CISPA

[Sgtusmc]

Dear friend,

The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, or CISPA, is a proposed law that would give companies unprecedented power to hand your personal information from the internet, including from private communications, over to government agencies without a warrant.

When CISPA first showed up last year, we successfully defeated it together--so we need to remind President Obama about this dangerous threat to our personal privacy.

I just signed a petition calling on President Obama to tell Congress he intends to veto CISPA. Will you join me?

https://www.aclu.org/secure/tell-obama-veto-CISPA

Thanks.

 

[bart2278]

It's back again?

 

[BroodXI]

yea, it's back again. they just don't get it.

 

[Expat]

It has been passed out of committee now. I know we are all busy fighting gun control but perhaps everyone can send one more letter off.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/...mmittee-heres-why-new-version-still-threatens

I used the link in the story to send letters to my Senators and Congresswoman. It is easy to do.

Wednesday, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence marked up the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA), the misguided “cybersecurity” bill that would create a gaping exception to existing privacy law while doing little to address palpable and pressing online security issues. The markup was held entirely behind closed doors—even though the issues being considered will have serious effects on the liberty of Internet users—and was passed out of the committee.

The article gives the EFF's analysis of why the bill is bad.

 

[Designer99]

This is what really pisses me off about Congress. They tried this last year, the people overwhelmingly said NO! A year later, they bring it back again.

Did you not hear us the first time? We said NO! Who are you working for?

 

[calcot7]

This is what really pisses me off about Congress. They tried this last year, the people overwhelmingly said NO! A year later, they bring it back again.

Did you not hear us the first time? We said NO! Who are you working for?

I'd say whomever this legislation would benefit.

 

[VikingWarlord]

This is what really pisses me off about Congress. They tried this last year, the people overwhelmingly said NO! A year later, they bring it back again.

Did you not hear us the first time? We said NO! Who are you working for?

They're hoping that all the fresh meat that got sent to Washington in November didn't know that.

ETA: I just sent this to Susan Brooks. At least it's on record that I told her to oppose it.

Rep. Brooks,

The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) is coming back to the floor in the near future. This bill was soundly defeated the last time it was brought before Congress by the people, who overwhelmingly opposed it on the grounds that it expands governmental powers into areas it has no business and violates the Fourth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments.

Giving the government the power to demand information from private companies about its users and customers without a warrant is an overreach of staggering proportions. The fact that the most recent markup meeting was held in secret could not be more telling of just how bad for the people this will be, especially when considering that it does nothing to increase security. The bill was written by people who have no experience or education in telecommunications security and are, therefore, wholly unqualified to pass legislation on it.

Rep. Brooks, I ask that you will vote against anything that violates the right to privacy that the Supreme Court has upheld in Griswold v. Connecticut.

 

[VikingWarlord]

Don't forget that, among all the gun stuff, this is happening. Likely today.

Get on this one too.

 

[VikingWarlord]

In case no one paid attention, this passed the House today 288-127 with 17 not voting.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2013/roll117.xml

 

[JWAS]

I know... this is very bad news. This needs to be rejected in the senate. What were Indiana's votes for this bill?

 

[VikingWarlord]

I know... this is very bad news. This needs to be rejected in the senate. What were Indiana's votes for this bill?

The only ones I looked at were that Carson voted no and Brooks voted yea.

I'm hoping that the extreme partisanship of this bill is going to be of use for once and Reid won't even let it come to a vote because of the Republican support.

ETA: Rokita, Brooks, Young, Walorski, Stutzman, Messer, and Buschon all voted yea. It was a straight party split with Carson and Visclosky voting no.

Wow.

 

[grahamsy2k]

I didn't see any news about it recently... I wonder why

 

[Expat]

So I wrote to Senator Donnelly urging him to oppose it. Here is his response....

April 23, 2013 Dear Mr. Expat, I appreciate the time you took to express your thoughts about cybersecurity. Like you, I am concerned about the potential use of the Internet and telecommunications technology to cause harm to the nation's economic and security interests. Similar to other national security challenges in the post-9/11 era, cyber threats are multi-faceted and lack clearly defined boundaries. The source of cyber intrusions is often difficult to determine, but recent reports indicate that many of these attacks or espionage activities may be sponsored by foreign governments. In light of these findings, we have a responsibility to protect critical networks while we protect civil liberties and individual privacy. Last Congress, in an effort to protect proprietary information stored on domestic cyber networks, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 3523, the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA). I supported this legislation because it gave U.S. businesses the support they need to better protect their customers and networks from a cyber attack, and included provisions to ensure that the private information of American citizens would remain private. This legislation also would have helped to defend our nation's computer networks by making it easier for the federal government and approved U.S. companies to share information about cyber threats and attacks. The 112th Congress ended before the Senate took action on this legislation. Should future legislation concerning cybersecurity come to the floor of the Senate for a vote, I will be sure to keep your thoughts in mind. It is a privilege to represent you and all Hoosiers in the U.S. Senate. Your continued correspondence is welcome and helps me to better represent our state. I encourage you to write, call, or email if my office can ever be of assistance. You can also check out my Facebook page and follow me on Twitter by visiting my website.

 

[lucky4034]

Thanks for bringing up this stuff!

I find these types of threads VERY VALUABLE. I don't keep up with stuff like this, but when its brought to my attention, I am more than happy to send a letter in my name.

So... thank you guys and rep inbound!

 

[rambone]

 

[rambone]

CISPA sponsor, Rep. Mike Rogers says CISPA opponents are "14 year old tweeters in their basement."



[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3htEqpr99lk[/ame]

 

[rambone]

What's wrong with CISPA? (in as few words as possible)

As it's written, CISPA won't protect us from cyber threats, but it will violate our 4th Amendment right to privacy:

1. It lets the government spy on you without a warrant. (read more)

2. It makes it so you can’t even find out about it after the fact. (read more)

3. It makes it so companies can’t be sued when they do illegal things with your data. (read more)

4. It allows corporations to cyber-attack each other and individuals outside of the law. (read more)

5. It makes every privacy policy on the web a moot point, and violates the 4th amendment. (read more)

6. When we say that your information can be shared with "The Government" it's not hyperbole. Federal Agencies from the Fish & Wildlife Service to Amtrak to the NSA could access your data. (read more)

READ MORE: CISPA breaks the 4th Amendment

 

[rambone]

View image: EFFCISPAinfographic

 

[ZombieApocolypse]

Who needs CISPA?

Obama administration bypasses CISPA by secretly allowing Internet surveillance ? RT USA