back to article Google to join Wednesday's anti-SOPA protest

Google will join Wednesday's anti-SOPA and anti–PROTECT IP Act (aka PIPA) protest by noting its opposition to the bills on its home page. "Like many businesses, entrepreneurs and web users, we oppose these bills because there are smart, targeted ways to shut down foreign rogue websites without asking American companies to …


This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Steven Raith

    This shit....

    ....just got real.

    Or something.

    Steven R

  2. LarsG


    This kind of legislation will criminalise huge numbers of law abiding people and open them to legal abuse from a minority self-interest group.

    What was civil law will become criminal offences.

    Everyone who uses the web will be at risk of prosecution, children doing homework, grandparents surfing the web, workers in offices.

    You, me and them over the road all at risk of being prosecuted in a foreign court for doing something that is not illegal in the UK.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      When the US movie industry... using a treaty - created to facilitate extradition of terrorist suspects - to extradite a student for doing something which is not even proved to be illegal in the UK (and he wasn't even hosting it in the USA), there is something very, very wrong.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        when you hear that

        A former Senator is CEO of MPAA then u know how crooked and how bent and how influenced by outside lobby groups they are.

        How many favours and how many brown envelopes later?

    2. John Lilburne

      Follow the real money

      Google fined $500 million for advertising on rogue websites. Google donates $500,000 to WP. WP goes black. Pay back!

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    The power of the web

    May now be revealed!

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward


    I'm sure they could manipulate their algorithms to make any sites and supporters sites of this dishonest legislation disappear forever.

    They might then consider how censorship of the web works!

    Bet they would be the first to blest about it.

  5. John Robson Silver badge

    Get Bing and Google (are there others?)

    to simply go dark for DC on Wednesday....

  6. pcsupport

    Oh the delicioous irony of it all

    Google - Anti piracy - Youtube

    Ha ha ha ha!!!!

    1. ElReg!comments!Pierre

      Could be worst

      Google has to take steps or MegaVideo will eat them!

      More seriously, the distribution channel -or indeed the "property" at stake- is unimportant. The rules should be consistent. I can't get my neighbour thrown in jail just by sending a nasty letter suggesting that he might have stolen my lunch. In all modern judiciary systems (excluding the US, apparently) the burden of proof is for the accuser to deal with. I'm all for intellectual property protection (I make a living exclusively from my intellectual process; that should count as intellectuall property. Although for some reason involving me no having billions to spend on lobbying, it apparently doesn't). This SOPA thing is just ridiculous.

    2. Voland's right hand Silver badge

      You are forgetting something

      Google also operates the Android Market. The Android Market, the Kindle/Amazon market and iTunes in the long run are something which will make most of the piracy go away.

      1. They allow the individual developer a distribution channel including all the financials associated with it.

      2. They lock paid apps and app-wrapped content to a _UNIQUE_ user identity maintaining naturally both user rights (move from device to device, etc) as well as user contractual obligations (where and how you can access stuff).

      3. They handle revocation, app and content killing as required by contract and do that once again as per "UNIQUE user"-supplier relationship.

      They are exactly what RIAA/MPAA do not want to do. They do not want to sell to _YOU_ because this entails all of the responsibilities by contract law and other laws and regulations. They want to get money without going through all of that rigmarole and give nothing in return.

  7. David 45

    Good show, chaps

    Unprecedented action. Let's hope those technically-incompetent ignoramuses that masquerade as representatives of the people (yes - I'm looking at you, Mr. Smith) take note that in future, they do NOT follow their own misguided agenda or any one else's, such as the entertainment industry

  8. ElReg!comments!Pierre


    Oh lord. Acronymizing the acronyms. Why not "PIP Act", so we can add a layer and make it PA?

    1. ScottAS2

      In defence of PIPA

      I hear it has a lovely bum.

  9. Mectron

    The *ONLY* Criminals

    is the MPAA/RIAA membership. Nobody else. if this pass in any shape of form it will the the definitive proof that hollywood OWN the USA justice system.

