9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 Lets say that you´re the owner of some copyrighted material. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 Maybe its a movie, maybe its music of some kind 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 and you observe that there is a site that is operating 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 outside of the US and that side - at least in your mind - 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 seems to be infringing on your copyright by US law 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 so this is the site - you think is doing illegal at least by US standards. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 The Problem ist that theres nothing you can do - 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 its operating outside of Us soil and outside the US laws. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 You can even go to the government, even if the government wanted to do something 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 it really couldn´t. Because once again its outside US restrictions. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 The purpose of SOPA and it seems really banal at first 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 is to give some tools to the actors to stop this. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 The Problem and we´ll see that its quite a large problem is, 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 that it gives tools to these actors to do much more than to stop illegal activities. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 That allows essentially, to some degree -- kind of a witch hunt 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 anyone that might have a wish of enabling this type of activity. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 There won´t even just be for foreign sites. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 So lets write this down, so SOPA stands for: 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 Stop Online Piracy Act - 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 that sounds pretty reasonable. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 And this is the version of the bill that comes from the house of representatives. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 The one from the senate is slightly different 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 - but they have the same intent - its PIPA. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 And what it does is - you can´t go after these - 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 this site itself maybe you can go after sites that is somehow benefiting this site. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 And those sites are inside the United States. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 So this is outside, this is inside the United States. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 So things that are doing that might incloud search engings. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 So search engings like Google or Bing. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 They obviously link to this site here. You might have ad networks - 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 so sites that allow this site over here to display ads and to get revenue from them - 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 that are benefting this site over here. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 You might have payment sites like PayPal 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 or Creditcard processors that this site uses to collect revenue. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 And maybe most importantly you have things like the DNS servers within the US 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 that associate this sites domain name with the actuall servers. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 And I wont get to technically about that, but when you type in 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 www.shady.foreign 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 and once again we´re gonna see that this site might 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 not even have to be shady or foreign 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 but when you type something like that in - 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 there´re servers in the United states that associate that with these servers 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 that might be operated outsite the United States - that associate this text with a number 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 that points to this website, that points to this website servers. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 So this are all things within the United States - 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 that to some degreee this site is dependend on. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 So what SOPA does is, it allows these actors here - 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 the ones that are obviously concerned with enforcing their copyrights - 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 the issue court orders and notices to these actors right over here 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 that essentially compels them, very strongly to immediately 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 cut of thights with this illegal site - or what they thing is an illegal site 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 Now that might seem reasonable to you - exept for the fact that 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 its kind of a shoot first and thing later type of policy 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 The basic way it works is, you presume guilt until this guy 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 somehow to proof his innocence and we´ll see 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 this guy isn´t naturally outside the US. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 It might even be completely legal and what I would consider 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 completely legal sites inside the US. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 Essentially as soon as this allegation is made and either a court order 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 or a notice is payed these enablers have to cut off tights to this site - 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 and you can imagine these cut off thighs to this site 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 - this sites´ business - whatever it might be - whether illegal or legal 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 - immediatly gets obliterated, especially this one here 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 including search engines, Ad networks and payment. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 And if they don´t comply then these guys are going to start having illegal balast. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 So these guys are not going to have to comply and that by itself is hard 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 but if they don´t comply, then theirselfs are going to be in trouble. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 Now it gets really obviously creepy, when you start 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 going into - so when you thing of this - you´re like 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 okay, so maybe we can work arround this a little bit. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 But it gets creepy when you even know that this is the spirit of the legislation. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 Whe you actually read the wording of the legislation 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 and obviously thats what matters - not the name or the intent. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 But actually how its worded. The way its worded 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 - it´s pretty clear that its intent is to go after much more 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 than a site that explicitly selling illegal pharmaceuticals or 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 allowing people to download movies or, or videos or music 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 that these owners don´t have access to. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 When you read the wording its pretty clear that they want to be able 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 to shut down anything that isn´t in any way associating with itselfs - 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 or in any way enabeling it. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 And you see it in the wording. So this is actually section 1.0.3 of the SOPA legislation 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 - and this is how the definy a site that is dedicated to theft of US Property. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 So an internet site is dedicated to theft of US Property - 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 So an internet site is dedicated to theft of US Property if - 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 and so you know its useable by people in the United States - 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 and this is interessting. It´s primary designed to operated for purpose of, 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 has only limited purpose or use other than, 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 or is marketed by its operater or another acting in concert 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 with that operater for use in offering goods or services 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 that engages in, enables or facilitates - now that is interesting - 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 enables or facilitates all of these violations. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 And these are the violations that would be illegal: 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 You´re selling things that you can´t sell, 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 you´re infringing on other people´s copyright. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 And it might seem harmless, this enables or facilitates until you thing about 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 what that could encapsulate. