Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

eBay's Lobbying Efforts May Include the CIA

Posted by Zonk on from the you-wouldn't-believe-the-deals dept.

samuraiknight writes "The Washington Post reports that eBay was among eight entities that lobbied the CIA during the first six months of 2007, according to disclosure forms maintained by the Senate public records office. An eBay spokesman claims its listing was an error, but also notes that the company met with CIA officials in the second half of 2006 to discuss the amendments to the 1994 Communications and Law Enforcement Act (CALEA), which include a requirement that VoIP companies submit to government wiretaps. The article suggests that eBay and the CIA discussed the law's potential effects on Skype (owned by eBay), but does not elaborate further."

38 comments

  1. GREAT TRANSACTION by User+956 · · Score: 5, Funny

    The Washington Post reports that eBay was among eight entities that lobbied the CIA during the first six months of 2007

    A+++++++++ WOULD DEFINITELY COLLUDE WITH AGAIN

    --
    The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
    1. Re:GREAT TRANSACTION by Finallyjoined!!! · · Score: 0

      2 Airplane tickets to Syria. No name on ticket. Genuine reason for sale............

      --
      If I had an Ass, I'd call it Fanny Bottom, then I could slap my Ass; Fanny Bottom, on the Arse.
    2. Re:GREAT TRANSACTION by russ1337 · · Score: 1

      " eBay and the CIA discussed the law's potential effects on Skype (owned by eBay), which was quickly resolved after the CIA informed e-bay they already have access to the Skype private encryption 'backdoor', noting the whole reason for the 'supernodes' thing and why they're all CIA assets. "
      There, I fixed that for you.

      *thinks to self: now where is my shiney hat?*
  2. I was lobbying the CIA too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Then fucking ebay snipped me at the last second.

  3. From Beanies by ackthpt · · Score: 1

    To bugs.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:From Beanies by jo42 · · Score: 1

      To "Fight The Facist Future".

    2. Re:From Beanies by owlnation · · Score: 1

      eBay has always had bugs -- oh, you meant the other kind?

    3. Re:From Beanies by owlnation · · Score: 1

      Oh don't fight! Be like us -- Embrace!!! We're far too fat, indebted, drunk and lazy to fight.

      Over here in the People's Democratic Republic of (formerly Great) Britain -- you Americans may also know it as Airstrip One -- our very beloved (or else) Premier Brown recently announced that the 30 year period for keeping sensitive Government documents secret may be extended, and may also include documents from Businesses too.

      Perhaps eBay should consider moving here, I sure our Government would be most helpful as always. Just think eBay chaps, lots of secure video cameras too!

      Doubleplusgood, that's all I have to say!

    4. Re:From Beanies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=73011&in_page_id=34

      "Gordon Brown announced a review of the present 30-year rule on the release of confidential documents. It could be cut to just 20 years.

      The Prime Minister said: 'I want to explore how together we can write a new chapter in our country's story of liberty.'

      Slashing the 30-year rule would lay bare the most explosive events of the Thatcher years, including the 1982 Falklands War and the 1984 miners' strike."

      "In a major shake-up of Britain's secrecy laws, other proposals included a Bill of Rights and the extension of the custody time limit for terror suspects from 28 days to a possible 56.

      The Freedom of Information Act could be extended to private firms working in the public sector. "

      That articles dated Thursday, October 25, 2007

      So what parent said was pretty much wrong, however it's all sugar round a rather nasty tasting pill namely to increase the length of time someone can be held without charge to 8 weeks. Long enough to seriously mess up most peoples lives, should you be innocent.

      This Prat just got 8 years http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/10/23/europe/EU-GEN-Britain-Terrorism.php
      Ok he said he intended to become a suicide bomber and he posted stuff on the web about how to make bombs and guns (probably the anarchists cookbook). At what point did it become more than words?

  4. What else do you want to know? by no-body · · Score: 4, Insightful
    International calls from inside US are monitored
    International calls to inside US are monitored

    And with this, anyone thinking (even in dreams) something not "appropriate" can be treated as a terrorist and monitored as well.

    > The U.S. House of Representatives recently passed HR 1955 titled the
    > Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of
    > 2007. This bill is one of the most blatant attacks against the
    > Constitution yet and actually defines thought crimes as homegrown
    > terrorism. If passed into law, it will also establish a commission
    > and a Center of Excellence to study and defeat so called thought
    > criminals. Unlike previous anti-terror legislation, this bill
    > specifically targets the civilian population of the United States and
    > uses vague language to define homegrown terrorism. Amazingly, 404 of
    > our elected representatives from both the Democrat and Republican
    > parties voted in favor of this bill. There is little doubt that this
    > bill is specifically targeting the growing patriot community that is
    > demanding the restoration of the Constitution.

    Laws are actually not needed any more - it happens anyway and the president pardons everyone at the end or anything "sensitive" is declared as damaging to national security when dragged courts.


    Sieg Heil America!


