How the Stop Online Piracy Act Functions

On January 20, 2012, U.S. Representative Lamar Smith retracted the contentious Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) from the House floor. The bill faced heavy opposition from critics, while powerful groups like the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) and the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) stood in support. Smith stated that although foreign piracy remains a problem, further discussion is necessary [source: Reuters]. SOPA may not be entirely gone, but it has been temporarily shelved. So, what caused the uproar?

Let’s clarify this from the outset: Stealing is wrong. It’s unethical and often illegal to take something that doesn’t belong to you without permission or compensation. This concept is easily demonstrated with tangible items—like taking apples from a store reduces the store's inventory for other customers. But the situation becomes more complicated when dealing with digital property.

In the online world, it’s possible to steal something and make an exact copy without taking anything away from the original owner. For example, if you manage to get your hands on the latest Hollywood movie and upload it to a website for others to view, you have stolen intellectual property, even though no physical object has been transferred. The movie studio can still sell tickets, DVDs, or other methods of accessing the content.

Adding to the complexity, the Internet is a global network. With a web browser, you can access sites hosted on servers across the globe. Some of these sites may offer pirated content. How can a company in one nation prevent illegal activity conducted by individuals or organizations in another country?

Piracy, particularly the issue of foreign sites hosting illegal copies, is at the heart of the SOPA legislation. Texas Representative Lamar Smith introduced SOPA, also known as H.R. 3261, to the U.S. House of Representatives on October 26, 2011. The language in the bill states that its goal is to "promote prosperity, creativity, entrepreneurship, and innovation by combating the theft of U.S. property, and for other purposes."

The act targets sites hosted on servers in countries outside the U.S. By doing so, it seeks to address the problem of pirate sites that exist outside of U.S. legal authority. The intention is to disrupt or shut down these sites through indirect methods, as they are beyond the reach of U.S. law. The proposed regulations in the act have been controversial, with multiple companies and Internet professionals voicing concerns. Some even argue that it could result in breaking the Internet.

So what exactly in SOPA stirred up so much controversy?

The SOPA Drama

While the Stop Online Piracy Act contains various sections, its primary focus is on preventing potential customers in the United States from accessing websites that distribute pirated or counterfeit products.

The act targets "foreign infringers," which refers to sites based in other countries. It specifically targets sites dedicated to the distribution of pirated or counterfeit goods, whether for profit or not. The primary concern is intellectual property. These sites must be "United States directed," meaning that Americans are at least partially the intended audience of these websites.

Since prosecuting individuals or organizations in foreign nations is complicated, the act shifts its focus to U.S.-based companies and services. The law particularly targets Internet service providers, search engines, payment processors, and online advertising services. If the act is enacted, these companies will be required to follow strict guidelines upon receiving a court order from the attorney general and must act on those instructions within five days of receiving them.

These regulations aim to block access to foreign infringing sites. Specifically, the act mandates that ISPs block the domain names associated with the infringing websites. So, if a user in the U.S. attempts to access a blocked site, they would either see an error message or be redirected to a different page. On the backend, ISPs would ensure the blocked domain names no longer resolve to the IP addresses of those infringing sites.

The attorney general can instruct search engines to eliminate all direct links to an infringing site. Services such as Google would be obligated to search for and remove all links to the site within five days of receiving the court order.

Payment processors like PayPal and online advertising companies would need to stop funding infringing sites upon receiving a court order. The objective is that by cutting off the financial backing, the illegal activity will cease. Additionally, advertising services would be prohibited from placing ads on the infringing site, or creating ads for that site.

SOPA also targets websites that stream copyrighted content. These sites allow users to view or listen to media on demand without first obtaining permission from the intellectual property owners. There are also provisions aimed at sites that distribute counterfeit products, particularly pharmaceuticals.

Halting the financial support to a site is a significant action, and intellectual property owners must follow a specific procedure to ensure it happens. In the next section, we'll delve deeper into this process.

The SOPA Strategy

SOPA’s legal text contains two primary ways for intellectual property owners to take action against pirates. The first approach involves the attorney general, who would need to seek a court order against Internet service providers (ISPs), search engines, payment processors, and advertising services. Once the order is served, these companies must comply within five days. However, there’s also a market-driven alternative that doesn’t require the attorney general’s involvement.

