A Resounding No
Best Argument: A Resounding No
It isn't the Wild West anymore
Larry Dignan: The Internet has grown up with this somewhat ludicrous idea that there's this heavy dose of freedom and anything goes. The reality is that every entity that plays on the Internet---advertisers, content providers, information producers, service providers and the U.S. government---all have a role in tracking what you do and roles to thwart piracy. The Internet just isn't Wild West anymore although some folks like to portray it that way. If we want professional content and capital risk, we have to fight piracy. This argument also goes beyond Hollywood and the music industry. Pirated software costs technology giants a bundle too. Will that anti-piracy movement mean that some freedom falls away? Yes, for people who are pirates/criminals. Criminals sacrifice freedom in real life. Is the Internet all that different?
For me, the question about whether Internet freedom can ever be sacrificed for piracy is decidedly yes. We just have to be smart about who loses the freedom.
We would not stand for it
Zack Whittaker: The answer of course is simply a resounding "no". As seen in recent weeks with the SOPA and PIPA protests, the Web would become a stagnating pool of offline sites and 404 messages.
Pandora's box was opened with peer-to-peer file-sharing during the late '90's. Nothing was done at the time, and now our respective governments are trying to claw back what little control it has on Web users' actions.
We as a society have seen what a "free and open" Web is---something the founding fathers of the Internet prescribed---and it would be inconceivable to see a fragmented, distorted and 'broken' online world.
Simply put, we would not stand for it. We can only really miss something once it has gone, and as seen with recent protests, a significant minority speaking on the vast majority would not let such infringed freedoms happen.
If it started with piracy, it would never stop.