H.R.3261 - Stop Online Piracy Act

To promote prosperity, creativity, entrepreneurship, and innovation by combating the theft of U.S. property, and for other purposes. view all titles (7)

All Bill Titles

  • Popular: SOPA as .
  • Popular: Stop Online Piracy Act as introduced.
  • Short: Stop Online Piracy Act as introduced.
  • Official: To promote prosperity, creativity, entrepreneurship, and innovation by combating the theft of U.S. property, and for other purposes. as introduced.
  • Popular: Enforcing and Protecting American Rights Against Sites Intent on Theft and Exploitation Act as introduced.
  • Popular: E-PARASITE Act as introduced.
  • Popular: SOPA.

This Bill currently has no wiki content. If you would like to create a wiki entry for this bill, please Login, and then select the wiki tab to create it.

Comments Feed

Displaying 1-30 of 495 total comments.

walker7 11/06/2011 2:54am
Link Reply
+ 40

We will never be ready for Internet censorship. This bill is overly broad, and therefore it is too ridiculous. It is very important that you should oppose this bill and save the Internet!

allyReport101 11/07/2011 4:44am
Link Reply
+ 38

Can anyone explain the difference between burning books and taking down websites>? Want a huge government have intellectual property law_ Something that is not scarce cannot be owned, a song/movie/media can be recreated by anyone with a tape recorder or computer, this does not mean you can take credit for creating a song you did not write, but what is shouldn’t mean is that the writer has a team of armed goons ready to stick guns in people’s faces demanding payment for singing their songs at karaoke_

starwood 10/28/2011 9:24am
Link Reply
+ 21

I don’t know whats going on or what, but I’m hearing that the government is wanting to track our every move on the internet?! Isn’t that invasion of privacy? I don’t understand what the fuss is about being able to download songs for personal use you can get cd’s at the library for free are they going to go after them too? we are able to record off the radio also are the going to take away our radio also? Where will it end? I think this bill is just wrong and unfair and I don’t see the point if we are using it for pursonal use only and not selling it.

HubsterB 11/09/2011 12:20pm
Link Reply
+ 16

So much for freedom in America. Download anything everywhere but here in our great country? Sounds like these congressmen are getting paid by the American taxpayers and the media moguls. Where does it end? It doesn’t. Once the door has been opened, it only gets wider. If the American public had as many lobbiest on Capitol Hill as big business, “We the people” would mean just that.

Kaze 11/15/2011 8:55pm
Link Reply
+ 13

Well, well, well. Take a look at those monetary donations thrown at our senators and representatives by the interest groups that support this bill.

RegisFrey 11/16/2011 8:35pm
Link Reply
+ 10
in reply to CurtisNeeley Nov 08, 2011 10:40am

Reading that brief it sounds like NameMedia Inc acted poorly in response to your copyright assertion. A more involved FCC could penalize companies that disregard legitimate claims. However, extending that to cleaning up the internet moves into outright censorship which is misguided and a very slippery slope. If you are concerned you should seek better parental controls and filtering at the user level (school/personal firewalls, browser blocks, better google search filtration in safe mode) not censorship at the content level.

molonlabe 11/05/2011 12:15pm

I could understand who someone could IP as far as exact copies of movies, music, movies and books go. But, when it comes to someone incorporating a part of another person’s IP in their own original work like remixes of songs or even something more mundane like a mother posting a video of their child dancing to a song on you tube civil or criminal penalties for those actions are simply indefensible. Patents on drugs or chemicals are completely ridiculous. Patenting a chemical compound is like patenting the color blue or the process of making a sandwich. Patents like that only hurt consumers. The only reason drug companies need patents to earn crazy profits is the oppressive over-regulation perpetrated by the FDA. If it wasn’t for the ridiculous drug regulations healthcare would be much cheaper too.

ashlelyliz 11/16/2011 1:34pm

The internet is far to powerful for a few to control. The government has enough power. If they take away our rights on the internet, what rights will they fight next?

pmoore 11/16/2011 11:38pm
in reply to Kickerman28 Nov 16, 2011 3:00pm

Blatant theft of people’s work is one thing, but this bill extends beyond that problem and threatens people who are in no way involved in that. Think of it this way: It’s as if every time you left a store, someone could point at you and shout “Hey, he just stole a candy bar!”, and suddenly you’d have security guards pouncing on you and a felony charge waiting just around the bend. SOPA won’t save your precious property, but it will make it possible for anyone who doesn’t like you to royally screw you over for something you haven’t done.

