Tag Archives: net neutrality

Reply from Senator Inhofe – CISPA

Posted on by

By Jay Hansen

This is Senator Jim Inhofe’s response to my letter I wrote him about CISPA (the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act), which you can read here. Say what you want about Senator Inhofe, he’s probably the most prompt politician I’ve ever even heard of. I wrote him on May 3rd, and received a response on May 7th. He also responded to my previous letters very quickly.

Summary: Senator Inhofe did not address CISPA at all in his reply, exactly as he did when I asked him of SOPA in the previously linked correspondence. He did, however, mention related legislation such as The Cybersecurity Act of 2012 and the SECURE IT Act, but even still did not give comment on this legislation. He said should this or similar legislation reach the Senate floor, he will “keep [my] views in mind,” and that he “will continue to support efforts to strengthen  cybersecurity defenses while importantly promoting the free flow of commerce and information on the Internet.”

To give just a little commentary here, his letter is almost identically structured and worded as his response to my letter about SOPA, with virtually no specifications about the legislation about which I actually asked. With SOPA, this was apparently because Inhofe was undecided how to publicly approach the legislation, or possibly undecided on it altogether. Given that, it’s entirely possible Inhofe may soon be against CISPA, or at the very least, given that he said nothing to the affect of CISPA in his reply, he’s undecided on the issue.

Full Text:

Dear Mr. Hansen:

Thank you for contacting me regarding  cybersecurity in the United States. As your voice in Washington D.C., I appreciate hearing from you.

Cyber attacks on the federal government continue to increase.  In 2011, out of the total 107,655 attacks reported, 43,889 were aimed at federal departments and agencies.  As new high-tech dangers emerge, we must be prepared to defend against both domestic and foreign hackers who wish to do harm to the United States.

Several bills were introduced in the 112th Congress to address these increasing  cybersecurity threats.  On February 16, 2012, Senator Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) and Senator Susan Collins (R- ME   )   introduced S. 2105, the  Cybersecurity Act of 2012.  This legislation requires the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the private sector owners and operators of critical infrastructure, to conduct risk assessments to determine which sectors are subject to the greatest and most immediate cyber risks.  It authorizes DHS, with the private sector, to determine  cybersecurity performance requirements based upon the risk assessments, and issue regulations to ensure they are met. The performance requirements would cover critical infrastructure systems and assets whose disruption could result in severe degradation of national security, catastrophic economic damage, or the interruption of life-sustaining services sufficient to cause mass casualties or mass evacuations.

The bill is designed to cover the most critical systems and assets in a given sector, and only if they are not already being appropriately secured. Some critical infrastructure is already required to adhere to very high standards by their oversight agency. Lastly, this bill provides a framework for the sharing of cyber threat information between the federal government and the private sector, and within the private sector.

Additionally, on March 1, 2012, Senator John McCain (R-AZ) introduced the SECURE IT Act, which encourages voluntary information-sharing between the government and private sectors but includes no requirements for securing privately owned critical infrastructure.

  Should either of these bills be considered by the Senate during the 112th Congress or a new consolidated bill come to the Senate floor, I will certainly keep your views in mind.  Please know that I will continue to support efforts to strengthen  cybersecurity defenses while importantly promoting the free flow of commerce and information on the Internet.

Thank you again for your correspondence. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future with any other concerns or comments you may have.

Sincerely,

James M. Inhofe
United States Senator

Reply from Senator Inhofe – Stop Online Piracy Act

Posted on by

By Jay Hansen

This is Senator Jim Inhofe’s response to my letter I wrote him about SOPA (the Stop Online Piracy Act), which you can read here. I will not add commentary on the letter or Senator Inhofe’s statements at this time. To be fair to the Senator, I received this e-mail Tuesday, January 3rd, while my website was down, and am only just now getting around to publishing it.

