Bryan Alexander recently summarized a Google+ hangout discussion on the topic of SOPA’s potential affect on higher education, and I think the group hit on some very important points.
Under the bill’s terms aggrieved IP holders can cut financial support to such sites, or have them shut down, or have their Web locations blocked at the Domain Name Services (DNS) level. The US attorney general can apparently create a blacklist of offending Web sites. Internet service providers (ISPs) would no longer have “safe harbor” protection; instead, they would be liable for content whose publication and access they facilitated. [snip]
Safe harbor - this may be the crux of the matter for schools. If ISPs no longer have safe harbor protection, campuses acting as ISPs will have extra incentive to police existing content, and to enforce more scrutiny of new creations. IT departments will have more work, much as librarians. Financially strapped institutions will have additional problems. [snip]
Fair use - SOPA makes no provision for that 1976 doctrine. Indeed, schools might find supporting fair use less appealing if infringement risks are more salient. Risk aversion might lead to decreased fair use claims.
jenibo on 23 Nov 13"The positions of the Australian negotiators have been mixed. In relation to some provisions they are acting in accordance with domestic developments, including the recommendations of the IT pricing report on parallel importation and the abusive assertion of IP rights; on other issues, such as the extension of the term of copyright and the omission of "fair use," their position is not so strong. On these matters, and on the proposed cooperation between ISPs and copyright holders - which is controversial domestically and represents a significant change - the treaty terms ought to be open to public debate. *"
