i did this months ago, this is what BS my congressmen wrote to me:"Thank you for contacting me regarding your opposition to the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA). I appreciate hearing from you and welcome your input.
First, let me say that I share your belief that a free and open Internet has been a powerful force for positive change around the world. This year alone, we see in the Arab Spring a movement that was made possible by the advent of online and global communications through the Internet.
Yet the Internet has never been beyond the reach of the law. Activities that are illegal offline, whether distributing child pornography or selling pirated movies, are not rendered legal because they occur through the Internet. That is why we have put in place various laws like the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) of 1998. The DMCA is generally viewed as a successful effort to strike a delicate balance – in exchange for immunity from law suits by copyright holders, U.S. based websites agreed to respond to "takedown requests" from the legitimate license holders for copyrighted material.
Problems arise when the sites in question are based overseas and do not respond to or act upon notices from legitimate copyright holders. These rogue sites are easy to find – they offer everything from music, movies, and television shows to pharmaceuticals – and they are often the first search result a web user sees if they search for a copyrighted work. Frequently, these sites sell digital copies at a price far below what the legitimate owners could possibly compete with, or else they give away content free while supporting their site through online ad revenues. These are not legitimate businesses – they are stealing from U.S. creators, from the smallest self-published author to the largest movie studio. Online piracy is a serious economic problem for the United States, and perhaps no place is it more keenly felt than in our Los Angeles home.
The Stop Online Piracy Act was introduced to respond to the problem of foreign based rogue websites that pirate U.S. Intellectual Property, whether in the form of movie downloads, trademarked merchandise, or counterfeit pharmaceuticals. The bill applies only to "foreign infringing sites," which it defines as a website that would be subject to seizure under existing law if it were based in the United States because it was primarily dedicated to facilitating copyright infringement. In this way, the bill does not expand what constitutes copyright or trademark infringement – it only creates tools that will allow the Attorney General, with an order from a Federal Judge, to take steps against foreign infringing sites. The definition in the bill is crafted to ensure that legitimate U.S. based websites that comply with the DMCA, sites like – Facebook, Twitter, and Reddit – will not be impacted by SOPA.
The steps the Attorney General may seek from a judge are specifically delineated in the bill. They include orders preventing payment processors from facilitating transfers to the site owners; orders instructing Internet Service Providers to block access from the United States to these sites; orders instructing advertising networks to stop placing advertisements on these websites; and orders instructing search engines to remove sites from their search results.
Since SOPA was introduced, we've heard concerns from many parties, and many have sought to participate constructively in a discussion of how to improve the bill. One concern that was raised that I found persuasive was that of Internet security experts who suggested that aspects of the bill dealing with Domain Name System (DNS) blocking could make it impossible to implement the next generation of online security, known as DNSSEC. In response, the Judiciary Committee adopted a Manager's Amendment clarifying that no entity must comply with a court order to block access to a site if doing so would compromise the security of Internet users. As SOPA and the Senate companion, known as the PROTECT IP Act advance in the legislative process, the Congress and the Judiciary Committee will continue to hear from experts about how best to accomplish the goal of cracking down on foreign based websites that steal U.S. intellectual property.
I appreciate hearing from you and understand your views on this issue. I believe we can strike a balance that preserves the open nature of the Internet while preserving the rights of the creators of Intellectual Property to profit from their investments. Please be assured that I will keep your views in mind as Congress continues to work on these issues.
An on-going job of a Representative in Congress is to help constituents solve problems with federal agencies, access services, and get their questions answered promptly. On my website, I offer a detailed guide to the services my office can provide to you as a constituent. I also encourage you to subscribe to the Washington Update, my email newsletter which contains information on local events, my work in Washington, and even lets you weigh in on important issues through online polls. Visit me online at http://schiff.house.gov to subscribe. Please know that you can always reach me at (626) 304-2727 or via my website if I can ever be of additional assistance.
Thank you again for your thoughts. I hope you will continue to share your views and ideas with me.
Adam B. Schiff
Member of Congress" sooooooooooo basically you mean you wanna help big coorperations like hollywood and TV to create jobs? sure they are creating jobs just not for the us citizens