Slashdot Mirror
Why CISPA Is a Really Bad Bill
We've heard recently of CISPA, the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, a bill currently making its way through Congress that many are calling the latest incarnation of SOPA. Reader SolKeshNaranek points out an article at Techdirt explaining exactly why this bill is bad, and how its backers are trying to deflect criticism by using language that's different and rather vague. Quoting:
"The bill defines 'cybersecurity systems' and 'cyber threat information' as anything to do with protecting a network from: '(A) efforts to degrade, disrupt, or destroy such system or network; or (B) theft or misappropriation of private or government information, intellectual property, or personally identifiable information.' It's easy to see how that definition could be interpreted to include things that go way beyond network security — specifically, copyright policing systems at virtually any point along a network could easily qualify."
Why must we have overbearing, obsequious legislators whose only goals seem to be to annoy, obfuscate, and make dirty money? The power to expel a Congressman should extend to anyone in the US with at least a given number of supporters.
____________
Please.
CISPA is bad... mkay
Most laws are designed to increase the power of the federal government and reduce the honest citizens rights.
Laws don't apply to the criminals.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
http://intelligence.house.gov/bill/cyber-intelligence-sharing-and-protection-act-2011
AT&T
Boeing
BSA
Business Roundtable
CSC
COMPTEL
CTIA - The Wireless Association
Cyber, Space & Intelligence Association
Edison Electric
EMC
Exelon
Facebook
The Financial Services Roundtable
IBM
Independent Telephone & Telecommunications Alliance
Information Technology Industry Council
Intel
Internet Security Alliance
Lockheed Martin
Microsoft
National Cable & Telecommunications Association
NDIA
Oracle
Symantec
TechAmerica
US Chamber of Commerce
US Telecom - The Broadband Association
Verizon
In my view the real power of SOPA was protection for those choosing to act in "good faith" as judge jury and executioner without the possibilty of civil recourse when this is abused.
No ISP is going to implement MPAA's wet dream if they know they will be successfully sued into oblivian the second it is switched on.
This is the same thing all over again.
Only the choice of words is different to appeal to the "security" boogyman this time around.
Or at least global social networks/mail providers/etc. What happens when (if?) other countries with some minimal respect for their citizens privacy (i.e. EU) put laws that forces companies to protect their citizens privacy?
It's like somewhere a bunch of congressmen and lobbyists got other and said:
"Wow, the internet has really been a force for global change. It empowers people to coordinate with each other and share information in a way never before possible. What can be do to put a stop to it?"
The corporate and government sectors are BOTH corrupt as hell.
Enough so that whenever they actually manage to agree on something, it's probably something bad for us small folks.
Rather how ex wives never like each other unless they both hate the husband.
"Eventually one will slip through and become law"
How do you motivate the obese, bewildered masses that only want their iPhones and snacks? Seriously I don't respect the general populace of this country any longer (if I ever did) they get what they deserve.
Consumer cattle led to slaughter.
Idiocracy was a documentary.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
This comes at the same time Sony announces a $6.4 billion loss. Im sure they will blame music piracy, yet Apple is making those same billions in profit during a GFC. Can anyone see that one business model is overtaking the other? - Sony obviously cant, and have missed the bus too.
I find tyranny a bit harder to swallow when it's "for the People"
After going to thomas.loc.gov and reading the text of the proposed law, it seems that it really is pretty harmless.'
Once you get past the scary definitions, what you have is a law that requires the government and "cybersecurity providers" to not make public any otherwise confidential material relevant to a security breach.
Plus it allows the government to share information it may have about "cybersecurity threats" with outsiders.
The only really interesting bit in the whole thing is that it uses "entity" a lot, and specifically defines it as NOT including "an individual".
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
Even "paleoconservative" Alex Jones is firing up his followers against government internet surveillance legislation in the works. Here's an example from one of his sites that even made the Drudge Report last Saturday.
If only congressmen had moderators...
to address multiple issues, not the least of which is transgression against your freedom. while the arab spring fallout from wikileaks was an excellent goose for american foreign policy, the occupy movement has left a rank taste in the mouths of billionaires and the government has thus far run out of productive things to do with Bradley Manning, nude or clothed.
dont think of it as trampling your rights, think of it as pepperspray-prevention.
Good people go to bed earlier.