    The rest of the world should protest by declaring the MPAA/RIAA a terrorist group and issue international warrrants for the arrest of any of it's members.

    This is so serious that it should result in a country wide revolt in the USA where everything that represent the MPAA/RIAA or it's members is DESTROYED.

  10. Turtle

    Servers as proof.

    This protest against the rights of creators simply serves as proof that website operators are fully aware of the importance of piracy and content-theft to the economy of the web.

    I am sure that Jim Wales would *love* to be able to enrich his website by putting entire books of copyright-protected material on-line. And considering that of all the huge number of people who either are directly employed by, or contribute to, Wikipedia, he is the only one who gets paid, it is understandable that he feels so much solidarity with a movement to insure that content-creators get nothing for their work.

    Really, it's easy to see why website operators are on one side, and the AFL-CIO is on the other.

    Oh, and who remembers

    1. Ben Tasker

      Protest against creators rights


      So you believe creators have a right to have sanctions taken against another, who will be assumed _guilty_ without them even having to prove they _own_ the copyright?

      You may well be right about Jim Wales, I'm sure he probably would love to put entire books on WikiPedia. It's not entirely relevant to the argument about whether SOPA/PIPA are good or bad though is it? I mean I personally would love to be rich, doesn't have much bearing on whether laws relating to theft are stringent enough though does it?

      I make money from two main sources - bloody hard work and creativity. I maintain a day job and also take/sell photos. Yes I want to see my rights protected, I don't want people ripping off my work, but you know what? I'm not so arrogant as to think that my rights are any more than this - if people want to use my work, I should get paid. That does _NOT_ include most of the provisions made by SOPA. It certainly doesn't include the right to block DNS (albeit now dropped).

      It really is this simple - if you can't make enough money to live on from a job, you need to find another (whether as a replacement job or a second job). That's as true for 'creative' people as it is for everyone else, whinging about creators 'rights' and trying to back them with draconian legislation just doesn't cut it.


      Personally if I was google, I'd also tweak the search results page so every search was headed by "Did you mean 'why SOPA is dangerous'".

      If I was a Government wanting to make some cash, I'd wait until SOPA passes and start offering good tax rates to 'Internet companies' (their term not mine) as the end result of SOPA may well be that for the US the WWW becomes a sort of national intranet when everyone else decides to route around them (especially as SOPA/PIPA aren't the only www related legislation that have been of concern in the US).

      1. John Lilburne


        SOPA is against websites whose primary purpose is to enable the selling of pirated and counterfeit goods. As for the screed against creators rights go back and crawl back under your stone. wikipedia would be nothing if it wasn't for creators, neither would youtube, and neither would any of the search engins. All of it is pre-requisited on the work of creators, remove them and you have no more web.

    2. Richard 12 Silver badge

      @Turtle. This is life under SOPA and PIPA:

      I write to your boss*, saying:

      "Turtle has infringed my copyright. Yours, Richard 12"

      Your boss fires you. (Stops paying you, blocks you from the building)

      He has no requirement to check that either I do actually own the copyright involved, or that you have actually infringed it.

      The only possible way of getting your job back is for you to go to court and prove that you didn't infringe my copyright.

      This may be rather difficult, given that proving a negative is damn near impossible, and of course you have no money on account of having no job.

      Story ends.

      SOPA and PIPA are designed to do exactly this to any online business.

      Still like SOPA and PIPA?

      That is why it is a piece of **** legislation that could only be drafted by somebody more corrupt then anybody you could possibly think of.

      Protecting the rights of content creators is important, but SOPA and PIPA do not do this.

      - It's important to remember that the RIAA and MPAA have no interest whatsoever in creators' rights - their interest is exclusively in record and film distribution company profits. Look at the lists of members, that's who they are lobbying on behalf of.

      *Technically this would really be your bank and your office building management companies, but that's probably stretching the metaphor a bit far.

