Changes

Proponents of the bill claim that it exists to protect the intellectual properties, and revenue of copyright holders, and is necessary to enforce copyright laws in the US. However, opponents state that it violates the [[First Amendment]], that it will cripple and ultimately destroy the [[Internet]], and will threaten online free speech. Some critics have likened this bill to China's [[Great Firewall]].

Proponents of the bill claim that it exists to protect the intellectual properties, and revenue of copyright holders, and is necessary to enforce copyright laws in the US. However, opponents state that it violates the [[First Amendment]], that it will cripple and ultimately destroy the [[Internet]], and will threaten online free speech. Some critics have likened this bill to China's [[Great Firewall]].

Those supporting the bill include [[television]] and [[music]] companies (and their trade group, the Recording Industry Association of America), whilst critics include [[Google]], [[Facebook]], [[Twitter]], [[Wikipedia]], [[Yahoo!]], and [[Mozilla]], the creators of [[Firefox]].

Those supporting the bill include [[television]] and [[music]] companies (and their trade group, the Recording Industry Association of America), whilst critics include [[Conservapedia]], ConservativeNewsAndViews.com, [[Google]], [[Facebook]], [[Twitter]], [[Wikipedia]], [[Yahoo!]], and [[Mozilla]], the creators of [[Firefox]].

The [[Obama Administration]] released a statement which read, in part, "we will not support legislation that reduces freedom of expression, increases cybersecurity risk, or undermines the dynamic, innovative global Internet. Any effort to combat online piracy must guard against the risk of online censorship of lawful activity and must not inhibit innovation by our dynamic businesses large and small."<ref>[http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/01/14/obama-administration-responds-we-people-petitions-sopa-and-online-piracy]</ref> In political terms, such a statement means that the politician may sign the bad bill but then claim it does not harm anything. The administration has also released a statement implying that it will veto the legislation should it reach the president's desk.

The [[Obama Administration]] released a statement which read, in part, "we will not support legislation that reduces freedom of expression, increases cybersecurity risk, or undermines the dynamic, innovative global Internet. Any effort to combat online piracy must guard against the risk of online censorship of lawful activity and must not inhibit innovation by our dynamic businesses large and small."<ref>[http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/01/14/obama-administration-responds-we-people-petitions-sopa-and-online-piracy]</ref> In political terms, such a statement means that the politician may sign the bad bill but then claim it does not harm anything. The administration has also released a statement implying that it will veto the legislation should it reach the president's desk.