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 If I have a site, like this, I´am part of a site : Khan academy 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 Let´s say someone puts a message on Khan Academy 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 and from Khan Academy they link to a site that actually is really illegal 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 and that is really shady and they link to it in the message words. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 Well under this am I enabling, as Khan Academy enabling or facilitating - 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 and if thats the case the Khan Academy - by this definition - 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 would be concidered to be a site that is dedicated to theft of US properties. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 And there are much bigger players, than is Khan Academy, 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 that can be thrown into this bucket, like Youtube or Vimeo or any site. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 Or even a news site, that allows people to comments, 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 or allows people ot put images things like Flickr. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 That maybe had - in some way - their users infringing on the copyright 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 now all the sudden the whole site - based on this definition - the enire site 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 can be definded dedicated to theft of US property. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 By this definiton Youtube could be that, if its viewed in kind of 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 you´re enabeling or facilitating. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 Khan Academy, any news site could be viewed like that. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 Vimeo could be viewed that way, 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 a photosharing site could be viewed like that. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 People might take a photo or something that they don´t have the copyright 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 and upload an image and all the sudden - by this definition - 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 based on just a sense thats beeing violated, 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 they won´t just be able to shut down the illegal sites. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 They would be able to shut down things like Youtube, or Vimeo 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 or even things like CNN.com, if someone puts some message 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 or an image, that they thing is somehow violating. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 And so ist not just going - right now the methodology is 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 if there is some content on Youtube or Vimeo or some other sites, 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 that they feel is infringing on their copyrights - 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 there are laws, where they contact Youtube directly, 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 they point them to the content, that seems to be infringing 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 and Youtube or Vimeo or who ever will take down that content. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 But what this allows them to do is shoot first and thing later. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 Oh, look: You´re enabling that, if they could some court 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 to give a court order, X can start giving notice to these players over here 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 to cut of thights wiht major - what I would concider very legal sites - 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 like Youtube or Vimeo or CNN. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 It´s really almost any site that allows people to upload things 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 or put links on it, which is almost - Facebook is another one - 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 anything that has user generated content. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 On just a whim they could take down the entire site - 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 not just take down that user generated content - 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 they could, on just convincing one judge, or convincing any of these, 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 they could cut of thights wiht Facebook. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 Not even making Facebook that - you can´t even point to Facebook anymore. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 CNN - they could just completly take down these sites on a whim. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 And it gets worse than that, because you would say 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 well if they can take this down on a whim and you know 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 maybe they kind of thought it was, but they didn´t do homework 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 and then they realize that it wasn´t copyright infringement. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 Couldn´t these guys sue back, although the damage would have been down, 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 these sites would have been taken down, 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 it would have lost millions or billions of dollars. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 Millions or tenth or hundreds of users would not be able to access these things 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 and this would also be true for wikipedia 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 if someone uploaded something that wasn´t completly, 100 % verdict. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 They could take down the entire site, not just that content. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 And you say: Okay, thats bad enough! 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 But couldn´t these people say: Hey, look you´re wrongfully took us down 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 we´re going to sue you now. Well to see that they can´t and 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 to see how onesided this legislation is notice: 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 The threshold for beeing able to sued back, if you kind of 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 misrepresented a violation - the only way you´re kind of held 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 accoutable is if you´re knowingly materially misrepresented the violation. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 So, if the copyright holder says: Oh, I think someone on Youtube 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 - I feel pretty good that someone on Youtube is violenting 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 and that Youtube is enabling a violation and therefore Youtube 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 is a site dedicated to theft of US Propertie and it later on 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 it finds out that it wasn´t, it was fair used or maybe that person 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 actually did have the copyright to it. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 They can´t be sued, because they said: Oh, I just thought it was. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 They werent knowingly materially misrepresenting themselfs. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 So even if it ends up, not even beeing a violation, these guys 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 could take the site down. Maybe some small producers actually 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 secured the rights, put it up on Youtube and them 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 ,all the sudden these guys take down all of Youtube based on 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 not actually knowing what they are talking about. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 And they can´t even be a counter sued in that case, based on the law. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 And it gets even creepier than that, because to be concidered this 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 you don´t even just enable or facilitate - which is almost everything - 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 one could argue a computer is enabling or facilitating this on some level. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 But you are concidered to be site, dedicated to theft of US property. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 Even if you do nothing illegal, even if you don´t enable anything illegal - 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 but if you just take actions that make it difficult for parties to confirm 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 that you´re doing something illegal. So if you view this in the physical world: 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 Obvioulsy some people are doing illegal things in their homes 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 and obviously some people lock their door to keep people out of their homes. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 And maybe people are doing illegal things, it would even be 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 more likely to look their doors and close their shutters. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 What this would do and this would do in the virtual sense, 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 is that say: Look! Just by taking the action of closing your shutters 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 and looking your doors. Which makes it hard for federal agents to confirm 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 that you´re doing illegal things - just by doing that - that itself is an illegal act. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 This is maybe one of the creepiest and draconian Intrusions of privacy, 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 that I have actually heard of - 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 that was even attempted to be passed into law. 9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000 So if I where you - just as a privacy and liberty loving American - I´d be worried.