Money, power, and Congress: how lobbyists will determine the fate of SOPA

By T.C. Sottek on January 18, 2012 02:55 pm 101Comments

I used to be a lobbyist.

When I first strolled the long halls of the Rayburn House office building, a marble monolith of bureaucracy, I was overcome with a surreal feeling of wonderment. There's a lot of history here, and occasionally I found myself swept up in what felt like the entire span of democratic civilization. Tourists stand, mouths agape and camera shutters firing, witnessing the same veneer of mythical magnitude. In D.C., romanticism often trumps reality.

This, I thought, this is where everything happens. This is where noble members of the public trust harness enlightened traditions and institutions to advance the common interest.

But then I met the members of Congress.

Section TOC Title

I quickly learned that our elected officials are not demigods solely focused on the collective good — they’re just people. To inflate them into anything else trivializes their real accomplishments at best, and blinds us from the reality of Congress at worst. Lawmakers may have their own parochial interests or lofty causes, but first and foremost they're always looking for votes. To get votes, they need attention and money -- something that corporate lobbyists can dish out in abundance. The end product of this system is lawmaking that's less about making good public policy and more about appeasing the hands that feed — as a result, powerful corporations with deep pockets gain unparalleled access to members of Congress, and they help set the agenda. That agenda is why bills like SOPA and PIPA gain such traction — they were delivered to Congress in return for money and votes.

You don't even have to dig deep into the history of SOPA and PIPA to find blatant conflicts of interest: According to Politico, Allison Halatei, former Deputy Chief of Staff to House Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith, and Lauren Pastarnack, a Senate Judiciary Committee Senior Aide, just accepted jobs with two of the lobbying firms backing SOPA and PIPA. Halatei and Pastarnack helped write the bills. Halataei is now the National Music Publisher's Association chief liaison to Congress, and Pasternak is now the director of government relations for the MPAA.

You don't even have to dig deep into the history of SOPA and PIPA to find blatant conflicts of interest

It gets worse: Chris Dodd, who served as a senator for thirty years, is now the Chairman and CEO of the MPAA. As a senator, Dodd swore he'd never take money from lobbyists, but he now reaps a $1.5 million base salary and a $100 million lobbying budget. Lobbying is one art form the entertainment industry doesn’t mind investing heavily in: SOPA’s 32 co-sponsors received four times more in campaign contributions from the entertainment industry than from the tech industry. We shouldn’t be surprised that SOPA is as bad as it is; we should be surprised it’s not worse.

Demonstrators and Defectors

Despite the urgency with which certain members of Congress tried to push SOPA and PIPA through the gears of government, legislators are abandoning ship as a direct result of pressure from voters.

As I mentioned, policymakers are more interested in taking positions than making great laws, because positions are more valuable for grabbing votes. Knowing that a massive public outcry over SOPA and PIPA may threaten their offices more than pressure from interest groups, sponsors of the bills have dialed back their enthusiasm for their most controversial provisions. In the past week alone, leaders from both major political parties that once supported pushing SOPA and PIPA through without critical evaluation have quickly backpedaled, postponing hearings and making broad assurances that "consensus" will be reached before a vote occurs.

Don't be fooled: these legislators still want to enact anti-piracy legislation that will please their benefactors, and the advantage is squarely in their court.

Wikipedia, Google, and others joining in today's internet blackout in opposition to SOPA have paid an immense price: their credibility is now on the line, and protest doesn't come cheap. The conversation may reach a flashpoint in the next few days, but Congress has plenty of time to sit on SOPA and PIPA until the fervor dies down. Wikipedia can't shut itself down every month to protest the bills every time they take a new turn for the worse, and the public's attentiveness isn't likely to last forever. Just today, Chris Dodd published a statement denouncing the blackouts. He says that "a so-called 'blackout' is yet another gimmick, albeit a dangerous one, designed to punish elected and administration officials who are working diligently to protect American jobs from foreign criminals." Members of Congress actually care about what this man says. They care a lot.

Even if SOPA and PIPA die on the vine, Congress will be back with fresh legislation and cute new propaganda-laden titles, courtesy of the MPAA and RIAA's ruthlessly effective combination of money and patience — a combination the tech community has shown little interest in matching. To change Congress, you have to change who Congress listens to. But more importantly, you have to change what those people are saying — and to do that you need to peer outside the marble halls of Congress and focus your gaze squarely on Silicon Valley.