  11. Steven Roper

    Since you

    worship and adulate "intellectual property" so much, I expect you to, for the next 120 years:

    1. Pay the plumber who installed your toilet every time you use it;

    2. Pay the electrician who installed the light switches in you home every time you turn them on;

    3. Pay the manufacturer of your car every time you drive it;

    4. Pay the architect of your house every time you cross the front door.

    I could go on, but I think your 2-cell brain should get the picture. FOADIAF.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      So ...

      ... I should spend a year writing a piece of software and sell it for fifty grand to one person. Or I suppose I could sell it for £50 to one person, and eat sawdust and live in a cardboard box.

      Which pricing model would you like the author of your favourite train sim to choose? Would you pay him fifty grand for it? Perhaps he should have written it for free in between plumbing gigs ...

      What's your brain cell count these days?

      1. Voland's right hand Silver badge

        Same as most "supporters" you are clueless

        The key problem of the MAFIAA is that it continuously refuses to _SELL_ _TO_ _CUSTOMERS_.

        Coming back to your example. If I want, I can (and there is more than enough technical means out there) to:

        1. Sell my software for 50 quid (or even for 5) and uniquely identify this clone of the software as sold to user A.

        2. Identify any "shared" or "leaked" software from user A and sue user A as per current legislation. There is _MORE_ _THAN_ _ENOUGH_ laws and treaties out there to do that. No need to invent any new legislation.

        3. I would not even bother with anti-copying provisions. Identifying who leaked it enough to sustain most forms of business model.

        4. In a connected world you can make 99% of that fully automated and transparent and there is nothing wrong with that.

        That is the problem of the MAFIAA and their BSA bretheren. They do not want to sell to an individually identified customer because this entails the responsibility to that person as a customer instead of treating him the way a racket mob treats someone being shaken for money. They do not wan the customer to have rights (as customary and as specified by law). They want them to have only obligations and those obligations enforced by the state without giving anything in return.

        1. John Lilburne

          How dumb

          Its a matter of moments to anonymize tagged software. I recall doing that on several bits of software back in the 1980s just as an experiment.

          But even if the software isn't anonymized and you can tell who bought the leaked copy, that doesn't help if the leaker is in Russia, China, or some other gawd forsaken hell hole. Or indeed if you've sold a copy to some school where a freetarding thief as got their hands on the install disc.

        2. Anonymous Coward

          Supporter? I hope you're not pointing that at me.

          "The key problem of the MAFIAA"

          This is in reply to two posts that don't mention the "MAFIAA" ...

          "Identify any 'shared' or 'leaked' software from user A"

          Which sounds like some sort of intellectual property to me. If I don't own something, how can someone be said to have illegitimately shared or leaked it? You seem to have assumed that because I'm vaguely in favour of authors (of any sort) being paid per copy of created work, not per act of creation, that I'm some sort of "MAFIAA" goon. Perhaps yourself, or any of the eleven cluetards who upvoted your little speech, can riddle me why.

          "sue user A as per current legislation. There is _MORE_ _THAN_ _ENOUGH_ laws and treaties out there to do that. No need to invent any new legislation."

          Let's please not continue with this stupid fucking idea that regulation by lawsuit is the basis of a happy (or even barely functioning) society. And who said anything about inventing new legislation? Who the fuck are you shouting at? Myself or Steven Roper?

          "Identifying who leaked it enough to sustain most forms of business model."

          It sustains the lawyers' business model.

  12. RAMChYLD

    The fun is starting

    If this bill passes, it will set a bad example for the governments of the rest of the world.

    Let the blocking begin.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      It's just another example of increased control over the Internet and a claw back of power over the Internet by the US. This is deeply unfair and nobody wants to have to fly over to the USA to defend themselves of wrong doing.

      You can say there's nothing wrong with this act, but the DMCA has been abused and this law would get abused and used for purposes other than its intended use. One company would claim copyright infringement or patent infringement on a competitor shutting down their business until they could defend their case.

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    MPAA says: blackout is "dangerous" & "abuse of power"

    The MPAA 's CEO (who is a former US Senator - quelle surprise!) has condemned people choosing to black out their web sites as "an abuse of power"

    This coming from one of the biggest abusers of power on the planet; an organisation that believes making films gives them the right to extradite under terrorism agreements, create and impose laws world-wide regardless of legal jurisdiction, and sanction / punish based on accusation alone. If ever there was an abuser of power, it is them.

