You say that.. but have you seen the people in charge of our government?

what is bullshit is your false belief.Well you're failing to consider that the law rarely applies to people who actually commit perjury (because most prosecutors do choose not to pursue prosecuting them for any number of reasons.). And of those they they do choose to prosecute, it typically ends in failure: "A perjury defendant can persuasively argue that they testified honestly, but perhaps from faulty memory, in many cases. Perjury charges in criminal cases are also rare. In 1996, US Sentencing Commission statistics indicated that in federal cases, only 86 of the 42,436 convicted criminal defendants were found guilty of perjury, encouraging perjury or bribing a witness. " source

All they would have to say it they "thought" it looked like something they recognized from somewhere else.

There is no faulty memory or "I thought this is my material". He must, in order to file a complaint in the first place, present the following:

1) proof that he is the owner of material X
2) proof that website Y is using his material X

All the anti-sopa folk seem to be living in a dream bubble where you can supposedly file an anon complaint, the courts accept this anon complaint with no proof at all and on top of all of this perjury is not a crime.

You are missing the point.. this is a slippery slope, give an inch, they take a mile..

And you are going to put your trust into the hands of a single entity.. one who may or may not even fully understand what he/she is doing. You are naive to believe that it is not possible for someone to intentionally forge any type of "proof" they need to sabotage someone else, and do it with fake identities (I mean it's the internet for fucks sake! all you need is basic computer knowledge to fake the shit they would require). The people in charge of this will certainly not take the time to fully verify things as their decision does not affect them directly. And I am sure the appeals process would be slow moving.. maybe long enough to damage the company permanently.

Companies like Google, Wikipedia, and even Adult webmasters who own forums who could not afford the risk of some dumb asses making a judgement call on them, to fully comply they would all have to hire additional help to verify every single post that is made to ensure the post does not link to content that is copyrighted or have links to a site that contains pirated content.

In effect this law could be compared to a massive nightclub that has over 5000 guests a day. 10 of those 5000 guests use illicit drugs. Those drugs are against the law, so the nightclub is shut down because it did not hire 1,000 bouncers to frisk everyone for drugs at the door, because doing so the cost would have put them out of business in the first place.

Seems a fair few people want SOPA once they are allowed & do speak up :thumbsup

This is exactly correct, too many people have got away with murderous misuse of content that has taken time, money & hardwork to provide, it should be protected :2 cents:

right and exactly what percentage of the site has to be used for piracy to meet that definition

it an undefined term, which means it whatever you can convince a judge it is.