Eight US lawmakers have withdrawn their backing from anti-piracy laws, after "blackout" protests on thousands of internet sites.

Two of the bill's co-sponsors, Marco Rubio from Florida and Roy Blunt from Missouri, are among those backing away.

Online encyclopaedia Wikipedia and blog service WordPress are among the highest profile sites to block their content.

The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) has branded the protests as "irresponsible" and a "stunt".

The MPAA, Hollywood's primary advocate in Washington and a key supporter of the legislation, is led by former Connecticut Democratic Senator Chris Dodd.

Both bills focus on responding to online piracy, specifically illegal copies of films and other media.

The bills would also outlaw sites from containing information about how to access blocked sites.

The BBC's Jonny Dymond says that with Mr Rubio and Mr Blunt withdrawing their support, the Senate bill - Protect Intellectual Property Act (Pipa) - that had looked likely to pass, now appears to be in trouble.

Mr Rubio is a rising star in the Republican party, and is often suggested as a viable vice-presidential choice for this year's Republican presidential nominee.
Bi-partisan backlash

Republicans and Democrats were among the lawmakers rowing back on Wednesday.

The list of senators no longer backing Pipa includes Mr Rubio and Mr Blunt, and Utah Senator Orrin Hatch, all Republicans, as well as Democrat Ben Cardin of Maryland.

In the House of Representatives, Republicans Ben Quayle of Arizona, Lee Terry of Nebraska and Dennis Ross of Florida said they were no longer supporting the Stop Online Piracy Act (Sopa), joining Pennsylvania Democrat Tim Holden.

Mr Ross tweeted that he was no longer supporting Sopa, because as "a true free marketer, I want IP protected correctly".

In a Facebook posting, Mr Rubio said he and fellow Senators "heard legitimate concerns about the impact the bill could have on access to the internet".

Mr Hatch called Pipa "not ready for prime-time" and said he would remove himself from the bill's list of sponsors.
Blackout on the web

The US news website Politico estimated that 7,000 sites were involved by early Wednesday morning

more

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16623831

when Congress was talking about handing Wall Street a free trillion dollars so they'd have the strength to colossally fuck up the world economy again?

Lots of people who'd never contacted their reps about anything reached out to them about that. Everyone who seldom or often contacts their reps did too. And the public's opinion was unanimous: Do not do this, we said.

They did it anyway. Just like they did under relatively similar circumstances for the AUMF in 2003.

I heard their message loud and clear: "We do not give a stale cat shit about what y'all think."

I don't believe they care about what we think this time either. But there is a significant difference this time around. If there was a message that got through, it was this: "You are all set to piss off the people who make the Internet possible, and who likewise can make it impossible. For you. Choose carefully."

If this latest effort succeeds, it won't be because the public has convictions about it. What can the public do, anyway? It will succeed because the titans of the web have made a practical point that the ignorant turds in Congress can't ignore.

How optional and secondary certain things are in life! Nice to have you back though :)

Anonymous - Operation Blackout
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czY-dZQsd-k&feature=related

The second American revolution - liberation from the Kings of the North - is ON.

but as is our way, the fury will now dissipate and we'll be fighting this battle all over again next year this same time.

We beat back the great hun invasion, yippee for the good guys. But where is the counter-proposal that we want Congress to pass that makes this sort of fight moot? The clearly written, no frills net neutrality bill we've needed for odd on 5 years now? We just won a big battle, we've got the steam built and our foes on the retreat. Why the hell can we not keep it together and seal the deal?

They are going to reform and come at this issue again. Maybe not this year during election cycle, but the money keeps flowing, we stand around while the politicians get good and greased (again), then we're shocked when suddenly it all happens again.

We should be out in front of this issue, at the very least trying to build some sort of coalition between Google, Yahoo, all the other big opposition players and small blogs to stand tight and come at this again and again until this war is over. We win a big battle and then we disperse until the next one, why wouldn't they try it again? They've got nothing to lose and everything to gain. We should be attacking them on fair use of IP, keeping censorship off the net (by having it acknowledged as protected free speech), equal service by providers regardless of customer/client. We won't win all these battles, but we might win a few and it puts them on the defensive and changes the frame of the argument if nothing else.

This is how the gay community won their battles last year, they stuck to their guns and wouldn't quit until they got what they needed. They'd win a big victory, then redouble their efforts to push for another and another. The time to get Net neutrality on the table framed in our terms is NOW, right now. Otherwise, we are patting ourselves on the back for nothing but a brief respite.