Congress is a game, and anyone who wants to get something done in government plays

Playing the Game

As long as the entertainment industry spends more money in Washington than the tech industry, bad laws like SOPA and PIPA will appear with frightening regularity. The government will seem ignorant and unresponsive to the internet community for as long as the internet community refuses to participate — that’s just how this works.

Congress is a game, and anyone who wants to get something done in government plays. Those who don't play never accomplish anything. It's a game of reputation, relationships, back-room deals, and big money. And if you haven't called or written your representatives, or engaged someone to advocate on your behalf, you're not even spectating from the bleachers — as far as Congress is concerned, you're sitting in your car listening to the game on the radio, somewhere in the uncharted Canadian tundra. Meanwhile, special interest groups help decide the batting order, while lobbyists line the bases, waving their pet legislation home.

Getting Congress to listen is not the problem with SOPA or PIPA, because they are listening — to the loudest voices with the most money. The tech industry has long been in the game — Google and Microsoft and Apple all certainly employ lobbyists — but it’s time to start playing to win.

There are 101 Comments. Add yours.

ScottSisco says:

Outstanding :)

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 3:00 PM EST reply Recommend (24) Flag actions

Gregounech's reply:

I used to be a lobbyist.

and then I took an arrow in the knee.

Sorry, had to do it.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 4:04 PM EST reply Recommend (23) Flag actions

lancelott's reply:

@arrow in knee joke guy
A more useful reply (no offense)… A video showing us every politician who sponsored SOPA. :-)

Shameless plug? Sure, whatever…

http://youtu.be/ENXmXI_oTvI

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 11:02 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions

mathew hudec's reply:

Meh.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 5:33 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

mathew hudec's reply:

This sums up the SOPA opponents::

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 7:22 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions

Foxholes says:

So…we’re screwed unless Google, Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, etc. start paying off lobbyists? What country do we live in? What’s up 1984. I say, we the people use our collective voice today to be heard, and let them know we will never back down from the fight for our freedom. Burn them so hard with this storm they never think about passing something like this again.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 3:01 PM EST reply Recommend (11) Flag actions

Ghost650's reply:

So…we’re screwed unless Google, Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, etc. start paying off lobbyists

Duh…

You didn’t think that our Government operated differently, did you?

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 3:05 PM EST reply Recommend (7) Flag actions

RagingTyrant's reply:

Not necessarily. The push today has caused atleast one cosponsor to bail today: http://www.facebook.com/notes/orrin-hatch/hatch-statement-on-the-protect-ip-act/10150489342453499

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 3:18 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions

aNYthing24's reply:

A couple have changed their stance.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/19/technology/web-protests-piracy-bill-and-2-key-senators-change-course.html?hp

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 3:59 PM EST reply Recommend (3) Flag actions

Ghost650's reply:

I was speaking very generally and somewhat tongue-in-cheek. that aside, I hope more of this happens. The internet is an incredible tool, and probably our best chance, to let our senators and representatives know how we feel about legislation in their respective houses.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 4:02 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

Jacks Attack's reply:

…and that is why they want to pass legislation to gain more control over the internet. They can’t allow the people to gain knowledge and organize while they try and sneak laws taking liberty away from us little by little. Why do we keep re-electing these clowns even after they show their true colors?

Posted on Jan 19, 2012 | 6:31 AM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

Ghost650's reply:

Because running for office is so expensive… where do you think all the money comes from?

Posted on Jan 19, 2012 | 12:44 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

Jacks Attack's reply:

It may be expensive, but it is you and me who vote and determine who gets into office. Essentially it is our fault for allowing sleazy politicians to get elected. If there were more informed, civic minded Americans, it wouldn’t matter where the money comes from. Unfortunately, the apathetic, misguided citizen helps keep this downward spiral going. My earlier point is simply, if politicians gain more control over the internet, it will be easier for them to spin the propaganda and foster apathy among the people they rule over…
yawn… but who cares, right?

Posted on Jan 19, 2012 | 8:45 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

pcgamer's reply:

I feel Horrible, Being in Missouri and Having BOTH Senators as Co-Sponsors for the Bill… . They BOTH know how i feel though, i Assure you.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 4:21 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

thesaxpax's reply:

Actually, http://www.savetheinternet.com/pipa-whiplist is saying that Roy Blunt is now against the bill (I checked this morning and it said he was supporting, now he isn’t). Same website says Claire McCaskill is “on the fence”, whatever that means.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 6:11 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

Psycros's reply:

