tagged w/ CISPA
An attempt to ban US bosses from asking employees to hand over their Facebook login details has been blocked by Congress.
A last minute alteration to the controversial Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) that would have prevented employers demanding that prospective employees disclose social media passwords as a condition of employment was voted down in the house of representatives. The proposal, put forward by Democrat
Invasion of privacy? An amendment to a new US bill on cyber attacks aimed at preventing employers asking prospective employees for their Facebook login has been rejected
Handing over passwords could legally be a condition of acquiring or keeping a job, said WebProNews.
Perlmutter said of his amendment before it was defeated: 'It helps the individual protect his right to privacy and it doesn't allow the employer to impersonate that particular employee when other people are interacting with that person across social media platforms.
Full Story: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2313367/CISPA-Amendment-US-cyber-attack-law-banning-employers-asking-Facebook-passwords-blocked.html#ixzz2RRGYQiwaAn attempt to ban US bosses from asking employees to hand over their Facebook login... more
The “cooling saucer” effect might be working in the Senate the way the Founders intended. According to various reports, the Senate is too weary from trying to hammer out bills relating to immigration and gun control to face the gauntlet that would come from taking up the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA).
By a vote of 288-127, the House of Representatives passed CISPA, a measure that if enacted would have far-reaching and frightening effects on the right of Americans “to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures” as protected by the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution.
Representative Justin Amash (R-Mich.), one of a handful of lawmakers who consistently vote against unconstitutional bills, tweeted this explanation of the dangers latent in CISPA: “CIPSA destroys freedom of contract, prohibits companies from making legally binding commitment to users not to share personal data/e-mails.”
Later, just prior to the roll call vote in the House, Amash warned on his Facebook page, “The bill threatens our due process rights protected under the Fourth Amendment and prohibits companies from guaranteeing your privacy.”
Amash is right. CISPA’s threat to our most fundamental rights is real and irreversible if passed by the Senate and signed by the president (the president has repeatedly insisted that he would veto the bill, however).
For example, CISPA would obliterate (and invalidate) all Internet privacy laws presently in force. Companies large and small would be permitted to turn over to the federal government users’ e-mails, usernames, passwords, browsing history, and most other forms of electronically stored information.
That’s not all. According to information distributed by CISPA’s two largest opponents — the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) — the data the government is targeting with CISPA includes medical records, credit reports, and most other “personally identifiable information” that might be caught in a cybersecurity net.
Who would be the most likely recipient of this cache of personal digital profiles? The National Security Agency (NSA). Agents of the this domestic surveillance mammoth would need no warrant before approaching Internet companies with requests for their customers’ otherwise private information.
Although proponents of the bill point out that Internet companies could redact their customers’ most private information, the text of CISPA contains no provision for such protection of privacy.
Beyond simply “allowing” Internet companies (Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, Apple, etc.) to pass private information along to the NSA (and other federal departments, including the Pentagon), CISPA shields these corporate collaborators from all civil and criminal liability for their betrayal.
In fact, although most customers enter into valid, enforceable contracts with Internet companies requiring the latter to protect their privacy, CISPA voids these agreements in the face of federal requests for personal data.
And, thanks to the indemnification clauses, should companies share information with federal agents, users would be left without legal recourse whatsoever....
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/congress/item/15188-cispa-supporters-outspent-opponents-38-to-1The “cooling saucer” effect might be working in the Senate the way the... more
Update: As of Monday evening, about 900 websites are participating in the protest
About 400 websites are taking part in an online blackout today to protest the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA). The web-based demonstration, organized by the hacktivist organization, Anonymous, is not likely to interfere with the average web user's day, unless that user frequently posts funny videos on Reddit. CISPA, a controversial bill that aims to boost cybersecurity by removing legal barriers that prevent tech companies and the government from sharing sensitive information about web users, sailed through the House last week, despite strong opposition from privacy groups and President Barack Obama, who is threatening to veto the current version of the bill. Early last year, the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA), two online copyright enforcement bills, spurred widespread blackouts involving more than 7,000 websites and tech giants, including Wikipedia and Google, yet the biggest websites willing to take a public stand against CISPA merely include various subsections of Reddit and a Facebook page for the Libertarian party.
