Quote from Rydian;697328:
Isn't a main difference here that anybody can submit a request? Who's to stop me from being a dick and flagging a video/site I don't like simply because I don't like it?
I mean even under the current system companies manage to take down videos just because they don't like them, without them even having any infringing material.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-27080_3-57344570-245/mystery-surrounds-universals-takedown-of-megaupload-youtube-video/
No, you need to be the copyright holder. Your request has to go through the Justice Department. And like with the current DMCA, you can get the action reversed if you have the legal backing (ie. you weren't breaking the law in the first place). And as in that article (which I already read :P), you can get sued if you abuse this law.
The main difference is that SOPA allows for copyright enforcement against sites which are currently hiding outside of US jurisdiction, like Piratebay for example. The logic here is that it's not right for pirates to be able to circumvent anti-piracy laws by simply hosting the site elsewhere, which is a fair concern that needs to be addressed.
Quote from BobYoMeowMeow;697447:
Let Play videos will be taken down
for the company's chance at generating more profit
"If people watch our games instead of playing, they wont buy it! Take them down"
the whole point of this bill is to generate more profits at the fullest potential
that is the rule of the US economy.
Like I said, this logic doesn't work. If companies felt they were missing out on revenue because of those play vids, they would be taking them down
right now. They don't need SOPA for this, unless you upload your vids to some obscure website, and not Youtube.