    How did the MPAA (and RIAA) get to the point where swathes of people and companies across the World have to take action just in order to keep these two organisations in check? Are films and music really THAT important that any course of action (no matter how draconian or destructive) is justified in order to preserve their business models?

    And who does the MPAA think it is to tell people that they cannot choose to blackout their own web sites? What the fuck has it got to do with the MPAA? It's up to the individual web site owner (and possibly also the users of the web site) but as far as the MPAA goes, they should STFU because it's none of their damned business!

    Here is a list of sites currently abusing power ... er, I mean taking part in the blackout.

    1. Dani Eder

      Re: Anon Coward at 5:30 GMT

      Cnet is in an interesting position to be commenting on SOPA. Their parent company CBS support the bill (as you would expect for a media giant). At the same time, Cnet has distributed over 150 million copies of torrent and other file sharing software, they have a whole section for it in the Downloads tab.

  14. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward






    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward


      Screwing Our Patrons Ambitiously

  15. Anonymous Coward


    Facebook should shut down - a luxury it will not have once it goes public. 200 million FB zombies without their fix could bring the economy to a screeching halt.

    1. introiboad

      or rather increase productivity by 100%?

  16. Spud2go

    SOPA, PIPA...

    I love all these politicized acronyms - I'm really hoping the boys on the hill try introducing a new bill along the lines of the 'Web Accessible Neutralized Knowledge Act' - something that, imho, describes the collective character of these bureaucratic dimwits.

  17. This post has been deleted by its author

    1. Ragarath

      You think they do not know this?

      Jimmy and Google will know this they are not silly.

      But the users that go to Wikipedia will initially see the reason before going back to Google for the cached page (as long as they know about it) thus the message still gets sent.

    2. Miek

      Or just click your stop button before the Ajax kicks in and provides the "Black out" ;)

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Wikipedia is still there really

      If you just click through the Wikipedia black-out screen (Learn More) you can then still get to the content. It's only a token black-out. No need to resort to Google.

      1. This post has been deleted by its author

    4. Pete 6

      Use IE6

      Thanks to creaky old IE6 I was browsing Wikipedia at work and didn't notice any difference.

  18. James Micallef Silver badge

    Google's just protecting it's bottom line

    " there are smart, targeted ways to shut down foreign rogue websites without asking American companies to censor the internet"

    How about by enacting a law that forces ad brokers to block advertising (and therefore revenue streams) on sites that have been PROVED in a US court of law to host illegal content? Maybe even giving infringing sites a leeway of X strikes before they're out to account for the massive volumes of pirated stuff?

    The reality is that Google will be against ANY form of action against sites hosting illegal content because (a) searches for such sites drive a lot of traffic to Google's search engine and (b) these sites display a LOT of ads that are brokered by Google. The big G is making bucketloads of money from other people's piracy.

    And Hey! Copyright holder Lobbyists! Quit acting the victims here, because some of this mess is of your own creation. You want to block piracy? Cool, I'll support that, if in return you (a) put in place a licensing mechanism where if I buy a film / album etc I have FULL rights to copy that as many times I want onto and convert that between any format I want and to play on any device I own so long as it's for reasonable personal / family / friends use. Stop treating your legitimate customers as criminals. and (b) stop lobbying to extend copyright again and again ad infinitum. You get 20 years, 25 years tops, after that it's public domain. That's plenty of time to monetise your creativity, and you can't rest on your laurels and live forever off the rent of one big hit.

    1. Greg J Preece

      "You want to block piracy? Cool, I'll support that, if in return you (a) put in place a licensing mechanism where if I buy a film / album etc I have FULL rights to copy that as many times I want onto and convert that between any format I want and to play on any device I own so long as it's for reasonable personal / family / friends use."

      One word: Ultraviolet. OK, doesn't apply to music, but it may answer some of your gripes.