"Unfortunately, there have not been any confirmed reports of larger companies joining the protest," says a spokesperson for Anonyops, a website that reports news on the activities of Anonymous. "SOPA threatened to take down websites that even linked to copyright infringed material, so for companies that allow their users to post freely on their sites [like Facebook, Google+, and Reddit] this would have been devastating. CISPA mostly effects the user's of these services, and doesn't cut into profits of these big companies, and let's face it, that's why they're a business, to make a profit."
"We've been running ads against CISPA for the past few months, but we didn't think the timing was right for us to participate in today's blackout," says Erik Martin, general manager at Reddit, the social news site. "We're going to plan more action closer to the vote in the Senate, but in the meantime, the [independently controlled] subreddits are becoming kind of a lab for how you raise awareness on something important like this. Some of them are blacked out, others are posting about it."
Molly Schwoppe, a spokesperson for the Libertarian party, tells Mother Jones that the party is "vehemently opposed to CISPA" but refused to confirm whether or not the Facebook page holding the blackout officially belonged to the party.
CISPA was first introduced in late 2011 by Rep. Michael Rogers (R-Mich.), but the measure failed to advance through the Senate. Rogers and Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-Md.) reintroduced the bill in February of this year. Dozens of civil-liberties-minded groups have cried foul and opposed the bill on the grounds that it delivers personal information like emails and Internet records straight to the hands of the government, which could freely use all this information for vague national security purposes. "This bill undermines the privacy of millions of Internet users" Rainey Reitman, activism director for the Electronic Frontier Foundation said in a press release. The Obama administration last week declared that it "remains concerned that the bill does not require private entities to take reasonable steps to remove irrelevant personal information when sending cybersecurity data to the government or other private sector entities."
But privacy concerns may not be enough to stop the bill. CISPA supporters spent 140 times more money on lobbying for the bill that its opponents, according to the Sunlight Foundation. Big-name companies that openly support CISPA include AT&T, Intel, IBM, Time Warner Cable, and Verizon, and other tech giants are quietly on board, including Google and Facebook, which released a statement arguing that "if the government learns of an intrusion or other attack, the more it can share about that attack with private companies (and the faster it can share the information), the better the protection for users and our systems." Facebook also claims that if shares data with the government, it will safeguard user information.
Anonyops isn't so optimistic. "Do I find it hypocritical [that tech companies are supporting CISPA]? It could be seen that way, after all," its spokesperson says....
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/04/anonymous-organizes-blackout-over-cispa-tech-companies-dont-careUpdate: As of Monday evening, about 900 websites are participating in the protest... more
Surprise, surprise House committee to amend CISPA in secret, again: WTF is CISPA, and WTF does it mean for you? FAQDescribed as “misguided” and “fatally flawed” by the two largest US privacy groups, the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) threatens the online privacy of ordinary US residents more so than any other Bill since Congress amended the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act in 2008.Described as “misguided” and “fatally flawed” by the two... more
13 Oil Spills in the last 30 Days (INFOGRAPHIC)-Call-in day to demand Israel release jailed Palestinian-American boy-Poverty Facts and Stats-The “StingRay” Cell Phone Spying Device-Leak Shows US Hid The Truth About Drone Strikes-Louisiana town bans sagging pants-Shots Fired As Guards Clash With Gitmo Prisoners – US Military-House to vote on CISPA this week despite being horribly flawed after secret committee markup-A Missouri School Trains Its Teachers to Carry Guns, and Most Parents Approve13 Oil Spills in the last 30 Days (INFOGRAPHIC)-Call-in day to demand Israel release... more
We’ve been hearing for a while that when the planned markup occurs next week for CISPA, that the House Intelligence Committee is intending to hold a closed markup, basically hiding the discussion and the possible amendments from the public. There is no good reason for this. The Intelligence Committee will claim, of course, that it needs to do this so that confidential information can be discussed in debating the markup, but that’s hogwash. There are numerous concerns with the bill that can and should be addressed publicly. If there are key concerns about classified info getting out, that’s easy enough to avoid, since so much that CISPA touches on has nothing to do with classified info — and whatever comes up can be dealt with appropriately.
