How does any non-corporate website stay legal in this case? It looks like you can't link to something not under your control without a substantial risk of committing a crime. Without "blogrolls" it's hard to find related blogs. Without links to actual news articles, it's hard to write commentary worth reading. If some copyright troll can link to Most Sacred and Holy "IP" in the comments, you can't really have comments on articles.

This particular bill seems like an attempt to unring the Internet bill, to stuff the genie of disintermediation back in the bottle, to put gatekeepers/editors back in place.

The law has no trouble distinguishing between something that happens as a side effect and something that is intended.

I don't believe you in the slightest. The people who wrote the bill in question either didn't think of what happens to Google, or they want it to happen to Google, or they consider it something like "you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs".

google would start removing sites from the results -- like it already does: http://www.tsurupeta.info/content/google-removes-lolicon-sit...