[mwk]

This directly contradicts the GoDaddy saga. Edit: And by this I mean that we (including Google) should be pursuing more or less the same measures that proved effective with GoDaddy, i.e, pressure through boycott. It is not clear whether Google intends to pressure Smith to withdraw support, and in any case it's the wrong path if one considers the amounts Smith gets from the companies that want SOPA passed.

[ConstantineXVI]

Difference being: GoDaddy very blatantly and explictly supported SOPA (until doing so stopped making business sense). All Google's done here is give money to this member of Congress (which could have been with the intent of for or against); they haven't stated an explicit position (EDIT: they took out an ad against it; though not on their own). We have nothing to judge them on besides these receipts, so I can't rightly condemn or praise them without a more explicit position.

[sp332]

GoDaddy explicitly stated that they support the SOPA legislation. Google (and others) took out a full-page ad in the Wall Street Journal denouncing it. It's not the same thing.

[dmethvin]

Not at all! Lamar Smith's opinion on these issues is influenced by the people who pay to get face time with him and his staff. I hope that Google is getting what they pay for.

If our democracy can be sold to the highest bidder, it's better for us if the winning bid is made by someone who shares our values. As a recent post said, "It's not ok for the Internet to understand how Congress works."