Summary: Senator Inhofe did not address SOPA at all in his reply. He did, however, comment on the PROTECT IP Act (Preventing Real Online Threat to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act), a very similar bill in the Senate. He claims he is “monitoring” the PROTECT IP Act, but says nothing about his personal opposition or favor of the legislation. He does, however, highlight the reasoning behind it, and the massive criticisms of it. He says nothing to counter or absolve those criticisms.

Full Text:

Dear Mr. Hansen:

Thank you for contacting me regarding the Preventing Real Online Threat to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act (PROTECT IP). As your voice in Washington D.C., I appreciate being made aware of your views.

As you are aware, the Internet has become a central part of the American economy. The Internet allows us, as American citizens to use the free flow of information. However, the free flow of information has created problems with copyright and trademark infringements. It is estimated that the unauthorized sale of copyrighted and counterfeit goods costs the U.S. billions of dollars per year, and results in the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs.

In an effort to combat online piracy, S. 968, the PROTECT IP Act was introduced on May 12, 2011.  The Senate is scheduled to vote on a procedural motion to begin consideration of the bill on January 24, 2012.  The act seeks to protect the investments American companies make in developing brands and creating new content, while protecting those jobs associated with it.  The Act will also protect American consumers guaranteeing that goods purchased online are the exact type and quality they expect.  Lastly, this act restricts access to foreign sites promoting infringement or the sale of counterfeit providers located in the United States.

Numerous concerns have been raised regarding provision of the Protect IP Act. First, some lawmakers are concerned with the broad definition of the “Internet” in the bill. They feel as if the broadness of the definition could infringe our freedom of speech, by giving government the ability to regulate, and in some instances block access to, the Internet. Secondly, concerns have been raised that suggest the bill may affect the integrity of the Internet, affecting the internet’s reliability, security, and performance. Lastly, some lawmakers are concerned that content owners will use private rights of actions to stifle Internet innovation and protect outdated business models, disrupting the traditional business model for reasons having nothing to do with infringement.

I am glad you took the time to let me know just how important this issue is to you and to explain your thoughts and concerns. As your Senator, I seek to ensure that Oklahoma’s values and needs are priorities here in Washington.

I will continue to monitor this legislation, and again, thank you for sharing your concerns.

Sincerely,

James M. Inhofe
United States Senator

SOPA & The End of the Internet

Posted on by

By Jay Hansen
(Originally published November 30th, 2011)

Here I had a cool piece to write about Ron Paul when suddenly this bombshell gets dropped at my extremely sick feet. I had to write about this issue right away because it’s so important to me, and to all of us. The House is currently considering a piece of legislation called SOPA, Stop Online Piracy Act. This one piece of legislation could single-handedly end the internet as we know it.

SOPA’s original purpose was to help protect copyrighted material on the internet, and fight against piracy of music, movies, and other intellectual property. The problem is though, the language in the bill is so vague, and the power of the government to regulate the internet within this bill is so broad, it makes the Net Neutrality argument look like nothing in comparison. The bill states that a simple allegation of piracy against a website, any website, is enough to start the process of shutting down the website. The Justice Department then simply has to deem the website as “rogue,” and they will be able to issue a court order to internet service providers, search engines, financial networks, and ad networks, to have the “rogue” site cut off.

Worse yet, the word “rogue” is defined so vaguely in the bill that it could include any website that allows people to participate – commenting, uploading, posting, anything. That would include Youtube, Twitter, Facebook, Digg, Reddit, and much more. For example, if someone posted a short FOX News clip on youtube to make commentary on it, which is legal (for now), and someone, anyone, reported it as copyrighted, the Justice Department could shut down the entirety of Youtube. But even just for websites allowing comments, all it would take is for someone to post a comment with a link to a different website that contains pirated material somewhere on it (not even a link to pirated material itself) and that comment can be reported, the entire website flagged as rogue, and thus, shut down. Even search engines would be at risk of being shut down via this court order if their search results pulled up a website that had pirated material on it. Google, then, would have to “police” the internet, the entire internet, for any website with pirated material and cut off that site from popping up on their search engine, or risk being declared rogue and the entire company of Google being shut down.