The truth is that this is yet another way to try to hide from the public on this issue. Congress doesn’t want an open discussion on the many problems with CISPA, so it does what it does best: try to hide things away and rush them through when (hopefully) not enough people are looking. It makes you wonder just what CISPA’s supporters are so worried about. Congress is supposed to work for the public, not hide things away from the public. This isn’t a situation where they’re discussing classified info or plans — but merely a bill focused on information sharing between the government and private companies. Any markup on CISPA needs to be public....
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130402/02291422544/congress-planning-to-debate-cispa-behind-closed-doors-no-public-scrutiny-allowed.shtmlWe’ve been hearing for a while that when the planned markup occurs next week for... more
The two US lawmakers responsible for last year’s failed cybersecurity bill known as CISPA are reintroducing the act, and renewed interest from Washington means it might have a fighting chance this time at being signed into law.
Less than ten months after the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act stalled on Capitol Hill after being overwhelmingly approved in the House of Representatives, the architects of bill that’s been called “Worse than SOPA” are once more pitching their effort to politicians.
If approved, CISPA could reshape the way American businesses interact with the federal government by setting up a system for private sector entities to share cyberthreat information with any agency administered by Uncle Sam, a notion being called a national security necessity by an increasing number of figures in Washington. Critics of the act condemn the bill’s vague verbiage, though, and less than one year ago orchestrated an online opposition movement with hopes of snuffing CISPA for good. But while the bill — the brainchild of Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) and Sen. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-Calif.) — failed to garner the support needed within Washington to make it become a law last year, urging from both Congress and the commander-in-chief — and coupled with a new slew of alleged cyber intrusions — could help CISPA be added to the books in no time.
CISPA, a bill “to provide for the sharing of certain cyber threat intelligence and cyber threat information between the intelligence community and cybersecurity entities,” was approved by the House by a 248-168 vote last April, but ended in political purgatory after lawmakers in the Senate failed to see eye-to-eye with their congressional counterparts. Even had CISPA made it that far, though, aides for US President Barack Obama insisted problems with the bill would make it the subject of an executive veto. During just a few short months, however, the White House has rallied support for cybersecurity legislation, and just this week Pres. Obama signed an executive order to establish the framework needed to protect the country’s critical and wired infrastructure in lieu of Congress’ inability to do so on their own part, whether through CISPA or by other means. Pres. Obama announced the order during his State of the Union address Tuesday evening, and added a plea to the politicians in his audience to work towards a Legislative Branch solution.
“Earlier today, I signed a new executive order that will strengthen our cyber defenses by increasing information sharing, and developing standards to protect our national security, our jobs and our privacy. Now, Congress must act as well, by passing legislation to give our government a greater capacity to secure our networks and deter attacks,” Pres. Obama said.
An executive order from Pres. Obama isn’t exactly a rare occurrence, and a laundry list of directives signed in the wake of last year’s Sandy Hook massacre aimed to establish gun reform was faced with furious opposition on the Hill. Either way, though, the orders he’s made from the Oval Office have led some lawmakers to suggest that the commander-in-chief is bypassing both Congress and the Constitution.
“Obama's increasing reliance on executive orders to push policy and skirt congressional deliberation is worrisome,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) tweeted this week.
But in a joint statement issued by the officers of Rep. Rogers and Sen. Ruppersberger on the day of the annual address, the CISPA co-authors said they were “pleased” with the president’s remarks and agreed that “our biggest barriers to bolster our cyber defenses can be fixed only with legislation.” CISPA, said the lawmakers, will “help US companies better protect themselves and the privacy and civil liberties of their customers” from international hackers per the president’s request.
“This is clearly not a theoretical threat – the recent spike in advanced cyberattacks against the banks and newspapers makes that crystal clear: American businesses are under siege,” Rep. Rogers said. He added that American companies need to have their networks better protected because, as he explains in an op-ed published last week in The Detroit News, “thousands of highly-trained computer engineers wake up” every morning in China with the mission to “Steal American intellectual property that the Chinese can in turn use to compete against us in the international market.”
“It is time to stop admiring this problem and deal with it immediately,” Rogers added this week. “Congress urgently needs to pass our cyber threat information sharing bill to protect our national security, our economy and US jobs.”