Unless there’s free stuff to be gained or a direct threat to their income, you’ll have a hard time getting anyone to do more than bitch and moan as they suck on their lite beer and watch American Idol. Nobody cares about their civic responsibilities anymore – they care about what Lady Gaga wore to some gathering of imbeciles.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 3:59 PM EST reply Recommend (7) Flag actions

dankinshane's reply:

Its so sad how true this statement is. I think half the problem is that Americans dont even realize whats going on in the political world because 99% of the time, legislation doesn’t affect their day to day lite beer drinking and lady Gaga watching. Most Americans depress me. SOPA will affect almost ALL AMERICANS! Hopefully it will wake people up to realize that the government is seeking more and more control and censorship. I hope the government doesn’t start a firefighting squad to destroy kindles in the future.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 4:08 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

DrDenim's reply:

Trust me, this does not just apply to Americans, but pretty my everyone else in the world. Most of the people who care, and make the most noise are crazies furthest out to the right and left. Or if there is some sort of entitlement/pay out for regular people they might wake up

Posted on Jan 19, 2012 | 12:29 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

za7ch's reply:

Being further right or left of the apathetic center is considered making noise/being a crazy? Happy to be a leftist loon, then, I guess.

“At least I’m fucking trying…” -Ian MacKaye

Posted on Jan 20, 2012 | 10:00 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

Kirielson's reply:

That technically applies to about roughly half of the world in general. There are certain legislation that truly won’t affect you directly nor is it tangeable. That’s what makes certain things hard to pitch. That and the fact that legislation, in order to escape loopholes, have to be long winded and long. One thing we can do is to find topics like this and explain it to people properly.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 10:57 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

Jacks Attack's reply:

Apathy is inexcusable, and to care more about American Idol then what is going on in DC should be a crime. But I do empathize with the reality for the average family. They spend a majority of their day working to barely support their family, then have to take care of kids and spouse when they get home with little time to spare. They trust the media to tell them what is going on in the world and in politics. They have no time to do the research and sift through the bias and BS. They should know better, but they are more worried about the immediate bills that have to be paid then the “snakes” in Washington making backroom deals that reduce the average citizen to peasants that serve the modern aristocracy. Again, it is inexcusable and because of it, we get what we deserve.

Posted on Jan 19, 2012 | 6:46 AM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

i Have Met The verge's reply:

How else did u think business got done in Washington? It ain’t from our votes being cast, if you would really think, the only thing we get to vote on is who we get to call the President

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 5:41 PM EST via mobile reply Recommend Flag actions

Sqube's reply:

I don’t want to sound disrespectful, but have you ever read 1984? There’s not really any comparison here; this isn’t a totalitarian society run in total secrecy. It’s a representative democracy run by the wealthy.

Posted on Jan 19, 2012 | 9:31 AM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

kadajawi's reply:

Well, paying lobbyists (why not buy the politicians directly?) or start their own private army and get rid of lobbyists and politicians. An alternative would be to learn from the Israelis, they tend to be quite efficient in dealing with unwanted persons.

Posted on Jan 20, 2012 | 9:00 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

joeythehobo says:

The Verge, and Ars Technica both are posting some amazing SOPA/PIPA articles today. I hope these pieces get seen by people outside their usual readership, as they are extremely well done.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 3:02 PM EST reply Recommend (20) Flag actions

mathew hudec's reply:

Non-geeks are just going to see a bunch of geeks getting upset because someone wants to stop them from pirating.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 5:36 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

clackerd's reply:

Jesus Christ, Debbie Downer. Start helping or get out of the way.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 7:06 PM EST reply Recommend (4) Flag actions

durangojim says:

What’s new. Congress isn’t for, by, and of the people. It’s for whatever group gets the most effective lobbiests, and this is nothing new. Just hope that the corporations that oppose SOPA are willing to spend big money to lobby congress.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 3:03 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions

mathew hudec's reply:

Those companies that oppose SOPA are dependant on the ones that support it. Apple, Microsoft, and Google can’t do anything as long as they don’t create their own content. (Which is why Google is making a half-assed attempt to get into content creation.)

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 5:38 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

Okaysthen says:

Let me ask you this….is what Wikipedia, Google, The Verge and other sites do by asking people to sign and to protest by forcibly either shutting down services or by making up the minds of their userbase not a form of lobbying?

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 3:06 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

Ronindan's reply:

Lobbying could range from grass roots efforts much like what Google and the rest are doing to using paid lobbyist that is being used by both sides

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 3:12 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

T.C. Sottek's reply:

For the record, I don’t think lobbying is evil, and there’s not always huge money involved.

