SOPA and PIPA are bills in the US House and Senate, respectively, that were written to address issues regarding content theft and piracy. Because they were written for ( and likely by ) lobbyists of the Media industry, they take an overly aggressive approach, creating a framework where the mere allegation of copyright infringement can remove content and ENTIRE websites from the internet - without any proof or judicial oversight. The laws create a framework under which entire domains can be wiped off the internet due to a single comment on a blog. A current law in existence, The Digital Media Copyright Act ( DMCA ), has been grossly abused with media companies filing "bogus DMCA claims" through overzealousness or trying to suppress opposing opinions- SOPA and PIPA don't fix this issue, they exacerbate it.
Just to give an idea of how much industry money is at stake: According to ProPublica.org $5,579,819 in contributions to US Senators, with an average contribution of $55,798 ; $7,861,021 was funneled to US Representatives, with an average contribution of $18,154.
The breakdown of campaign contributions to support is even more shocking. The following figures are based on ProPublica's reporting on 2012-01-20
| Disbursement of Media Industry Contributions ( 2012-01-20 dataset) | |||
| SOPA | |||
| All Contributions | |||
| Total : $7,870,021.00 | |||
| Mean : $18,133.69 | |||
| Contributions to Supporters | |||
| Total : $1,371,206.00 | |||
| Mean : $52,738.69 | |||
| Contributions to Opposers | |||
| Total : $1,309,807.00 | |||
| Mean : $13,098.07 | |||
| PIPA | |||
| All Contributions | |||
| Total : $5,579,819.00 | |||
| Mean : $55,798.19 | |||
| Contributions to Supporters | |||
| Total : $3,672,136.00 | |||
| Mean : $99,246.92 | |||
| Contributions to Opposers | |||
| Total : $741,946.00 | |||
| Mean : $33,724.82 | |||
On average, supporting House members received $52,000 from the media industry, vs an average contribution of $13,000 to opposers. Supporting Senate members received $99,000 from the industry, while the opposers received $33,000. Keep in mind that these numbers are also skewed by officials who accept massive amounts of money - Senator Charles Schumer of NY, who supports PIPA despite constituents protesting outside of his office, accepted nearly half a million dollars from the media industry.
The bills currently before congress are so troubling to free speech that many of the most trafficked websites on the internet have 'gone black' in protest ( shutting off public access, January 18 2012 ). The Center for Democracy and Technology has been compiling a list of opposition letters filed with congress , which you can read on their site, including ones from:
With all that being stated, there is absolutely no rationale to support this bill, other than placing the interests of the Media Lobby above Free Speech.
The origins of both bills are still murky. Congresspeople seldom actually write the bills they sponsor -- the bills are often written by their Offices / staff and by lobbyists or industry experts who team up to introduce the bill
In the House: Lamar Smith (R-TX) is the chief sponsor of the bill, and is commonly referred to as the "Author".
In the Senate: Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) introduced the bill, along with 11 cosponsors.
Don't see your representative? Data out of date?
We're working on it! This site was quickly built off a few datasets; when important data is missing, we had to hide that person. We're hoping to re-enable everyone soon!
Disclaimer: Any allegations of improper conduct are made solely by computers and algorithms, based entirely on analysis of candidate positions and campaign contributions. No humans allege or claim anything. Our computers employ what is called the "duck test" - if something looks , acts, smells, and sounds like a duck... our computers call it a duck.