[Beingist]

Originally Posted by Spinoza

All right I have read the bill and I'm missing where the due process is left out. Questionable sites have to be notified that action will be taken.

See, this is precisely why the law has been written intentionally vague--so no one notices the effect on due process.

What I've bolded above is precisely where due process is under threat. What makes a site "questionable?"

A court order is obtained.

Note that this is all before the fact. Nothing, no infringement has yet been proven by anyone.

These sites have the right to defend their actions in court.

Defend what actions? What laws have they broken? Why should they have to defend themselves at all, if they're not charged with a crime?

If they are not infringing on media creators rights then everything I read says they will go back to business as usual.

If legal fees don't bankrupt them, you mean. Moreover, this makes having to go to court just defend being in business to begin with. Moreover still, this doesn't consider hosting sites that must protect their interests by denying hosting what they consider suspect sites. "Sorry, we think you're suspect, so we're shutting down your site." Where's the due process in that?

The Attorny General does not get to say "I'll shut down what ever site I feel like, end of story". He does have to go through due process procedures.

This isn't about the Attorney General, this is about the government encouraging people to rat on others, shutting down sites at will, and the gradual erosion of due process of law.

In my eyes really it boils down to the larger question of when I buy a song or a movie what is the extent of that ownership. Should that ownership be totally defined by the creators or does the government have the right to define that realtionship. How much should the government get involved in enforcing that agreement.

There are already intellectual, copyright, and trademark laws on the books. Currently, if anyone is believed to be violating a copyright law, the copyright holder can exercise his right to file suit against that entity. That's called due process. If that is currently in effect, why, then, this law? Ask yourself what is the real need for it?