I like the free market principles defined by such a bill.</sarcasm> The idea of blatant censorship, even though it might be used to protect copyright holder's

I like the free market principles defined by such a bill.</sarcasm> The idea of blatant censorship, even though it might be used to protect copyright holder's rights, is entirely out of line with the First Amendment; let alone free speech principles. Posting on a website is technically fair use, it's only when accessed that you have issues. IANAL, of course. How long can the MPAA's (and the ilk) reign of terror and lobbyists last? The free market always wins, provided regulation doesn't occur. That's exactly what they want to happen. It is time for a serious disruption(s) in the content producers, not the content distributors. The content distributors will never change, the internet has ruined their business model. They are clawing to recover their broken ideas, dreams, and bank accounts. The first company to figure out how to take the content directly from the producers and deliver it to the public in a free (not monetarily free, but in regards to civil liberties) manner will make a killing. (iTunes is a stop-gap. Netflix is also. Both continue to access through distributors.)