This bill amends the National Security Act of 1947 to include "(1) efforts to degrade, disrupt, or destroy such system or network; or (2) theft or misappropriation of private or government information, intellectual property, or personally identifiable information" as "cyber threat intelligence". This is important because amending the National Security Act makes "cyber threat intelligence" a product of the intelligence community. This is important because US persons have protections under Title 50 when included within intelligence products.
Basically it would make it unlawful to collect these products against a US person without a very serious warrant. Now say AT&T decides to cooperate with the government in this bill, they would become a "certified entities" and thus as a collection partner and would be subject to restrictions. IE it would be pretty impossible for say the RIAA to subpoena the intelligence that in reality can't even be collected without a warrant and even if it was and was done with a warrant it would have to be the AG acting on it. Basically, it turns your info into intelligence which makes it a very protected thing.
In reality this bill might make it significantly harder to monitor your communications and provide much larger penalties for doing so without a sufficient warrant. Basically it would make it unlawful to collect these products against a US person without a very serious warrant. Now say AT&T decides to cooperate with the government in this bill, they would become a "certified entities" and thus as a collection partner and would be subject to restrictions. IE it would be pretty impossible for say the RIAA to subpoena the intelligence that in reality can't even be collected without a warrant and even if it was and was done with a warrant it would have to be the AG acting on it. Basically, it turns your info into intelligence which makes it a very protected thing.
In reality this bill might make it significantly harder to monitor your communications and provide much larger penalties for doing so without a sufficient warrant.
------
I am not a lawyer, I am not your lawyer, I might be a pound of chease.
So if this bill is passed, won't it, "degrade, disrupt, or destroy" the Internet? Won't it therefore become illegal?
Pulp Audio Weekly - Geek News and Reviews
The official summary says this pertains to the protection of government intelligence information and the measures that are necessary to protect it. This is not about protecting movies from file sharers. The intelligence community is not thinking about movies. They're thinking about espionage.
You are incorrect there. It is Illigal to Collect where in that collection involves reporting on US persons without a warrent. NOW, it does include provisions for, we where collecting and some random data got into the system, Basically, you have to delete it. Also, once it's IC carp, it dosn't matter if its PI or not its collecting on a US person. Have you even read the law?
Which are the good laws? Laws good for you? What about laws good for other things, but not so good for you. What about laws which are good for me and bad for you? I make it a point to understand as much of the law as I have time for. There are always going to be laws, and they are always going to screw you if you don't take the time to understand them. Please go read something, spend a few hours on gov tracker if anything. I really recommend starting with the Titles, they make really good bed time reading.
The occupy movement is a bunch of idiots, should have protested ten years ago when they deregulated everything. I KNOW I DID. I remember standing in a part in downtown (Sorry, you don't get to know where I lived) with a sign showing “They are gonna fuck it up” written on one side, and "Osama != Iraq" on the other. That lasted all of 10 minutes. I still have the damn sign! Found it when I was moving a few months ago. Triggered one of those, "maybe its time I purge some of this carp". Anyway. the occupy lot isn't any better then the people they protest, only see what happened, never looking ahead to what is going to happen and trying to stop it. That lot only gives a flying crap about it self and it can't even get that right.
You know what I want to see, people protesting? The lack of regulations on corporate handling of personal information. Ya, not much has happened there yet, just you wait. But no, they protest their debt, “corporate greed”, and what not. I really don't get protesting how deep in the hole you are. Should have had the foresight to understand the damn loan was shit. Really, when did taking out a loan for 120% of the value become a good idea, or was it just the “free money”? No one gives out free money! Oh wait, I forgot – no foresight.
Corporations are greedy, fact of life. If you vote a bunch of corporate friendly politicians into office what do you think was going to happen. YOU VOTED, protest yourself.
Oh and while I'm on the subject of protesting one's self. If you vote in representatives which pass laws allowing people to shoot each other willy nilly its YOUR OWN FAULT when your kids get shot. Should have been paying attention to your government. But thats hard, it's much easer to just bitch when it all goes to shit and you didn't see it coming.
Maybe you should stop watching propaganda and spend some time learning. Whats, really good about that propaganda though. The fact that you can watch it and not get arrested. Welcome to America, but it only stays that way if you keep on top of it and take the time to understand what the hell is going on.
Next time, before you decide to go all righteous fury, take the time to figure out if your right.
NOTE: I understand the use of pronouns might be confusing, however when I use "you" I am not directly speaking about You, more the general youes.
Double NOTE: Writing in a condescending tone is not a good way to convince someone to do anything, it does however make one's self fell better about what they are saying. I know I felt better writing this note!