SOPA/PIPA Debate Puts IP in the Spotlight

If you were on vacation without Internet access for the past week, you returned to a United States of America where intellectual property issues had become the subject of mainstream media dialogue. SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) and PIPA (Protect Intellectual Property Act) are acronyms that even lay people who can’t distinguish between a patent and a copyright now recognize. The rapid rise of IP to the national conscience is surprising. 

What is SOPA?

A little background may be necessary for those returned vacationers. Both bills are essentially about copyright protection. SOPA is the congressional version, while PIPA is the Senate flavor. If passed, they would enable copyright holders to obtain court orders from the Justice Department against websites that 'engage in, enable, or facilitate' copyright infringement. Infringement ranging from stolen MP3 files and unauthorized movie streaming, to an imitation Prada handbag. The court orders could also force the financial and technical service providers (such as search engines, payment provides like PayPal and Internet Service Providers) who enable access to the infringed offerings from providing it. 

Who supports SOPA/PIPA?

Lined up in support of SOPA are groups and organizations that benefit from copyrights to do business. You’ve got the usual suspects, such as the Recording Industry Association of America and the Motion Picture Association of America along with the Chamber of Commerce. A less obvious supporter is the AFL-CIO (American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations), which equates online piracy with unemployment. 

Who opposes SOPA/PIPA?

Lined up on the other sideline is a phalanx of organizations, many of whom have business models that involve introducing consumers and businesses to services and products, including physical goods. Among these are Google, Yahoo, and eBay. They’re joined by Twitter, Wikipedia, and the American Civil Liberties Union. 

It’s not Ali-Frazier, but it’s a well-financed, heavily lobbied battle between heavyweight opponents, a contemporary version of the “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter” adage. In this case, it has become one lobbying group’s “copyright protection” initiative is another group’s “Internet censorship” effort. 

The mass media awareness arose from the collective efforts of both sides to argue their case in the arena of public discourse as the respective bills came to the discussion floors. There were online protests and in a few tech-centric regions like San Francisco, people even took to the streets, using their free-speech rights to voice their SOPA opposition. 

Imagine a world without free knowledge 

This ominous message greeted visitors to Wikipedia.com, the sixth most visited* website, during a 24-shut down on January 18. Twitter explained that it was a global company and, despite its SOPA opposition, would continue to operate. Other heavily trafficked sites, however, did shut down, replacing their home pages with somber invitations for visitors to contact their elected representatives and “Just Say No to SOPA/PIPA.” Their opponents talked to the mass media while their lobbyists took the elected representatives to lunch. The mass media wrote stories to explain why Wikipedia was on hiatus. 

By midday Thursday, a Google news search for “SOPA” produced over 9,500 results. A lot of people have been reading and commenting. But where does this leave the issue that both sides readily admit is a problem only exacerbated by technology – how to improve protection for copyright owners so they can continue to make money from their creations?  

We’ll look at it next week after some of the immediate dust has settled. 

* - according to Alexa data.