Updated throughout the day with quick takes from staff.
Vox Media Position on SOPA
The internet has been abuzz recently with strong opinions on the Stop Online Piracy Act, or SOPA as it is commonly called. Content owners feel that the legislation is absolutely necessary to enable them to stem the rampant piracy that is eroding their markets; they need a better way to enforce their rights. New media companies see the legislation as a Web killer that threatens their very existence, as the key to engaged communities is the freedom to contribute to the conversation, including the contribution of relevant content. As a new type of media company that invests heavily in both developing our own premium content and providing our communities of readers with powerful tools with which to express themselves, Vox Media is in a unique position to understand the conflict raised by the Stop Online Piracy Act, or SOPA.
Vox Media -- the parent company of SB Nation -- is officially opposed to SOPA. The bill as drafted is overly broad, vaguely worded, and gives rise to a number of significant concerns:
These are major issues that appear to be insurmountable in SOPA as it is written. Although the legislation purports to target only so-called foreign pirate sites and not US-based sites or those that end in .com, .net, or .org, there is a very real possibility that (over)reaction to the legislation would catch more than a few U.S.-based .com sites in its crosshairs.
Vox Media may find our domain names to be the subject of an in rem lawsuit as a result of users posting unlawful video clips. We may find that payment providers proactively turn off payment accounts for any sites that have been the subject of a recent copyright claim, however frivolous. We may find that a service provider decides to redirect our domain names away from our content as a knee-jerk reaction to a single unsubstantiated complaint.
Whether or not US-based sites are directly targeted by the language of SOPA, Vox Media will certainly end up having to defend our properties and the content we display, whether published by our own employees or by our dedicated readers. We will eventually be forced to show why our publications fall outside of the wording and thus the reach of SOPA, which may prove to be an easy task or a much more difficult one - the vague language of SOPA makes it impossible to predict. What we do know is that dealing with SOPA will cost us time, money, and energy that would be better spent serving our readers with quality journalism and empowering our communities with innovative technology. Whatever heightened protection SOPA might offer to content owners is not worth that price, and SOPA should be opposed.
If SOPA is not the right answer, what is? It seems clear that there are two legitimate sets of interests that need to be reflected, addressed, and balanced. As a media company that creates content and empowers communities, Vox Media walks the very line where the balance must be struck. Vox Media is a company founded on and steeped in community content across hundreds of editorial websites dedicated to passionate conversation, but we are also increasingly a premium original content owner and creator that employs top-tier journalists and produces premium multimedia programming across each of our content verticals. We believe this hybrid model is the future of journalism; it is certainly the future of our company. We need a copyright law that understands the rapid pace of innovation online and allows it to flourish.
Content owners, including Vox Media, need to be able to enforce their rights in a meaningful and practical way against those that would steal from them. And we need to preserve the power of communities, like the Vox Media communities, by explicitly expanding fair use to encompass a wide range of legitimate uses that do not erode the market for the original works: commentary, criticism, parody, remix. Vox Media's opposition to SOPA is not limited to defeating one bad law grounded in an outmoded view of content; it extends to a genuine desire for copyright law and policy to strike the right balance, which must start with comprehending and embracing the the powerful and inspiring new media world in which we now live.
Comments
Glad to see the whole network taking a firm stand against these bills.
Just some awful, awful legislating being done.
WRITTEN IN THE STAAAAARS, A MILLION MILES AWAAAAAAY
I write about the Arsenal for The Short Fuse.
Twitter: Brohan_Cruyff
by Thomas Wachtel on Jan 18, 2012 10:03 AM EST reply actions 21 recs
Good Job
But what about PIPA, OPEN, and ACTA? What about the collapse of the DNS structure in general?
by RACE!! on Jan 18, 2012 10:13 AM EST via mobile reply actions
PIPA is just as bad as SOPA
OPEN is slightly better and I don’t know about ACTA. I think if they allow the internet and tech industry’s input, instead of just simply deciding on info from one side, we could get a better bill overall.
by Kirielson on Jan 18, 2012 10:29 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Acta has been a good manager for the Tribe thus far.
by JulioBernazard on Jan 18, 2012 1:18 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Well said. Would be nice to see other websites take a firm stand like this.
by cyke on Jan 18, 2012 10:29 AM EST reply actions
The government can eat a dick.
