Showing posts with label SOPA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label SOPA. Show all posts

House passes CISPA bill

Politico
April 27, 2012



John Boehner is shown. | POLITICO Staff
Speaker Boehner said that the White House was in 'a camp all by themselves.' | POLITICO Staff
The House passed the controversial CISPA cybersecurity bill on Thursday, defying a White House veto threat and throwing the issue squarely into the Senate’s lap.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) said the bill was “needed to prepare for countries like Iran and North Korea so that they don’t do something catastrophic to our networks here in America.”
The final tally was 248-168, enough to pass the measure but not enough to override the threatened veto. Forty-two Democrats broke with the White House to vote for the bill, and 28 Republicans voted against it.
The administration and Democratic critics opposed the bill because of privacy and civil liberties concerns. The other main sticking point was that, unlike a Senate bill by Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), CISPA would not mandate new security requirements for a critical infrastructure network.
Although those disagreements still exist, House Republicans have now jumped ahead of the Senate in a race to avoid the political fallout in the event of a major cyberattack.
At least some of CISPA’s Democratic supporters weren’t happy with their colleagues’ opposition to the bill, nor with the White House.


ACTA explained

You Tube
January 29, 2012



ACTA is one more offensive against the sharing of culture on the Internet. ACTA (Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement) is an agreement secretly negotiated by a small “club” of like-minded countries (39 countries, including the 27 of the European Union, the United States, Japan, etc). Negotiated instead of being democratically debated, ACTA bypasses parliaments and international organizations to dictate a repressive logic dictated by the entertainment industries.

ACTA would impose new criminal sanctions forcing Internet actors to monitor and censor online communications. It is thus a major threat to freedom of expression online and creates legal uncertainty for Internet companies. In the name of trademarks and patents, it would also hamper access to generic medicines in poor countries.

Obama Signs Global Internet Treaty Worse Than SOPA


White House bypasses Senate to ink agreement that could allow Chinese companies to demand ISPs remove web content in US with no legal oversight
Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Months before the debate about Internet censorship raged as SOPA and PIPA dominated the concerns of web users, President Obama signed an international treaty that would allow companies in China or any other country in the world to demand ISPs remove web content in the US with no legal oversight whatsoever.

The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement was signed by Obama on October 1 2011, yet is currently the subject of a White House petition demanding Senators be forced to ratify the treaty. The White House has circumvented the necessity to have the treaty confirmed by lawmakers by presenting it an as “executive agreement,” although legal scholars have highlighted the dubious nature of this characterization.
The hacktivist group Anonymous attacked and took offline the Federal Trade Commission’s website yesterday in protest against the treaty, which was also the subject ofdemonstrations across major cities in Poland, a country set to sign the agreement today.
Under the provisions of ACTA, copyright holders will be granted sweeping direct powers to demand ISPs remove material from the Internet on a whim. Whereas ISPs normally are only forced to remove content after a court order, all legal oversight will be abolished, a precedent that will apply globally, rendering the treaty worse in its potential scope for abuse than SOPA or PIPA.

Bill Killed: SOPA death celebrated as Congress recalls anti-piracy acts


RT
January 21, 2012
A controversial American anti-piracy act was recalled on Friday, which came as no small victory for hacktivists who launched history’s largest attack on several websites – including that of FBI – in protest of the Stop Online Piracy Act.
Those opposing the controversial law have grown jubilant, with many seeing Friday’s news as real victory in a sort of war for online freedom. The vote on the anti-piracy legislation, which was due on January, 24, has been postponed.
The words of House of Representatives Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith – who was the chief sponsor of SOPA – came as a bombshell: he stated that American legislators would delay action on similar proposals until the matter is more widely agreed upon.
“I have heard from the critics, and I take seriously their concerns regarding proposed legislation to address the problem of online piracy,” Smith said. “It is clear that we need to revisit the approach on how best to address the problem of foreign thieves that steal and sell American inventions and products.”
“The Committee will continue work with copyright owners, Internet companies, and financial institutions to develop proposals that combat online piracy and protect America’s intellectual property.”
He said in a statement that the Judiciary Committee welcomes input “from all organizations and individuals who have an honest difference of opinion about how best to address this widespread problem.”
Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid (D-NV) said that he decision was taken “in light of recent events.”

Wikipedia to go dark Wednesday in protest against SOPA, PIPA


USA Today
January 17, 2012

Joining the protest against two proposed federal Internet regulation bills, Wikipedia's English-language site will be blacked out for all of Wednesday, co-founder Jimmy Wales announced on Twitter today.
Beginning at midnight ET on Jan. 18, visitors will see a protest message for 24 hours, Wales tweeted. The move will affect 30 million to 40 million users, he said, correcting an initial figure of 100 million.
"This is going to be wow," read one of his tweets.
Wikipedia and several other sites are calling on lawmakers to block the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and Protect Intellectual Property Act (PIPA). They are concerned the laws will "hold website owners liable for links to sources of illegal music and movie downloading, with a detrimental effect on free speech online," The Financial Times reports.
Reddit and the Cheezburger network, which includes such sites as The Daily What and Fail Blog, also plan to shut down to protest SOPA, The Washington Post  reports. The document service Scribd already made a billion pages vanish in protest, the Post says.
Craigslist posted a message to all its users explaining it and other websites' opposition to the bills.

