INFLUENCE GAME: Online companies win piracy fight

Jan 22, 2012 By ALAN FRAM , Associated Press
This screen shot shows the home page Google.com. A campaign whose backers include tech heavyweights like Google Inc. and Yahoo Inc. has successfully portrayed the bills _ the Stop Online Piracy Act and Protect Intellectual Property Act _ as an attack on a free and open Internet rather than a way to protect the jobs of Americans in the movie and music industries, in a protest Wenesday, Jan. 18, 2012. (AP Photo/Google.com)

(AP) -- Outspent but hardly outgunned, online and high-tech companies triggered an avalanche of Internet clicks to force Congress to shelve legislation that would curb online piracy. They outmaneuvered the entertainment industry and other old guard business interests, leaving them bitter and befuddled.

Before Senate and House leaders set aside the legislation Friday, the movie and music lobbies and other Washington fixtures, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, had put in play their usually reliable tactics to rally support for the bills.

There were email campaigns, television and in important states, a billboard, and uncounted phone calls and visits to congressional offices in Washington and around the country. That included about 20 trips to the Capitol by leaders of the National Songwriters Association International, often accompanied by songwriters who performed their hits for and their staffs.

"We bring our guitars on our backs," said songwriter Steve Bogard, the association's president.

Such campaigns are often music to the ears of lawmakers. This time, however, it was smothered by an online outpouring against the legislation that culminated Wednesday. According to organizers, at least 75,000 websites temporarily went dark that day, including the English-language online encyclopedia Wikipedia, joined by 25,000 blogs.

"The U.S. Congress is considering legislation that could fatally damage the free and ," said a message on Wikipedia's home page, which was shrouded in shadows and provided links to help visitors reach their members of Congress.

Thousands of other sites posted messages protesting the bills and urging people to contact lawmakers. Protest leaders say that resulted in 3 million emails.

, its logo hidden beneath a stark black rectangle, solicited 7 million signatures on a petition opposing the bills. Craigslist counted 30,000 phone calls to lawmakers and there were 3.9 million on Twitter about the bills, according to NetCoalition, which represents leading Internet and high tech companies.

"It's still something we're trying to comprehend," said Google spokeswoman Samantha Smith. "We had such an overwhelming response to our petition that it honestly far exceeded our expectations."

As co-sponsors of the bills peeled away, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., on Friday postponed a vote that had been set for this Tuesday on moving to the legislation. The vote seemed doomed well beforehand. Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, also put off further work. "I have heard from the critics," he said.

Just weeks ago, the bills seemed headed toward quiet approval with bipartisan backing that ranging from liberals such as Rep. Howard Berman, D-Calif., to conservatives such as Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla. The turnabout was so unexpected that some think the online world's triumph signals a pivotal moment marking its arrival as Washington's newest power broker.

"This does serve as a watershed moment," said Jennifer Stromer-Galley, a communications professor at the State University of New York at Albany who studies how political groups use high technology. "Certain channels for communication that people routinely use have the power to get their users to become political activists on their behalf."

Both bills are aimed at thwarting illegal downloads and sales of thousands of American movies, songs and books, as well as counterfeit pharmaceuticals, software and other copyrighted products. They would do so by making it easier to stop American websites and search engines from steering visitors to largely foreign websites that pirate the items.

Supporters estimate that online piracy costs the U.S. at least $100 billion annually and thousands of jobs; even the bills' critics say sales of pirated products must be stopped. But foes say the legislation goes too far, threatening to curb Internet free speech, stifle online innovation and burden online businesses with damaging regulations.

"People love their Internet. They use it every day, they don't want it to change and they don't want Washington messing with it," said Maura Corbett, spokeswoman for NetCoalition.

Claims that "big brother" would oversee the Internet infuriate bill supporters, who say their opponents employed fear-mongering and distortion to foment an online frenzy.

"They've misidentified this issue as an issue about your Internet, your Internet is being jeopardized," said Mike Nugent, executive director of Creative America, a coalition of entertainment unions, movie studios and television networks. "In fact their business model is being asked to be subjected to regulation. They're misleading their huge base."

Misleading or not, the online community had a huge impact on , with many saying they heard little from the but plenty from Internet users.

"Everyone's online, and a lot of people online are very inclined to complain about" new fees and other problems, said Rep. Gerald Connolly, D-Va. "It's a culture of fairly quick mobilization."

The bills' champions said they purposely avoided hauling entertainment celebrities to Washington, saying they preferred to focus on how the measure would help the entire economy.

"If we brought in Hollywood stars, that would play into the other side's narrative that this is all about Hollywood," said Steven Tepp, who helped guide the campaign for the Chamber of Commerce. "We want to keep the focus on the reality that this is much, much broader."

In the end, the outcome showed the lobbying world is changing, said Kathy Garmezy, an official with the Directors Guild of America, which supports the bills.

"Of course you say to yourself, `What can you change?'" she said. "I don't think we've come to conclusions or closure."

Participants say last week's online protests were spawned last fall, as Congress was writing the bills and Internet users started chatting and emailing about them.

