Geoffrey: There is a big difference between free speech and the theft of goods or services. Rogue websites exist to benefit from the theft of others’ intellectual property—no one has provided even a single example of a rogue site that contains speech protected by the First Amendment. Indeed, these two priorities are consistent. The protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights on the Internet is critical for the United States, for its creators and inventors, and for the jobs it promotes and the economic promise it provides.
bradburnham: Geoffrey, no one is suggesting that the Pirate Bay is hosting the Declaration of Independence. The problem is that the remedies proposed would undermine the characteristics of the Internet that have made it such a fantastic engine of innovation—primarily the right to innovate without permission from an incumbent who may be threatened by your innovation. PIPA and SOPA would require search engines, social networks and ISPs to censor the net on behalf of content owners. That creates a significant burden for those services. It also won’t work. The relatively simple techniques to circumvent the censorship will undermine the security of the Internet broadly and will lead inevitably to the next step, which is the implementation of a great firewall. Once we go there, we will have become China. The concern is not that rogue sites protect free speech. The concern is that the remedy will stifle it.
(source)
