One of the completely ignored questions in the larger debate over SOPA/PIPA is how big an issue this really is. How many of these dangerous "rogue sites" are there that need to be dealt with? When confronted
on the issue, they usually say it's around 50 sites or so. So it seems rather bizarre that we'd want to change the entire legal and technical framework of the internet, along with putting massive compliance costs and liabilities on tech companies who create jobs... just for such a small number of sites. And... it's looking even more ridiculous than before. As you know, every year the USTR comes out with its silly and widely mocked Special 301 report, which takes industry complaints about who's infringing where, rewrites them (with no significant additional investigation) and puts a government seal on top of it. This week, they came out with the "out of cycle" naughty list of evil sites. Again, this involves just asking the big entertainment companies what sites and countries they don't like, and then writing up a report.
So, given a chance to highlight just how "big" a problem this is... all the industry could turn up was 19 specific sites that are rogue sites
(well, here they're called "notorious"). To be fair, one of the 19 is "Allofmp3 clones" so that could encompass a few more sites. But, really, if the problem is just dealing with a small number of sites, is that really worth such a massive infrastructure change, since pretty much every
technically clueful commentator has noted the massive cost on internet security of using these laws?