    1. Re:What else do you want to know? by b17bmbr · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      you got your references wrong. thought crime was orwellian, not fascist. but for more thought crime, visit any college campus and proclaim that you believe marriage to be between one man and one woman.

      --
      My problem? I was perfectly gruntled, until some numbnuts came by and dissed me.
    2. Re:What else do you want to know? by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      International calls from inside US are monitored
      International calls to inside US are monitored

      Well, I'm safe, thank God! All my friends are either hookers, dope dealers, bookies, gun deaaskskJHKJH&(*^([no carrier]

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    3. Re:What else do you want to know? by FleaPlus · · Score: 1

      Could you cite the relevant portion of the bill regarding thought crime? I can't seem to find it.

    4. Re:What else do you want to know? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      look it up under "hate crimes" 18 U.S.C. Section 245

      Yes, it is federal law.

    5. Re:What else do you want to know? by flaming+error · · Score: 2, Informative

      Who are you quoting? I just read the bill, and the writeup you cite looks like a load of crap.

      This is just academic research.

    6. Re:What else do you want to know? by emurphy42 · · Score: 1

      Here's a link. And where does HR 1955 reference this? Nowhere does it contain the exact text "hate crime" or "245". There may well be some conceptual link, but I'm not going to spend my own copious free time hunting it down.

    7. Re:What else do you want to know? by Kazrael · · Score: 1

      I so vehemently wish to disagree with you, but after watching the news steadily deteriorate with foul news of our corrupt government, I just don't have the will anymore. Truth hurts.

      --
      Development notes at http://devscribbles.blogspot.com
    8. Re:What else do you want to know? by no-body · · Score: 1
      Yes, crap it is!

      It depends on how "violent" is defined.

      http://www.dictionary.net/violent
      1. Moving or acting ... excited by strong feeling or passion;...
      So, you feel strong about something, plan to make signs and go out and demonstrate, you can be classified as a terrorist, disappear one night and find yourself left alone in Guantanamo Bay everyone else wondering what happened to you.

      Actually, thinking about it - violence nowadays can be anything. Bombing some nation into oblivion on the other side of the planet is self-defense and somebody there thinking about defending themselves is violence and terrorism.

      Who are you quoting? I just read the bill, and the writeup you cite looks like a load of crap.

      It's proabably from that corner:

      Date: October 25, 2007 2:07:29 PM MDT
      To: "BORDC Board of Directors Mailing List"
      Subject: ***House Passes Thought Crime Prevention Bill





      http://www.roguegovernment.com/news.php?id=4682
      House Passes Thought Crime Prevention Bill
      10-25-2007
      Lee Rogers

      The U.S. House of Representatives recently passed HR 1955 titled the
      Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of
      2007. This bill is one of the most blatant attacks against the
      Constitution yet and actually defines thought crimes as homegrown
      terrorism. If passed into law, it will also establish a commission
      and a Center of Excellence to study and defeat so called thought
      criminals. Unlike previous anti-terror legislation, this bill
      specifically targets the civilian population of the United States and
      uses vague language to define homegrown terrorism. Amazingly, 404 of
      our elected representatives from both the Democrat and Republican
      parties voted in favor of this bill. There is little doubt that this
      bill is specifically targeting the growing patriot community that is
      demanding the restoration of the Constitution.

      First let's take a look at the definitions of violent radicalization
      and homegrown terrorism as defined in Section 899A of the bill.

      The definition of violent radicalization uses vague language to
      define this term of promoting any belief system that the government
      considers to be an extremist agenda. Since the bill doesn't
      specifically define what an extremist belief system is, it is
      entirely up to the interpretation of the government. Considering how
      much the government has done to destroy the Constitution they could
      even define Ron Paul supporters as promoting an extremist belief
      system. Literally, the government according to this definition can
      define whatever they want as an extremist belief system. Essentially
      they have defined violent radicalization as thought crime. The
      definition as defined in the bill is shown below.

      `(2) VIOLENT RADICALIZATION- The term `violent radicalization' means
      the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for
      the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance
      political, religious, or social change.

      The definition of homegrown terrorism uses equally vague language to
      further define thought crime. The bill includes the planned use of
      force or violence as homegrown terrorism which could be interpreted
      as thinking about using force or violence. Not only that but the
      definition is so vaguely defined, that petty crimes could even fall
      into the category of homegrown terrorism. The definition as defined
      in the bill is shown below.

      `(3) HOMEGROWN TERRORISM- The term `homegrown terrorism' means the
      use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group
      or individual born, raised, or based and operating primarily within
      the United States or any possession of the United States to
      int

    9. Re:What else do you want to know? by dpastern · · Score: 1

      Amen. For anyone that doesn't know, to get the truth about the US government, read anything by Noam Chomsky. Brilliantly honest and direct political commentator.

