Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
The SOPA Blackout Protest Makes History
An unprecedented wave of online opposition to the Sopa and Pipa bills before Congress shows the power of a free internet
Wednesday 18 January marked the largest online protest in the history of the internet. Websites from large to small "went dark" in protest of proposed legislation before the US House and Senate that could profoundly change the internet. The two bills, Sopa in the House and Pipa in the Senate, ostensibly aim to stop the piracy of copyrighted material over the internet on websites based outside the US. Critics – among them, the founders of Google, Wikipedia, the Internet Archive, Tumblr and Twitter – counter that the laws will stifle innovation and investment, hallmarks of the free, open internet. The Obama administration has offered muted criticism of the legislation, but, as many of his supporters have painfully learned, what President Barack Obama questions one day, he signs into law the next.
Websites protest against Sopa and Pipa on 18 January 2012. (Photo: ars technica/ minecraft/mozilla/ reddit/ wired)
First, the basics. Sopa stands for the Stop Online Piracy Act, while Pipa is the Protect IP Act. The two bills are very similar. Sopa would allow copyright holders to complain to the US attorney general about a foreign website they allege is "committing or facilitating the commission of criminal violations" of copyright law. This relates mostly to pirated movies and music. Sopa would allow the movie industry, through the courts and the US attorney general, to send a slew of demands that internet service providers (ISPs) and search engine companies shut down access to those alleged violators, and even to prevent linking to those sites, thus making them "unfindable". It would also bar internet advertising providers from making payments to websites accused of copyright violations.
Sopa could, then, shut down a community-based site like YouTube if just one of its millions of users was accused of violating one US copyright. As David Drummond, Google's chief legal officer and an opponent of the legislation, blogged:
"Last year alone, we acted on copyright takedown notices for more than 5 million webpages. Pipa and Sopa will censor the web, will risk our industry's track record of innovation and job creation, and will not stop piracy."
Corynne McSherry, intellectual property director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told me:
"These bills propose new powers for the government and for private actors to create, effectively, blacklists of sites … then force service providers to block access to those sites. That's why we call these the censorship bills."
The bills, she says, are the creation of the entertainment, or "content", industries: "Sopa, in particular, was negotiated without any consultation with the technology sector. They were specifically excluded." The exclusion of the tech sector has alarmed not only Silicon Valley executives, but also conservatives like Utah Republican Congressman Jason Chaffetz, a Tea Party favorite. He said in a December House judiciary committee hearing, "We're basically going to reconfigure the Internet and how it's going to work, without bringing in the nerds."
Pipa sponsor Senator Patrick Leahy (Democrat, Vermont) said in a press release, "Much of what has been claimed about [Pipa] is flatly wrong and seems intended more to stoke fear and concern than to shed light or foster workable solutions." Sadly, Leahy's ire sounds remarkably similar to that of his former Senate colleague Christopher Dodd, who, after retiring, took the job of chairman and CEO of the powerful lobbying group Motion Picture Association of America (at a reported salary of $1.2m annually), one of the chief backers of Sopa/Pipa. Said Dodd of the broadbased, grassroots internet protest, "It's a dangerous and troubling development when the platforms that serve as gateways to information intentionally skew the facts to incite their users in order to further their corporate interests."
EFF's McSherry said, "No one asked the internet – well, the internet is speaking now. People are really rising up and saying: 'Don't interfere with basic Internet infrastructure. We won't stand for it.'"
As the internet blackout protest progressed 18 January, and despite Dodd's lobbying, legislators began retreating from support for the bills. The internet roared, and the politicians listened, reminiscent of the popular uprising against media consolidation in 2003 proposed by then Federal Communications Commission chairman Michael Powell, the son of General Colin Powell. Information is the currency of democracy, and people will not sit still as moneyed interests try to deny them access.
When internet users visited the sixth-most popular website on the planet during the protest blackout, the English-language section of Wikipedia, they found this message:
"Imagine a World Without Free Knowledge.
"For over a decade, we have spent millions of hours building the largest encyclopedia in human history. Right now, the US Congress is considering legislation that could fatally damage the free and open internet."
In a world with fresh, internet-fueled revolutions, it seems that US politicians are getting the message.
• Denis Moynihan contributed research to this column.




18 Comments so far
Show AllMy my, so many fingers in the pie, it is very difficult to cut off just the right one.
It's more than one finger that needs to be cut off, Robert.
Wednesday January 18, 2012 could well go down in history as the day the Internet business sector discovered and flexed it's political muscle. It was also significant in that the grandees of the entertainment business continued to show their utter and historic cluelessness regarding new technologies (which begane with sound in films and has encompassed virtually every new advance), and made an enemy out of a rising industry, high tech, who's interests are somewhat similar and who they should be allied with, particularly against the sociopaths that run the extraction industries.
A one day protest will not be sufficient to achieve victory and reclaim the internet.
Our push-back must be many magnitudes of determination greater than the forces that wish to steal net freedom to have any chance of success.
The elite have taken our initial punch and will now regroup.
They will use their assets in the other media: t.v., radio and print, to launch a more subtle and stealthy campaign in an attempt to win compliance and acquiescence of the less informed.
