A broad coalition of global tech firms including Google, Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr and Yahoo are protesting a broad injunction that would require search engines, ISPs and hosting companies to stop linking to or offering services to MovieTube. The
preliminary injunction requested by the MPAA resurrects parts of the controversial SOPA bill, the tech giants warn. In recent months there have been several lawsuits in the U.S. in which copyright holders were granted broad injunctions, allowing them
to seize domain names of alleged pirate sites. In addition, these injunctions were sometimes directed at hosting providers, search engines and social networks, preventing these companies from doing business with these sites. Most recently,
such a request came from Hollywood's major movie studios, who previously sued several MovieTube websites. The companies asked for a preliminary injunction ordering several third-party companies to stop linking or providing services to the pirate sites.
This proposal reminded some opponents of the blocking provisions that were listed in the controversial SOPA bill. Among the opposition are some of the largest tech firms in the world. A few hours ago Google, Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr and
Yahoo submitted an amicus brief asking the New York federal court not to include neutral service providers in the injunction. According to the tech giants the proposed language goes too far. An injunction should not target companies that are not
in active participation with MovieTube, nor should it circumvent the rules that are outlined in the DMCA, they argue. The tech companies suggest that the MPAA is trying to resurrect SOPA-powers through this lawsuit and ask the court to halt
their efforts. The companies argue: Plaintiffs now appear to be repackaging the excesses of SOPA into the All Writs Act. Indeed, the injunction proposed here would require the same online intermediaries targeted by
SOPA to engage in the same kind of content and domain blocking that would have been required under SOPA had it been enacted. The Court should not allow intellectual property rightsholders to obtain through the existing statutes
the very sort of third-party blocking orders that failed to gain legislative approval.
| 
