CISPA Worse Than SOPA

KRSOne

Registered User
Dec 8, 2011
12,955
2,963
258
Sunnydale
#1
Online protests to controversial CISPA bill begin, amid changes

Industry groups attempted to corral the growing Internet protest against a proposed cybersecurity bill Monday, announcing what could spell tweaks to the wording of a bill that some call far too vague -- and a real threat to online privacy.

The Business Software Alliance and the Center for Democracy and Technology met Monday, Apr. 16, to discuss the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA), a new bill intended to regulate the flow of information online and make it easier for the government to communicate with companies in the event of a cyber threat.

“We agreed that the definition of what constitutes cyber threat information could benefit from sharpening,” the software alliance said in a statement. “We also discussed clarifying limitations on how threat information will be handled and used by government.”

Cyberwatchdogs may be slow to accept such tweaks, on the cusp of Stop Cyber Spying Week, an Internet-wide protest launched Monday leading up to the Apr. 23 vote on CISPA (HR 3523).
They argue that the bill itself is the real cyber threat.
“CISPA is likely to lead to expansion of the government’s role in the monitoring of private communications,” warned the Center for Democracy and Technology, and “is likely to shift control of government cybersecurity efforts from civilian agencies to the military.”

The Electronic Freedom Foundation and Reporters Without Borders agree, the later noting that this bill sacrifices freedom of expression and the protection of online privacy “in the interests of national security or copyright.”

CISPA is sponsored by Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich.., and Rep. C.A. Ruppersberger, D-Md. They claim it’s meant to prohibit Washington from forcing private companies to hand over information and to help American businesses protect their computer networks and intellectual property from cyber attacks.
And unlike the widely maligned SOPA legislation -- a bill meant to stop online privacy that led many sites to threaten Internet blackouts in protest -- CISPA has many backers, including Microsoft and Facebook.

“HR 3523 would impose no new obligations on us to share data with anyone,” wrote Joel Kaplan, vice president-U.S. Public Policy for Facebook. “And it ensures that if we do share data about specific cyber threats, we are able to continue to safeguard our users’ private information, just as we do today.”
The Electronic Freedom Foundation begs to differ.

“Kaplan assured users that Facebook has 'no intention' of sharing private user data with the government,” wrote Rainey Reitman, activism director with the not-for-profit watchdog group.

“But let’s be clear: Internet users don’t want promises from companies … we want strong laws that make such egregious privacy violations illegal.”
 

jsc315

AnalCunt
Dec 8, 2004
2,022
50
313
Evergreen Park,IL
#2
I may not agree with much of anything you say Kirk but this is very true. How this is not a few pages at the least is telling that people dont care. SOPA was big because it was very obvious what was wrong with it. This bill is very clever and is worded very carefully into not say anything direct and yet really vague. This little article is just a spec of what CISPA is all about.
 

KRSOne

Registered User
Dec 8, 2011
12,955
2,963
258
Sunnydale
#4
My favorite part is facebook saying they value their customers privacy and would never share it with the government unless it was for safety. Even though its facebook that is pushing for a internet ID to get online and Zuckerberg is the guy that called people dumb fucks for trusting him with their personal info.
 

LiddyRules

I'm Gonna Be The Bestest Pilot In The Whole Galaxy
Jun 1, 2005
141,468
49,794
644
#6
I think it's more telling how much of a retard everyone thinks Kirk is. If anybody else would have started this thread it would definitely be a few pages by now.
Just seeing it's a Kirk post makes me think "what did Alex Jones take out of context now."
 

KRSOne

Registered User
Dec 8, 2011
12,955
2,963
258
Sunnydale
#7
I think it's more telling how much of a retard everyone thinks Kirk is. If anybody else would have started this thread it would definitely be a few pages by now.
That must be why my truth thread is over 200 pages long.
 

Konstantin K

Big League Poster
Aug 25, 2010
15,784
3,875
273
#9
CISPA is a way less snazzy name than SOPA. So there's that.
 
Jan 25, 2006
33,635
4,413
578
Saint Louis
#11
How does this affect my porn and music?
Even with the last bill, and shutdown of different sites, I'm unaffected really...
 

The Godfather

Spark it up for The Godfather and say!!!!!
May 9, 2007
11,256
10
163
#13
[video=youtube;AA7QgMHuN4w]http://www.youtube.com/watch?&v=AA7QgMHuN4w[/video]
 

Party Rooster

Unleash The Beast
Apr 27, 2005
40,304
7,454
438
The Inland Empire State
#14
*Update*

Passed the House...

CISPA cybersecurity bill passes House 248 to 168

April 26, 2012
By Andrew Couts

The House of Representatives has passed the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act with a vote of 248 to 168.

Following hours of debate, the controversial Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, better known as CISPA, easily passed the House of Representatives this evening with a vote of 248 for, 168 against. The vote was primarily along party lines, with Democrats mostly voting against the legislation.

Prior to the CISPA’s passage, House Members approved a number of amendments, many of which provide further limits on what types of private information may be shared under the bill, as well as more narrow definitions of “cyber threat intelligence,” among others. All amendments backed by CISPA authors Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI) and Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD) were approved.

Despite these amendments, civil liberties advocates are still unhappy with the bill, saying that it continues to threaten individual privacy. Some even believe the bill is now more dangerous, as it includes a provision that allows information shared under the bill to be used for law enforcement purposes outside the realm of “cybersecurity” or “national security.”

The future of CISPA remains uncertain. It now moves on to the Senate, where it will likely face greater opposition than it did in the House. Moreover, the Obama administration on Wednesday threatened to veto CISPA if it does not include greater protections for privacy and for critical national infrastructure, like electrical grids and water supply systems.

The Senate is expected to take up CISPA debate sometime next month.

We will have more details soon, as they become available.

http://www.digitaltrends.com/web/cispa-cybersecurity-bill-passes-house-248-to-168/#
 

KRSOne

Registered User
Dec 8, 2011
12,955
2,963
258
Sunnydale
#16
I guess we know why SOPA didn't pass. They wanted something worse and now the media is ignoring it.
 

Hoffman

Guess who's back? Hoffman's back
Sep 28, 2006
34,674
2,022
458
Northern VA
#17
I guess we know why SOPA didn't pass. They wanted something worse and now the media is ignoring it.
The only problem with your little theory here is that the President is going to veto the bill Kirk. The media HAS reported on CIPSA and the vote on it was pretty much split on party lines. YES, it passed the House...but sometimes (as in this case) it means jack shit.
 

KRSOne

Registered User
Dec 8, 2011
12,955
2,963
258
Sunnydale
#18
The only problem with your little theory here is that the President is going to veto the bill Kirk. The media HAS reported on CIPSA and the vote on it was pretty much split on party lines. YES, it passed the House...but sometimes (as in this case) it means jack shit.
What a sucker. Obama said he was going to veto NDAA also but he only said that so people wouldn't make a fuss about it and when it came time to veto it he didn't. How many times will you believe his lies?
 

Hate & Discontent

Yo, homie. Is that my briefcase?
Aug 22, 2005
15,777
1,343
628
#19
What a sucker. Obama said he was going to veto NDAA also but he only said that so people wouldn't make a fuss about it and when it came time to veto it he didn't. How many times will you believe his lies?
Once again, you act like NDAA was PURELY about detention of US citizens, when it wasn't. If Obama HAD vetoed it, the Republicans would have had Obama's ass for not approving the military budget. If he didn't, he gets chewed for allowing indefinite detention.

Blame the people that added the indefinite detention amendment to NDAA. Blame the Democrats for not passing a real budget in years, and instead using continuing resolutions to avoid real work.
 

KRSOne

Registered User
Dec 8, 2011
12,955
2,963
258
Sunnydale
#20
Once again, you act like NDAA was PURELY about detention of US citizens, when it wasn't. If Obama HAD vetoed it, the Republicans would have had Obama's ass for not approving the military budget. If he didn't, he gets chewed for allowing indefinite detention.

Blame the people that added the indefinite detention amendment to NDAA. Blame the Democrats for not passing a real budget in years, and instead using continuing resolutions to avoid real work.
Another sucker. I don't care what was in the bill, signing something that completely changes the legal system and allows Americans to be imprisoned without trial should never be signed. His signing statement was pretty much a little threat saying you better vote for me again or else the next guy will imprison you without a trial.

Obama said after, that the reason he was going to veto it is because it didn't give the executive branch enough power. So they changed it and gave the executive branch enough power. Everyone thought. 'oh hes going to veto it because it takes away the right to a trial', but no he didn't like it because it didn't give the executive enough power. Another Obama cultist fail.
 

Hate & Discontent

Yo, homie. Is that my briefcase?
Aug 22, 2005
15,777
1,343
628
#21
Another sucker. I don't care what was in the bill, signing something that completely changes the legal system and allows Americans to be imprisoned without trial should never be signed. His signing statement was pretty much a little threat saying you better vote for me again or else the next guy will imprison you without a trial.

Obama said after, that the reason he was going to veto it is because it didn't give the executive branch enough power. So they changed it and gave the executive branch enough power. Everyone thought. 'oh hes going to veto it because it takes away the right to a trial', but no he didn't like it because it didn't give the executive enough power. Another Obama cultist fail.
Hey, fucknuts, you're calling the wrong poster an "Obama cultist." Maybe you should go back and look at my post history.
 

KRSOne

Registered User
Dec 8, 2011
12,955
2,963
258
Sunnydale
#22
Hey, fucknuts, you're calling the wrong poster an "Obama cultist." Maybe you should go back and look at my post history.
You are defending Obama for signing away the right to a trial. That sounds like someone that is a part of the cult, to me.
 

Kicked Frisky

I don't care about you
Apr 16, 2008
1,102
54
183
#23
How does this affect my porn and music?
Even with the last bill, and shutdown of different sites, I'm unaffected really...
If you're "unaffected" you either don't do enough downloading on the internet or you forgot how things were the week before all those assholes were cheering their pathetic blackout "victory". Pinching Kim Dotcom changed EVERYTHING as far as fileservers go, and they did that without SOPA & PIPA. Even right now the always reliable Stream site I watch is down, and was down last night as well. It's only going to get worse.
 

Party Rooster

Unleash The Beast
Apr 27, 2005
40,304
7,454
438
The Inland Empire State
#24
You are defending Obama for signing away the right to a trial. That sounds like someone that is a part of the cult, to me.
How much you want to bet this doesn't pass and/or Obama doesn't sign it? Loser never posts on Wackbag again. You game?
 

Hoffman

Guess who's back? Hoffman's back
Sep 28, 2006
34,674
2,022
458
Northern VA
#25
You are defending Obama for signing away the right to a trial. That sounds like someone that is a part of the cult, to me.
Your idea of defending Obama and the TSA is rather odd.