To CISPA’s critics, though, one very important item isn’t taken into consideration when it comes to offering protection. Opponents of the bill insist that approving CISPA could have damning repercussions for personal privacy and would put off-the-record conversations online and in the hands of any government investigator who can call that data relevant to a case. For that reason, it’s been opposed by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Center for Democracy and Technology and others. Even Mozilla, a leading Silicon Valley software maker, strayed from the pack last year and said, “While we wholeheartedly support a more secure Internet, CISPA has a broad and alarming reach that goes far beyond Internet security,”
“The bill infringes on our privacy,” Mozilla’s privacy and public policy official said in a statement to Forbes last year.
Even still, others say the overly vague language of the bill itself could lead to broad interpretation.
Speaking to RT when CISPA was last up for vote in April 2012, Demand Progress co-founder Aaron Swartz said the act has “all the censorship problems” of other cyber legislation that’s been proposed in under the Obama administration such as SOPA and PIPA — the Stop Online Piracy Act and Protect IP Act, respectively — but warned that CISPA is “incredibly broad and dangerous” since “it also goes much further and allows them to spy on people using the Internet, to get their personal data and e-mails.” All, of course, in the name of cybersecurity. But as Congress is still only in its infancy in terms of understanding computers, that ill-defined term can allow for Washington to interpret CISPA in a variety of ways.
end of excerpt.
BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU... and listening to you. First PIPA, then SOPA then ACTA and now this. This bill has morphed more times than a shape shifter on True Blood. Defeated in 2012 and now resurrected again in 2013. This affront to our civil liberties will simply not die because there is much money to be made out of spying. And notice Obama's announcement of the executive order in the SOTU (and it was kind of funny when he related that "hackers" look at private e-mails when Verizon, AT&T, GOOGLE, etc. under the auspices of this government have been doing it for years) shrouded under a cover of fear. Make no mistake about it, governments and their corporate benefactors have been working on taking all the freedom they can away from us for a very long time. So, is this the price of progress?
Please, fight for your Internet freedom.
Please sign the petititon: http://act.demandprogress.org/letter/cispa/The two US lawmakers responsible for last year’s failed cybersecurity bill known... more
By Stephanie Whiteside / current.com / @stephgwhiteside
Remember back in 2011, when Congress angered privacy advocates and Internet users by introducing the Stop Online Piracy Act and the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement? And when more concerns were raised as tech giants like Google fought back against federal law enforcement requests for emails? And how about when, in 2012, Congress introduced the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, which passed the House — despite a veto threat from the White House — drawing criticism from privacy advocates?
Well, CISPA is back and completely unchanged from the original draft. The Republican-sponsored bill comes after President Obama's signing of an executive order that calls for the creation of voluntary standards to beef up the security of computer networks in critical industries. The president mentioned the danger of hackers and the importance of security in his State of the Union address last week, warning that foreign countries and companies could sabotage power grids, financial institutions and air traffic control systems. By Stephanie Whiteside / current.com / @stephgwhiteside Remember back in 2011, when... more
Earlier this week, we wrote about how the White House was working on an executive order to act as a "stand in" for cybersecurity legislation that has so far failed to pass Congress (CISPA passed in the House, but a different effort, the Cybersecurity Act, failed in the Senate, and it would have been difficult to get the two houses aligned anyway). Last weekend Jason Miller from Federal News Radio wrote about a draft he saw... but failed to share the actual draft. We got our hands on a draft (and confirmed what it was with multiple sources) and wanted to share it, as these kinds of things deserve public scrutiny and discussion. It's embedded below. As expected, it does have elements of the Lieberman/Collins bill (to the extent that the White House actually can do things without legislation). It's also incredibly vague. The specific requirements for government agencies are left wide open to interpretation. For example, the State Dept. should engage other governments about protecting infrastructure. Well, duh. As expected, most stuff focuses on Homeland Security and its responsibilities to investigate a variety of different cybersecurity issues -- but, again, it's left pretty vague.
There is, as expected, plans concerning information sharing -- but again, they're left pretty empty on specifics. It talks about an "information exchange framework." Unfortunately, it does not appear to highlight privacy or civil liberties concerns in discussing the information sharing stuff. That seems like a pretty big problem. Homeland Security is tasked with coming up with a way to share information, pulling on some existing efforts, but nowhere do they call out how to make sure these information exchange programs don't lead to massive privacy violations, despite the President's earlier promises that any cybersecurity efforts would take into account privacy and civil liberties.