Imagine you're the head of a movie studio. Congratulations on your success! But now you’ve encountered a problem — you’ve discovered a website offering pirated copies of your latest blockbuster before it even hits theaters! Even worse, this site is hosted on a server in Eastern Europe, meaning you can’t use the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) to take action against it!

When faced with this situation, your next step is to utilize the measures available under SOPA. The first step is to obtain a court order, with the attorney general stepping in to help. You’ll need to draft a formal document and send it to the payment network provider or Internet advertising service. This document should include the following details:

After the payment network provider or advertising service receives your notice, they will have five days to sever all connections with the identified infringing site.

Next, let’s explore who supports SOPA and who wishes it would be left behind.

SOPA Supporters and Critics

It’s no surprise that the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) and the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) are two of the most vocal advocates of SOPA. These massive organizations represent powerful and profitable industries, and they have a direct interest in eliminating piracy.

The United States Chamber of Commerce is another prominent backer of SOPA. Though its name suggests a government affiliation, it is not a public agency. Rather, it is a lobbying group representing the interests of businesses and trade associations. With significant funding and influence, the Chamber of Commerce plays a key role in the political landscape.

The pharmaceutical industry is also on board with SOPA. The act includes provisions that specifically target sites selling counterfeit drugs or what it deems to be "inherently dangerous goods or services." However, the act leaves the definition of what constitutes ‘inherently dangerous’ goods or services up to interpretation.

On the flip side, companies such as Google, Facebook, eBay, and PayPal have voiced strong opposition to SOPA. Many of these companies could find themselves directly affected by the law. In addition, numerous technology experts argue that SOPA will do more harm than good and will fail to stop piracy altogether. Even Vinton Cerf, one of the pioneers of the Internet, wrote a letter to Representative Lamar Smith expressing his concerns about the bill.

What are the main criticisms of SOPA, and could the legislation really lead to the downfall of the Internet?

The Slippery SOPA Slope

Opponents of SOPA raise several concerns. They argue that the act's provisions lack due process, as there is no opportunity for a website to defend itself in court. Almost every action under SOPA targets sites that link to or support the infringing site, yet the ISPs, search engines, payment networks, and advertising agencies don't own the illegal content.

Picture yourself in charge of a massive search engine like Google. You might receive a flood of court orders demanding the removal of links to various sites. How could you verify whether each of these sites truly infringes intellectual property rights? Since you don't own the content you link to, you’d need to spend additional time ensuring the legitimacy of other services. To avoid complications, you might just comply with the order, which could result in censorship.

One of the websites that could be impacted by SOPA is WikiLeaks. This whistleblowing site hosts sensitive government and corporate documents. Although many companies may wish to see WikiLeaks shut down, its servers are located outside of the U.S., putting it beyond American jurisdiction. However, SOPA could allow companies to indirectly sever access to WikiLeaks.

Another concern raised is security. In recent years, various organizations focused on improving internet safety have developed a security protocol known as Domain Name System Security Extensions (DNSSEC). DNSSEC aims to enhance the security of internet traffic by providing origin authentication of DNS data and ensuring data integrity. It also enables encryption of domain names. However, if SOPA mandates ISPs to block or remove domain names from their databases, DNSSEC would be compromised.

One of the most significant criticisms of SOPA is that it may not actually stop piracy. In December, as the House Representatives were discussing the merits of the bill, the first anti-SOPA extension for Firefox appeared online. Named DeSOPA, this extension bypasses domain blocks by querying foreign DNS servers to resolve the address. As foreign servers are outside U.S. jurisdiction, they are free to retain domains for sites that are blocked.

Even without browser extensions, users could still access blocked websites if they knew the correct IP address. While these numerical addresses are difficult to remember and can change often, they serve as the foundation of the domain name system. Domain names point to the appropriate IP addresses, sparing users from memorizing long sequences of numbers. If domain names are blocked, however, knowing the IP address could be the only way to access certain sites. If SOPA is enacted, expect to see websites dedicated to compiling lists of IP addresses for blocked domains.