5 ms·

Law Firms Removing Their Name From SOPA Supporters' List

124 points by mjfern 15y ago

rsanchez1 15y ago
More SOPA supporters are starting to have second thoughts. We just need some of those to be Congressmen.
rcthompson 15y ago
Who's bright idea was it to antagonize a bunch of law firms?
droithomme 15y ago
So not all of these are even second thoughts, many didn't even have first thoughts. It's very interesting that it is turning out that many (most?) of the large number of names on the sponsors list were lies that completely misrepresented the positions of dozens of companies and organizations. Isn't that fraud or forgery? How many bills have been passed because of lists of sponsors that are fabricated? What an abuse of the legislative process this is.
- nextparadigms 15y ago
  Not to mention their dubious calculation of "lost jobs" or lost revenue, which many politicians seem to take for granted.
rbanffy 15y ago
Lots of mouths are saying "no", but I am more curious about what the wallets are saying.
fomojola 15y ago
The actual letter (http://judiciary.house.gov/issues/Rouge%20Websites/Letter%20of%20Counsel.pdf http://judiciary.house.gov/issues/Rouge%20Websites/Letter%20...) is interesting reading: the closing statement says In our considered opinion, the Protect IP Act and SOPA further the goal of free expression. Far from conflicting with the First Amendment, the proposed legislation will serve as an important contribution to ensuring an environment in which free speech and creative expression can thrive and flourish. That doesn't sound like they were just agreeing with the opinion: that sounds like fully fledged support.
- jeremymcanally 15y ago
  I think the main issue is that it's individual lawyers within these firms that endorse it, not the firm as a whole. In that case, stating that the whole firm endorses the legislation is deceptive.
CWuestefeld 15y ago
As I've said elsewhere the Committee's page is absolutely appalling. It gives no indication that there is deliberation going on. The page is nothing but propaganda. I would have hoped that our legislators would be performing these actions, like holding hearings and debating, for the purposes of finding the best answers -- NOT to stage a kangaroo court, pretending that they are weighing the sides. It seems that their web page is really nothing but media-industry-supported propaganda.

124 points by mjfern 15y ago

rsanchez1 15y ago

More SOPA supporters are starting to have second thoughts. We just need some of those to be Congressmen.

rcthompson 15y ago

Who's bright idea was it to antagonize a bunch of law firms?

droithomme 15y ago

So not all of these are even second thoughts, many didn't even have first thoughts. It's very interesting that it is turning out that many (most?) of the large number of names on the sponsors list were lies that completely misrepresented the positions of dozens of companies and organizations. Isn't that fraud or forgery? How many bills have been passed because of lists of sponsors that are fabricated? What an abuse of the legislative process this is.

nextparadigms 15y ago
Not to mention their dubious calculation of "lost jobs" or lost revenue, which many politicians seem to take for granted.

rbanffy 15y ago

Lots of mouths are saying "no", but I am more curious about what the wallets are saying.

fomojola 15y ago

The actual letter (http://judiciary.house.gov/issues/Rouge%20Websites/Letter%20of%20Counsel.pdf http://judiciary.house.gov/issues/Rouge%20Websites/Letter%20...) is interesting reading: the closing statement says In our considered opinion, the Protect IP Act and SOPA further the goal of free expression. Far from conflicting with the First Amendment, the proposed legislation will serve as an important contribution to ensuring an environment in which free speech and creative expression can thrive and flourish. That doesn't sound like they were just agreeing with the opinion: that sounds like fully fledged support.

jeremymcanally 15y ago
I think the main issue is that it's individual lawyers within these firms that endorse it, not the firm as a whole. In that case, stating that the whole firm endorses the legislation is deceptive.

CWuestefeld 15y ago

As I've said elsewhere the Committee's page is absolutely appalling. It gives no indication that there is deliberation going on. The page is nothing but propaganda. I would have hoped that our legislators would be performing these actions, like holding hearings and debating, for the purposes of finding the best answers -- NOT to stage a kangaroo court, pretending that they are weighing the sides. It seems that their web page is really nothing but media-industry-supported propaganda.