eff

Rogers’ 'Cybersecurity' Bill Is Broad Enough to Use Against WikiLeaks and The Pirate Bay

Congress is doing it again: they’re proposing overbroad regulations that could have dire consequences for our Internet ecology. The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act of 2011 (H.R. 3523), introduced by Rep. Mike Rogers and Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger, allows companies or the government1 free rein to bypass existing laws in order to monitor communications, filter content, or potentially even shut down access to online services for “cybersecurity purposes.” Companies are encouraged to share data with the government and with one another, and the government can share data in return. The idea is to facilitate detection of and defense against a serious cyber threat, but the definitions in the bill go well beyond that. The language is so broad it could be used as a blunt instrument to attack websites like The Pirate Bay or WikiLeaks. Join EFF in calling on Congress to stop the Rogers’ cybersecurity bill.

Read more: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/03/rogers-cybersecurity-bill-broad-enough-use-against-wikileaks-and-pirate-bay

Stop the 'Stop Online Piracy Act' (SOPA)

Given the threat to free speech, information and the internet as we know it today, I'm submitting this EFF update regarding the 'Stop Online Piracy Act' or SOPA - if you oppose this bill and haven't called your representatives yet, please do. See this EFF page for contact info and talking points: https://wfc2.wiredforchange.com/o/9042/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=8173 - loose nuke:

Blacklist Bills Ripe for Abuse, Part I: "Market-Based" Systems by Parker Higgins

Proponents of the misguided Internet blacklist legislation — the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the PROTECT IP Act (PIPA) — downplay the idea that the overbroad bills could be used for censorship. But one only needs to look at the way existing copyright laws have been abused to know there’s serious cause for concern.

From shocking examples of government censorship without due process through domain name seizure, as we've seen with both Rojadirecta and now with the yearlong saga of Dajaz1.org (which we address in the second post in this series), to bogus DMCA takedowns and actual litigation, the message is clear: the government and corporations have no problem abusing legal process to threaten or shut down legitimate speech.

France Declares Three Strikes Unconstitutional

Source: Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), June 10th, 2009
Commentary by Danny O'Brien

Before legislation becomes law in France, it must pass the muster of the Conseil Constitutionnel: a group of jurists who determine whether each new law is consistent with the principles and rules of France's constitution.

For the passage of Sarkozy's unpopular "three strikes" HADOPI legislation, the approval of the Conseil was the final hurdle to cross. If the council had approved the law, rightsholders in France would have been able to cast French citizens off the Internet with no judicial oversight, simply by alleging to the new HADOPI administrative body that they were repeat copyright infringers. These citizens would then have their names added to a national Internet blacklist for up to a year, and ISPs would be subject to financial penalties if they gave these exiles access to the Internet.

Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF): Surveillance Self-Defense site

The Electronic Frontier Foundation has launched a "Surveillance Self-Defense" website to educate the public about what the US govt. might be doing to surveil you, and what you can do about it.

Obama voted for the warrantless wiretapping/Telco immunity bill, and seems to be completely disinterested in investigating the Bush Administration's admitted criminal actions.

https://ssd.eff.org/

FBI Backs Off From Secret Order for Data After Lawsuit (Internet Archive)

Was this for your info, 911veritas?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/07/AR2008050703808.html

The FBI has withdrawn a secret administrative order seeking the name, address and online activity of a patron of the Internet Archive after the San Francisco-based digital library filed suit to block the action.

It is one of only three known instances in which the FBI has backed off from such a data demand, known as a "national security letter," or NSL, which is not subject to judicial approval and whose recipient is barred from disclosing the order's existence.

NSLs are served on phone companies, Internet service providers and other electronic communications service providers, but because of the gag order provision, the public has little way to know about them. Their use soared after the September 2001 terrorist attacks, when Congress relaxed the standard for their issuance. FBI officials now issue about 50,000 such orders a year.