Separately, it lists out 16 critical infrastructure "sectors," but those can be interpreted really broadly, which is dangerous. We all understand how things like the electric grid, nuclear power plants, water facilities and such can be seen as critical infrastructure. But does "communications" include things like social networking? It's important that any plan be very, very specific about what sorts of things are critical infrastructure, so as to avoid sweeping up all sorts of things like internet services and opening them up to information "sharing" abuse efforts by the government. We all know there's plenty of evidence that when the government is given a loophole to spy on private communications, it figures out ways to drive fleets of trucks through that hole. Unfortunately, there's little indication that any of that has really been taken into consideration.
All that said, it is important to recognize that this is a draft, and it is not only subject to change, but there are indications that it is likely to change. But, seeing as this could have significant impact, it should be something that the public has a chance to weigh in on.
Honestly, looking this over, you get the sense that it's really designed to do one thing: scare those who fought against the various bills back to the table to compromise and get a bill out. It's no secret that the administration's overall preference is to get a law in place, rather than this executive order. That's been a failed effort so far, but you have to wonder if this is a ploy to scare those who opposed the Cybersecurity Act into thinking that if they don't approve some legislation, the exec order might be a bigger problem. There are way too many things left open ended in this draft, and while the administration can't go as far as Congress on many things, the open-ended nature of this order could certainly lead to problems for the industries who opposed previous efforts.
Either way, we'll have some more on this next week, but since we just got this and want to get it out there for comment, hopefully folks can spend some time this weekend discussing the (yes, once again, vague) particulars...
More at linkEarlier this week, we wrote about how the White House was working on an executive... more
Hello, we are Anonymous.
We come to you with a message of Revolution, or more so, Evolution. We have all witnessed the United states uprising with Occupy Wall Street venting their frustration with politicians, banks, and corporations. While we do agree with their message, their tactics of civil disobedience has only invoked violence with police officers around the country which has caused an extreme distraction for the Occupy movement. With censorship bills being passed and bills that attempt to rid us of our freedoms that this country was founded upon the time has now come to act. We have devised a plan to bring forth the final act of the evolution. This act how ever will only be as real as the people of the world decide it to be. The United States Government is fully aware of this plan and has been preparing for it with the cybersecurity act of 2012. The United States Government foresees a plan that will destroy the system and now they fear us. You say you want a revolution and now the time has arrived. We now call upon the top hacktivists, coders, crypto anarchists, cypher punks, Non-violent Civil Rights activists, Internet Censorship and Freedom of Speech activists everywhere to collaborate to jointly BRAINSTORM IDEAS to develop TYLER. TYLER is a massively distributed and decentralized Wikipedia-style P2P cipherspace structure impregnable to censorship. TYLER will improve where Wikileaks could not. In other words TYLER will be a Wikileaks on steroids. We not only call upon the people of the United States but the people of the world to gather evidence of illegality, corruption, and fraud and upload it to TYLER From the 12th of December 2012, to the 21st of December 2012. On the 5th of November TYLER will be out of beta testing. To construct TYLER and leak it all is only one phase of Project Mayhem 2012. Remember, there is no certainty, only opportunity.
You are Anonymous,
You are Project Mayhem 2012,
Together we are legion,
To the global and financial leaders of the world,
PR: Anonymous Project Mayhem 2012 Call to HackZION!:
Project Mayhem 2012 'Dangerous Ideas #1 and #2':
Project Mayhem 2012 Tyler: http://pastebin.com/Wt15GXTn
TYLER forum discussion:
TYLER pad discussion:
RA2012 Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/R-EVOLUTIONArt/289445424416752Hello, we are Anonymous. We come to you with a message of Revolution, or more so,... more
Recently in New York City, Mayor Bloomberg proposed a ban on super-sized drinksand it seems more Americans are upset over the proposed prohibition than theForeign Intelligence Surveillance Act. On Thursday, US lawmakers deliberated whetheror not the bill's overseas spying power should be re-established and used athome. FISA is one of several bills that are aiming at Internet freedom's forAmericans. David Seaman, host of The DL Show, gives us his take.
http://youtu.be/X6z9c5RmIgERecently in New York City, Mayor Bloomberg proposed a ban on super-sized drinksand it... more
While the international ACTA treaty and United States’ CISPA legislation are setting the stage to clamp down on the world wide web, technocrats are working overtime to try to pin down your identity and make sure all your activities are thoroughly monitored and under control.
