I think this article is empathetic in how it has shifted focus to trying to understand the view of SOPA from "their" position. This is a good thing to do, because without understanding your opponents argument you can't fully understand your own.
However, as kpanghmc pointed out, even if Google had the capability, that doesn't mean every company does. I'll take that a step further. Even if Google had the capability, the government doesn't have the right to step in and demand that a single private entity build something to stop it, even using government (taxpayer) money. This is how you know the government has gotten too big.
Furthermore, the article while trying to empathize, omits the fact that this is censorship. The banning of web pages or websites as a whole without undue process is not constitutional and un-American.
However, as kpanghmc pointed out, even if Google had the capability, that doesn't mean every company does. I'll take that a step further. Even if Google had the capability, the government doesn't have the right to step in and demand that a single private entity build something to stop it, even using government (taxpayer) money. This is how you know the government has gotten too big.
Furthermore, the article while trying to empathize, omits the fact that this is censorship. The banning of web pages or websites as a whole without undue process is not constitutional and un-American.