We must be prepared to counter their next offensive with a protest that does not yield, or have an expiration date.
We must also awaken to the possibility that many web sites that joined the initial protest are not genuine allies and may, in fact, be wolves lying in wait to sell out the people for a quick "compromise".
The congress cannot and will not stop in its attempt to neuter the net which is the last hurdle between them and their successful fascist coup.
We canNOT stop defending the web.
Cygnus-X1-isaHole: I agree with your remarks. They call up the Sun Tzu quote: " Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat." Yesterday's blackout was a tactic. Vigilance and longterm strategy is needed because the can is simply being kicked down the road by the PTB.
Truth finds a way, even through all the graffiti.
Thank you, Denis.
Trylon
Those of us determined to put the power back into the hands of the people are not so thrilled about the various websites' action against SOPA. Yes we want large entities like Wikipedia on our side. But today is different than yesterday. Today, we will no longer depend on large entities. Read: No more old boss, no more new boss. So we want the public discourse framed like so: "Big godzilla, thank you, but get back in your cage right now." Goodman needs to convey the people's new attitude. It's going to be permanent.
Christopher Dodd's comments on behalf of his new employer are a hoot. Wikipedia, Google, and their internet friends "intentionally skew the facts to incite their users in order to further their corporate interests."
Coming from the mouthpiece for the Motion Picture Association of America, the pot calls out the kettle for being black, even if the accusation held a grain of truth.
Bill from Saginaw
Mr. corruption himself, Senator Dodd said the SOPA protests were " a gimmick" . If anyone knows about gimmicks, Mr. Dodd certainly does! What is your problem Mr. Dodd, too much truth to power for you and your fellow crime syndicate called Congress ? Yeah, I know, you would love to have Fox News control the net!
Amy Goodman is one day supporting the imperial invasion in Libya and Ivory Coast one day and the other day protesting SOPA and the death penalty etc. Indeed the different branches of the same imperial tree.
Amy Goodman is one day supporting the imperial invasion in Libya and Ivory Coast one day and the other day protesting SOPA and the death penalty etc. Indeed the different branches of the same imperial tree.
This may be a bit negative and cynical, but the thing that struck me about this protest was how well organized and popular it was. To save your favorite website.
If only we could have that kind of passion and commitment when it comes to bombing human beings to death.
I had the same thought, Actually. It's worth noting in comparison that NDAA didn't garner nearly this must interest. It's amazing to me that we live in a society in which the president can order by fiat the due process-free assassination or detention of anyone in the world, including U.S. citizens, but legislation such as SOPA and PIPA generate outrage and indignation.
Don't get me wrong; I deplore the idea of censorship and fully support the idea of a First Amendment, but let's face it, the corporate state will eventually control internet content in an effort to further erode the last remaining vestiges of participatory democracy. It's only a matter of time. The only thing impeding their progress at this particular time are competing, powerful corporate factions, i.e., Google, Facebook, Twitter, Paypal, etc., which have just as much leverage with our congressional misrepresentatives as institutions like the MPAA.
Personally, I think they just threw the mob a bone and the expendable ones who have to pick up the tab are musicians, writers, artists and anyone who depends on not having their intellectual copyright stolen. That the need to protect these people became a civil rights issue, was lamentable and inept... and neither the lazy public who don't like paying 99cents for a song, nor the gun-for-hire politicians, who drafted a draconian badly thought-out bill, come out of it well
I want to be able to give my money to the recording artists not through the RIAA. They do their very best to rip off the artists. And no, I don't like paying 99 cents for one song, that is a rip off to us and to the artist since they don't see most of this amount. The recording industry never came to manifest their promise of CD's, that the introductory price of $14.98 would be reduced because of the 'mass production' to about $10 range, it never happened and at the same time they changed their contract arrangements to own more of the material. That way they could control it for the life of the artist. The RIAA acts as bad as the banks do, selling and repackaging, and owning the rights. That shouldn't happen. The artist should own the rights and the record companies should only be able to 'rent' them for a certain amount of time. There are just too many 'street' artists that have been fleeced for 'their' property that I really don't give a rat's ass about the record companies or the RIAA. Most of it is just plain thievery.
If you check out the Obama Bundlers for his 2012 campaign at OpenSecrets.org, you will find his top 2 contributors are coming from the entertainment industry. Comcast and Dreamworks:
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/bundlers.php?id=N00009638
I am sure they are lobbying for SOPA and PIPA.
A slightly modified version of this legislation will come back after the election if either Obama or Romney are elected.
This industry is already profitable and we don't need to spend more federal tax dollars to help them get even more profitable and at the expense of user interface innovation on the web. Any increase in revenue would not be passed on to consumers with reduced prices. Prices are only going up.
This is a perfect example of regulation to favor the 1% instead of 99% of the American people.
Obama and congress are still refusing to re-regulate the banking industry and are maintaining their ongoing industry bailouts which again are not being passed on to borrowers.
Good job Amy! Keep a free internet and a free press for politicial democracy's sake. Then we can work on economic, ethnic, and gender democracy which Henry Wallace talked about in the early 1940s as vice president. Let's do it! The four freedoms et all!