Rob Cadwallader

Dear Senator,

I am very concerned. PIPA has the potential to scar the internet as we know it. The Internet encompasses the purest form of communication and information ever known to man. It thrives on the creation, modification, and distribution of ideas. It is and has to be inherently free. To be frank, I believe the internet is one of humanity’s most valuable resources. It promotes commerce through worldwide and sometimes instant distribution of goods. It allows people to freely communicate with anyone, anywhere, and in any way they like. It is the greatest compendium of human knowledge ever compiled; through that it promotes understanding between cultures. The United States is based on personal freedoms. There are few freedoms that can compare with the freedoms of the mind the internet provides.

But the Internet is fragile. It is of utmost importance that we protect it so that information can flow freely. It is easy for people in power to restrict this tool to suppress ideas. China is known for its “Great Firewall.”  Egypt shutdown internet traffic to suppress protests last year. A free society in the information age is a society with freedom of information.

However, freedom does not mean anarchy. We do need to govern the Internet to protect people’s rights. Copyright plays an important role in how we reward and foster creativity. Artists, writers, and performers deserve control over their work. This is a tricky issue; there is nothing new under the sun. Art is derived, not solely conceived. Sharing, remixing, augmenting, and enhancing are integral functions of creativity. Our laws need to respect the fact that the public is entitled to a part of all intellectual property.  The laws we have now were written for a world where intellectual property was primarily distributed by physical media. Now distribution is effortless; the line between fair use and infringement is blurred. We need to make new rules, but we need to be precise and fair in creating these rules. I do not think PIPA has this precision or fairness.

The first thing I noticed about PIPA were its broad guidelines. As you know, PIPA allows copyright holders to block websites found with copyrighted materials. Many legitimate websites rely on user-generated content (Tumblr, Soundcloud, Vimeo, etc.) Similarly, Internet marketplaces (eBay, Craigslist, etc.) rely on user-sold goods. There is an inherent risk of copyright violations on these types of sites. With PIPA these websites could potentially be taken down. They must be protected from the wrongdoings of their users. That does not mean they should lose all accountability, but that the law should distinguish between a website that has copyright infringing work on it and a website that actively promotes copyright infringement. PIPA’s strategy in these case could throw the baby out with the bath water. I would prefer a more conscientious approach.

The second, more technical, problem I have with PIPA is how it proposes to block websites. I would like to point out that DNS blocking will do little to prevent online piracy. Websites which don’t have hostnames can easily be accessed by their numerical IP addresses. You may argue that DNS blocking adds a layer of complexity to piracy that will discourage users. Perhaps, but pirates are generally computer savvy and we have to ask: is it worth it to tamper with the frameworks of the internet to stop a fraction of piracy? I say no. 

All this I say realizing that the courts would help temper the misuse of this law. I fear they won’t be enough. In cases of this nature a certain amount of technical knowledge is required to rule fairly. The internet’s inner workings are by no means common knowledge. I also fear that the vast legal resources of media companies could tip the courts against internet start-ups. As I understand it, our legal system works best when both the law and judge are fair. A judge’s compassion (or lack thereof) is checked by the rigidity of the law and vice versa. PIPA is too vague, and leaves too much to be decided by our courts.

We are only at the beginning of the internet age. The way the internet is used changes daily. Inexplicit and uninformed legislation could stunt innovation. A successful anti-piracy law must be written with the overwhelming support of the Internet community and online businesses. They know where the Internet is going and are invested in its future. Stopping online piracy is a must, but we can’t destroy the things that make the Internet great in the process. I urge you to strongly oppose this bill.

Thank you,

Rob Cadwallader