CISPA

[Weebitty]

SOPA mutates into much worse CISPA, the latest threat to internet free speech
Saturday, April 21, 2012 by: Ethan A. Huff, staff writer



(NaturalNews) Just because SOPA and PIPA, the infamous internet "kill switch" bills, are largely dead does not mean the threat to internet free speech has become any less serious. The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA), also known as H.R. 3523, is the latest mutation of these internet censorship and spying bills to hit the U.S. Congress -- and unless the American people speak up now to stop it, CISPA could lead to far worse repercussions for online free speech than SOPA or PIPA ever would have.

CNET, the popular technology news website that was among many others who spoke up against SOPA and PIPA earlier in the year, is also one of many now sounding the alarm about CISPA, which was authored by Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) and Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-Md.). Though the bill's promoters are marketing it as being nothing like SOPA or PIPA, CISPA is exactly like those bills, except worse.

What CISPA will do, if passed, is remove all the legal barriers that currently stop internet service providers, government agencies, and others from arbitrarily spying on internet users. In the name of "cybersecurity," a term that is undefined in the bill, CISPA will essentially allow internet users to be surveilled by the government without probable cause or a search warrant, which is a clear violation of users' constitutional civil liberties.

Additionally, it will allow websites like Google, Facebook, and Twitter to intercept emails, text messages, and other private information that might be considered a threat to "cybersecurity." The government can then demand access to this information, even if it has nothing to do with copyright infringement, which is one of the excuses being used for why such a bill is needed in the first place.


Internet users are already required to abide by the same laws as everyone else
"Just because you commit a crime on the internet doesn't immunize you from liability just because it's on the internet," said Kendall Burman from the Center for Democracy & Technology, an internet freedom of speech advocacy group, to Russia Today (RT) in a recent interview. "Law enforcement has many tools to go after crimes that are committed anywhere, including the internet."

And Burman is right. Contrary to what former presidential candidate Rick Santorum and others have inferred about the internet being an unregulated "free for all," internet users are already required to abide by the same rules as everyone else. And those who commit crimes online are subject to the same legal obligations as those who commit them offline.

"When you talk about using information that the government receives that's purportedly for the purpose of protecting cybersecurity, and you're using it for law enforcement purposes or national security purposes that don't have anything to do with cybersecurity, well law enforcement has tools already to go after those crimes," added Burman. "And we very much fear that the information sharing machine that's related to cybersecurity could very much become a backdoor wiretap or a surveillance program by another name."

You can watch the full RT interview with Burman here:
http://rt.com/usa/news/cispa-bill-sopa-internet-175/

In truth, there is no legitimate need to pass any "cybersecurity" bills because legal mechanisms to address internet crimes are already in place.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), another internet civil rights group, has created an Action Alert page where you can learn more about CISPA, and also petition your Congressmen to oppose it: https://action.eff.org/o/9042/p/dia/...ction_KEY=8444

Sources for this article include:

http://news.cnet.com


Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/035638_CI...#ixzz1sqU7zrTw

[GMF]

Sign the online petition against CISPA here

https://secure.avaaz.org/en/stop_cispa/

and spread the word

[Bernard]

Congress is set to vote on this turd today. I urge you to contact your Congresscritter and voice your concerns *now* - before it's too late.

http://cyberspying.eff.org/

[Weebitty]

Thanks for putting the petition up GMF that helps too. I did spread the word I posted the article on here. Hopefully people will read it.

[Sunfyre7896]

Originally Posted by ScriptMan

Texas remains untamed in all respects. I could offer a couple of members as examples.

My true point was that all countries are about to reign in the Internet. It has run free with very little controls in place for close to 20 years. No government likes human events it can not control.

Wouldn't this be considered 'censorship?' I don't see any other way when you say things like *taming* or *reigning in.* I see nothing good with taming the internet. There comes a time when the level of control a government has on every aspect of people's lives begins to impinge on their freedom and liberty.

I'm all for stopping child porn sites and other sites that involve crimes such as murder or rape or molestation, but if people want to stream something or look at porn or gamble, then that should be their right, as long as it doesn't harm others. And when I say harm, I mean mostly physically and not what some might consider 'offensive' as is the case with adult porn or speech possibly in poor taste.

