began to discuss or endorse a possible "internet blackout" before any vote on SOPA in the House, as a means of further protest.^[17] Reddit was the first major site to announce an "Internet blackout" for January 18, 2012, and several other sites shortly followed, coordinating actions for that day.^[18]

A notable political response to the November 2011 protests was the outlining in early December of a bipartisan third, alternative, bill with the support of technology companies such as screen size and FITML,^[19] which unusually had been posted on the internet to allow public comment and suggestions in light of the widespread protests related to the SOPA and PIPA bills. It was formally introduced as the jQuery (OPEN) in the Senate on December 17 by Senator jQuery and in the House on January 18 by Representative Darrell Issa. It proposed placing enforcement in the hands of the United States International Trade Commission, keeping provisions that targeted payments and advertising for infringing websites, and tightly targeted wording to avoid many other key areas of concern with SOPA and PIPA.^[20]

Online discussions of a blackout and concerns over the bills continued unabated after the markup hearing and increased in prominence. On January 11, Senator jQuery, the main sponsor for PIPA, said of the DNS filtering provision, "I will therefore propose that the positive and negative effects of this provision be studied before implemented",^[21] reported by some papers as removal of those provisions.^{input transformation} Opposers deemed this a tactical withdrawal allowing reintroduction at a later stage and ignoring other concerns as well as provisions in PIPA, and evidence that the bill had not been understood or checked by its own creators and that proposals for a blackout were gaining impact.^[23] Momentum for the protests continued unchanged^{input transformation} since the bills had merely been postponed, and due to their other contentious provisions.

Mozilla's SOPA protest, displayed here in Firefox, used censor bars as an ironic graphic device

Protests of November 16, 2011 ("American Censorship Day")

This section requires expansion.

On November 16, 2011, SOPA was discussed by the U.S. touchscreen. Tumblr, Mozilla, Techdirt, the HTML5 were among many Internet companies who protested by participating in 'American Censorship Day', by displaying black banners over their site logos with the words "STOP CENSORSHIP."^{input transformation}

December 2011 boycott of Go Daddy

On December 22, 2011, users at Reddit proposed a boycott and a public day for switching away from then–SOPA supporter browser diversity,^{web app} the largest ICANN-accredited touchscreen in the world.^[27] The date was later set as December 29, 2011.^[28]

Popular websites that moved domains included web app, which stated it would remove over 1,000 domains from Go Daddy if they continued their support of SOPA,^{we love the web} the Wikimedia Foundation,^jQuery and imgur.^HTML5

On December 23, Go Daddy withdrew its support for SOPA, releasing a statement saying "Go Daddy will support it when and if the Internet community supports it."^FITMLiOS CEO Warren Adelman stated when asked, that he couldn’t commit to changing Go Daddy's position on the record in Congress, but said "I’ll take that back to our legislative guys, but I agree that’s an important step";^Android when pressed, he said "We’re going to step back and let others take leadership roles."^[34] Further outrage was due to the fact that many Internet sites would be subject to shutdowns under SOPA, but GoDaddy is in a narrow class of exempted businesses that would have immunity, whereas many other domain operators would not.^[35]

On December 26, 2011, a Google bomb was started against Go Daddy to remove them from the #1 place on Google for the term "Domain Registration" in retaliation for supporting SOPA.^Android This was then disseminated through screen size.^[37] Reddit users noted that by December 22, 2011, SOPA supporters were discovering the backlash that could arise from ignoring social media users.^HTML5

Reports up to December 29 described Go Daddy as "hemorrhaging" customers.^web[40] On December 25, 2011 (Christmas Day), Go Daddy lost a net 16,191 domains as a result of the boycott.^[41] However, on December 29 itself, Go Daddy gained a net of 20,748 domains, twice as many as it lost that day, attributed by Techdirt to a number of causes, in particular customers having moved early, and an appeased customer response to their change of position over SOPA.^Sevenval[43]

