When we talk of preventing real online threats to economic creativity and theft of intellectual property, we (Indians) have hardly any solution. The formulation and monitoring of cyber laws has always been a sluggish and neglected arena. However the internet censorship, prevention of foreign intrusion and online counterfeiting has been dealt with utmost legitimacy outside India. SOPA and PIPA are essentially, two versions of the anti-piracy bill being introduced in U.S.
What is SOPA or PIPA
SOPA stands for “Stop Online Piracy Act” and PIPA means “PROTECT IP Act “
SOPA is the House of Representative’s version (House Bill HR. 3261), while PIPA resides in the Senate (Senate Bill S. 968).
Both SOPA and PIPA are intended to curb online piracy, specifically piracy facilitated by “foreign rogue websites,” meaning sites that are hosted outside of the United States, and thus outside the reach of US law. (The Pirate Bay is a prime example of a “foreign rogue website.”
SOPA VS PIPA
• However; unlike SOPA, PIPA lacks a provision that requires search engines, like Google and Bing, to remove a “foreign infringing site” from their indexes. This provision in SOPA is one of the most highly criticized.
• PIPA also contains provisions that require greater court intervention to go after an accused website than SOPA does.
PROVISIONS:
1. Both bills currently require Internet service providers to block users from accessing specific websites using a technique known as DNS (the domain name system,) blocking which is supposed to cause damage to the underlying infrastructure of the Internet (or DNS)
2. It has an anti-circumvention provision, which would make it illegal to inform users how to access blocked sites
3. Another provision highly cited by critics is the “vigilante” part of SOPA/PIPA, which allows or give immunity to ISPs to voluntarily block access to certain foreign websites, “in good faith,” if they have “credible evidence” that these sites are devoted to illegally distributing copyrighted material.
CRITICS REACTION AND PROPOSAL
• Opponents/Critics of SOPA/PIPA have introduced the “Online Protection and Enforcement of Digital Trade” or “OPEN Act,” to both the House and the Senate militating against the powers of enforcement to the Attorney General, and to copyright holders.
• OPEN simply expands the Tariff Act of 1930 to allow the International Trade Commission (ITC) to “take action against unfair digital imports or unfair imports that are digitally-facilitated by foreign rogue websites,” instead of being limited to physical goods that violate US intellectual property law
• This includes requiring financial institutions (again, like PayPal or Internet advertisers) to sever business ties with sites that are found to be in violation of US copyright law.
What is SOPA or PIPA
SOPA stands for “Stop Online Piracy Act” and PIPA means “PROTECT IP Act “
SOPA is the House of Representative’s version (House Bill HR. 3261), while PIPA resides in the Senate (Senate Bill S. 968).
Both SOPA and PIPA are intended to curb online piracy, specifically piracy facilitated by “foreign rogue websites,” meaning sites that are hosted outside of the United States, and thus outside the reach of US law. (The Pirate Bay is a prime example of a “foreign rogue website.”
SOPA VS PIPA
• However; unlike SOPA, PIPA lacks a provision that requires search engines, like Google and Bing, to remove a “foreign infringing site” from their indexes. This provision in SOPA is one of the most highly criticized.
• PIPA also contains provisions that require greater court intervention to go after an accused website than SOPA does.
PROVISIONS:
1. Both bills currently require Internet service providers to block users from accessing specific websites using a technique known as DNS (the domain name system,) blocking which is supposed to cause damage to the underlying infrastructure of the Internet (or DNS)
2. It has an anti-circumvention provision, which would make it illegal to inform users how to access blocked sites
3. Another provision highly cited by critics is the “vigilante” part of SOPA/PIPA, which allows or give immunity to ISPs to voluntarily block access to certain foreign websites, “in good faith,” if they have “credible evidence” that these sites are devoted to illegally distributing copyrighted material.
CRITICS REACTION AND PROPOSAL
• Opponents/Critics of SOPA/PIPA have introduced the “Online Protection and Enforcement of Digital Trade” or “OPEN Act,” to both the House and the Senate militating against the powers of enforcement to the Attorney General, and to copyright holders.
• OPEN simply expands the Tariff Act of 1930 to allow the International Trade Commission (ITC) to “take action against unfair digital imports or unfair imports that are digitally-facilitated by foreign rogue websites,” instead of being limited to physical goods that violate US intellectual property law
• This includes requiring financial institutions (again, like PayPal or Internet advertisers) to sever business ties with sites that are found to be in violation of US copyright law.
No comments:
Post a Comment