..................

And I would consider myself untamed as well.

[dWhite]

Please also visit the Electronic Frontier Foundation website here:

http://cyberspying.eff.org/

And contact your State Reps about it.

[dWhite]

http://www.avaaz.org/en/stop_cispa_corporate_global/?fp

Tell Facebook, Microsoft and IBM to stop their support of CISPA here also.

[__Web__]

Hopefully not, but seeing how 'into it' are those people, i suppose it is just a matter of time until something of this kind make it through. I thought it will take a year or two until they will make another bill of this kind but for what i see, they just want it -now. So yes, it is just a matter of time, i suppose.

[rabble]

+ YouTube Video

Still think CISPA is harmless?
CISPA grants blanket immunity to companies should they provide
information to the NSA about YOU for data mining.

[robjones]

For the sake of continuity I just merged Rabbles new CISPA thread start with the 2nd CISPA thread, and merged that with GMFs original CISPA thread. We now have ONE thread on CISPA instead of three.

Hopefully it'll avoid the confusing "Gee I thought I posted in that discussion" problem. Happy commenting.

[rabble]

Good point, but ... I really did want to have NSA is lying as a thread title.

Oh well.

[robjones]

I'd like to look like Brad Pitt.

[HTMLBasicTutor]

The Obama Administration joined the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) debate yesterday when a senior State Department advisor told The Guardian that the White House opposed the controversial bill.

CISPA emerged in the wake of the equally controversial Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) came out of the gate fast, condemning the bill and two others as overly vague and expressing their concern that it could open the door to corporate and government abuses.

Obama Administration Opposes CISPA As Congress Amends Proposed Law

[snakeair]

Well it Passed.

The House passed the controversial CISPA cybersecurity bill on Thursday, defying a White House veto threat and throwing the issue squarely into the Senate’s lap.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) said the bill was “needed to prepare for countries like Iran and North Korea so that they don’t do something catastrophic to our networks here in America.”

The final tally was 248-168, enough to pass the measure but not enough to override the threatened veto. Forty-two Democrats broke with the White House to vote for the bill, and 28 Republicans voted against it.

The administration and Democratic critics opposed the bill because of privacy and civil liberties concerns. The other main sticking point was that, unlike a Senate bill by Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), CISPA would not mandate new security requirements for a critical infrastructure network.

Although those disagreements still exist, House Republicans have now...

Continued at: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0412/75670.html

[Bernard]

Hopefully the Senate will be a little smarter, but I'm not holding my breath.

[rabble]

The Senate will most likely pass a similar bill.
After reconcilliation the bill will go to Obama's desk.
He has threatened to veto the bill.
I might remind you all this is the same trajectory
the NDAA legislation took.
Obama signed NDAA despite threats to veto.

Neither the republicans or the democrats are
working for us. They are working for the corporations
who need immunity and legality for their practice
of selling information about us. They will sell if all.
There will be no privacy and no legal recourse
when you are harmed.

We need to find another way.
Don't be fooled. We are living in a corporate oligarchy.
We must rise up. We must resist. Occupy your space.
It is our space. Retake the commons.

[robjones]

I'm not gonna disagree with you about it the corporate oligarchy, but if you're planning on stockpiling weapons you better do it at somebody else's house cause after that post yours is already on the list.

[Sunfyre7896]

Originally Posted by robjones

I'm not gonna disagree with you about it the corporate oligarchy, but if you're planning on stockpiling weapons you better do it at somebody else's house cause after that post yours is already on the list.

So do you disagree that corporations run this country or just that they run politicians?

I'll sub in something else and see if it seems familiar. . . . Money makes the world go around. > So, then money makes the country go around. > Money makes the country go. > Money equals power. > Money equals influence. > Corporations have a great deal of money.

It's not too hard to assume that corporations and big industries dictate policy to politicians.

[Cricket]

House approves controversial CISPA bill
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501465_1...al-cispa-bill/

The House passed the amendment, 410-3

[robjones]

Originally Posted by sunfyre

So do you disagree that corporations run this country or just that they run politicians?

Huh? Was there some part of "I'm not gonna disagree with you " that suggested I disagreed with him?