Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

It was an ambush tactic -- he introduced a complete lie among his talking points, and dared everyone else to refute it. The next time around, anti-SOPA spokespersons will fire back on this point "with chapter and verse". Considering we're still quite far from the decisive votes, seeing the pro-SOPA camp already forced to resort to outright lies is comforting, they clearly have nothing else to show.


But HOW is his talking point a "complete lie"? It is amazing to me that nobody either on that interview or in this comment thread can clearly and succinctly point out how the NBC exec was lying.


Section 102:

(a) DEFINITION.—For purposes of this section, a foreign Internet site or portion thereof is a "foreign infringing site" if—

(1) the Internet site or portion thereof is a U.S.-directed site and is used by users in the United States

The term foreign used in this case is quite misleading.


I think you misunderstood this. Let me rephrase the above definition to make it easier to parse:

"A foreign infringing site is a FOREIGN SITE for which it is true that (1)... (2)... (3)..."

FOREIGN SITE is defined in section 101 as "an Internet site that is not a domestic Internet site".

DOMESTIC INTERNET SITE = "an Internet site for which the corresponding domain name or, if there is no domain name, the corresponding Internet Protocol address, is a domestic domain name or domestic Internet Protocol address". It is open to interpretation whether a site with a US and non-US domain is a domestic site.


It is open to interpretation whether a site with a US and non-US domain is a domestic site.

Exactly. There is a lot in this bill which is open for interpretation.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: