"SOPA II" Passed?

[evilneko]

-megasnip-

CISPA doesn't give the government carte blanche to monitor anyone. It does not involve the government eavesdropping on anyone's internet traffic at all.

Here's what it does do:

1. Lay out rules for with whom spooks can share intel (ie, who can get clearance and how to go about it)
2. Lay out rules for what the government may and may not do with information given to it by private individuals/firms, if and when such information is given. (And one of the things verboten is, interestingly, firearms sales records. Wait, what?)
3. Spell out penalties for violation of the above
4. Provide for protection from liability for certain parties pertaining to what they do with their information, which for one, means security researchers need not fear being sued. I explained previously why I doubt the EFF's scenario is likely

Quite frankly I'm more worried about Google than CISPA.

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

Meh. I'm over it all. They can do whatever they want. Consider me officially apathetic.

 

[DefiantGoblin]

The only thing I disagree with this is America's belief that they have the right to police the world.

There was a post on here a few months back asking why the rest of the world hated America - why do you think?

The rest of the world has to abide by numerous human rights laws and international bills but America seem to be above that. At the moment we in England are struggling to deport a Terrorist (illegal in every country on Earth) yet for some reason the Americans were able to extradite a Uk citizen to be arrested over there for linking to copyrighted material (which is perfectly legal over here, it is only illegal to download or host copyrighte material).

In itself the bill doesn't do that much but I really resent that fact that America can enforce these bills across the planet.

 

[Zer_]

-megasnip-

CISPA doesn't give the government carte blanche to monitor anyone. It does not involve the government eavesdropping on anyone's internet traffic at all.

Here's what it does do:

1. Lay out rules for with whom spooks can share intel (ie, who can get clearance and how to go about it)
2. Lay out rules for what the government may and may not do with information given to it by private individuals/firms, if and when such information is given. (And one of the things verboten is, interestingly, firearms sales records. Wait, what?)
3. Spell out penalties for violation of the above
4. Provide for protection from liability for certain parties pertaining to what they do with their information, which for one, means security researchers need not fear being sued. I explained previously why I doubt the EFF's scenario is likely

Quite frankly I'm more worried about Google than CISPA.

It removes the need for warrants. I don't trust government agencies and I don't trust corporations either. Warrants were created for a reason. I mean I don't trust any Justices either, but fuck it I trust them a fuckload more than I do government agencies.

And yes I know it's not carte blanch, however it still serves to remove an important aspect in preventing the government from gaining access to your personal information. At worst it infringes on one's right to privacy, at best it's a complete waste of time. It's not difficult for the Federal Government to paint someone as a risk to national security and start monitoring his/her personal information.

Let's be blunt, the removal of Warrants in due process is what worries me most. They can neuter the bill as much as they want, as I said before at best it's a complete waste of time.