Can Senator Patrick Leahy Actually Provide The Proof That The COICA Censorship Law Is Needed?

Where is the media discussion about this Leahy bill "Combating Online Infringements and Counterfeits Act" (COICA that brings censorship to the internet? Until this was sent to me yesterday, I had no idea it was happening. How many others are in the dark about this bill?

This is the background on the censorship bill that Senator Leahy is trying to push through the Senate. Even his fellow Democrat Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon sees no reason for the bill. Looks like the real reason is in the bill itself because if it passed, it could limit political and other speech which would disappear from the net if the Attorney General asked the court and the court agreed a website could be placed on the blacklist. Looks like Senator Wyden didn't get the memo from either Obama, Holder, or the DNC about this bill which has the capability to limit political speech.

You may ask why Obama, Holder, or the DNC were mentioned. We do not believe that Leahy has the capability to come up with this on his own and sounds like something right out of the Obama White House and DNC. Giving any Attorney this kind of power is frightening but with Eric Holder it is even more frightening.

Fortunately, this bill is going to be DOA in the House if it even gets through the Senate. Will Wyden jump on Leahy's bandwagon for this bill before it is voted on by the Senators? The jury is still out on that.

The "Combating Online Infringements and Counterfeits Act" (COICA) is an Internet censorship bill which is rapidly making its way through the Senate. Although it is ostensibly focused on copyright infringement, an enormous amount of noninfringing content, including political and other speech, could disappear off the Web if it passes.

The main mechanism of the bill is to interfere with the Internet's domain name system (DNS), which translates names like "www.eff.org" or "www.nytimes.com" into the IP addresses that computers use to communicate. The bill creates a blacklist of censored domains; the Attorney General can ask a court to place any website on the blacklist if infringement is "central" to the purpose of the site.

There is something eerie when Sen Leahy who leaked classified documents as a member of the Intelligence Committee and admitted it in July 1987 is now worried and thinks we need COICA censorship on the internet even though he has no proof? Maybe it is time, actually past time, that he retire. Leahy should have been removed from the Senate for his breach of security in 1987 but he is still there thanks to the people of Vermont who don't seem to care as long as he brings home the pork. Who wrote this bill? That may be more telling than anything.

In doing the research on Leahy leaking discovered this gem:

In December 2004 intelligence types were allegedly seeking a criminal investigation into the outing of a top-secret spy-satellite program by some disagreeable Democrat senators.

The Bush administration was major league torqued over leaks about a new covert generation of satellites.

The premature, inappropriate congressional brain flatulence was articulated by Senators Jay Rockefeller and Ron Wyden. Although the petty partisan hacks didn't ID the satellite program or give details, a Washington Post follow-up identified the program for what it is. The details included in the Post make clear that people with intimate knowledge of the program leaked details.

"At a minimum, what they did was irresponsible," said an official.

Now we have the Democrat Oregon Senator Wyden opposing this bill by Leahy when he himself released classified information. At least he has this bill correct. All we need now is Jay Rockefeller, Democrat from West Virginia, to weigh in and we have a trifecta of Democrat Senators who leaked classified information discussing this bill.

Does the Senate even have an Ethics Committee?

Can Senator Patrick Leahy Actually Provide The Proof That The COICA Censorship Law Is Needed?
from the ah,-law-making-in-action dept

Mike Mansink
Feb 17, 2011

This is hardly a surprise, but despite folks like Senator Ron Wyden pointing out the massive problems with Senator Patrick Leahy's COICA bill, Leahy intends to push forward with it. What's amazing is that he even seems to admit that there's no real evidence that it's needed. In his remarks pushing COICA, Senator Leahy noted:

"Copyright piracy and the sale of counterfeit goods are reported to cost the American economy billions of dollars annually and hundreds of thousands of lost jobs. That is why inaction is not an option, and we must pass online infringement legislation in this Congress before rogue websites harm more businesses, and result in more lost jobs."

"Are reported?" By whom? Not the US government, who a year ago noted that all of the studies making those sorts of claims were bogus, and the various studies discussing these claims of "losses" to both jobs and the American economy have been thoroughly debunked. The only people still claiming that such things are factual are lobbyists and legacy industry insiders, who clearly stand to benefit from such laws that can be used to stifle innovation.

If Leahy is going to insist that these numbers are factual, shouldn't he at least have to say where he got those numbers from -- and also avoid relying on numbers from the very industries this law is designed to help?

So, what are the chances that Senator Leahy will put forth the details that prove why he needs to censor the internet to protect a few companies who don't want to adapt to a changing market? Anyone a constituent of Leahy's

Source: techdirt.com

Senator Wyden joined the discussion on this bill and at the link you will find his six specific points to consider in dealing with these issues. We also agree with Wyden that separating counterfeiting from copyright protection is necessary.

Senator Ron Wyden (who just joined Twitter) was kind enough to send over the remarks he made to the Senate Judiciary Committee concerning COICA. It's an excellent read that highlights many of the points we've been making. Basically, he says that we need to be careful not to decimate basic principles of free speech and create all sorts of collateral damage in an effort to go after a few bad actors who can be targeted via other laws:

Make no mistake, I share the committee's goal of fighting counterfeiting and protecting our creative industries and the good paying jobs they support. The Internet has unquestionably created new opportunities to traffic in counterfeit and illegal goods. The fact that the law has not always kept pace with technology may make it easier for bad actors to exploit new opportunities. Congress is right to want to go after those who are "stealing American intellectual property." However, in writing laws to target the bad actors, Congress cannot afford to forget that the primary uses of the Internet are activities protected by the First Amendment, not civil or criminal violations.

[...] Yes, the Internet needs reasonable laws and bad actors need to be pursued, but the freedoms of billions of individual Internet users cannot be sacrificed in the interest of easing that pursuit. The decisions we make to police the Internet today will also govern how this relatively new medium will continue to develop and shape our world. I objected to last year's Combating Online Infringement of Copyrights Act not because it might reduce the Internet's ability to facilitate infringement, but because I believe it went about it in a way that would also reduce the Internet's ability to promote democracy, commerce and free speech.

He also laid out six specific points to consider in dealing with these issues. I agree with all six, and am particularly happy to see him mention the importance of separating counterfeiting from copyright protection, a key point that we've discussed here, but I had not seen anyone in politics pick up on until now.

Excerpt: Read more from Sen Wyden and his six specific points at techdirt.com

Several questions need answered about this bill starting with 'Why did Leahy go overboard with this bill so it could affect free speech including political speech?,' 'Why did he not separate counterfeiting from copyright protection?,' and 'Why is Master Card supporting this bill?' When is our mainstream media going to ask these questions? There seems to be a vacuum in reporting about this bill because in doing a search, all the information on COICA comes from websites like this one not from the broadcast news networks. Why?