4 ms·

That's not the madness of the legislative process. You'll witness the madness play out when the legislators, having given the plebes their "voice", ignore ever

That's not the madness of the legislative process. You'll witness the madness play out when the legislators, having given the plebes their "voice", ignore every single one of them and proceed with graduating the bill to a full vote. Which will likely pass.

tomkinstinch 15y ago
If it does pass, there is still a chance (however small and expensive) that it will be ruled against in the courts. The judiciary seems like the branch least impacted by the influence of big-media.
- JoshTriplett 15y ago
  That requires someone to bring a relevant legal case to an appropriately positioned judicial body, which requires a great deal of money, and two sides willing to take it that far.
  - regularfry 15y ago
    Doesn't that just mean YouTube v. Viacom redux?
    - mMark 15y ago
      Hopefully it won't have to come full circle back to YouTube. The Puerto80/RojaDirecta case seems like it has lawyers who know what they're doing(cough unlike a certain other Harvard-based lawyer cough) - I'm hoping they get a good precedent before SOPA even takes effect
    - Natsu 15y ago
      Viacom v. YouTube. The one who complains is listed first. But yes, it does mean wasting a lot of money on lawyers to fight a very bad law which Google could instead be using to build computer-driven cars, improve machine translation, and to create more high-paying jobs. Instead, we're getting the broken window version where they're forced to create more highly-paid lawyers, instead.
  - pnathan 15y ago
    I suspect (hope?) that Google has both the cash and the will to force the issue.
- delinka 15y ago
  But how many Little People (i.e. those who can't afford to pay a defense lawyer) will have to roll over and pay up before a court actually gets a chance to strike at the law? That kind of injustice should be stifled before the law ever passes. Should
- kpozin 15y ago
  Not entirely. Cf. Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.
jad 15y ago
> Which will likely pass. Pass the House of Representatives. Then a similar bill has to pass in the Senate, which, because of filibuster rules, now effectively requires 60 votes to pass anything significant rather than a simple majority of 51 votes. Once it's passed in both the House and the Senate, the two sides have to reconcile the differences into one bill that both houses then have to pass again. That final bill then has to be signed by the President to become law. All of this has to happen in an election year, which always makes it harder to pass significant legislation. There are still lots of places for the bill to die, or at least be weakened significantly, and there's still plenty of time for voters to take action to make their voices heard.

tomkinstinch 15y ago

If it does pass, there is still a chance (however small and expensive) that it will be ruled against in the courts. The judiciary seems like the branch least impacted by the influence of big-media.

JoshTriplett 15y ago
That requires someone to bring a relevant legal case to an appropriately positioned judicial body, which requires a great deal of money, and two sides willing to take it that far.
- regularfry 15y ago
  Doesn't that just mean YouTube v. Viacom redux?
  - mMark 15y ago
    Hopefully it won't have to come full circle back to YouTube. The Puerto80/RojaDirecta case seems like it has lawyers who know what they're doing(cough unlike a certain other Harvard-based lawyer cough) - I'm hoping they get a good precedent before SOPA even takes effect
  - Natsu 15y ago
    Viacom v. YouTube. The one who complains is listed first. But yes, it does mean wasting a lot of money on lawyers to fight a very bad law which Google could instead be using to build computer-driven cars, improve machine translation, and to create more high-paying jobs. Instead, we're getting the broken window version where they're forced to create more highly-paid lawyers, instead.
- pnathan 15y ago
  I suspect (hope?) that Google has both the cash and the will to force the issue.
delinka 15y ago
But how many Little People (i.e. those who can't afford to pay a defense lawyer) will have to roll over and pay up before a court actually gets a chance to strike at the law? That kind of injustice should be stifled before the law ever passes. Should
kpozin 15y ago
Not entirely. Cf. Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.

jad 15y ago

> Which will likely pass. Pass the House of Representatives. Then a similar bill has to pass in the Senate, which, because of filibuster rules, now effectively requires 60 votes to pass anything significant rather than a simple majority of 51 votes. Once it's passed in both the House and the Senate, the two sides have to reconcile the differences into one bill that both houses then have to pass again. That final bill then has to be signed by the President to become law. All of this has to happen in an election year, which always makes it harder to pass significant legislation. There are still lots of places for the bill to die, or at least be weakened significantly, and there's still plenty of time for voters to take action to make their voices heard.