Technology entrepreneurs rallied against the PROTECT IP act this week, calling it vague and a likely innovation killer. Over 100 executives signed a letter asking Congress to vote down the bill should it hit the floor. The Motion Picture Association of America swiftly criticized the move, suggesting that the signatories "should read the PROTECT IP Act before attacking it."
"There's a theme in the series of letters that we've seen so far from collections of people opposed to the PROTECT IP Act, including today's message from tech executives: they convey sweeping, generic concerns that, compared with the actual language of the bill, seem completely unfounded," wrote Alex Swartsel, MPAA spokesperson, at the organization's blog.
Countering the entrepreneurs' concern that "legitimate sites with legitimate uses can also in many cases be used for piracy," Swartsel argued that PROTECT IP is "actually very carefully written" and would not hurt "legitimate businesses operating in good faith."
"In fact, the PROTECT IP Act is, intentionally, so narrowly focused that it covers only websites whose sole purpose is to provide or point to stolen content," said Swartsel. "It's clear that this definition is meant to apply to the Pirate Bays of the world, not the Twitters or the LinkedIns or the FourSquares."
Swartsel also called out the group's claim that PROTECT IP (.PDF) would "put new burdens and possible liability on independent third parties" and could lead to small businesses' struggling to implement "costly changes to their infrastructure."
"The letter totally overlooks PROTECT IP's very, very strong legal protections for service providers and other entities in the Internet ecosystem that are called upon to take action under this bill," he said.
Swartsel pointed to three measures in the bill which discuss certain liability protections for businesses. Litigating against companies for their customers' misdeeds wouldn't necessarily be a walk in the park for rights holders, he claimed.
"The bill permits plaintiffs to ask the court for injunctive relief only if an entity 'knowingly and willfully fails to comply' with a court order, not in instances of good faith efforts to comply," said Swartsel. "This is a high, high bar for plaintiffs to meet."
While Swartsel admitted that innovation was important, he doesn't believe new businesses can succeed when they go up against free.
"Certainly the opportunities created by new platforms are immense - but those new platforms and services will never reach their full potential, nor serve creators as they should, if they are forced to compete with thieves," he said. "Legislation like PROTECT IP is the right approach to protect content online."