Ron Paul 2012
by BuffaloBlueBlood on Jan 18, 2012 10:38 AM EST via mobile reply actions 11 recs
If you ran for president with that as your slogan
I’d vote for you
"It’s easy to lie with statistics, but it’s easier to lie without them." -Fred Mosteller
Follow me on Twitter
by John Stephens on Jan 18, 2012 3:45 PM EST up reply actions
either him or the turd sandwich
right
Winning
by Foilhat on Jan 19, 2012 11:23 PM EST up reply actions
Me, too.
Winning doesn't matter. -Lyle
by 5thStarter on Jan 19, 2012 4:21 PM EST up reply actions
SOPA?
_________________
I'm Banana dammit!!!
by BurritoBrosShits on Jan 18, 2012 10:55 AM EST reply actions 20 recs
Lulz
by RACE!! on Jan 18, 2012 11:10 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
more like
NOPA!
by LHO on Jan 18, 2012 1:09 PM EST up reply actions
This is the one time spiders should be encouraged
by kizzak on Jan 18, 2012 2:06 PM EST up reply actions
Awesome
Its great to see the SBNation take a stand against this.
This legislation is the wrong way to handle piracy. The best way is to make it just easy and cheap enough that its not worth the hassle to pirate. Its why iTunes is so successful. Why spend 15 minutes or more trying to find a song when I can get it for a dollar?
In the sports world- the NFL really needs to look at what the MLB (and NHL) are doing. Restricting content by going exclusives (Verizon and DirecTV especially) is not the way to do it. Offer it to everybody. I hate to deal with finding a stream to watch a crucial game- I’d rather just pay the NFL but I’m not getting DirecTV. So they lose money. Its stupid.
by bdawk4ever on Jan 18, 2012 11:29 AM EST reply actions 6 recs
so just get directv
takes 15 minutes on the phone. why should nfl give it to everyone when directv is paying them billions for it.
"If guns cause crime then all of mine are defective."
by detroit_fan on Jan 18, 2012 11:51 AM EST up reply actions
Yes. This.
by Phrozen on Jan 18, 2012 12:03 PM EST up reply actions
Ehh.. I'm fine with the idea that DirecTV gets the games.
Just like I’m fine that FOX gets the World Series or what not. They paid a huge chunk of money to be able to broadcast the games, and then they sell it to us. I doubt the NFL is losing out on money from this.
Brandon Crawford: Yeah, but check out that Defense!
Lars Bet: 1st HoF: Bonds > Clemens
by Azmanz on Jan 18, 2012 1:54 PM EST up reply actions
FOX is available on every carrier.
DirecTV isn’t available to everyone even if they want it, for technical reasons. (Got an apartment facing the wrong way, or one with trees behind the balcony? You’re S.O.L.)
I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
by SpartanDan on Jan 19, 2012 12:05 AM EST up reply actions
What if you live in a place like Portland Or.?
Say your a huge NFL fan and a Trailblazers fan. Can’t get the basketball games on Direct TV. So as a sports fan you have to make a choice. Get the NFL package or get Blazer games on Comcast. Or illegally stream one or the other. Sure we as sports fans have become spoiled by all the options to watch games but the ability of companies to drive up prices by limiting access is getting out of hand. Tickets are too expensive if you actually want a seat to see the games. Cable/Sat prices go up because stations like ESPN demand four to five dollars per subscriber. At some point this is going to hurt the sports world but until then prices are just going to go up.
Anyway not a place to rant about the whole system. It is just frustrating that in a world with all these advances I actually get less access to some sports now as oppossed to 15-20 years ago as a kid without cable.
by ronb78 on Jan 18, 2012 12:16 PM EST reply actions
I applaud SB Nation for taking a stand.
This is such a big issue, every company with an internet presence – and especially those hosting extensive user content – should be voicing a stong opinion on SOPA. Some of them might support it, and some of them obviously do oppose it, but it’s too big a change in how the internet would work for anyone to remain silent.