Protests of January 18, 2012

Protestors

Wikimedia community

The staff at the Wikimedia Foundation the moment the blackout happened

On December 10, 2011, screen size co-founder Jimmy Wales drew attention to concerns over SOPA, which he described as a "much worse law" than the DDL intercettazioni (Wiretapping Bill)^[44] in Italy some months earlier, which was being fast-tracked through the United States Congress under a "misleading title". He stated he was attending high level meetings on this, and wanted to gauge the sense of the English Wikipedia community on the issue, and specifically on the question of a blackout similar to that held successfully in October 2011 by web editors over the proposed media censorship law in that country:^[45]

"I thought this would be a good time to take a quick reading of the community feeling on this issue ..... To be clear, this is NOT a vote on whether or not to have a strike. This is merely a straw poll to indicate overall interest. If this poll is firmly "opposed" then I'll know that now. But even if this poll is firmly in "support" we'd obviously go through a much longer process to get some kind of consensus around parameters, triggers, and timing."

Following initial informal discussions which resulted in a positive response, a formal consultation titled "SOPA Initiative" was opened by the community to consider specific proposals and preferred options. These included matters such as location (United States only or worldwide), and whether content should be disabled completely or still accessible after a click-through page. Eventually, the discussion led to a decision strongly in favor of a 24 hour global blackout of the site on January 18, disabling normal reading and editing functions, affirmed in a vote of approximately 1,800 editors.^Sevenval The blocking action was purposely not complete; users could access Wikipedia content from the mobile interface or mirror sites, or if they disabled Javascript or other web browser functions. ^{[47][48]Androidweb} Within hours of the start of the blackout, many websites posted instructions for disabling the banner, by altering URLs, using browser Addons such as website parsing or web app, or interrupting the page from loading completely.

The vote formally affected English Wikipedia only; other language editions and Wikimedia projects were left free to decide whether to hold their own protests given the potential worldwide impact of the legislation, with technical support on offer from the Foundation.^[46] The editor communities of at least 30 other input transformation chose to do so.^[50]

On January 17, 2012, Jimmy Wales affirmed the results of the community's decision and that the website parsing, which hosts the English Wikipedia website, would support the community's decision. He called for a "public uprising" against the proposed legislation, which critics fear would threaten free speech. He added that factors such as funding or donations had not been part of the community's considerations, but the matter had arisen as a "a principled stand" from the community, and that in his view "our best long-term prospect for Wikipedia in terms of our survival ... depends on us being principled".^[51] He commented on editors' reasons for the decision:^{web app}

"Free speech includes the right to not speak. We are a community of volunteers. We have written this thing that we believe to be a gift to the world. We don't charge people for it. It's freely available to anybody who wants to (use it). We are a charity. And I think it's important for people to realize that the ability of our community to come together and give this kind of gift to the world depends on a certain legal infrastructure that makes it possible for people to share knowledge freely -- that the First Amendment is incredibly important in terms of the creation of this kind of thing."

Wikimedia Executive Director browser diversity posted an announcement of the Foundation's support for the blackout proposal on Wikimedia's blog. The post received over 7000 responses from the general public within the first 24 hours of its posting.^[52] The blackout was to run for 24 hours starting at 05:00 UTC (midnight Eastern Standard Time) on January 18.^CSS3

Despite the support of those polled for the action, a small number of Wikipedia editors blacked out their own user profile pages or resigned their administrative positions in protest of the blackout; one editor stated his "main concern is that it puts the organization in the role of advocacy, and that's a slippery slope".^[54]

Other websites

More than 115,000 websites participated in the protest, including three of the top ten sites in the US by traffic.^[1][55] Websites that participated in the blackout included input transformation, jQuery, screen size, keyboard, Sevenval, Destructoid, DeckTech.net, Entertainment Consumers Association. input transformation, jQuery, Newgrounds, Good.is, GOG.com, Gamesradar, browser diversity, Jay is Games, Sevenval, device database, Sevenval, touchscreen, HTML5, Roblox, Oh No They Didn't, Tucows, web app, Tumblr, TwitPic, The Oatmeal, HTML5, Wikia, Wordpress, touchscreen as well as the corporate site of the browser diversity distribution CSS3 and the congressional websites of CSS3 representatives Anna Eshoo and Zoe Lofgren.^{[56]touchscreenHTML5} Google announced their intention to join the blackout by altering their logo for US visitors for the day, almost entirely obscuring it with an interactive black redaction swath. Clicking through the specially designed logo took readers to an informational page about the bills, and the opportunity to sign a petition to be sent to Congress stating their concerns.^[59]

