You may have heard Chris Dodd (former Senator) speaking about websites’ response to SOPA – if not catch up here (external link: The Verge). In a nutshell, he describes them as “irresponsible”, and thinks that they should be on the side of the US Government to put an end to online piracy, by empowering the same Governmental body as a sort of online-god.
It seems far more irresponsible to call Wikipedia, Reddit, etc. “irresponsible” than for those companies to hold their services.
Perhaps it would surprise the US Senate to learn that compiling speeches from Wikipedia isn’t their god-given right, nor is it in any amendments!
Private companies are well within their right to withhold their services as they please, whether striking or closing, or whatever. Why should websites be any different?
I’m coining e-strikes.
Also, while I am in no way against regulation of online traffic, that absolutely does not mean this is the correct way to do it. I think it’s difficult to imagine it ever working with any one country at the centre of it – a joint effort will almost certainly be required to form a sort of independent from all countries, yet sponsored by, regulatory body.