Obviously, the level of moderation that would be required to prevent shut down is impossible. Imagine this; under this bill, one person could post a comment on a website with a link to another website that had pirated material. That same person can report the comment, and the process will then start for a court order to be issued by the Justice Department for the website to be shut down.

This bill is a troll-pocalypse, giving internet trolls the almighty power to shut down a website whenever they want.

This is governmental overregulation at its worst. Small internet businesses wouldn’t stand a chance because of the legal bills associated with just trying to combat allegations of being a rogue site. Commentary and social networking cites could be shut down within days of this bill passing, ending communication via the internet altogether. Large companies would dominate the internet, something of which they’ve dreamt for decades, and it gives the government the power to pull the plug on pretty much any website they don’t like.

The worst part is that SOPA has massive bipartisan support. Republicans favor the bill, obviously, because it will let them crush the internet as they’ve always wanted to do, and supports the largest corporations by helping them become monopolies. Democrats support the bill, sadly, because their largest financial backers support it. Two of the largest financial supporters of the Democratic Party are Hollywood Studios, who have massive profit-motive in stopping piracy at all costs, and trial lawyers, who have massive profit-motive in the amount of litigation, and thus business for them, that would inevitably come from this bill. If that weren’t enough, Pharmaceutical companies, one of the top three donors to both political parties and a primary source of corruption in politics, have also pitched in their support for this legislation because some websites sell cheaper drugs or those from other countries like Canada, which is does violate a Pharmaceutical company’s copyright on a particular drug. Thanks to the Obama administration, American Pharmaceutical companies hold 12-year patents on drugs, making them monopolies for each individual drug they produce.

Which is the last bit of bad news about SOPA; the Obama Administration fully supports it. I’ve been at odds and found myself frustrated with the President in the past on things like the budget battles, the Bush Tax Cuts, and Health Care Reform, among other issues, but this goes far beyond simple frustration. Protection of the internet is one of the most vital issues of our day, behind only campaign finance reform, and even still it’s not behind by much, so I do not make my next statement easily, nor is it to be taken lightly or dismissed. If Obama fights against the great equalizer that is internet, which he seems to be doing, then he may have officially lost my vote in 2012.

Already a similar bill has passed the Senate out of committee, and the House is considering the legislation and almost certain to pass it given its wide support, but we do have some people on our side. Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon has created an online petition I encourage everyone to sign, stating your opposition to this and similar legislation. Wyden has gone on to promise a filibuster against this legislation once it reaches the floor. Most promising, though, is that we do have some big money on our side. Obviously, virtually all internet-based companies are strongly opposed to this bill. Google, Facebook, Ebay, Twitter, and many more have vowed opposition to this bill, and like all companies and corporations, they have access to lobbyists and politicians they keep in their back pocket. I always feel a little sick when our only hope at stopping something is the very same source that is responsible for the corruption within our government, but this issue is so important I’ll take all the help we can get. On top of all that, a massive, massive majority of American voters are opposed to the bill; liberal and conservative voters alike. Even many Tea Party members are opposed to this bill.

It’s going to be an uphill battle to stop this legislation, but we need to do everything we can. Like Senator Wyden says, sign his petition, write your representatives in Washington, call their offices, speak out against it, do everything you can. The internet must be protected. As I said, protection of the internet is the second most important issue in America today, behind only campaign finance reform, as the internet is the great equalizer. Small, local businesses are held on par with massive multi-national corporations. Individual bloggers and commentators such as myself are given roughly the same exposure as massive media outlets like FOX News. This is what drives corporations insane about the internet, and why they’re so desperate to gain control of it. SOPA will let them do that, and be the end of the internet as we know it. We must not let this happen. Be sure to sign Wyden’s petition linked above, and may God help us all.