Today the Obama Administration issued a statement on the Stop Online Piracy Act and the Protect-IP Act, in response to two online petitions opposing the bills — the White House says that while it still supports anti-piracy efforts, it "will not support legislation that reduces freedom of expression, increases cybersecurity risk, or undermines the dynamic, innovative global internet." The White House also says that it cannot endorse policy that "drives users to dangerous, unreliable DNS servers and puts next-generation security policies, such as the deployment of DNSSEC, at risk." Since SOPA and PIPA would threaten DNSSEC, the White House's statement puts it in de-facto opposition to the bills in their current form (however, it's worth noting that the administration's statement does not necessarily mean that Obama would veto the bills if they reach his desk).
Meanwhile, support for the bills in their current form is crumbling in Congress. The administration's statement is yet another strike against the controversial bills, following a number of setbacks for SOPA / PIPA supporters in the past week: yesterday, House Judiciary Committee chairman Rep. Lamar Smith said he plans to remove the controversial DNS blocking provision from SOPA, and PIPA's author, Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont, said that "further study" is needed to sort out the consequences of the bill before it reaches a vote.
As The Hill reports, House Oversight Chairman Darrell Issa, one of the largest and most vocal opponents of SOPA's controversial DNS-blocking measures, said this morning that he will postpone hearings on SOPA's DNS provisions, after Majority Leader Eric Cantor promised him that the House won't vote on SOPA unless there is a consensus on the bill. The assurance of consensus is another step towards slowing the bill's progress, and could give the committee additional time to evaluate SOPA's consequences. Given the mounting levels of opposition to the bills, it's unlikely that SOPA / PIPA will be pushed through as they currently stand, but there's also no guarantee that other controversial measures — like the ability for private companies to take action against presumed copyright infringers — will be removed.

There are 30 Comments. Add yours.
Power to the people!
Posted on Jan 14, 2012 | 4:03 PM EST reply Recommend (3) Flag actions
Kill Bill
Posted on Jan 14, 2012 | 9:04 PM EST reply Recommend (4) Flag actions
Kill Bill 2 – including PIPA
Posted on Jan 16, 2012 | 7:03 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
DAMN IT! Obama opposes it! That means Congress will vote for it regardless.
Posted on Jan 15, 2012 | 3:19 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
This means nothing. We must not back down. This is only a win for the battle, not the war. And Obama’s word means NOTHING. NDAA, Gitmo, Medical Marijuana… he promised one thing, and did the opposite. This is simply trying to make it look like they are appeasing the people. This bill needs to KILLED COMPLETELY. Not modified.
Posted on Jan 14, 2012 | 4:29 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
In all fairness, it’s not like his word means “nothing”. It mounts further pressure on Senate dems at the very least to do just what we all want: kill the bill.
Don’t get me wrong, I agree this is not a time to let the guard down, but it’s a bit exaggerated to say it means “nothing”.
Posted on Jan 14, 2012 | 4:50 PM EST reply Recommend (6) Flag actions
He lied the other day about NDAA in similar circumstances.
Posted on Jan 14, 2012 | 6:46 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/
Posted on Jan 14, 2012 | 11:25 PM EST reply Recommend (4) Flag actions
That’s a decent score as far as politicians go…
Posted on Jan 17, 2012 | 9:39 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
way to go by not over reacting dude!
Posted on Jan 15, 2012 | 9:04 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Big news. You’d think it would be on the front page of CNN. Nope. Well, I’m sure it’s because ‘weird baby names can be illegal’ is a more important story, and not because of the relationship between the media corporations and the people who drafted the bill. Real sure.
Posted on Jan 14, 2012 | 4:32 PM EST reply Recommend (5) Flag actions
I’m sure there are dozens of things of this magnitude going on under the table that we don’t know about. We’ve only caught on to this because it’s something inside our area of expertise.
Unfortunately, riders are becoming extremely common (and more outrageous) these days.
Posted on Jan 14, 2012 | 5:46 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
Exactly,.
Posted on Jan 14, 2012 | 10:59 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
The fight is not over, but lets be prudent… This IS a big victory for us. Geeks, nerds, internet users, citizens… Today we earned a landmark victory.
Posted on Jan 14, 2012 | 4:42 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
obama did something right? wow…
Posted on Jan 14, 2012 | 4:53 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
Posted on Jan 16, 2012 | 12:46 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I’m pleasantly surprised, as most of the other petitions on We The People (the White House’s online petitioning site) have been met with either a boilerplate “We’re looking into it” response or – as the legalize cannabis petition was – with a pandering response that simultaneously talked down to the petition signers. Their response is a clear sign that SOPA opponents have the ear of the government. I say that this is progress.
Posted on Jan 14, 2012 | 5:22 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
Good call. I rarely agree with this administration’s decisions, but credit where credit is due.
Posted on Jan 14, 2012 | 5:39 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
This is the equivalent of receiving a reach-around while being jail-raped.
Posted on Jan 14, 2012 | 8:39 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Pretty typical Obama position: He claims to support anti-piracy but, offers no solution.
Posted on Jan 14, 2012 | 9:10 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
Well, it’s better than him not reading into the issue and letting it just glide by.
Posted on Jan 14, 2012 | 9:28 PM EST reply Recommend (6) Flag actions
as most other presidents would have. its better than him being in the pocket of the companies/people that support the bill
Posted on Jan 14, 2012 | 11:49 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
Why don’t they improve relations with the countries that the servers are usually hosted on? A fancy meal here and there and then I’m sure whatever website will be taken down.
Posted on Jan 14, 2012 | 10:11 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
You may have a distaste for Obama. But could you imagine John McCain doing any better?
Posted on Jan 14, 2012 | 11:57 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
uhhhhh yea. Yes I can.
Posted on Jan 15, 2012 | 11:53 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Well, you’re totally and provably wrong. He supports SOPA and is a friggin’ sponsor of PROTECT-IP:
http://projects.propublica.org/sopa/M000303/
Congratulations on your poor choices.
Posted on Jan 15, 2012 | 9:54 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
VICTORY!!!
Posted on Jan 15, 2012 | 12:46 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
DELAY!
Posted on Jan 15, 2012 | 5:26 AM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
Concern over SOPA PIPA but fine with locking up America citizens indefinitely without trial?
I used to love the USA when growing up watching the A-Team and Airwolf but with……that sucks for you guys in the US.
Posted on Jan 16, 2012 | 7:00 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Well yeah it sucks for us in the U.S. but if YouTube, google and other websites get shut down because of SOPA… No one will be able to get on them even if you’re across the Atlantic and Pacific Ocean. Just saying.
Posted on Jan 19, 2012 | 1:08 AM EST via mobile reply Recommend Flag actions
Something to say? Choose one of these options to log in.