In my own stint in D.C., I worked for a non-profit association focusing on National Park-related issues (pretty uncontroversial stuff, politically speaking). As a member-based organization, we certainly weren’t making huge donations to candidates or offering legislators lucrative positions — we worked on modest salaries to try to influence Congress on behalf of our membership.

Lobbying is a form of speech, and it’s an important one: it allows dedicated groups of people to organize and share their message with the government. When money and job offers enter the mix, that’s something else entirely.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 3:12 PM EST reply Recommend (18) Flag actions

baclap's reply:

So in other words the biggest issue in politics is campaign finance reform? Vote Buddy Roemer.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 5:09 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

vbchrist's reply:

Although most lobbyists may not be evil*, lobbying provides a platform for the upper class to influence politics. It can/is be used to give more rights to those with money then those without. Class warfare, and we are not on the winning side.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 5:17 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

Kirielson's reply:

But the NAACP lobbies, the NRA lobbies, heck even MADD lobbies. like TC Said, it’s more about money, but it’s kind of hard to separate it, when you want to push a good legislation, but you’re terms about to go up AND you cannot get votes from everyone by simply going to each town (As there are more people around than in the 1800s and there are many multi-media outlets that can let your info get across faster). .

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 10:51 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

LionRage's reply:

Lobbying isn’t the issue, true, and I agree. The problem is these lobbyists throwing unlimited amounts of money at politicians. Thanks to the Supreme Court and their ruling on giving corporations “personhood,” yet limiting real people to $2,500 per election per person.

Posted on Jan 19, 2012 | 11:36 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

Kingmaker's reply:

I would find it interesting to have a bit more of ‘insider info’ on how the whole lobbying thing works. The article does not really say “how lobbyists will determine the fate”, only in the implied sense that they are the tools required to change things.

Posted on Jan 19, 2012 | 10:48 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

T.C. Sottek's reply:

Lobbying is basically the attempt to persuade elected officials with direct personal contact. Fun tidbit: the term comes from the way special interest groups started played the game with Congress in the 1800s. A bunch of legislators used to hang out and eat together at the Willard Hotel in D.C., and people who wanted to influence them waited for the legislators in lobby of the hotel and spoke to them as they passed through. (Perhaps this is why providing members of Congress with fancy, high-priced meals became pretty common lobbying practice in the decades following, though that’s not allowed anymore.)

In a practical day-to-day sense, most lobbyists have to work very hard to cultivate and maintain relationships with members of Congress and their staff. Some groups have it easier than others depending on their stature, but lobbyists basically have to convince members of Congress that their particular interest or policy positions deserve attention. Usually they have to go through a member’s staff first — each office has legislative associates that vet and help manage outside relationships and policy matters.

How lobbyists get their particular work done varies, but it typically involves appealing to a member’s positions, convincing them on a subject with facts or evidence, or most importantly, telling them how they or their constituency will benefit from taking a certain action. For instance, if I were lobbying a senator from Alaska on Keystone oil drilling, I might use a narrative about job creation, or national security, or ecological impact.

But there are other kinds of relationships, too. Many members of Congress come from the heights of the business world, and have very high-profile networks. Lobbyists and business magnates thus tend to get close personal access to Congress, and can end up influencing members heavily.

It’s worth mentioning that the overall impact of lobbying is actually pretty small. A recent study suggests that 60% of recent lobbying efforts failed to change policy , and that less than 5% of the difference between successful and unsuccessful efforts can be explained by resources. But in this case, there are very close ties between the industry in question (MPAA/RIAA, etc) and members of Congress, which explains how these groups were able to “set the agenda” for Congress with the introduction of SOPA / PIPA.

Posted on Jan 20, 2012 | 12:08 AM EST reply Recommend (3) Flag actions

T.C. Sottek's reply:

Also, Wikipedia’s article on lobbying is actually pretty good.

Posted on Jan 20, 2012 | 12:14 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

Jacks Attack's reply:

You may have a point T.C. I see nothing wrong with a group of like minded people getting together to let government officials know/educate them about something they feel is important. The money part of it is wrong, and is basically a form of bribery.

Here’s an idea. A law should be passed to make it illegal for elected officials to take money from lobbyist. Lobbies can collect money from people who also feel the same way the lobbies feels about the issue. The lobbies can use that money to pay employees, administrative overhead, and get their message out, but it should not be allowed to go to pay politicians.

You see… it isn’t complicated to solve some the problems this country is facing. Its just that the ones who would have to pass the law are the ones profiting from the corruption. Fat chance of that happening. Once these crooks get the power, the People will never get it back.