      1. James Micallef Silver badge
        Thumb Up

        Yes I know about Ultraviolet. If implemented as specified will be great, I alrady commented to that effect on the Reg article on UV.

        But will copyright holders be willing to reduce copyright terms from the current.... what.... 70 years?? in exchange for laws that properly work against online piracy?

  19. illiad

    so, only the USA then???

    seems ok here in blighty.... ???

  20. Ascylto
    Big Brother


    Mudroach supports SOPA.

    Therefore SOPA is bad.


  21. illiad

    @James Micallef

    the only problem with many adverts, is that lazy webdevs, whatever, only use one server, that other dubious websites also use!!

    If you use Fanboys adblock on FF, you will know they have an 'ad preference' thing, where **good** ads can be let through... :) :)

    - the definition is NO flashing, moving, or sound... at least in my book! :P

  22. auburnman

    Wikipedia Blackout

    Strikes me as being a bit lazy on the technical side. I checked it this morning and it seems to provide your article as normal and then slap the blackout notice over it a split second later.

    I can't be arsed checking but I imagine an extension like AdBlock or NoScript could stop the notice from displaying and reveal the article in full after a little tinkering. In fact there could be users who haven't even noticed that there's a blackout on the go.

    1. Studley

      Correct - one new AdBlock rule to restore normal Wikipedia service:*

      But then the blackout itself isn't really the point, it's the drawing people's attention to it that counts. If you're seeking out AdBlock rules then you already know the score.

      thedailywtf, on the other hand, are in full shutdown mode :(

      1. Anonymous Coward

        TheDailyWTF is not in full shutdown. They're in ironic whiteout and, if you just click the IP address on the page you get to the site as normal....

    2. Miek

      No, it replaces the page content with the blackout bit, simply click stop before this happens.

    3. robin48gx



  23. illiad

    lets not forget that Piracy IS BAD... >:(

    The only proper way to stop piracy is to price software at a *worthwhile* price, or even a shareware model.. :)

    and selling hopeless software at an inflated price does not help!!! I have seen once good software(I mean graphics & sound, NOT 'net.. ) taken over by another company, and basically ruined by leaving out the best features!!!

    (to say nothing about turning it into a slow memory hog...)

    If you can successively **undercut** the pirates price for full quality stuff, you will drive them out of business!!

    1. auburnman

      "If you can successively **undercut** the pirates price for full quality stuff, you will drive them out of business!!"

      While I would agree that pirates who steal material for the sole purpose of selling it themselves are pretty much scumbags, how do you expect honest creators to undercut such pirates? Almost by definition pirates have at the very least significantly lower (if not zero) costs because they didn't pay to create the content they are selling.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      And everyone

      registers their shareware, right?

  24. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Shut down Groupon!

    Watch the world economy collapse!

    ... oh.

  25. ElNumbre

    Don't Panic...

    Don't panic! I've got a copy of the Internet on a couple of floppy disks, its all fine.

  26. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Stop Pipa!

    And about time too. I mean she's hardly very Royal strutting around with her arse stuck out and that.

  27. Tony Paulazzo


    Why hasn't Facebook joined the blackout. I know SOPA only targets foreign sites - but that's for now, once entrenched and mission creep gets going, they will be found culpable of allowing users to share links to infringing copyright (ie youtube - assuming youtube hasn't been shut down).

    Or is Facebook going to start disallowing links. Point of fact, the post SOPA internet will have to work without links, since that link you innocently put to show lolcat #26413 might have a link that links to a link with infringing copyright, making all those websites guilty of encouraging infringement.

    Then Hollywood wins and the consumer loses (and those who create will be no better off thanks to Hollywood's well known creative accounting that shows nothing makes a profit ever).

    SOPA and PIPA aren't anti piracy, they're pro control.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward


      I think if you go to, you'll find that facebook is in there too.

      You will also notice that a lot of individual facebookers have joined, so this means you have to search a bit, but "" is one of the participants...


  28. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I can still haz cheezburger has not gone dark.