We need an open and honest debate about this one.
by Llewdor on Jan 18, 2012 1:18 PM EST reply actions
so when dealing with the internet, too big a change, in principle, should be opposed? This is about content producers not wanting sites to distribute their content for free and without permission, and web sites that host this unauthorized content or otherwise link to it wanting to maintain this luxury errrrr theft. The inconvenience to internet users shouldn’t factor in.
by salary_cap on Jan 18, 2012 1:28 PM EST up reply actions
Salary, Llew's talking about...
…fundamental changes to the structure of the internet that could prove to be disastrous. You should read up on it.
No one’s saying content owners shouldn’t be able to protect themselves, they say that granting the power to break the internet as a structural level is an awful way to accomplish that goal. This could have negative consequences (to put it mildly) for our economy as well as our constitutional rights to free speech.
This is how liberty dies... with thunderous applause.
by GonzosDirtyTrailer on Jan 18, 2012 1:40 PM EST up reply actions
Opening the door to government censorship if the ultimate slippery slope that will absolutely end the web as we know it.
by Big Jared on Jan 18, 2012 8:51 PM EST up reply actions
I didn't say everyone should oppose it.
I said everyone should discuss it. It’s a really big deal.
by Llewdor on Jan 19, 2012 2:48 PM EST up reply actions
AND MY AXE!
"Start playing with some jam in here"
by CoburnsCuddleBuddy on Jan 18, 2012 2:16 PM EST reply actions
Great stuff
Glad to see SBNation taking a stand against SOPA. I have found the SBN network of blogs to be a fantastic community, and taking this stand makes me even prouder to be a small part of this great community.
Contributor to Nucks Misconduct
Editor of Hockey in Society
by nucksandpucks on Jan 18, 2012 2:18 PM EST reply actions
yay
Watch me all in flames, on a butterfly I ride
by nolander on Jan 18, 2012 3:10 PM EST reply actions
Good on ya SB Nation!
Never forget: Chucky Mullins - Tony Fein - Bennie Abram.
Once a Rebel, Always a Rebel.
"Mississippi is like my mother. I am allowed to complain about her all I want, but God help the person who raises an ill word about her around me, unless she is their mother too." - Kathryn Stockett
by BimBamOleMissByDamn on Jan 18, 2012 3:16 PM EST reply actions 14 recs
brilliant
Die-hard Rockies fan since 1993.
Poo-Bah of the San Diego Padres in the Purple Row OOTP League.
@Paul_Franz
My blerg
by EmersonCR on Jan 19, 2012 12:57 AM EST up reply actions
Down with SOPA!
Arizona Cardinals/Chicago Bears fan
Phoenix Suns, Arizona Diamondbacks, Phoenix Coyotes, Arizona Rattlers fan
[I have always lived in Arizona, dad is from Chicago].
Leading the NFL in swagtangibles
by JoeCB1991 on Jan 18, 2012 5:50 PM EST reply actions
Really.
SBN is opposed to censorship, huh?
The irony is practically dripping off my computer screen.
"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.
by PaulThomas on Jan 18, 2012 7:50 PM EST reply actions 10 recs
LMAO!
Oh shoot. The chatspeak police are gonna get me for that one! :0
by Seabeek on Jan 18, 2012 8:13 PM EST up reply actions
I read the link you posted...
…and can see why you are upset. However, I wouldn’t blame SBN for what is happening at AN, any more than you can blame the US Government for local book burnings at neighborhood libraries.
I have seen differing levels of tolerance amongst the various blogs I follow on SB; like the USA, it is a collection of smaller jurisdictions, under one flag.
I applaud VOX on their stance, and personally, don’t see any hypocrisy here; your issue is more with AN than VOX.
Just my $0.02 worht
United we Stand, melded like Steel
To Roger Goodell, We'll never Yield.
by PaVaSteeler on Jan 20, 2012 10:36 AM EST up reply actions
Not one retard is going to back this turd of a bill
Winning
by Foilhat on Jan 19, 2012 11:24 PM EST reply actions
Prohibition was passed....
…even though the average American wanted nothing to do with it.
United we Stand, melded like Steel
To Roger Goodell, We'll never Yield.
by PaVaSteeler on Jan 20, 2012 10:30 AM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed