Not shilling. Take away the DNS portion, take away the government extension portion, but leave Section 103 please:
It extends the DCMA's definition of service providers to include Ad Providers and Payment providers (not DNS, not tinkering with search results). Under VERY LIMITED circumstances, with explicit penalties. So if a site is overseas, devoted solely to pirated content, and is using Google Ads and PayPal to make money -- you can at least send a takedown to the US Companies involved and cut off the revenue if you can't get the content down.
In this case, it also extends Safe Harbor to include Google and PayPal, further protecting them.
To me, this is a sane and sensible extension of the DMCA that reflects 13 years of bad guys coming up with ways to avoid it.
both google and paypal are very aggressive about cutting off piracy sites. there's no need to put it into law, simply inform them and they will voluntarily take it down.
in any case, laws don't work that way. you can't just get the sections you like. you get the whole thing.
It extends the DCMA's definition of service providers to include Ad Providers and Payment providers (not DNS, not tinkering with search results). Under VERY LIMITED circumstances, with explicit penalties. So if a site is overseas, devoted solely to pirated content, and is using Google Ads and PayPal to make money -- you can at least send a takedown to the US Companies involved and cut off the revenue if you can't get the content down.
In this case, it also extends Safe Harbor to include Google and PayPal, further protecting them.
To me, this is a sane and sensible extension of the DMCA that reflects 13 years of bad guys coming up with ways to avoid it.