avclub-609447e665c8e66293f8de3269c6bb5b--disqus
deomed
avclub-609447e665c8e66293f8de3269c6bb5b--disqus

He shoots, he scores!  Now the rats are running for their holes.

Congratulations hipsters, you win this round.  I love the good old fashion political maneuver of chickening out until the heat dies down (which it will).

I agree that's a difference.  But I don't think that's a reason to not apply the same force.

Ok, I read a little more closely and I think the crux of the matter is that the government can issue an injunction/restraining order to shutdown a site, after the notification/counter process and after a court order is filed by the complainant.

Sean… sorry, when I said "you" I meant "you people".  And the due process argument you're making is just wrong.  Read the bill.  Nothing can be shut down until a complaint goes through the courts, after the notification and countering process..

I'm not arguing against due process.  Have you guys actually read the law?

Calling the appeals process generally ineffective before it's even been attempted is unfair.  But let's assume for the moment that this ends up being the case.  That's too bad.  It's also too bad that currently content owners have to go through a long drawn out process to get a pirating web site shut down and, by the

Wrong and wrong.

"To us, this is a similar argument to the 'if you’re not a terrorist, you have nothing to worry about'"
Not really.  It's more like "If you don't do anything illegal you don't have anything to worry about".  I liken this to trying to prevent pawn shops from buying and selling stolen goods.  Generally I believe that if