Chunmeista 11/17/2011 3:44am

As shown, Google opposes this bill. Enough said there.

I can imagine the Internet as a nation in itself. Its citizenship includes millions, even billions of people from countries across the world. On the internet, people decide what is right and wrong, be it voicing their opinions, or even liking or disliking a comment. It’s simple and true democracy, at its finest. As such, the Internet has an efficient form of self government, where everyone can vote.

If any nation attempts to censor the internet, I’d say it’s comparable to an act of aggression on another country.

The Internet is the one true “land of the free and home of the brave,” where the citizens of the world can freely express their ideas and opinions. Let’s keep it that way!

lorrodriguez 11/16/2011 10:35am

do NOT allow this bill to pass it will cripple our nation as a whole, and destroy what our founding fathers have created for us…This is the land of the of the Free!! lets keep it that way!

zankulong 11/17/2011 12:27am

I say we should use are constitutional right to fight the government take these money grubbing people out of our government and remake our government to were you have to have a degree to in it and they have to swear a oath to up hold the constitution and if they break that oath they get the death penalty

asasasas 11/18/2011 8:43am
in reply to CurtisNeeley Nov 18, 2011 7:37am

WE.DONT.CARE.ABOUT.YOUR.PORN. I can drive down the road and pick up an illegal hooker once a week for less than the cost of an internet subscription, why would I care about ‘unlawfully’ looking at the pictures you have taken?

lalbert 11/16/2011 11:07pm
in reply to Kickerman28 Nov 16, 2011 3:00pm

“Creative vision” is not more important than the rights of an entire country to have a free and uncensored Internet. If this bill passes, it’s not going to be just artists that will have trouble making a living- it will be the entire IT sector, since it will stifle innovation and put the IT companies at risk for lawsuits, even if they’d done nothing wrong other than allow users to find sites that contain pirated content.

There are already countries that control what their citizens can access on the Internet, or whether or not they can access it at all. But hey, if you want to go live in North Korea, be my guest.

IvyLilithe 11/18/2011 1:16pm

1% Users Support Bill

We elect people to the United States government to represent the wants and need of the American people, not the wants and needs of these elected representatives or the wants and needs of the people with the most money. With only 1% of the people who view this bill actually supporting it, and with all of the opposition that we the people have made to show that this is NOT what we want and NOT what we need, why is it even being considered?
There are bigger problems they could and should be focusing on, but instead they delay and turn toward frivolous issues such as this. Leave our constitutional rights alone and focus on the important things. Like, oh I don’t know, unemployment and education.

patrickrhodesmartin 11/16/2011 7:29pm

The Protest Site for this can be found at American Censorship Day

lorrodriguez 11/16/2011 10:39am

If this bill does go through and goverment does have a control over a majority of websites….what if that power gets into the wrong hands? hackers or terrorist then they will have a control over everything that keeps us moving every day cyber war is real!…Please dont allow this to go through for the sake of our country!

molonlabe 11/04/2011 7:39pm

Intellectual property (IP) was invented by staists in furtherance of crony capitalism. IP is really a ridiculous idea if you think about it. I highly recommend this book to those interested in reading more on the subject http://mises.org/books/against.pdf

asasasas 11/18/2011 8:39am
in reply to CurtisNeeley Nov 18, 2011 7:26am

Censorship of US TV and Radio is also unconstitutional. The concept that this would balance our budget is laughable. Our budget is, in all honesty, completely fraudulent, balanced by a $2 trillion influx of drug money (thank you, drug addicts), and even if the budget was solved every year, until the end of time, it fails to address the serious debt restructure we need to endure on every level of government.

goofoofighter 11/17/2011 8:42pm
in reply to KingGeedorah Oct 28, 2011 7:08am

The bill was heard in Congress yesterday. Discussion, amendment, and voting are still to come.

pmoore 11/17/2011 9:10am
in reply to Kickerman28 Nov 16, 2011 3:00pm

Furthermore, I don’t see any problem with spanking the brats who try to take other people’s work and pass them off as their own, but this is just ridiculous. It’s going to punish more than just the thieves. It will punish the mothers who send home videos to their soldier son overseas with copyrighted materials (properly attributed, mind you) used as the soundtrack (perhaps their son’s favorite song). It will punish documentarians who have no way to block out audio used in PA systems and are thus forced to “infringe on your copyright” with proper attribution in order to make their own free expression possible. Even worse, there is no warning system. If you “get caught infringing copyright”, BOOM, that’s it; you’re a felon.