    1. Isendel Steel


      only has the black banner - so possibly only from blocked from the US...

      (having said that I'm VPN'd via the US at present and got the "cats" sites as well)

  29. JMB

    I was just using Wikipedia as normal except that I cannot edit pages. It must depend on the URL that you have stored to access it.

  30. Stephen 2


    you mean like this - ?

  31. Anonymous Coward

    I'm alright Jack!

    I knew my decision to not chuck out my copy of Encarta '95 would be vindicated. Take that Wikipedia!

    1. Ben Tasker

      Probably more accurate and up-to-date as well!

  32. illiad

    @auburnman: ROFLMAO.. :P

    well it seems the 'blackout' only works in firefox!!!!!!! :) :)

    - nah, I'm not using crappy exploder, or even the new, 'old-addon incapable' version higher than FF4... I can give you a list of my addons, if you want to tell me if they ALL work in FF10... only then will I be confident enough!

    I am mostly using opera, due to its ease of use - EVERY single element of this can be customized, using only a text editor, and paintshop.. :)

    when FF does ALL it does, I may switch totally.. meanwhile I only use FF for the problems opera has.. like hating being criticized(banning forum users for it!), behaving a bit like Steve Jobs(without the money!), removing well-loved features, and not doing fancy scripts like FF has always done... >:(

    thats why its at the bottom... :p

  33. Greg J Preece

    Wait a sec

    El Reg has Cheezburger fans amongst its number? Next you'll be telling me you're members on My Little Brony.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      If the Moderatrix were still here, she'd love & tolerate the shit out of you for that comment.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      MLP fans can go to hell

      Cute kittehs for the win.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Really? Because I think this widdle puddy tat has your name written all over it. Yes, he does. Aww, look, he likes you!


  34. Aitor 1


    Obama now says that he will not support the SOPA law. But the us government has forced minor governments across the globe to create similar laws.

    For example the leaked cables clearly show that the spanish SINDE law is a clone of SOPA.. Its goes against our constitution, but just recently went "online".

    These laws will put a brake to piracy, they will work. But the damage they are creating is much greater than the good they will do. The lawmakers and proponents know this, and the goal of these laws has nothing to do with piracy, they are about censorship and interest group control of information and news.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      They won't work

      Why? Because the first or second time they get used they'll get so much publicity that the politicians will end up leaping over each other to condemn the censorship laws and repeal them.

      Also, they are in clear conflict with ECHR rules, so EU countries enacting them will end up in Brussels getting yet more fines.

      - The DEA in the UK (also known as Mandybill as he's the one that was given the fun cruise then sponsored it and ensured it got put through in washup) is already being slowly dismantled, though I'm still pissed off at the Tories for not opposing it in the first place.

  35. JDX Gold badge

    Wikipedia - worst blackout ever

    I hope that's not an indication of their normal development skills.

  36. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I used to think the USA was a democracy... now i realize its just a corporation headed by the MPAA, RIAA & Big OIL, first they will block, then they will extradite, how long until they start to invade countries to protect their interests.. oh wait they already do for OIL... guess its not long then!

  37. illiad

    @JDX: have you seen my last comment??

    I think you forgot your 'sarcasm' tag... :/

  38. pcsupport

    If Google did block advertising (and therefore revenue streams) on sites that had been shown to host illegal content then their share price and revenues would fall dramatically. Hell, they'd be forced to shutdown Youtube which must be made up of 99+% illegally hosted copyrighted material.

    This is very definitely a case of pot-kettle-black.

  39. Giddy Kipper

    Yes indeed

    NoScript seems to address the wiki blackout just fine.

    That'll show 'em.


  40. _Vendetta_

    bigger picture

    don't these people read the news about what happens to people that try and fuck with the internet... The internet is a harsh world with it's own bitter brand of brutal justice.

    If the good clean people of the web are unable to deter these fools from this course they've set then it will be up to the grays and the blacks to punish their stupidity.

    It is not us who should fear them switching out internet off... it is them who should fear us turning theirs off.


