The rebuttal is that this statement is false:
But PIPA doesn't force Google to scour the internet for pirates — it is copyright holders who must hunt down potential violators and then "convince a federal judge" that offending sites are "dedicated" to copyright infringement.
Relevant part bolded. SOPA simply requires a court order, and search engines and payment processors must
pull the plug within 5 days or they're also liable. The only way to reverse that is with legal effort (which is hardly fair when it's copyright holding megacorporation vs website). I'll let someone else cover this part, since it has to do with the US justice system, of which I'm not well-versed at.
Even the irrelevant parts are relevant:
The bill would authorize the U.S. Department of Justice to seek court orders against websites outside U.S. jurisdiction accused of infringing on copyrights, or of enabling or facilitating copyright infringement.
They don't even have
to actually do any infringement, simply "facilitating" is good enough. No, really, Section 103 defines it as such: "engage in, enable, or facilitate". You don't even need to "dedicate" yourself to it.
SOPA section 104 gives immunity to ISPs who police the internet - yes, independently block websites at will. Quoting The Verge
Oh, but it gets worse. Much worse. SOPA section 104 offers legal immunity to ISPs that independently block websites that host illegally copied material without any prompting from the government. That's a major conflict of interest for a huge ISP like Comcast, which also owns NBC — there would be nothing stopping Comcast from blocking a foreign video service that competes with NBC if it could claim it had a "reasonable belief" it was "dedicated to the theft of US property." And indeed, Comcast is among the companies that support SOPA.
Then you have the logic errors, such as:
Critics of SOPA and PIPA absurdly charge that the bills would "break" the internet, "turn Google and its cohorts into full-time internet cops, and end freedom of speech as we know it,"
Google is making a statement that they'll have to police their content if SOPA/PIPA pass. So yes, it will turn them into "internet cops". They're making the statement themselves.
A good part of Wednesday's protests is based on hyperbole
Laws should always be examined in every hyperbolic sense. Something's wrong if you can misuse a law simply by using it fully.
and "what some of us might call lies."
Because the entertainment industry never lies when they randomly pluck videos off YouTube for no disclosed reason at all.