A suggestion was made, and it went too far. Why not just cut out the parts that people keep pointing out as problems? If a law goes too far, then obviously things need to be removed from it. The removal is part of the revision process. It isn't necessary for new things to be suggested as additions if the removal of certain things is the only thing those protestors see as needed.

Plus, you realize that you are setting a double standard? You say industry lobbyists demanded certain points, and now they're getting them in law, but isn't that the same thing that sites are doing now? Demanding certain points, only in this case to be removed rather than added. But for some reason of the latter you expect a brand new law that will be perfect and satisfy everyone, while the former get away with just listing their demands.