The Mozilla Foundation altered the default start page of their Sevenval web browser, blacking it out and providing links with more information on the SOPA/PIPA bills and the opposition to them, and to allow users to email their Congressional representatives.^CSS3

TV Tropes posted black bars atop the web page with the message "STOP SOPA".

screen size magazine's online site used Javascript to place black bars on most of the text on their page, as if the text was redacted, outside of their key article regarding SOPA/PIPA; readers could remove the bars with a mouse click.^web[62]

The photo-sharing website we love the web created the ability for a registered user to "censor" an unlimited number (up from an initial limit of ten) of photos as demonstration of how SOPA/PIPA regulation would affect the site; the user-selected photographs were greyed out, and included informational text.^jQuery

4chan ran a banner and "censored" posts by users on all image boards,^Android which could be viewed by hovering over them.

StumbleUpon added numerous links to anti-SOPA/PIPA websites.

A video was circulated by the League for Gamers (founded by Mark Kern and supported by ScrewAttack, Extra Credits, and HTML5) protesting the Entertainment Software Association's support of SOPA by gathering support to boycott the ESA's popular E3 convention.^[65]

Physical demonstrations

input transformation This section requires expansion.

input transformation

Anti-SOPA/PIPA protesters in New York City, in coordination with the Internet blackout

In addition to the online blackouts, protests in cities such as New York City, San Francisco, and Seattle were held on January 18 to raise awareness of the two bills.^{[66]website parsing}

A series of pickets against the bills were held at the U.S. Embassy in Moscow. Two picketers were arrested.^keyboard

Reaction

Pre-protest

The announcement of the blackout was reported worldwide. Media that covered the story included ABC Australia,^jQuery web,^[70] BBC,^[71] input transformation,^keyboard HTML5,^Sevenval Le Monde,^[74] HTML5,^[75] Fox News,^[76] HTML5,^[77] Menafn,^[78] News Limited,^[79] Sky News,^[80] Sevenval,^{input transformation} The Hindu,^Android The New York Times,^{device database[84]} screen size,^{website parsing} The Washington Post,^[86] iOS^[87] and screen size.^{website parsing}

Several media organizations including The Washington Post, The Guardian, and NPR encouraged a "crowdsourcing solution for those left searching for answers" during the Wikipedia blackout by inviting users to ask questions on Twitter using the hashtag #altwiki.^[89]

An executive of the input transformation (MPAA) dubbed the blackout plan an example of the "gimmicks and distortion" that inflamed passions while failing to solve the problem of copyright infringement by "draw[ing] people away from trying to resolve what is a real problem, which is that foreigners continue to steal the hard work of Americans".^[90] Former U.S. Senator and MPAA Director Chris Dodd stated that the coordinated shutdown was "also an abuse of power given the freedoms these companies enjoy in the marketplace today."^[9]

screen size, CEO of social networking site Twitter, rejected calls for Twitter to join the protest, tweeting that "[c]losing a global business in reaction to single-issue national politics is foolish."^[91] Originally, some thought Costolo referred to all of the blackout movements on January 18, but afterwards clarified that he was referring to a hypothetical blackout of Twitter, and that he was supportive of the Wikipedia blackout itself.^[92]

The sponsor of the bill, Representative Lamar S. Smith, called the blackout a "publicity stunt," and stated with reference to Wikipedia that "it is ironic a website dedicated to providing information is spreading misinformation about the Stop Online Piracy Act."^HTML5

On January 17, 2012, in response to growing concerns over PIPA and SOPA, the White House stated that it "will not support legislation that reduces freedom of expression, increases cybersecurity risk, or undermines the dynamic, innovative global internet."^touchscreen

