I think I was the one calling for a concrete proposal. I freely concede this isn't anywhere near what I was expecting, far more on the DMCA side than the SOPA side.
I don't think as written it would work well, because of an incentive misalignment. Nobody wants to run this centralized website, not even the government. Nobody will want to staff it, or enforce it, or deal with the huge, huge, huge pile of false positives it's going to generate, both generated by technology and generated by hostile people gaming the system. (Yes, I know you address that topic and I acknowledge that, but somebody still has to do the things you mention.) Half the decisions this site would make would end up in court anyhow, and then we're right back where we are now, only with an extraneous step in the middle.
It's also now a centralized control point which will experience regulatory capture for any number of things you never intended but are far worse than mere infringement. Actually, as a CEO of a small company in the space, this system would sign your death warrant far more effectively than any amount of piracy... regulatory capture does not favor the small companies!
Also, nothing you've discussed covers torrent sites. They don't have the content to be fingerprinted in the first place.
I also find it unlikely that anything like this idea could possibly pass 1st Amendment muster. It's still a government web site which every expression of speech is being routed through and approved yea or nea. I'd rather see the entire industry go flat out of business than lose free speech. It isn't the choice we face, but if it were, the choice is clear.
>* Nobody wants to run this centralized website, not even the government.*
That's not true, actually. Media companies will want to run this organization to protect their interests, and tech companies will want to ensure it's run fairly to protect theirs, while free speech groups will want to make sure that society doesn't suffer as a result of both parties just working to earn a profit.
You've done a fine job to point out a few potential problems. It would be more interesting to hear ideas about solutions.
I don't think as written it would work well, because of an incentive misalignment. Nobody wants to run this centralized website, not even the government. Nobody will want to staff it, or enforce it, or deal with the huge, huge, huge pile of false positives it's going to generate, both generated by technology and generated by hostile people gaming the system. (Yes, I know you address that topic and I acknowledge that, but somebody still has to do the things you mention.) Half the decisions this site would make would end up in court anyhow, and then we're right back where we are now, only with an extraneous step in the middle.
It's also now a centralized control point which will experience regulatory capture for any number of things you never intended but are far worse than mere infringement. Actually, as a CEO of a small company in the space, this system would sign your death warrant far more effectively than any amount of piracy... regulatory capture does not favor the small companies!
Also, nothing you've discussed covers torrent sites. They don't have the content to be fingerprinted in the first place.
I also find it unlikely that anything like this idea could possibly pass 1st Amendment muster. It's still a government web site which every expression of speech is being routed through and approved yea or nea. I'd rather see the entire industry go flat out of business than lose free speech. It isn't the choice we face, but if it were, the choice is clear.