  41. Cave Dweller

    Wikipedia Blackout

    Wikipedia is happy to explain how the blackout works and workarounds. In short: disable javascript.

  42. Greg J Preece

    For every tech story, an XKCD

    Or not, in this case.

    Looks like Randall's blacked out too.

    1. Anonymous Coward

      @Greg J Preece

      "Looks like Randall's blacked out too."

      And its funnier than his usual strips too.

      (Sorry, I've never "got" xkcd, is much better)

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Looks like a few webcomics are getting in on it. Blade Bunny is denying us our fix of sword-wielding bunnygirls.

  43. Andrew Moore

    Google cache- The anti-anti-SOPA browser's friend...

    If Google wanted to do something they should consider switching off caching, which I've been using to circumvent the anti-SOPA pages all morning.

  44. Andus McCoatover

    Just read Andrew Orlowski's article...

    Brilliant. The man's either a genius, or certifiable. (There is a very fine line)

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward


      Did you comment on it?

      1. Andus McCoatover


        "...Did you comment on it?..."

        No. Article not open to comments. Even if it had been, my comment would've been as effective as a mosquito on a windshield.

  45. Toby 2

    PIPA & ICANN = dead internet

    Nobody seems to have realised that (unless I've got it wrong) PIPA will effectively give MPAA the reins to ICANN, seeing as it is HQ'd in the US, so basically any site anywhere ever, not just in the US or hosted there, is at threat from DNS shenanigans

  46. Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

    Interesting list...

    "Other sites that have announced plans to go dark in protest include the Internet Archive, the Tor Project, openSUSE, XDA Developers, the Center for Democracy & Technology, Greenpeace International, and many more."

    Do any of those NOT receive funding from Google?

    Just wonderin' :-)

  47. illiad

    as the man said...

    disable javascript, use opera... it all seems to work, unless you HAVE to use one of those fancy webs, that needs it..

  48. A_Flat_Minor
    Paris Hilton


    Greek slang for 'blow job', so I'm told!

    It's all Greek to Paris

  49. illiad

    @Andrew Orlowski

    what do you mean by 'dark'?? a Javascript driven warning like wiki, or **actually ** offline???

  50. Petrea Mitchell

    Best SOPA protest online today is...

    Over at this site:

  51. illiad

    If you only use FF, download 'yesscript' -

    its a very simple addon, that will stop scripts only on sites you tell it..

    NOW, if these 'so-called' experts will do it **properly** and **close down or lock** the sites as a protest, that would be MUCH more effective!!!

    1. Richard 12 Silver badge

      The point is to get the message across

      Not to actually fully shut down.

      An error code won't explain to the masses why you're going offline - it will just bounce people away without informing them and they will be annoyed with the website itself for not working.

      A big banner saying "If X, then we're gone. Please pressure your representatives against X.", will let everybody who visits know what you are protesting against and how they can help if they want to.

      A link to the normal site content is perfectly fine and sensible - once informed, people can continue on with whatever they wanted to use the site for, and they'll be annoyed at the "X".

      Only thing is, this SOPA/PIPA won't be going away permanently, so we'll have to expect a repeat of this blackout later once the RIAA and MPAA have paid off another few congresscritters.

      - That said, they'll be a bit more wary now. Some of them are going to lose their seats over this fiasco.

  52. roger stillick

    Just move home page to Iceland

    SOPA makes me sick...I buy my music on Amazon... cant watch DVDs on my Chinese laptop for the last 3 years... SO I DONT... the MPAA and the RIAA can eat their stuff... if USA congress is dumb enough to mess up the interweb- I will simply move my web activities Offshore where the URL converter isnt corrupted... WHAT A COMPLETE AND UTTER WASTE OF RESOURCES...

  53. Andus McCoatover

    Easy to defeat...(Wikipedia)

    I needed to look up something (Litz wire)

    typed it in, Wikipedia gave a flash, then the 'down-page'.

    I simply refreshed, then hit the 'stop downlading' button on Firefox as soon as I saw the page. Had to be quick, mind.

    No sweat.

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like