S.968 - PIPA

A bill to prevent online threats to economic creativity and theft of intellectual property, and for other purposes. view all titles (6)

All Bill Titles

  • Official: A bill to prevent online threats to economic creativity and theft of intellectual property, and for other purposes. as introduced.
  • Short: Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act of 2011 as introduced.
  • Short: PROTECT IP Act of 2011 as introduced.
  • Short: Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act of 2011 as reported to senate.
  • Short: PROTECT IP Act of 2011 as reported to senate.
  • Popular: PIPA.

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 121-146 of 146 total comments.

darthgoon 11/01/2011 7:36pm

You know… people will find a way to steal or download whatever they want regardless of this bill. And simply because these organizations spend all their money suing people instead of protecting their content.

This is a giant waste of time. And only exists because some bean counter at some point said “No, we don’t need to spend more money securing the content”.

All those organizations who support this bill, and are giving hundreds of thousands of dollars to congress-people…
Spend that money making your organization SMARTER than the downloaders.

If I leave my garage open, and keys in the car EVERY NIGHT. Whats smarter, spending millions suing all the joy-riders, or closing the garage and buying a $10 masterlock?

Who wants to bet that piracy increases, and this bill adversely affects sites like YouTube if it passes?

kellina 10/30/2011 11:03pm

Free speech my aSS! Would any member of congress please take the time to address why exactly I have 2 rods and 6 pins in my spine fighting for this country’s freedoms when our very government is the ones who need to be knocked off their high horse and given a bath; you are all pretty dirty for the bills you have passed previously. This bill proposal is something we’d expect from the original al-Jazeera, now it’s America, Inc. turn to impose those restrictions on us? For your information the people must give their consent to be governed, and that consent can be revoked at anytime.

Dizzylemon 10/29/2011 2:47am
Link Reply
+ 34
in reply to sanityscraps Jun 09, 2011 1:56am

Do you understand the details of this bill? If there is one item on a webPAGE that breaks the S.968 act rules then the entire SITE can be shut down. Also the government can then block that site from search engines so no one can visit that entire site again without already knowing the direct address. This is the same thing Americans criticized China for. The government has already agreed to block people from donating to Wikileaks because they want to end the funding they receive. This act puts America on the fast track to a police state when it comes to sharing information.

Also if one person uploads pirated content to a site the site can be held liable. No more Youtube or twitchtv. It is not only about protecting intellectual property. It is also about controlling information.

walker7 10/27/2011 3:09pm
in reply to kratkatomas Oct 18, 2011 12:14pm

That’s one reason why this bill must get destroyed ASAP!

walker7 10/27/2011 3:03pm

As I have said, please oppose this bill at all costs!

There is the possibility that this Bill could destroy YouTube, Twitter, and other sites that rely on user-generated content.

I oppose bill S.968 one trillion percent.

Spam Comment

Spam Comment

Spam Comment

Spam Comment

SFCMAC 10/23/2011 8:06pm

This is what I sent to Rob Portman (R-OH). I won’t bother with the Dems. They won’t listen anyway.

I oppose S.968 – PROTECT IP Act of 2011, and am tracking it using OpenCongress.org, the free public resource website for government transparency and accountability.
This proposed bill is another example of Big Government intrusion into our internet freedom and freedom of speech. Patrick Leahy, the sponsor of this censorship bill, was already defeated in his last attempt:
“The Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA) would have permitted a blanket takedown of any domain alleged to be assisting activities that violate copyright law, based upon the judgment of state attorneys general.”

To his credit, it was a democratic senator, Ron Wyden (OR) who blocked the passage of this ominous crap.

“Oregon Senator Ron Wyden could very well go down in the history books as the man who saved the Internet.

Spam Comment

SFCMAC 10/23/2011 7:35pm

Listening to downloaded music is infringing on “intellectual property”??
You’ve GOT to be kidding. What’s next, making us pay to hear music on the radio? This is nuts. It’s another tactic by the current socialist regime to shut down any and all internet freedom.

