BSA Changes Its Mind On SOPA: Unintended Consequences Too Big

from the whoops dept

Mon, Nov 21st 2011 2:18pm — Mike Masnick

Late last week and over the weekend, supporters of SOPA started pushing a slightly ridiculous idea that a bunch of big tech companies "supported SOPA." This was based on the fact that the oftentimes extremist organization, the BSA, had come out in favor of SOPA, and a few people chose to believe that meant every member of the BSA -- including companies like Apple, Intel and Dell -- supported SOPA. The attempt to pretend that Apple must support SOPA was angering a lot of Apple fans, and it appears that something happened behind the scenes.

The BSA has now come out with a blog post "clarifying" its position, which seems a lot more like completely backing down on its position, and admitting that SOPA is way too broad and would have serious unintended consequences:

Valid and important questions have been raised about the bill. It is intended to get at the worst of the worst offenders. As it now stands, however, it could sweep in more than just truly egregious actors. To fix this problem, definitions of who can be the subject of legal actions and what remedies are imposed must be tightened and narrowed. Due process, free speech, and privacy are rights cannot be compromised. And the security of networks and communications is indispensable to a thriving Internet economy. Some observers have raised reasonable questions about whether certain SOPA provisions might have unintended consequences in these areas. BSA has long stood against filtering or monitoring the Internet. All of these concerns should be duly considered and addressed.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: copyright, free speech, sopa, tech industry
Companies: apple, bsa

35 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Nigel (profile), 21 Nov 2011 @ 2:26pm

Everybody... Get outside quick!
Cus is just started raining Skittles :)

Nigel
[ link to this | view in thread ]
hothmonster, 21 Nov 2011 @ 2:29pm

The wild west days of congress are over. No longer can the company with the most money just strut around demanding laws to support their failing businesses that are unwilling to adapt. Hope you cowboys had your fun time to start working.

#amIdoingitright?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
weneedhelp (profile), 21 Nov 2011 @ 2:29pm

Due process, free speech, and privacy are rights cannot be compromised.
Awww. Its so cute. They think we still have those.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Nigel (profile), 21 Nov 2011 @ 2:30pm

*it.... note to self.... Stop doing 5 things at once.

N.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Nov 2011 @ 2:34pm

Eat a dick SOPA supporters! /troll off
[ link to this | view in thread ]
:Lobo Santo (profile), 21 Nov 2011 @ 2:37pm

Re:
troll off?
That's like a 'dance off', right?

;-P
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Nov 2011 @ 2:40pm

Re: Re:
Do we get to keep our pants on for this one?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Nov 2011 @ 2:40pm

Re: Re:
Do we get to keep our pants on for this one?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Nov 2011 @ 2:43pm

Re: Re: Re:
I swear that I hit submit once, then used the link to comeback to my comment. Anyone having problems with Chrome?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
:Lobo Santo (profile), 21 Nov 2011 @ 2:44pm

Re: Re: Re: Re:
It's happened to me one on FireFox, but it's one of those rare intermittent hard to duplicate bugs apparently.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Dark Helmet (profile), 21 Nov 2011 @ 2:45pm

Re: Re: Re: Re:
I think the source of your confusion may be the fact you aren't wearing pants....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
another mike (profile), 21 Nov 2011 @ 2:46pm

clarification
Sounds to me like BSA's members clarified their position on continuing their membership. BSA wants dues paid more than they want this law.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
:Lobo Santo (profile), 21 Nov 2011 @ 2:46pm

Re: Re: Re: Re:
Though, come to think of it--should be easy enough to filter out accidental double posts thru a simple pattern matching algorithm; said posts are always "on top of" each other and always have the exact same text, and are from the same IP address.

Hey Mike!

