The MPAA has sent around a "top 10" people in Congress why they should vote to censor the Internet through the protection of intellectual property (PIP). This is actually two different lists of the top five. The first is five reasons to vote by law. The second is five reasons why "Google" is a mistake about the law (as if Google is the only complaint of the law - which is pure garbage). Of course, the ten reasons that make little sense, and we realized it might be useful to shine a little light the reality of claims:

PROTECT Act to preserve American jobs and encourage economic growth.

Internet piracy and counterfeiting is millions of American jobs at risk. More than 10.6 million Americans rely on copyright industries of their work. It is about 1 in 10 private sector jobs in the United States and about 2.2 million Americans depend on industries of film and television work. Many of these Americans are working behind the scenes of good-paying jobs for the middle class.
misleading in the extreme. First, as explained in detail, over and over in the past, "copyright industries" (a term formed by people who support the more draconian copyright) does not mean that they depend

author

. Many existing jobs, with or without copyright. The myth is that although copyright, these jobs would not exist. However, this is ridiculous. It is assumed that one. Priori, that without copyright there would be no content creation at all is ridiculous. In fact, as we have seen, that the author has been ignored, it is actually the result of production much higher and the size of the copyright industries continued to grow and has outperformed the rest of the economy. Moreover, using the exact same methodology that "copyright industries" can actually be demonstrated exceptions to copyright that generate more jobs - and thus the conclusion might be that the copyright should be lower , not harder.

Internet piracy and counterfeiting is a threat to consumers and national security.

many sites dedicated to piracy and counterfeiting appears to be legitimate. Consumers looking for prescription drugs bought online counterfeit goods unknowingly contaminated as a drug. And the defense industry is very sensitive to the counterfeit coin, because many defense systems rely on electronics that are no longer produced by the original manufacturer. An investigation by the Armed Services Committee found more than 1 million suspected counterfeit parts have been purchased by the supply chain defense electronics.

Ah, the false argument of the still enormous confusion. First, if the counterfeit drugs are really a problem (and the data suggest that this is a very small), then create legislation to that. Not stuck with a lot of things that are not a danger to consumers. The same applies to military equipment. First, why buy our military parts of the "pirate sites"? To my knowledge, the military, as part of the government, had to buy from suppliers with GSA, which are not readily available. If somehow people buy anything, then it is a problem and we will deal with it. But for these two very narrow and very limited problems with the much larger, but nothing to do, the online edition of counterfeiting is dishonest and dangerous.

Internet piracy and counterfeiting of funds organized crime networks.

many organized crime networks involved in piracy and counterfeiting on the Internet. They often use the profits from this activity to finance other criminal activities that are violent and dangerous.

Bullshit. Seriously. This is total lie. The argument has been discredited on the basis of a recent comprehensive study of the issue. From this report SSRC

the argument that piracy is an integral part of [organized crime and terrorism] networks to ignore the dramatic changes in technology and organizational structure of pirate market in the last decade. By necessity, the testing standards to very loose. Decades of stories are recycled as evidence of terrorist links contemporary stories remain as further evidence of systemic linkages, and the threshold for what counts as organized crime is very low. The RAND study, repeated and is based on the principles of the IFPI and Interpol reports, is built almost entirely around these practices. Stories about the prominence of the IRA in film piracy and the involvement of Hezbollah in the DVD and software piracy date, respectively, for the years 1980 and 1990. Supplier networks, rue de Mexico - a subject discussed in detail in Chapter Mexico - are misinterpreted as criminal gangs linked to drug trafficking. Piracy in Russia is attributed to criminal gangs instead of the porous border between legal and illegal business reviews. The criminal gang D-Company in Pakistan, far from "forging a clear pirate monopoly" in Bollywood, that is, RAND, piracy plays a low and declining in India DVD - their smuggling overshadowed by local production. " / Aa>
US registration is no more convincing in this regard. McIllwain Jeffrey reviewed the Department of Intellectual Property related to the processes of Justice between 2000 and 2004 and found that only 49 of 105 suspected cases that the defendant was operating in more organized networks. Almost all were "warez" groups of distribution of pirated software - the hacking community that are explicitly and often fiercely orientation Noncommercial. McIllwain "found no direct reference to organized crime, professional groups" of a criminal charge of the Department of Justice (McIllwain 2005:27). If organized crime is a serious problem in these settings should not be difficult to produce a test disc louder.

But the blade of the MPAA is not a strong test case. Just repeat the lie.

copyright protection encourages innovation and freedom of expression.

laws protecting copyright have contributed to today's Internet, I live with freedom of expression, innovation and trade. Copyright laws in the United States defend the freedom of expression, while encouraging innovation, providing an economic incentive for artists and investors to create new content and distribute them online. He noted First Amendment expert Floyd Abrams concluded that the law protects intellectual property protects freedom of expression.
copyright protection when done with care can

promote freedom of expression. When done poorly, it is clear that the limits and inhibits freedom of expression. This is not a debate. Even the courts recognize that copyright law can do no wrong and do not hinder the freedom of expression. It is our concern here. Protecting intellectual property is the author of evil. Floyd Abrams was hired by the MPAA to support the protection of intellectual property. However, more than 100 lawyers, including Laurence Tribe as constitutional experts have said it violates the First Amendment. The MPAA has someone other than Floyd Abrams. And if Abrams admits that these laws to censor speech protected - they just do not think it's the level that is a problem.

PROTECT Act provides the necessary tools to target offenders out of the reach of existing laws.

foreign sites that traffic in counterfeit or stolen content violates the copyright, but are often beyond the reach of our current laws. The Copyright Act to protect the white criminal behavior. Everyone involved in the legal trade in the Internet welcome this legislation.

There are better and others to address the issue of restricted sites that are outside of our laws. Wyden proposal / Issa, for example, some objectives of this specific problem, without any collateral damage.



The next step, the points are anti-Google, repeated as the above, but with a special anti-spin Google:

Google says

Find best price for : --Abrams----Floyd----copyright----Google----PROTECT----internet----MPAA--