Oh yeah, BTW… I know campaigns are expensive, but I don’t care. I don’t want the richest politicians getting elected because they could buy more commercial time. I want a politician with the best message and ideas. If we actually had a politician that had some great ideas, I am sure average citizens would be more than happy to support them financially. I know that is idealistic, but there is evidence that this would happen.

Posted on Jan 20, 2012 | 3:08 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

JPenguinCA's reply:

It is but I believe one of the points of the article is that the companies lobbying for SOPA/PIPA have the patience to wait until the public forgets about this then they’ll be back again. Wikipedia, Reddit, etc will not be able to keep doing this, it will become too expensive for them and the public will start to get angry and not care about the cause anymore.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 3:13 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

willwillywilson's reply:

The difference being no one is donating thousands of dollars to my “campaign fund” to try to influence my decision. Just look at recent history. When it was time to make budgetary decisions a few months ago the government nearly ground to a dead stop. To rush SOPA/PIPA though the media industry donated near a $100 million dollars to various officials and suddenly we see swift government action.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 4:02 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

vallabhc's reply:

Only thing shutdown of a sites does is draw people’s attention to SOPA/PIPA. They are not forcing you to form opinion against SOPA/PIPA. They are making people think about them and form an opinion by providing relevant information. Do you oppose (or support) SOPA/PIPA because T.C.Sottek does? And the lobbying T.C. talks about involves huge amounts of money. Lobbying in general (the kind you say these sites are doing) is not a bad thing, is it?

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 4:53 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

aNYthing24 says:

So…Google/Apple/Microsoft/etc basically need to outbid Hollywood. Gotcha.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 3:07 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

westonp says:

Here’s an idea: revolution

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 3:08 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

aNYthing24's reply:

I’m starting to feel the same way. This system isn’t working.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 3:11 PM EST reply Recommend (4) Flag actions

iDamien's reply:

Overthrowing the government won’t change anything unless the people themselves want change. Many people are too polarized, lazy, apathetic, or simply don’t want to do the research it takes to truly understand these issues and go by gut-reactions, causing this ineffectiveness we see now.

The debt ceiling debates were perfectly examples of this. The President had to us THE PEOPLE to call to make our voices heard, because like the article said:

“And if you haven’t called or written your representatives, or engaged someone to advocate on your behalf, you’re not even spectating from the bleachers — as far as Congress is concerned, you’re sitting in your car listening to the game on the radio, somewhere in the uncharted Canadian tundra. Meanwhile, special interest groups help decide the batting order, while lobbyists line the bases, waving their pet legislation home.”

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 3:12 PM EST reply Recommend (4) Flag actions

Ronindan's reply:

Participation is key.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 3:17 PM EST reply Recommend (4) Flag actions

pcgamer's reply:

Here’s an idea, Participation. If EVERYONE called thier Senators and Member sof the House This would be over. I am under the belief that Since We the People Elect Knowingly Corupt Officials, We get a Corrupt System. When Someone isnt involved Deeply with Washington, and they run for office we laugh at them, say they have no experience, and re-elect the guy who’s Been stealing your Money and Cheating you out of whats yours.

Ron Paul 2012. Who cares if his Foregn Policy is Wack. Right Now America is Wack, and we need someone to fix it.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 4:29 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

TCrimson05t says:

A good read. I woder why Microsoft, Google, Apple and these other major companies aren’t fighting against the RiAA’s lobbiests and what not. I’m not saying they have the people’s interests at heart either but laws like this are just as damaging to them as well.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 3:09 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

TCrimson05t's reply:

wonder* (sighs)

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 3:10 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

jayefef's reply:

lobbyists* (it’s OK.)

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 3:20 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

RaggedKarma's reply:

It’s because they’re trying to be broadcasters too- they need to play nice to get a seat at the table.

Games are played at all levels.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 3:25 PM EST via mobile reply Recommend Flag actions

D4N14L says:

I used to be a lobbyist.

Why am I expecting to see a “then I took an arrow to the knee” comment right after that?

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 3:19 PM EST reply Recommend (10) Flag actions

Ross Miller's reply:

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 3:34 PM EST reply Recommend (31) Flag actions

Renverse's reply:

I love you so much.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 6:34 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

E. Rodgers's reply:

That jpeg is all I wanted.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 7:51 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

toptekjon's reply:

That right there is one of many reasons why I love the Internet!!