I hear you, man, but this is not a bill to win back the “poor artist’s” intellectual property. This is an attempt by the business-oriented producers to ensure that their content is under draconian lock and key.

Samizdat 11/11/2011 4:27pm

The ironic thing is that I will wrangle (not to be confused with Rangel) opencongress.org in any way I can to help elect Ron Paul, whereupon we will proceed to put an end to forcing the public to pay for opencongress.org. This outcome would ideally be but a benefit of ending the income tax. Isn’t it fascinating how the Eastern Bloc repudiated Communism in the early 80s, yet the U.S. increasingly embraces Communism?

zankulong 11/17/2011 12:32am
in reply to Kickerman28 Nov 16, 2011 3:00pm

think of it this way you paint something that has a relavance to something else. a.k.a a joke or something. you are now a felon.

lalbert 11/18/2011 5:07pm
in reply to CurtisNeeley Nov 18, 2011 7:37am

Bro, I don’t give a flying blue fart about your nude photos. I have about as much use for your nude photos as a fish would have for a toaster. However, I am in school to become an IT professional. This bill threatens everything I’ve worked my entire life for, and I’m not going to take it lying down. Have you considered using a password to protect your files? Just saying, that would cut down on people accessing them without your

AWPhilly 11/17/2011 2:18pm

Copyrights are important, but the mechanisms in this bill, the potential for abuse by right’s holders, and the self-censorship and prior-censorship that would occur will destroy the internet as we know it. It will become less social, less inter-connected, less stable. This bill truly scares me.

Irisiridescent 12/15/2011 2:50pm
in reply to CurtisNeeley Dec 13, 2011 4:23pm

I’ve been reading your posts and I am sorry that you feel you have had your work stolen but this is NOT the way to go about it.

The way this is worded, any sight that the government decides they don’t like or any corporation doesn’t like can be shut down for little or no reason.

Consider this, someone goes over to your house and places a stolen item in your house. The said item is stolen, and they call the police and say that you have the stolen item. Without reading your rights, or even hearing your story, they arrest you and convinct you on the spot and put you in jail for stealing. You don’t get a court date, you don’t get an attorney, you just get thrown in jail.

That’s what this bill is doing, among many other things.

Also, regulating internet wire communications is an infringment on a right. I don’t want the FCC peeking into what I’m doing online. I’m not doing anything wrong, but you wouldn’t want anyone going through your drawers in your house, would you?

Kickerman28 11/16/2011 3:00pm

As an artist, I think the Internet has already gone way too far in trampling on the rights of artists and copyright-holders. There’s an entitlement mentality that thinks entertainment should be free, not realizing the enormous investment of time, effort, skills and resources that’s required to produce many of the works they enjoy. When it costs millions of dollars to produce a movie, and entire lifetimes of effort to generate the skill necessary to make it, people have the effrontery to think that it should be distributed to anyone and everyone online at absolutely no cost or recompense. It’s sad and abhorrent how people grossly undervalue creative works these days, and even sadder how little people realize they’re fatally damaging an artist’s capacity to make a living through their works. I can say with little hesitation that I support increased regulation on an Internet that fights against an artist’s or company’s ability to control their own copyright as they deem fit.

Spam Comment

uzumakiclan43 11/22/2011 7:30am

Several points- First off, instead of fining people who have illegally uploaded songs or movies without the parent company’s permission, use sites like YouTube for free advertising. Every time that a media source comes across as being part of a third party’s property, it will send a link to a site where you can buy the song or movie, like iTunes or Amazon. $.99 × 3,000,000+ hits to send a viewer to a place where they can buy your copyrighted work? That doesn’t sound too bad. Funimation uses YouTube to advertise their products, and companies like Warner Brothers charge $5 for viewing a movie like “The Hangover” on YouTube. All that free revenue would be gone if SOPA is passed.

Also, being able to blacklist a foreign sight on suspicions that it might infringe on copyright laws? Isn’t that discrimination, and isn’t discrimination against U.S. policy and law?

Finally, instead of attacking sites under suspicion of copyright infringements, attack the bitTorrents and P2P’s.

patrickrhodesmartin 11/17/2011 5:48pm

I will seriously consider suing the government if this passes.

Vote on This Bill

1% Users Support Bill

32 in favor / 3128 opposed

Send Your Rep a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments