Rackspace CEO not backing SA Congressman's SOPA bill

Reported by: Lauren Lea
Set Text Size SmallSet Text Size MediumSet Text Size LargeSet Text Size X-Large
Share
Updated: 1/19 10:34 am
SAN ANTONIO- Websites like Wikipedia and craigslist pulled the plug Wednesday, protesting the Stop Online Piracy Act.  It's a fight that has roots in San Antonio, with a congressman on one side and a local CEO on the other.

Rep. Lamar Smith wrote SOPA but Rackspace CEO Lanham Napier says legally, it's not the way to go.

"The problem with SOPA it that it's technology remedy does more harm than good," Napier said.  "It doesn't eliminate pirates, number one.  Number two: it asks us to manipulate some of the underpinnings of the Internet and asks us to behave in a way that increases security flaws."

He said Rackspace already spends millions to fight pirates and has an entire team devoted to the cause.

"The gist of it is the SOPA bill tries to remove websites from being online. This is why people on the web today thinks it's tantamount to censorship," he explained.

However, Rep. Smith is defending his bill.

"If the protests were based on facts and good information, that might be persuasive but I didn't hear anything but misinformation," he said.

"The bill in question does not target domestic websites, it only targets illegal, foreign websites. Last time I looked, Wikipedia and others were domestic sites so they don't have anything to worry about unless they are engaged in illegal activities," he said.

Napier supports a difference piece of legislation called the OPEN Act, but Rep. Smith was critical of that bill, saying it would only make the problem worse.

Rep. Smith has already made some changes to SOPA, but a similar bill called the Protect IP Act, or PIPA, was set to be voted on in the Senate Jan. 24, however, some senators are asking to delay the vote.
Share
4 Comment(s)
Comments: Show | Hide

Here are the most recent story comments.View All

The views expressed here do not necessarily represent those of News 4 WOAI (WOAI.com)

ermedic64 - 1/19/2012 7:13 PM
1 Vote
Mike... "As for shutting down websites...good!" Are you insane?!? No not good. Censoring free speech is never good. Who gets shut down Mike? Wheres the line? Who decides? The only way to keep up with the "pawn shops" that can change internet addresses in mere minutes is to give the government such a broad brush that no website is safe. One complaint and there goes your website Mike. Welcome to US government approved only websites. Reality is you can never stop piracy. If the MPAA was smart they would realize that. Most people would be willing to pay for movies for the right price... i.e. redbox, netflix. Getting pirated movies is actually kind of a pain in the a#$, but still better then paying $20 for a DVD. Why doesn't the MPAA just compete with the pirates at their own game. Realize that people are lazy and are willing to pay for convenience. I'd be willing to bet they would actually turn an even larger profit then they are now if they had a small monthly fee with easy access too new movies. Like netflix...but you know with good movies. 1 DVD sale at $20 or a thousand monthly subscribers at $10... makes them a ton of money they wouldn't of had, and puts the pirates out of business. Free market in action...there's a solution, not censorship.

ermedic64 - 1/19/2012 7:13 PM
0 Votes
Mike... "As for shutting down websites...good!" Are you insane?!? No not good. Censoring free speech is never good. Who gets shut down Mike? Wheres the line? Who decides? The only way to keep up with the "pawn shops" that can change internet addresses in mere minutes is to give the government such a broad brush that no website is safe. One complaint and there goes your website Mike. Welcome to US government approved only websites. Reality is you can never stop piracy. If the MPAA was smart they would realize that. Most people would be willing to pay for movies for the right price... i.e. redbox, netflix. Getting pirated movies is actually kind of a pain in the a#$, but still better then paying $20 for a DVD. Why doesn't the MPAA just compete with the pirates at their own game. Realize that people are lazy and are willing to pay for convenience. I'd be willing to bet they would actually turn an even larger profit then they are now if they had a small monthly fee with easy access too new movies. Like netflix...but you know with good movies. 1 DVD sale at $20 or a thousand monthly subscribers at $10... makes them a ton of money they wouldn't of had, and puts the pirates out of business. Free market in action...there's a solution, not censorship.

ermedic64 - 1/19/2012 7:13 PM
0 Votes
Mike... "As for shutting down websites...good!" Are you insane?!? No not good. Censoring free speech is never good. Who gets shut down Mike? Wheres the line? Who decides? The only way to keep up with the "pawn shops" that can change internet addresses in mere minutes is to give the government such a broad brush that no website is safe. One complaint and there goes your website Mike. Welcome to US government approved only websites. Reality is you can never stop piracy. If the MPAA was smart they would realize that. Most people would be willing to pay for movies for the right price... i.e. redbox, netflix. Getting pirated movies is actually kind of a pain in the a#$, but still better then paying $20 for a DVD. Why doesn't the MPAA just compete with the pirates at their own game. Realize that people are lazy and are willing to pay for convenience. I'd be willing to bet they would actually turn an even larger profit then they are now if they had a small monthly fee with easy access too new movies. Like netflix...but you know with good movies. 1 DVD sale at $20 or a thousand monthly subscribers at $10... makes them a ton of money they wouldn't of had, and puts the pirates out of business. Free market in action...there's a solution, not censorship.

Mike K - 1/19/2012 5:38 PM
1 Vote
Note to Rackspace CEO Lanham Napier: The remedy you support -- the OPEN Act -- is just plain stupid. How you don't know this, I have no idea. The enforcement mechanism that the OPEN Act uses against piracy is to block American money transfers to the owners of the pirating websites. I distinguish "American" money transfers because this is US law that is not enforceable outside the US. Any other money transfers are absolutely not effected. Now here's a consideration...how many Chinese intellectual property pirates do you think use US credit card processing? None you say??? Well then how is the OPEN Act going to be effectively enforced in any way? The pirates will continue to make their billions because they'll continue to use Russian (Indonesian...Vietnamese...etc.) card processing. As for shutting down websites...good! If a thief breaks into your house and steals your stuff then goes to a pawn shop who sells the stuff knowing its illegal origin and this happens over and over again, shouldn't that pawn shop be shut down and doors shuttered??? Here's a clue Mr. Napier and this comes from the owner of a technology company who considered your company as a host of our cloud based SAS solution: IP piracy costs your clients lots and lots of money. I would think (and hope) you would be for the strictest enforcement mechanisms against that piracy instead of stupidly ineffectual ones.
Current Conditions
83°
High: 96° | Low: 73°
Mostly Cloudy
Inergize Digital This site is hosted and managed by Inergize Digital.
Mobile advertising for this site is available on Local Ad Buy.