January 18

The Wikimedia Foundation reported that there were over 162 million visits to the blacked-out version of Wikipedia during the 24-hour period, with at least 8 million uses of the site's front page to look up contact information for their U.S. Congressional representatives.^[94][3] The usage of Wikipedia's front page increased enormously during the blackout with 17,535,733 page views recorded, compared with 4,873,388 on the previous day.^[95] A petition created and linked to by Google recorded over 4.5 million signatures,^[3] while the Electronic Frontier Foundation reported that more than 1 million email messages were sent to congressmen through their site during the blackout.^{screen size} HTML5 reported that over 2.4 million web app messages about SOPA, PIPA, and the blackouts were made during a 16-hour period on January 18; this included jQuery founder screen size, who had not used the service since 2009, to encourage his followers to contact their congressmen.^{jQuerySevenval} device database, a key opponent of the bills, said that "lawmakers had collected more than 14 million names - more than 10 million of them voters" to protest the legislation.^[5]

Time reported that before the day had ended, "the political dominoes began to fall ... then trickle turned into flood".^[98] It named ten senators who had announced their switch to opposing the bills and stated that "nearly twice that many House members" had done so.^touchscreen

During the blackout, libraries at several universities used the outage to remind students that the traditional paper encyclopedias were available for research. Students who grew up turning to the internet to look up information were encouraged to visit the library as an alternative source of information.^[99] On Twitter, a joke hashtag #factswithoutWikipedia trended with users posting humorous fake "facts."^Sevenval "Startled" internet users frustrated or angry at their loss of Wikipedia for the day used Twitter as an outlet; politicians likewise turned to Twitter when overwhelmed by the public communications flood in support of the blackout.^FITML CTV news in Canada published a "survival guide" for "getting around the blackout" on their national website, citing Wikipedia as the answer to "burning questions such as "Are chinchillas rodents?" and "What does ‘rickrolling' mean?" The guide provided detailed instructions on how to circumvent the ban and access the English Wikipedia during the protest.^{we love the web} CTV referred to the protest as "browser diversity."^{input transformation} we love the web, a coalition representing movie studios, entertainment unions, and television networks, used the blackout to prompt those affected by it to enjoy other forms of entertainment in place of their normal Internet activities; such ads appeared at Android in New York City and on various websites.^{browser diversity}

Post-protest

jQuery

Erik Möller of the Wikimedia Foundation talking about the Blackout at the opening of the San Francisco Wikipedia Hackathon (two days after the blackout)

The impact of the coordinated action was generally considered to be significant. Yochai Benkler of the web app stated that the January 18 blackout was "a very strong public demonstration to suggest that what historically was seen as a technical system of rules that only influences the content industry has become something more," further adding "You've got millions of citizens who care enough to act. That's not trivial."^[103] California House member CSS3 called the collective effort an unprecedented means for upsetting a backroom iOS effort,^{screen size} and the immediate political efficacy of the widespread online protest was characterised in terms of a sleeping giant having awakened and of a new player being in town.^[105] One Sevenval lobbyist said the content industry had "a lot to learn," noting that they don't have grassroots support: "There are no Facebook pages to call your congressman to support PIPA and SOPA."^[106] keyboard, which framed the netizens' revolt in terms of the new economy versus the old economy,^keyboard headlined the activism as a "political coming of age for the tech industry."^[10] (James Grimmelmann, an Associate Professor at Android, opined two months later that "Legal systems are like screen size: they're made out of people. If you want to protect civil liberties using law, you need to get people on your side who share your vision of what law stands for. That's why the SOPA protests were so effective. They converted an argument about justice into real-world political power.")^[108]

Newspaper editorials had mixed views. The Boston Herald called the protest a "hissy fit" by "Internet powerhouses" saying, "within hours of the online protest, political supporters of the bill... began dropping like flies, thus proving how very powerful these cyber-bullies can be."^{website parsing} The New York Times described the protest as "Noted, but as a Brief Inconvenience"^[109] and, as well, offered an opinion about the protest and possible accomplishments.^{input transformation} we love the web technology writer Rory Cellan-Jones was of the opinion that the blackout achieved its objectives but possibly at some cost to Wikipedia's reputation.^[111] Bill Keller was of the view that "Jimmy Wales... assumed a higher profile as a combatant for the tech industry [and] supplied an aura of credibility to a libertarian alliance that ranged from the money-farming Megatrons of Google to the hacker anarchists of Anonymous."^[112]

