Congress is currently debating legislation that could transform the Internet by blocking websites that illegally host copyrighted content. This doesn’t just mean that you will no longer be able to stream a season of Modern Family episodes in one sitting for free, as devastating as that possibility is. This legislation is a form of censorship that will have much more far-reaching effects, undermining the positive potential of the Internet and violating the fundamental American value of freedom of speech.
The Protect IP Act, which is coming close to passing in the Senate, is aimed at protecting the intellectual property of the entertainment industry by granting the US attorney general the newfound ability to block Internet service providers and search engines that host illegal content. An even more severe version, the Stop Online Piracy Act, is going through the House. This bill will permit companies to file suits against service providers that host copyrighted material inadvertently and without first notifying them.
These measures are overreaching and harmful to the constructive elements of the Internet. There is already recourse for copyright holders to sue against copyright infringement through legislation such as the Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual Property Act of 2008 and the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement of 2011.
This new legislation would be ruinous to the unique democratizing power of the Internet. It has become increasingly clear that social media sites aren’t just valuable for posting status updates and organizing flash mobs. Websites like Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr and YouTube changed the face of world politics as organizational tools for the Arab Spring and Occupy Wall Street. The wide range of authority over online content that these bills confer to the government could have disturbing reverberations for the voice that the masses can claim through Internet forums. Legislation could cause traffic on social media sites to decrease or shut down political blogs just for posting a link to a song.
These bills would also hurt innovative start-up websites by requiring companies to pour money into ensuring the legality of their online content. The Chinese version of Twitter, Weibo, has a department of 1,000 people that screen and block content. The extra spending these bills will necessitate discourages entrepreneurial ventures from launching, hurting the chance that the next life-changing online service like Facebook or Twitter will ever develop.
Finally, the slippery slope that would ensue with the passing of this legislation is a real danger. There is more incentive for websites to play it safe and over-censor their content than to risk getting punished by the authorities.
The controversies over intellectual property rights expose the enigmatic problem of how to effectively make a profit off the Internet. I’m a huge fan of independent music and moviemakers, who arguably suffer the most from Internet piracy, but this doesn’t mean that the entertainment industry should attempt to hinder the flow of progress. The way technology and the Internet are progressing, purchasing music is becoming obsolete. Illegal music downloading and streaming is practically ubiquitous, and artists themselves often offer free streaming and downloads on their websites to promote an album. The music, movie and television industries should evolve with technology, rather than struggle against it. Examples of this kind of thinking are found in Hulu, which works with a number of television networks to provide a level free content, with the option of providing more by purchasing a Hulu Plus membership. Additionally, musicians are selling phone apps as a component of their music.
I’m a poor college student and I know that out of all the music, movies and television that I stream online, maybe I would buy some of it if it got blocked. Are the sales that the entertainment industry would gain worth reducing the ability of the Internet to encourage democratic and innovative entrepreneurial projects
Constitutional rights and core American values like freedom of speech should not be compromised in order to provide even more protection for Hollywood.
Natalie Friedman is a Weinberg senior. She can be reached at [email protected]