SFCMAC 10/23/2011 7:32pm

Another example of liberal fascism masquerading as “protection”.

kratkatomas 10/18/2011 12:14pm

You like youtube? You can’t go on that site anymore. It will be blacklisted by this bill

jlutz2007 09/09/2011 6:48pm
Link Reply
+ 12

It’s a foot in the door to censorship. Government regulating internet browsers and search engines? Are you kidding me? It’s the responsibility of the content providers to adequately protect their intellectual property, not the strong arm of the federal government, and they have the ability to create the technology to do so. The federal government isn’t even supposed to have general police powers, according to the Constitution. Not that I would expect anyone who supports this bill to know anything about that, though.

Spam Comment

Spam Comment

wrenwren 07/31/2011 11:21pm

This goes far beyond intellectual property protection, this would be disastrous allowing any agency to decide to shut down a site based on vague reports. then TAXPAYER money would be spent on enforcing this and finding ways to implement control of the internet and deal with every “infringing” site

this bill seems like a case of overstepping boundaries and having tunnel vision that would ultimately hurt intellectual property and the internet. this is not a sound solution.

SirLeadhead 07/22/2011 12:27am

Do you even know what you’re talking about? Say you make a video and post it on youtube. In it, you quote your favorite movie, maybe do an impression, just for fun. Or you sing a few bars from a song your kids taught you this morning.

Bam. You are now a felon.

You support that kind of control?

SirLeadhead 07/22/2011 12:23am
Link Reply
+ 16

Well, let me try and play devil’s advocate for this bill…

Nope, can’t do it. It won’t pass, and everyone should email their congressman to make SURE it doesn’t pass. The writer’s and supporters of this bill either do not understand it’s full ramifications, or are trying to push some sort of agenda. I’m sure they MEAN well enough, but honestly, their own families would break this law every day, were it to pass. Every single person in America would become an accidental felon.

Unless that’s what they are going for, in which case, shame on them!

Tntsp1 07/15/2011 12:03am

“In some cases, action could be taken to block sites without first allowing the alleged infringer to defend themselves in court.”

No, bad bill, everyone should have the right to defend themselves in court. One shouldn’t take down random sites because they are “dedicated to infringing activities”. The previous statement is also unclear on what exactly “Infringing Activities” are.

matth35 07/09/2011 2:16pm
Link Reply
+ 14

This bill is a joke. It wont pass. Even with companies like walmart backing it. This is a clear violation of freedom of self expression. If you are doing something to express your self artistically or for sheer entertainment value and not making money off of it then there is absolutely no way the law can step in. If this were to pass, which again…it wont. You can say good by to karaoke night at the local pub or American idol. There is to much money to be made illegally for the government to let this pass and the government knows that. Its more than likely just a distraction from something bigger to come down the road. Its nothing more than a Joke. A poorly executed one at that.

shad0w 07/02/2011 4:59pm
Link Reply
+ 32

How could anyone support this? Unless you are getting your pockets lined with money from the recording industry that is.

Not only a significant breach of human rights, but would put institutionalize government censorship of the internet. Totally ridiculous and I’m shocked this bill has even been thought of in our so called “free” democracy.

mathiasthebold 06/10/2011 9:57am
Link Reply
+ 24

the strong arm of the government to redirect traffic is something I’d expect to see coming out of China, not the land of the free.

mathiasthebold 06/10/2011 9:55am
Link Reply
+ 16

It is not a win win for everyone. It is a win for record companies, but a loss for everyone who wants to use the internet without hassle and obstruction. Using

Spam Comment


Vote on This Bill

1% Users Support Bill

27 in favor / 2237 opposed
 

Send Your Senator a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC
Save to Notebook Make A Bill Widget

Top-Rated Comments

OpenCongress is a free and open-source project of the Participatory Politics Foundation, a 501(c)3 non-profit organization with a mission to increase civic engagement. The non-profit Sunlight Foundation is the Founding and Primary Supporter of OpenCongress.