The European Union is now moving to create a mandatory electronic ID system for all EU citizens that would be implemented across Europe to standardize business both online and in person, authenticating users via a common ‘electronic signature.’ A single authenticating ID would guard access to the Internet, online data and most commerce. It is nothing short of an attempt to phase in a Mark of the Beast system, and a prominent Bilderberg attendee is behind the scheme.
Neelie Kroes is the EU’s Digital Agenda Commissioner, and is introducing legislation she hopes will force “the adoption of harmonised e-signatures, e-identities and electronic authentication services (eIAS) across EU member states.”
The extent of such a system would, of course, expand over time, particularly as many EU nations have resisted the big government encroachment of ID requirements on civil rights grounds, which even now smack of the Nazi regime’s draconian “papers please” policies that empowered their other avenues of tyranny. According to EurActiv.com, Neelie Kroes would later “widen the scope of the current Directive by including also ancillary authentication services that complement e-signatures, like electronic seals, time/date stamps, etc,” as the supra-national body attempts to corral more nations into participation.
This big brother system will be implemented in Europe first and later pushed in North America and the remainder of the globe, as the world is nudged step by step towards a total cashless control grid in the name of ‘safe, verifiable commerce,’ and of course, in the name of “security.” Nevermind that the plan would invite the hacking of identities and fast track forgeries. In the case of Europe, special emphasis is placed in part on “establishing a truly functioning single market” — part of the larger EU goal even now floundering.
Neelie Kroes has been a long term Bilderberg attendee, showing up annually since 2005. She was on the official list for the 2006 meeting in Ottawa, Canada, then the 2007 meeting in Istanbul, Turkey, 2008 in Chantilly, Virginia, 2009 in Vouliagmeni, Greece and 2010 in Sitges, Spain as a delegate from the European Commission.
But in 2011, Kroes came to the table in St. Moritz, Switzerland with a new title: the EU’s Commissioner for Digital Agenda, so obviously now seeing development on that agenda was not unexpected. Kroes latest effort will surely be bolstered during the 2012 meeting now just days away....
http://www.infowars.com/bilderberg-demands-internet-id-for-all-eu-citizens/While the international ACTA treaty and United States’ CISPA legislation are... more
Thom Hartmann talks with Steve Bucci, Ph.D. , Senior Research Fellow, Defense and Homeland Security-the Heritage Foundation Website: www.heritage.org about the Cybersecurity Information Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA), introduced by House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence chairman Mike Rogers (R-MI) and ranking member Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD). Under CISPA, the U.S. government will be able to share information about incoming cyber attacks — that includes providing American companies details on malware, viruses, and other malicious code that pose a threat to their security. But will it mean the end to our online privacy?Thom Hartmann talks with Steve Bucci, Ph.D. , Senior Research Fellow, Defense... more
H.R. 3523: Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (On Passage of the Bill):
Number: House Vote #192 [primary source: house.gov]
Date: Apr 26, 2012 (112th Congress)
Related Bill: H.R. 3523: Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act Introduced by Rep. Michael "Mike" Rogers [R-MI8] on November 30, 2011 Current Status: Passed House
This was a vote to approve or reject a bill or resolution.
http://youtu.be/gcNfSyrXLU4H.R. 3523: Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (On Passage of the Bill):... more
The Pirate Bay website was blocked to millions of users. A UK high court ruled that the country's leading Internet Service Providers had to censor the site, claiming that both the Bay and its users were breaking copyright laws. David Seaman, journalist and host of The DL Show, joins us to take a closer look at the case.The Pirate Bay website was blocked to millions of users. A UK high court ruled that... more
Ben Swann takes a look at SOPA, PIPA, CISPA, ACTA and even the so called Legal Intercept. Sorry about the commericals but you can forward past. http://youtu.be/yL6kTIV99tMBen Swann takes a look at SOPA, PIPA, CISPA, ACTA and even the so called Legal... more
Ben Swann takes a look at the issues with CISPA and where it stands in Part 1 of this half hour reality check special. http://youtu.be/8VWCj_WeVsABen Swann takes a look at the issues with CISPA and where it stands in Part 1 of this... more
I just received the below email, stating that I have now become a CYBERBULLY.
