Even for the sake of argument assuming legislation is the right answer here:
The problem with SOPA is not so much what can be done to stop "bad guys", but how it can be done, namely without a court order, and only based on "reasonable belief".
It is massively chilling by virtue of causing large liabilities if someone don't act, even if/when they don't or even can't know for sure if the claim made is true, while granting immunity if they do act.
It creates a de facto assumption of guilt by creating a strong incentive to act without evidence of any wrongdoing.
I searched scholar.google.com for the word law and the quoted phrase "reasonable belief". The results were interesting to see, it seems "reasonable belief" has a lot to do with a lot of laws.
The problem with SOPA is not so much what can be done to stop "bad guys", but how it can be done, namely without a court order, and only based on "reasonable belief".
It is massively chilling by virtue of causing large liabilities if someone don't act, even if/when they don't or even can't know for sure if the claim made is true, while granting immunity if they do act.
It creates a de facto assumption of guilt by creating a strong incentive to act without evidence of any wrongdoing.