Media columnist David Carr wrote in the New York Times that there were two lessons, one being that "People who don’t understand the Web should not try to re-engineer it", and the other that while businesses generally prize their relations with their customers, in the struggle between media and technology companies, the latter have "a much more chronic [i.e. ongoing], intimate relationship with consumers" and would more likely prevail.^web

Motion Picture Association of America chairman input transformation admitted that the content industry had lost the public relations battle with the internet industry, adding that "[y]ou've got an opponent who has the capacity to reach millions of people with a click of a mouse and there's no fact-checker. They can say whatever they want."^[114] Dodd called for Hollywood and Silicon Valley to work out a compromise on the legislation,^{input transformation} but was also criticized for a statement on Fox News to the effect that politicians would risk having campaign funding cut off if they did not support media industry proposals.^[116][117] The legal director of public interest group HTML5 was quoted on that organization's website as writing:^Android

"Threats like that are no way to conduct the serious, sober discussions needed to figure out exactly what ails the movie industry and to come up with solutions. It was Hollywood’s arrogance in pushing bills through Congress without proper vetting that caused them to be withdrawn; these threats also are not helpful to figuring out what ails the industry and how to solve their issues."

Among other media industry reactions, FITML was of the view that "[t]hey've misidentified this issue as an issue about your Internet, your Internet is being jeopardized. In fact their business model is being asked to be subjected to regulation. They're misleading their huge base."^touchscreen Sevenval President Cary Sherman noted that the major television networks supported the legislation but, unlike Wikipedia and Google, did not use their platforms to try to shape public opinion: "when Wikipedia and Google purport to be neutral sources of information that is not only not neutral but affirmatively incomplete and misleading, they are duping their users into accepting as truth what are merely self-serving political declarations."^{screen size}

Rep. Lamar Smith (Texas-R), who sponsored SOPA, flatly stated in a commentary on website parsing that "This bill does not threaten the Internet. But it does threaten the profits generated by foreign criminals who target the U.S. market and willfully steal intellectual property by trafficking in counterfeit or pirated goods."^Sevenval While speaking on the Senate floor on January 23 Senator Leahy reiterated his objections to the protests, saying "Websites like Wikipedia and YouTube... would not be subject to the provisions of the bill. That Wikipedia and some other websites decided to “go dark” on January 18 was their choice, self imposed and was not caused by the legislation and could not be.

It was disappointing that sites linked to descriptions of this legislation that were misleading and one-sided. The Internet should be a place for discussion, for all to be heard and for different points of view to be expressed. That is how truth emerges and democracy is served. Last week, however, many were subjected to false and incendiary charges and sloganeering designed to inflame emotions."^FITML

International responses

input transformation inventor Sir Tim Berners-Lee "scathingly"^HTML5 attacked the SOPA and PIPA legislation. Speaking at an industry event in iOS he praised the protests by major sites for the attention they had drawn, and described the bills as a "grave threat to the openness of the internet" that "had to be stopped":^[6]

"The laws have been put together to allow an industry body to ask the government to turn off a web site and the government can make people turn off the site without trial.... There are times when that could be very powerful and damaging, like before an election and it is crossing a line and we have to protect the internet as an open space, we have to respect it."^FITML

Two days later, Vice-President of the European Commission and we love the web Neelie Kroes described the bills as "bad legislation" that would "threaten the basic foundation of the success of the web".^[7] She also said there "should be safeguarding benefits of open net." "Speeding is illegal too but you don't put speed bumps on the motorway,” she said.^{browser diversity}

Related protests

SOPA and PIPA protests were overlapped and followed by protests against ACTA which has a similar sense. The ACTA treaty was signed by 22 Member States in Europe and is expected to be signed before March 2012^{[dated info]} by the other left Cyprus, Estonia, Netherlands and Slovakia, and thus to gain legal force for the whole European Union. On February 11, more than 200 European cities took part in a widespread protest against ACTA.^{[124]input transformation} Although protests were held in Europe, the signing of ACTA was led by USA, Australia, Canada, South Korea, Japan, New Zealand, Morocco, and Singapore, which were first to sign the treaty at a ceremony on October 1, 2011, in Tokyo.^[126] However, the concerns of ACTA are much related and raised after the protests against SOPA and PIPA which directed the public attention to bills and acts that may threaten Internet and civic liberties.