The blogging service Tumblr called attention to the measures on its website in November. Other efforts also garnered attention, including a drive by owners to remove their domain names from GoDaddy.com, which sells domain names and was a supporter of the anti-piracy legislation.

Among the first to publicly say they would darken their sites on Wednesday were Reddit and .

"Like most things on the Internet, it was very unorganized and chaotic," said Erik Martin, Reddit's general manager.

In terms of their Washington presence, online businesses are adolescents compared to the well-established industries they are battling.

According to Maplight, a nonpartisan group that analyzes money's role in politics, current senators have received $14.4 million over the past six years from entertainment interest groups supporting the online piracy bills, seven times the $2 million they got from Internet groups opposing the legislation.

The differences are also stark when it comes to lobbying.

Google, one of the Internet world's largest players in Washington, spent $5.9 million lobbying on all issues during the first nine months of 2011, according to data from the Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks money in politics. The Chamber of Commerce spent $46 million, the most in town.

Even so, online businesses have been beefing up their representation in Washington, the center's figures show.

Google's $5.9 million paid for 112 lobbyists last year, more than double the $2.8 million it spent for 54 lobbyists in 2008. Facebook's $910,000 for lobbying during the first three quarters of 2011 paid for 21 lobbyists, compared with two lobbyists and $351,000 it spent a year earlier.

High tech companies are also learning the value of big names. One Google lobbyist is former Missouri Rep. Richard Gephardt, a House Democratic leader and presidential candidate. Last year, Facebook hired Joe Lockhart, a press secretary for President Bill Clinton, as vice president of global communications.

Bill supporters lost one advantage because former Democratic Sen. Christopher Dodd, chairman of the Motion Picture Association of America, could not personally lobby senators. The Capitol Hill veteran retired from the Senate last year and is legally barred from lobbying his former colleagues for two years.

Explore further: Twitter takes note of other apps on smartphones

More information:
Senate's Protect Intellectual Property Act: http://tinyurl.com/7lqbgzh

House's Stop Online Piracy Act: http://tinyurl.com/75vtcxg

NetCoalition: http://www.netcoalition.com

4.3 /5 (6 votes)
add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Wikipedia, Google to protest Internet bills

Jan 17, 2012

Wikipedia went dark, Google blotted out its logo and other popular websites planned protests on Wednesday to voice concern over legislation in the US Congress intended to crack down on online piracy.

Protest exposes Silicon Valley-Hollywood rivalry

Jan 18, 2012

In a move that heightens the growing tension between Silicon Valley and Hollywood, Wikipedia and other websites went dark Wednesday in protest of two congressional proposals intended to thwart the online piracy ...

Recommended for you

UN moves to strengthen digital privacy (Update)

Nov 25, 2014

The United Nations on Tuesday adopted a resolution on protecting digital privacy that for the first time urged governments to offer redress to citizens targeted by mass surveillance.

Spotify turns up volume as losses fall

Nov 25, 2014

The world's biggest music streaming service, Spotify, announced Tuesday its revenue grew by 74 percent in 2013 while net losses shrank by one third, in a year of spectacular expansion.

Virtual money and user's identity

Nov 25, 2014

Bitcoin is the new money: minted and exchanged on the Internet. Faster and cheaper than a bank, the service is attracting attention from all over the world. But a big question remains: are the transactions ...

User comments : 3

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

axemaster
5 / 5 (1) Jan 22, 2012
They outmaneuvered the entertainment industry and other old guard business interests, leaving them bitter and befuddled.

They were bitter and befuddled long before this. The fact that they STILL have yet to devise a new business model for the internet really speaks to their incompetence. It's really telling that the entertainment industry is among the most hated in the United States, and has been for some years.
SilooliS
not rated yet Jan 22, 2012
BAH BAH BAH
Reality of this situation i worse, using "American jobs' as a point of leverage fails. As citizens what did we just see...Another corporation paying the government to try get things their way. That s@@t is getting real old and is also the reason why medical/insurance companies run wild.
If the movie industry had actually made a movie in the last 10 years worth buying, I'd see their point. fact is all movies nowadays are terrible sub standard storylines, actors hidden behind special effects. So their trying to make us feel guilty because they want to pay below par acting Millions of Dollars and charge us $20-30 for something that's only worth renting once it hits the $1/7 nights rental section.
Either earn ya money, or stfu and gtfo that simple.
I don't agree with piracy, or the acts of anonymous but can't blame people in this day and age. Get payed jack squat and are expected to pay full price for crap. Examples. Mission Imp 3 and Justin Beiber absolute crap.
_nigmatic10
not rated yet Jan 23, 2012
I finally got to experience an IMAX the other day and was left wondering what i paid for that was so great. The seating was exactly the way it USE to be before imax's, the goggles were substandard, and suffered poor clarity of vision, and the sound system was nothing more than again, how it USE to be.

As i left, i thought, gee, this sums up how the industry is, devalue in quality what use to be good, drum up new junk to jack prices up, and then scream like a little pig about how its greater than anything.

Piracy? We should really be asking who the pirates really are. My votes on them.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.