Why does this 'double post' bug still exist? ^_^
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Capitalist Lion Tamer (profile), 21 Nov 2011 @ 2:49pm

Re:
Here's how you tell someone to "eat a dick."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Capitalist Lion Tamer (profile), 21 Nov 2011 @ 2:50pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Because the algorithm fails to account for Pants=on/Pants=off.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
hothmonster, 21 Nov 2011 @ 2:52pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
its a good question lots of comment sites will just say "you've already said that" when you try to double post, i.e. rockpapershotgun.com
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Dark Helmet (profile), 21 Nov 2011 @ 2:54pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Beauty is in the eye of the be-algorithm, as it were....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Nov 2011 @ 2:58pm

Re: Re:
Nice to see that it is copyrighted.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
hothmonster, 21 Nov 2011 @ 3:05pm

Re: Re: Re:
it is??? OH NO!!! I hope the artist doesn't invoke SOPA to get this site shut down! Oh wait, that thankfully hasn't passed yet we are still allowed to link to copyrighted material.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Nov 2011 @ 3:10pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
What I do in the privacy of my partially private cubical is my business thank you. Besides it gets hot in here.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
TheStupidOne, 21 Nov 2011 @ 3:12pm

Re: Re: Re: Re:
Incorrect good sir. Cause I've just filed a complaint against techdirt about that copyright image and now they shall be cut off from the internet unless Mike can defend himself successfully and at his own expense.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Nov 2011 @ 3:14pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Your just upset that I got the legs, and you got the brains.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Nov 2011 @ 3:26pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I never wear pants, so that's not it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Nov 2011 @ 3:57pm

Ah, they finally realized that...
...it undermines their business model.

Consider: how does the BSA make money?

Why, extortion, of course.

Now what happens if SOPA becomes law and is actually enforced?

Then someone caught with 235 illicit copies of PhotoBabbleWordCel gets arrested and prosecuted.

This neatly removes them from the pool of possible extortion targets. Oh, it may mean a stop to their particular actions, and it may mean something good for the vendor of PhotoBabbleWordCel, but it does nothing for the BSA.

So, you see, the last thing that the thugs at the BSA want is anyone else working their side of the street. Nope, they want it alllll to themselves. It's just business, you know.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jordan (profile), 21 Nov 2011 @ 3:59pm

Great. Now I'm getting tweets from my senator that link to TechDirt articles. I'm stuck in a Ron Wyden infinite loop.

https://twitter.com/#!/RonWyden/status/138766335843901440
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Nov 2011 @ 4:06pm

Define BSA?
Mike,

Maybe it's just me, but when I see BSA it means Boy Scouts of America. I knew that wasn't right in this context, but I had to go look it up to know who you were actually talking about. Maybe next time you could define the acronym after the first full use, like in standardized writing style. Thanks.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
shane, 21 Nov 2011 @ 4:40pm

Re: Re:
i think it is more in the line of "no homo" ?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Prisoner 201, 21 Nov 2011 @ 11:52pm

Re:
This is brilliant. I am going to have a hard time not to quote this everytime someone uses the "wild west" analogy to defend copymaximalism.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Prisoner 201, 21 Nov 2011 @ 11:58pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Wax on. Wax off.
-Mr Miyagi

Pants on. Pants off.
-Capitalist Lion Tamer
[ link to this | view in thread ]
btrussell (profile), 22 Nov 2011 @ 1:47am

Re:
Doing it right?

One of the best.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 22 Nov 2011 @ 1:52am

Re: Define BSA?
Boy Scouts? You are obviously crazy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
mike allen (profile), 22 Nov 2011 @ 2:49am

and i thought it ment BRITISH SMALL ARMS lol
[ link to this | view in thread ]
btrussell (profile), 22 Nov 2011 @ 3:02am

Re: Re: Define BSA?
Exactly!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Tom Forest, 22 Nov 2011 @ 6:41pm

Re:

and i thought it ment BRITISH SMALL ARMS...

That would be Birmingham Small Arms
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birmingham_Small_Arms_Company
Former manufacturers of military and sporting firearms; bicycles; motorcycles; cars; buses etc.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonim, 25 Nov 2011 @ 1:19pm

If "has long stood against filtering or monitoring the Internet", why joined in SOPA lobby?
[ link to this | view in thread ]