The best way to know that we're having an impact? When our opponents lash out at us. And boy did they ever.
Politico wrote an article that highlights some of the work we've done in opposition to CISPA -- including our campaign to call Mark Zuckerberg out on lining up Facebook in support of the bill:
Facebook, IBM and other firms — along with lawmakers — have been targeted this week in attacks on Twitter and Facebook, via email and online petitions.
What do the powers-that-be think of our grassroots activism?
“Cyberbullying,” one tech company insider dubbed it.
Right on. We want to be free to 'bully' mega corporations and politicians whenever they deserve it. And your donations keep us independent and make it possible for us to do so.
We haven't won yet, but they're calling us cyberbullies because we're having a tangible impact on the workings on Capitol Hill.
We're making it harder for big businesses to push a pro-corporate, anti-Internet, anti-consumer agenda.
Over the last month alone we've generated more than 300,000 emails to Congress, nearly 200,000 signatures on our open letter to Facebook, and more than 15,000 phone calls to lawmakers.
And we've seen tangible results:
Amendments were adopted that made CISPA (marginally) better.
Earlier this month CISPA was supposed to sail through, but we helped foment real opposition, and the House vote was far closer than anybody could have imagined even a couple of weeks ago.
Most Democrats held firm in opposition, and more than two dozen libertarian-leaning Republicans defied their leadership and vote no.
Most importantly, President Obama has threatened to veto CISPA.
Thanks so much for your support!
-Demand Progress http://act.demandprogress.org/sign/obama_cispa/
THEY'RE STILL AT IT... The wanton desire, by the greedy few, to sabotage Internet creativity is still going and going like the Energizer Bunny. I hope we, who use the Internet for creating and viewing and learning and interaction with other Internet entities will have a voice in President Obama to stop this new threat upon our civil liberties in the guise of protecting us. Hmmm, again, where have I heard that before?
Please tell President Obama to stand strong against the new SOPA bill called CISPA... http://act.demandprogress.org/sign/obama_cispa/ thinkingblue
CISPA by any other name would smell as SOPA
CISPA has garnered favor from corporations and lobbying groups such as Microsoft, Facebook and the United States Chamber of Commerce, which look on it as a simple and effective means of sharing important cyber threat information with the government. CISPA has been criticized by advocates of internet privacy and civil liberties, such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the American Civil Liberties Union, and Avaaz.org. Those groups argue CISPA contains too few limits on how and when the government may monitor private individual’s internet browsing information. Additionally, they fear that such new powers could be used to surveil the general public rather than to pursue malicious hackers.
Some critics saw CISPA as a second attempt at strengthing digital piracy laws after the anti-piracy Stop Online Piracy Act became deeply unpopular. Intellectual property theft was initially listed in the bill as a possible cause for sharing web traffic information with the government, though it was removed in subsequent drafts.
The legislation was introduced on November 30, 2011 by U.S. Representative Michael Rogers (R-MI) and 111 co-sponsors. It was passed in the House of Representatives on April 26, 2012. President Obama has argued that the bill lacks confidentiality and civil liberties safeguards and has threatened to veto it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyber_Intelligence_Sharing_and_Protection_Act
The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA), which recently passed the US House of Representatives, will soon see its counterpart bills debated in the Senate. The vote on CISPA comes only months after the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) was withdrawn after widespread protest, and many are wondering whether CISPA will garner the same high-profile opposition. By allowing companies to share user data with each other or the government to combat vaguely defined "cyber threats," CISPA has raised major questions about online privacy.
Unlike SOPA, however, the provisions of CISPA largely absolve companies from responsibility if something goes wrong. This means that Google, Facebook, and others stand much less to lose (and in many cases, a good deal to gain) if it passes. We've taken a look at where several of the major tech companies and websites stand on this proposal. MORE HERE http://www.theverge.com/2012/5/2/2993495/cispa-hr-3523-business-support-opposition
MORE HERE: http://thinkingblue.blogspot.com/2012/05/are-you-cyberbully.htmlI just received the below email, stating that I have now become a CYBERBULLY.... more