SOPA - The Sleeping Giant

SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS!!!
Mark Matheny
January 17, 2012


Mark Matheny discusses the recent move to shelve SOPA by the White house, and the dangers of the bill should it be resurrected.



Listen to internet radio with Mark Matheny on Blog Talk Radio

Will The Internet Shutdown on Jan. 23, 2012?

SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS!!!
Mark Matheny
January 17, 2012

There are concerns that the Internet may be shut down on January 23, due to the SOPA bill. Is there a need to worry?

An article posted 5 days ago on Buzzfeed states:
Congress is about to vote on the Stop Online Piracy Act, which could give the government power to shut down any website with copyrighted content. Google, Yahoo, Facebook and Amazon are considering a day of blackout to protest the “Stop Online Piracy Act” or SOPA
First off, let's look at SOPA. It stands for Stop Online Piracy Act.

This Bill is also known as HR 3261, and was introduced back on October 26, 2011 by House Judiciary Committee Chair Representative Lamar Smith (R-TX) and a bipartisan group of 12 initial co-sponsors.
The bill itself states in the introduction that its purpose is: 
To promote prosperity, creativity, entrepreneurship, and innovation by combating the theft of U.S. property, and for other purposes.
 According to an article at PC World,
The bill, called SOPA, would allow the U.S. Department of Justice and copyright holders to seek court orders requiring online advertising networks, payment processors and other organizations to stop payments to websites and Web-based services accused of copyright infringement.
Proponents of the Bill argue that they are simply trying to protect the intellectual  property market  and corresponding industry, jobs and revenue, and this bill is necessary to bolster enforcement of copyright laws, especially against foreign websites.


According to the Washington Post, this bill would protect artists' intellectual property, and basically make it harder for internet users to download free versions of their content, by directing users to purchase the content instead. The article shows that among those supporting the bill are powerful groups of lobbyists  including the Motion Picture Association of America, pharmaceuticals makers, media firms and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.


However, as they say, for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. And there are plenty of groups and individuals who are in opposition to this bill. Among those groups opposing is a group called NetCoalition,  a group that represents Web firms and various public interest groups who opposed to the law.


The Director of NetCoalition, Markham C. Erickson stated, "Inexplicably, and almost overnight, SOPA has morphed into a full-on assault against lawful U.S. Internet companies." Other opponents of the Bill argue that this bill could put severe restrictions on blogsites and other alternative websites, as well as You Tube account users. "The intention is not the same as China’s Great Firewall, a nationwide system of Web censorship, but the practical effect could be similar", stated Journalist Rebecca MacKinnon, who formerly worked for CNN, and is now a blogger and co-founder of Global Voices Online. 


The other concern is that search engines such as Google, Yahoo and Twitter for example may block sites which are deemed to be "offensive". 


According to Electronic Frontier Foundation, under this bill:
.. service providers (including hosting services) would be under new pressure to monitor and police their users’ activities.  Websites that simply don’t do enough to police infringement (and it is not at all clear what would qualify as “enough”) are now under threat, even though the DMCA expressly does not require affirmative policing.  It creates new enforcement tools against folks who dare to help users access sites that may have been “blacklisted,” even without any kind of court hearing. The bill also requires that search engines, payment providers (such as credit card companies and PayPal), and advertising services join in the fun in shutting down entire websites.  In fact, the bill seems mainly aimed at creating an end-run around the DMCA safe harbors. Instead of complying with the DMCA, a copyright owner may now be able to use these new provisions to effectively shut down a site by cutting off access to its domain name, its search engine hits, its ads, and its other financing even if the safe harbors would apply. 
Recently Presidential Candidate Ron Paul condemned SOPA during a speech while out campaigning:


" Freedom really has been tested over such a short period, when you look at six thousand years of human history. Most of history has been tyrants, dictators and kings and pharaohs and... governments telling people how to live. So we have this wonderful test and the greatest prosperity, and we're losing it.
This is why I fear the economic crisis coming, this is why I fear this endless militancy overseas, this is why I fear the underminig of the protection of our rights here at home. There's a bill now... the Stop Online Piracy Act. They want to takeover the Internet! I mean can you imagine how...much we're going to be curtailed in the spreading of our information if we lose the internet? But there's a bill ... that's supposedly going to stop privacy, but actually what it's going to do is take over the internet, and be able to... restrict everybody in what they do, and monitor everything we do on the internet."
Infowars Nightly News has also reported on the unconstitutionality of this bill:




According to Buzzfeed  there have been calls for a day of "Blackout", and among those Companies considering this are Google, Face Book, Yahoo, and Amazon. "Anonomous" has called for a day of blackout as well in a You Tube video, as well as providing flyers that can be passed out and hung.

It appears however, that recently that the SOPA bill has been given a threat of Veto by the White House administration according to SHTF plan.com. The article states in part:

Though the administration did issue a formal veto threat, the White House’s opposition signaled the end of these bills, at least in their current form.A few hours later, Congress shelved SOPA, putting off action on the bill indefinitely.
So at least for now it would appear that the bill is dead in the water, but- It is important to remember that Obama said he would Veto the NDAA bill when it was in his hands as well and later changed his mind. Can we really trust the Administration when they say they will Veto this bill?

It is not apparent whether the Black out scheduled for January 23, 2012 will happen, but one thing is sure - SOPA may be on the shelf for now, but I believe it is not the last we will hear of it.