It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


US Senate Vote 19 - 0 On Website Shutdown Bill

page: 1

log in


posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 02:02 AM
They claim to be using this to shutdown breach of copyright sites, but how long until sites that criticise the government get shutdown too.

The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee has approved a controversial bill that would allow the government to seek court orders to shut down websites offering materials believed to infringe copyright.
The committee's 19-0 vote Thursday to send the Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act to the full Senate earned it praise from the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
The bill would allow the Department of Justice to seek court orders requiring U.S. domain-name registrars to shut down domestic websites suspected of hosting infringing materials. The bill would also allow the DOJ, through a court order, to order U.S. Internet service providers to redirect customer traffic away from infringing websites not based in the U.S.
"Rogue websites are essentially digital stores selling illegal and sometimes dangerous products," Senator Patrick Leahy, the main sponsor of the bill, said in a statement. "If they existed in the physical world, the store would be shuttered immediately and the proprietors would be arrested. We cannot excuse the behavior because it happens online and the owners operate overseas. The Internet needs to be free -- not lawless."
Critics of the legislation have said it would censor free speech online and damage the Internet.
"We are disappointed that the Senate Judiciary Committee this morning chose to disregard the concerns of public-interest groups, Internet engineers, Internet companies, human-rights groups and law professors in approving a bill that could do great harm to the public and to the Internet," Gigi Sohn, president of digital rights group Public Knowledge, said in a statement. "We look forward to working with the committee next year to craft a more narrowly tailored bill that deals with the question of rogue websites."
The bill, with 17 Senate co-sponsors, is unlikely to pass through the House of Representatives this year, with only a few working days left in the congressional session. After the newly elected Congress meets in January, Leahy, a Vermont Democrat and Judiciary Committee chairman, would have to reintroduce it in the Senate.
The bill would allow the DOJ to seek court orders targeting websites that are "primarily designed" for or have "no demonstrable, commercially significant purpose" other than copyright infringement.
Critics, including the Center for Democracy and Technology, have said the bill would block free speech and could lead to a fragmentation of the Internet, as other countries attempt to enforce their censorship and other laws on foreign websites.
But several other groups, including the Directors Guild of America and the Screen Actors Guild, praised the committee's action. The bill would target the "worst of the worst" copyright infringing websites, said Bob Pisano, president and interim CEO at the MPAA.
"These rogue sites exist for one purpose only: to make a profit using the Internet to distribute the stolen and counterfeited goods and ideas of others," Pisano said in a statement. "The economic impact of these activities -- millions of lost jobs and dollars -- is profound."

posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 02:09 AM
reply to post by acrux

My problem lies here...

The bill would allow the Department of Justice to seek court orders requiring U.S. domain-name registrars to shut down domestic websites suspected of hosting infringing materials.

So, they can shut down a website even if they simply suspect they are infringing copyright....they need not be proven guilty?
Please correct me if I am mistaken...

If it is indeed the case as I perceive, it doesn't sound just. Otherwise, I don't see any reason why a website should not be shut down for hosting material that infringes copyright, when it is proven without a doubt. Isn't it, in principle, stealing?

posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 02:19 AM
reply to post by Arrius
As I see it this is just a cover excuse.

edit on 19-11-2010 by acrux because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 02:31 AM
great what are they gunna control next, where will this stop, where's the line drawn??? mark my words this is only the start of something much much bigger they have planned for the internet!

posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 03:29 AM
China just got their satellite constellation around Earth.

If they create a new internet, I'm switching over.

There already are laws banning copyright infringement for the Federal Government to use against people.

Congress just tried to usurp the Judicial Branch of our Government and shut down websites without a person being convicted.

Our Supreme Court should stop Congress from usurping their powers, and our Liberty. But they wont.

posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 03:47 AM
They keep pushing the boundaries to see how far they can actually get.

Proposal: Curfew for the Internet
Init. Response: No way, they would never stand for it! The people would riot!
Enacted; Response: *silence*
Proposers Response: Hmm, wow... that worked... what else can we try???

Like dominoes our rights will fall, and like dominoes we will do nothing else.

The call was made and it went on deaf ears, for now we pay the price, the gods pity us.


posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 04:03 AM
I think if the issue is just about copyright infringement with no hidden agenda, ATS would be fine.

This site has pretty strict rules on copyrighted material, and from what i have heard they have decent lawyers to back them up. I'm sure the management here can expand on that, but thats my view anyway.

The other websites that don't give a damn about copyright material shoud be the ones who are worried.

As for sites that are "anti-government", thats a whole seperate issue. I'm not sure ATS would come under that even, this site is not anti-government so to speak. Yes members have opinions on the administration, but not all are negative, some are in fact positive or at least try to suggest improvements for the administration.

Thats not anti government.

This is where all the strict T&C's that many people moan about here, come into play and will surely minimize the risk of this site falling foul of certain laws that are passed.

Good thing too.


posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 04:08 AM
This is an outrageous and extremely dangerous bill pushed forward by the greedy and corrupt entertainment industry and mainly the RIAA/MPAA, you know, the ones that sue people who download a few songs for millions of dollars to ruin their lives and extort money out of others?

I would advise everyone who lives in the Fascist States of America to contact their representatives regarding this iniquitous bill just to let them know we do hold them accountable in enough numbers.

This is absolutely ridiculous. Copyright infringement as an excuse to blacklist any site the government essentially finds "possibly offending?" Copyright infringement is only a problem to the entertainment lobby and no one else. It's amazing how many rights they would trample to pass such a heinous piece of legislation.

new topics

top topics


log in