Public-interest group targets provisions in PROTECT IP (PIPA) and Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA).
Public Knowledge is opposed to using DNS blocking techniques to limit access to websites accused of peddling pirated content. Far from just being demonstrably ineffective in the first place, Public Knowledge believes that the practice would threaten the functioning, freedom, and economic potential of the Internet.
The provisions for website blocking in SOPA and PIPA short-circuit the legal system by giving rightsholders a fast-track to shutting down websites they accuse of infringing activities. This must be viewed as a precedent that could be applied to any kind of website that is opposed by a special interest in the future.
By using DNS blocking in particular, you create conflicts between DNS servers on the Internet, make the system less secure and create potential for identity theft.
Possibly the most important point for Americans however is the sanctioning government interference with the Internet, while at the same time the U.S. State Department blasts cencorship and firewalls used in China, or in more recent and volatile examples, such as Syria.
Public Knowledge asks simply why, if DNS blocking can be demonstrated to be ineffective and easy to circumvent, it is still worth the risk of damaging free speech and the functionality of the Internet to endorse its use in this way?
Sherwin Siy, Deputy Legal Director at Public Knowledge, discussed the issues in the following video, and shows how easy it is to reach a website that has been DNS blocked, or had its domain seized.
The provisions for website blocking in SOPA and PIPA short-circuit the legal system by giving rightsholders a fast-track to shutting down websites they accuse of infringing activities. This must be viewed as a precedent that could be applied to any kind of website that is opposed by a special interest in the future.
By using DNS blocking in particular, you create conflicts between DNS servers on the Internet, make the system less secure and create potential for identity theft.
Possibly the most important point for Americans however is the sanctioning government interference with the Internet, while at the same time the U.S. State Department blasts cencorship and firewalls used in China, or in more recent and volatile examples, such as Syria.
Public Knowledge asks simply why, if DNS blocking can be demonstrated to be ineffective and easy to circumvent, it is still worth the risk of damaging free speech and the functionality of the Internet to endorse its use in this way?
Sherwin Siy, Deputy Legal Director at Public Knowledge, discussed the issues in the following video, and shows how easy it is to reach a website that has been DNS blocked, or had its domain seized.