      Dave

      --
      Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. --Martin Luther King Jr.
  5. So what? by schwit1 · · Score: 1

    eBay pays taxes and its shareholders pay taxes. The government was making a law that would cost them money at some level. Don't they have a fiduciary responsibility to do what's best for the bottom line and minimize those expenses?

    1. Re:So what? by zappepcs · · Score: 1

      Actually, your thinking is misguided. CALEA requirements are very clearly laid out, and have been available for years. The ONLY reason that they would need to talk with the CIA is to help the CIA help themselves to YOUR conversations.

      CALEA rules are enforced for every telecomms carrier. It is NOT new, it is not undefined. To need more clarification is not only suspicious, it smacks of cooperation. The kind of cooperation that Hitler would have been proud of...

      --
      Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
    2. Re:So what? by pavon · · Score: 2, Informative

      Umm, they were meeting to discuss an amendment which had just been voted on. So no, the requirements for VoIP operators weren't clearly laid out at that time, and in particular it was unknown whether the rules would apply only to calls which connect to the phone network or also IP-only calls.

  6. What's the big deal by AgentPhunk · · Score: 1
    I don't understand, so what if eBay lobbied the CIA. Maybe they were just recruiting new chefs to cook for their employees - I hear that's one of the bennies, just like at Google.

    Oh, wait.. that CIA. Yeah that's bad then.

    1. Re:What's the big deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey the Culinary Institute of America made a pretty good vegetarian meal for me even though it wasn't on the menu... I *wish* eBay had free meals for employees... not just free bagels, granola bars, fruit, and soda.

  7. missing letter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    You sure it wasn't CTIA?

    oops, pretty much doesn't change the situation.

  8. Isn't the CIA for foreign concerns only? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As the CIA is at least in theory and in the letter of the laws currently not observed by the US administration supposed to deal only with foreign operations, shouldn't eBay be dealing with the FBI and NOT the CIA???

    1. Re:Isn't the CIA for foreign concerns only? by N1ck0 · · Score: 1

      MOTHER:
      Oh, sure, with a box like that, they could read the FBI's mail.

      WHISTLER:
      Or the CIA's. Or the White House's!

      CREASE:
      No wonder they don't want to share with the other children.

  9. Arms and Drugs by N1ck0 · · Score: 1

    Come on its a perfect match. The future of all commerce is on the internet.

    What other service should the CIA use to sell surplus weapons/aircraft/ships, information, and drugs to extremist/rebel/etc factions around the world? I mean they certainly can't be seen selling them directly. And who would ever suspect that eddieguns4056 sale of 200,000 AK-47s could possibly have anything to do with the CIA.

    And anyway using Nick Cage to do it is sooooo 1990's

    1. Re:Arms and Drugs by veganboyjosh · · Score: 1

      What other service should the CIA use to sell surplus weapons/aircraft/ships, information, and drugs to extremist/rebel/etc factions around the world? I mean they certainly can't be seen selling them directly. And who would ever suspect that eddieguns4056 sale of 200,000 AK-47s could possibly have anything to do with the CIA.

      Why not? The NTSA does it.

  10. It's right here by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

    "(5) IDEOLOGICALLY BASED THOUGHT- The term `ideologically based thought' means the use, planned use, or threatened use of contemplation or conceptualization by a group or individual to promote the group or individual's political, religious, or social beliefs."

    1. Re:It's right here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seems to end here in the current version:

      "`(4) IDEOLOGICALLY BASED VIOLENCE- The term `ideologically based violence' means the use, planned use, or threatened use of force or violence by a group or individual to promote the group or individual's political, religious, or social beliefs."

    2. Re:It's right here by flaming+error · · Score: 1

      Yes, but the bill doesn't outlaw thought, it sets up university centers to study how terrorists think.

      Understanding terrorism is a good thing. The current US approach of smashing hornet nests isn't working very well.

    3. Re:It's right here by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

      Wow, nothin' gets by you, eh?

    4. Re:It's right here by FleaPlus · · Score: 1
      Not sure if you modifying the original text is a joke, but for the curious, here's what it actually says (in the definitions section):

      `(4) IDEOLOGICALLY BASED VIOLENCE- The term `ideologically based violence' means the use, planned use, or threatened use of force or violence by a group or individual to promote the group or individual's political, religious, or social beliefs.
  11. The CIA Wiretaps Now? by rainsford · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Since when is the CIA concerned with wiretapping and listening to phone calls? Isn't that what the NSA is for?

  12. Skype is an interesting challenge by Zerimar · · Score: 1

    Skype is just another peer-to-peer app - I'm not exactly sure how eBay could cut the CIA into it. My guess would be if the CIA had access to most/all of the core Internet routers and could listen in on the traffic, then eBay could find a way of getting them a user's private key. Skype uses 1024-bit RSA Public keys to set up AES-256 encryption, so it's unlikely the government would be able to reliably break it on their own.

  13. CIA up for auction? by JackMeyhoff · · Score: 1

    Somebody should sell the CIA on eBay :)

    --
    http://www.rense.com/general79/wdx1.htm