It’s also something SOPA could kill. Hate to use Bethesda as an example, but they could probably sue you for using their meme/catchphrase if SOPA gets passed…scary

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 9:05 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

T.C. Sottek's reply:

Oh, Ross. You make me weak at the knees.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 9:25 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions

schlaeps says:

Great article. This is only going to get louder as the elections come up. grabs popcorn

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 3:23 PM EST via mobile reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

PocketWatched says:

Great article, T.C., but I don’t follow you to your conclusion. We don’t want the tech industry to put more money into Congress’ pockets, we want less money in Congress’ pockets, period. Comprehensive campaign finance reform, restricting corporate power and influence – these are the battles we must be fighting if we wish to reclaim a game in which to play.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 3:30 PM EST reply Recommend (4) Flag actions

T.C. Sottek's reply:

I tend to agree that we need to get money out of Congress’ pockets, at least from private corporations. But I don’t think that’s ultimately the responsibility of the tech industry to change — Congressional policing is pretty complicated and internally controversial.

I’m not suggesting that the tech industry necessarily deploy the same tactics as the MPAA and RIAA use — in fact, we’re seeing a lot of creative advocacy right now with internet blackouts. The only problem is that these efforts are not sustainable in the long term, so someone is going to have to play the entertainment industry’s game, either until Congress changes, or until tech advances to a point where the piracy question is irrelevant.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 3:39 PM EST reply Recommend (5) Flag actions

akn320's reply:

The problem is that no one has the money to play the game at the level that the media companies do. Sure, Apple and Google have gigantic piles of cash, but there’s no reason for them to spend that money fighting media companies that they need to work with to get the content deals they need. The tech industry lost to the media companies the instant the original iPod was released, because that made tech companies dependent on media companies for content.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 3:52 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

Sapereaude's reply:

Option 3: Everyone stop giving the media companies money, then they won’t have it to spend buying congressmen. The easiest way to do this now would be to boycott them, but that’s probably not likely on a large scale. Alternately companies could work to remove them as middlemen (chaotic good) (ie Google Music Self Publishing or independent film releases). Option three (chaotic evil) everyone pirate everything (and pay the artists directly if you want to be chaotic neutral) the media companies go bankrupt, ????, Freedom (and profit)

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 4:05 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

Funderful's reply:

Agreed. Pushing the tech industry companies into becoming a lobbying force to rival the media industry will perhaps win the battle but the end result is the creation of yet another powerful entity with a taste for the war. Who is to say that the tech industry will be on the side of good in the next battle or the one after that? All we can say for sure is that the industry will have built a large and probably expensive organization which will make them feel compelled to use it again and again to promote their interests, their bottom lines.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 5:46 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

i Have Met The verge's reply:

I agree. Revolution it is!!!!!

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 6:16 PM EST via mobile reply Recommend Flag actions

kadajawi's reply:

Yeah. But how are you going to do that? No sane politician would pass any law against all of this. All that have the power to do it are involved and profit, so the only way is to fight. But who is it who has the means and the will to do so? Who is preparing for war?

Posted on Jan 20, 2012 | 9:27 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

Psycros says:

You forgot the other major player controlling who wins and loses: the so-called “mainstream” media. You can have a major grassroots movement spring up and they can simply refuse to cover it, or they can turn clean-cut, law abiding middle class people into terrorists. Our esteemed members of Congress can get away with anything as long as they have the press in their back pocket. The result of this blatant media bias has been the rise of the internet journalist, who don’t have to answer to the political machine. Alternative news sources have become a major concern for the politicians (at least in ONE party) who rely on a sympathetic press to run interference for them. SOPA is about a lot more than pirated copies of “Avatar”: its about silencing dissent.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 3:40 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

Michael Shane says:

Opposition to SOPA and PIPA is reaching fever pitch today (and I’m proud of our coverage), but the most important thing to remember is that today has to be a beginning and not a climax. As T.C. pointed out, the people behind this legislation are mercilessly patient.

Our job as citizens and consumers is to let Congress know in a meaningful way (i.e. telephone and snail mail) that we do not believe SOPA / PIPA are crafted in our interests. They need to know that we won’t let special interests break the internet, Also, we must communicate to the companies we patronize that any support of these bills on their part is unacceptable. And as always, all of said communication should happen with dignity and respect for all parties involved.

Our community here represents a relative minority group of informed, tech-savvy constituents. It’s important to share this information with your friends who may be less plugged in to issues that, at the outset, appear to affect only those of us in the tech space. So far the mainstream media has not given this issue the coverage it deserves. I think our writers here at The Verge have done a great job keeping the SOPA/PIPA coverage accessible to ‘civilians’. Other authors and sites are doing great work, too. Tell your friends.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 4:34 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

prometheus says:

Our government is as broken as it has ever been.