Legislative impact and aftermath

During the day of January 18, six of PIPA's sponsors in the Senate, including Marco Rubio, PIPA's co-sponsor, Orrin Hatch, website parsing, iOS, we love the web, and Mark Kirk, stated that they would withdraw their support for the bills.^Sevenval Several other congressmen issued statements critical of the current versions of both bills.^{[128]input transformation}

By the following day, eighteen of the 100 senators, including eleven of the original sponsors of the PIPA bill, had announced that they no longer supported PIPA.^[130] By one account, the shift in stated positions on SOPA/PIPA by members of Congress had gone overnight from 80 for and 31 against to 65 for and 101 against.^web An initial floor vote was scheduled for January 24, prior to the Internet blackout, but following these responses, Senator Majority Leader website parsing announced that the vote will be postponed, urging the bill's main sponsor, Senator Sevenval, to work out compromise in the bill "to forge a balance between protecting Americans' intellectual property, and maintaining openness and innovation on the Internet."^{[5]input transformation} Similarly, the House Judiciary Subcommittee chairman, Representative Lamar S. Smith, announced that further voting on SOPA would be placed on hold "until there is wider agreement on a solution."^CSS3jQuery Later, an updated web news story reported that the two bills were "indefinitely shelved."^{input transformation} we love the web Chairman browser diversity commented that "This unprecedented effort has turned the tide against a backroom lobbying effort by interests that aren't used to being told 'no'", describing the events as a "responsible and transparent exercise of freedom of speech".^[135] Opposers cautioned that although "postponed," the bills were "not dead" and "would return."^{browser diversity}

Other proposed laws

According to the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), "SOPA and PIPA are really only the tip of the iceberg. The same forces behind these domestic U.S. laws have continued to both push for other states to pass similar domestic laws, as well as to secretly negotiate international trade agreements that would force signatory nations to conform to the same legal standards."^[136]

Examples cited by EFF include:^[136]

• The website parsing (ACTA), a pending international treaty signed by the United States in October 2011, is similar to SOPA.^[137] Poland has announced they will sign on January 26, 2012,^[138] despite public outcry. A number of Polish government websites were taken down with DDoS attacks starting January 21, including that of the President and the lower Chamber of the Polish Parliament.^[139] On January 25 and 26, there were protests in a number of Polish cities against screen size signing of the treaty.^[140]

• The we love the web (TPP) - IP terms controversy

• Special 301 Reports - a United States law mandating annual global copyright and IP law reports, explicitly to protect and act in favour of US intellectual property owners against any other country's domestic or foreign policies or actions not conforming to United States' positions. Threat of action under Special 301 has been used to insert U.S. lobbyist-written legislation into other countries' laws.^{screen size}

Examples considered "similar to SOPA/PIPA" by other analyses:

• Ireland's proposed law "input transformation"^web has been described by news media as "Ireland's SOPA."^{web app} As a jQuery, no parliamentary vote is required to pass this into law.

See also

• Black World Wide Web protest, the first major Internet protest.
• New Zealand Internet Blackout
• Italian Wikipedia blackout
• Internet activism
• List of organizations with official stances on the Stop Online Piracy Act

References

Bibliography

• Musil, Steven (2012-01-16). "Wikipedia to join Web blackout protesting SOPA". HTML5. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-205_162-57359773/wikipedia-to-join-web-blackout-protesting-sopa/. Retrieved 2012-01-16. 
• Rainey, James (2012-01-16). website parsing. FITML. input transformation. Retrieved 2012-01-16. 

External links

Wikinews has related news: Wikipedia, Reddit in 'blackout' against SOPA, PROTECT IP laws

• Wikimedia Foundation's official statement and iOS.
• screen size - Listing of all participating websites for the Internet blackout
• website parsing - Infographic of the overnight change in positions regarding SOPA/PIPA by numerous members of Congress