Speaking for myself (I am also a developer), I am concerned with the circumvention of due process and presumption of guilt that is built into these bills. If I am operating a service that someone files a complaint against, especially if I am a startup, I have very little recourse before my business is trashed. This is independent of whether or not I am guilty of anything, or my users have submitted infringing content to my service. Content owners and federal agencies have a historical lack of concern about the accuracy of their claims, so I would like to ensure that they have to be rigorous before they can take down my service. They should have to prove to a judge that I am in fact in violation of the law before they can cut off my source of income.

Speaking to the philosophical issue that pg raised, I believe people have a right to attempt to make money from their efforts. I also believe that they most definitely do not have a right to be successful in that attempt, regardless of how much effort they have put in. They also do not have a right to continued success if the world around them changes. What works on Monday may not work on Friday, and the fact that it worked Monday should not serve as a guarantee that Friday's endeavor has a right to success. If the effort it takes to secure a number of the size required to represent a 3 minute song becomes a burden on society, then I do not think they have a right to be successful in doing so. The same goes for the software I produce. If my securing it from copying that I do not approve of becomes a burden on society, then I do not have a right to be successful in securing it. Personally, I interpret a circumvention of due process and an attitude of "guilty until a successful appeal is filed" as a burden on society.