It’s unfathomable that there was such a struggle to come to an agreement on the debt ceiling and stave off economic disaster, yet some lobbyist funded nonsense like SOPA can make it through congress so swiftly.

Politics is no longer about public service and it is not really where a best and brightest look to make careers anymore. I hate to sound so negative, but congress is filled with self serving halfwits who would not make it nearly as far in the business world. There is a serious lack of young innovative minds in our government, and those who do want change face a major uphill battle from aging incumbents and lobbyists.

I only wish there was a simple solution.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 4:38 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

oracle2b says:

Great article.. Even if SOPA & PIPA never become law, we’ll see similar legislation crop up every time congress is in session. Unless the American people take swift action to recall these politicians and further ensure they never hold public office in any capacity nor should they be accessible to politicians as lobbyists. Threats to the internet are threats to freedom of speech.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 4:56 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

Malsinado says:

OPEN (ThickWHOIS) is the new SOPA/PIPA

Keep an eye out for this folks.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 5:23 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions

mathew hudec's reply:

Internet reform is inevitable because the Internet sucks.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 5:44 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

grooveI76's reply:

Prove to me that it sucks. You keep asking us to prove to you why SOPA/PIPA/OPEN sucks. You prove to me why the internet sucks.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 5:48 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions

mathew hudec's reply:

Google – Crap
Wikipedia – Crap
YouTube – Crap
Twitter – Crap
Facebook – Crap
Amazon – Crap
bloggers – Crap

The only thing good about the Internet is that sending and recieving data works.Everything else can, and will, be scrapped.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 6:29 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

grooveI76's reply:

Saying something is crap is not proving anything. You’re just giving your opinion. Explain how they are crap and leave out your opinion.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 6:37 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions

mathew hudec's reply:

I know I’m right because I’ve already designed something better. I’m way ahead of the curve. I always have been. You’re ordinary (which is fine.)

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 7:18 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

::er's reply:

You’ve designed something better than all the most successful sites on the internet? Wow this I gotta see.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 7:32 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

jayefef's reply:

Tell us more about what you “designed” …

We’ll be waiting with bated breath. No problem if you don’t want to share.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 7:33 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

grooveI76's reply:

HAHAHAHAH! You sound so awesome. I want to hang out with you so we can drive down city streets blasting ‘Pitbull’(an artist that the RIAA is funding).

What made you decide to create an account today so you could hang out with us ordinary people?

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 7:54 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions

RMarch's reply:

I have looked at a few of your posts in various threads with some bit of amusement. You’re entertaining to some degree. Lost all credibility with the above two posts however. Too bad you could not keep your cool. No sense in reading on anymore.

The sites above are just the latest phase of that which makes humans truly unique – the ability to collect and pass on information to future generations – allowing for marvelous breakthroughs in our understanding of our surroundings. From cave drawings to scrolls to Wikipedia and Facebook, it is a necessary human trait to make the sharing of information easier, faster and more efficient. Without the ability to store and pass on information, Einstein could not have seen space-time, Schrödinger would not have advanced his probability wave, and the Internet surely could not have been fathomed. Fear of change drives SOPA/PIPA. An incessant clinging to out dated business models (nothing very grand indeed). To not see that is naive and ordinary (which is fine).

Posted on Jan 19, 2012 | 7:49 AM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

revlayle's reply:

I LOVE YOU – THE EPITOME OF TROLL – BISCUITS!

Posted on Jan 19, 2012 | 9:57 AM EST reply Recommend (3) Flag actions

ttringle says:

Great article. One of the reasons I find myself more impressed with the Verge every day.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 6:10 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

AstroNut325 says:

This article basically paints the picture of what I’ve been commenting in several articles throughout the day. There is big money behind these bills. They will simply try to cram it into some obscure or improperly named legislation to get this through in some form or fashion. Unless we vote and vote with our wallets… the media conglomerates… SOPA/PIPA is inevitable.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 6:57 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

E. Rodgers says:

This writing is amazing.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 7:54 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

duvjones says:

You see, I think that the core problem here is the obvious. It is not that a law like SOPA and PIPA can be passed, is it not that Lobbyists are even influencing this…. It’s about Money, lots of money, that is handed to members of House/Congress/Senate either overtly or otherwise to push things like PIPA and SOPA.
Which point at two things…

One, companies like Google, Mircosoft and Apple are more or less forced to play this game to keep in business. They are not really in it, they more or less would rather spent resoruces on something else (and one a topic is over, they will go back to it). And are not like RIAA, MPAA, or even the ESA… all of whom can simply wait this out, and try again.
Two, the fact that votes can simply be bought is beyond revolting… It is one of the major thing that disgusses me with American politics (or any attempt to have a system simliar to this, which is happening in my home of Canada) is that this can simply be done..

