4 ms·
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 im
by 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 agoThat 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 agoDoesn't that just mean YouTube v. Viacom redux?
- mMark 15y agoHopefully 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 agoViacom 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 agoI suspect (hope?) that Google has both the cash and the will to force the issue.
- delinka 15y agoBut 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 agoNot entirely. Cf. Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.