It’s 2012, this has to change.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 7:56 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions

dubcars101 says:

█ ████████ ██████ ██████████ ██ ████ ██ ████ ██████████ ██. ███ ███ This post has been found in violation of H.R. 3261, S.O.P.A and has been removed.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 9:02 PM EST reply Recommend (3) Flag actions

mathew hudec's reply:

Good.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 9:05 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

Andy H says:

You can influence Congress in two ways: (1) you can deliver money; or (2) you can deliver votes.

Delivering money is usually the easiest approach, especially for corporations, so it’s the road more often taken.

Delivering votes is actually more effective, but it is generally much more difficult to do. Still, groups like AARP, the NRA, and various pro-life/pro-choice organizations are effective despite not having (historically) large lobbying budgets. What they do have is the ability to mobilize voters.

And this is also the reason that the anti-SOPA movement has been so successful: it mobilized a lot of people to actually pay attention to and care about a particular issue. Enough people to affect an election. And as soon as politicians noticed that a lot of individuals were actually paying attention and caring…well, MPAA money became much less important.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 9:36 PM EST reply Recommend (4) Flag actions

Kirielson's reply:

Thank you. Someone gets it and so does T.C. Sottek.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 10:44 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

cobyrne says:

Tech companies will begin to spend more on lobbying when their business model is outdated, unprofitable and they have no new ideas. Then it will be a better investment for them to attempt to force people, through legislation, into having to use their products and services instead of improving those products and services so customers actually want to use them.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 10:04 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

aNYthing24 says:

Aides to Senator Harry Reid, the majority leader, say he will press forward with a vote Tuesday to open debate on the Protect I.P. bill. Negotiators from both parties are scrambling for new language that could assuage the concerns of the Internet community, but expectations are that the bill will now fail to get the 60 votes to move forward — a significant setback.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/19/technology/web-protests-piracy-bill-and-2-key-senators-change-course.html?pagewanted=2&hp

Posted on Jan 18, 2012 | 11:03 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

oshizo2 says:

excellent writing.

Posted on Jan 19, 2012 | 6:25 AM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions

vishesh says:

the word “congress” and “government” can be replace with “politics”

Posted on Jan 19, 2012 | 12:54 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions

EBL says:

The day, the internet…died…. It does not have to be that way. We should all resist SOPA and PIPA (and if we resist them then we resist what follows too).

Posted on Jan 19, 2012 | 4:51 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

EBL says:

Yes big money is trying to buy a result they want. We should resist that. It does not matter if you are of the left or right, this legislation is a bad idea.,

Posted on Jan 19, 2012 | 4:53 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

EBL says:

The SOPA PIPA protest song

Posted on Jan 19, 2012 | 4:56 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions

xboomer says:

Open your. wallet. That is your voice…

Posted on Jan 19, 2012 | 11:38 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

groMMit says:

Money, power, and Congress: Why Corporations should not be classed as people and should also be re-configured by law and have a true HUMAN person or persons be liable to prevent the current purchasing of governments, human rights violations, environmental catastrophes and all in rape of the planet and its people.

Isn’t it true that by law a corporation needs to put the profits of its share holders above all things be it employees, customers, country or planet? Now that is fucked up.

Posted on Jan 20, 2012 | 6:15 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

za7ch says:

It’s not as if this government is actually for or by any of the actual majority of the people that live in it. It’s always valued the propertied, monied and top-dog. Let’s not forget the country was founded on a system of slavery, continuing into slavery-like sharecropping and further to spreading that all over the world in the guise of “democracy.”

Posted on Jan 20, 2012 | 9:27 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

kadajawi says:

I wish the Internet companies will just say screw you and unplug those media companies. A search for MPAA and RIAA and all of their supporters could be sabotaged, and surely there are other options too. Mail accounts could be, uhm, hacked and interesting information be leaked out Unfortunately they’d lose their credibility with this and are probably not willing to risk any backlash that could arise (something the MPAA and RIAA don’t seem to care about).

Posted on Jan 20, 2012 | 9:38 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions

Something to say? Choose one of these options to log in.

↑ Top of comments
↑ Top of page
↑ The Verge