Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Civil Liberties Groups Speak Out Against CISPA in Lead Up to Hearings

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 113 posts

Re: Civil Liberties Groups Speak Out Against CISPA in Lead Up to Hearings

#71

Post by nitrogen »

tptacek wrote: post #68
nitrogen wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CISPA is simply not about the interests of rightsholders. The commenter to which you are replying did not make that assertion. The mention of IP was an attempt to identify the source of the confusion between cybersecurity and IP rights, not about CISPA specifically. Here's what the parent comment actually claimed: When I look at what's being proposed I see that the government is using its sovereign power to trade awa…

The bill is clearly not about rightsholders, so it is intellectually dishonest to suggest that there is a legitimate concern about power grabs by rightsholders in it. "I watch C-SPAN religiously and they're always talking about IP rights" is not a substitute for reading the bill.

The sentence you quote is referring to the confusion about the bill, not the bill itself. Again, the OP didn't claim that CISPA was about IP.

Re: Civil Liberties Groups Speak Out Against CISPA in Lead Up to Hearings

#72

Post by tptacek »

nitrogen wrote: post #71
tptacek wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bill is clearly not about rightsholders, so it is intellectually dishonest to suggest that there is a legitimate concern about power grabs by rightsholders in it. "I watch C-SPAN religiously and they're always talking about IP rights" is not a substitute for reading the bill.

The sentence you quote is referring to the confusion about the bill, not the bill itself. Again, the OP didn't claim that CISPA was about IP.

I disagree, but I don't think this subthread is important enough to litigate. If he wants to chime in and say "I absolutely am not saying CISPA is part of a scheme that will increase the powers of rightsholders", I'll apologize for mischaracterizing him.

Re: Civil Liberties Groups Speak Out Against CISPA in Lead Up to Hearings

#73

Post by TallGuyShort »

tptacek wrote: post #60
TallGuyShort wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. In my mind, the best possible thing to happen would be a law specifically preventing any American government agency from requiring any company to hand over such information without due process. Sadly, you would think this was already clear enough from the constitution, but there are already enough loop holes that it happens anyway. Another good thing would be for American internet companies to voluntarily adopt a…

CISPA does not require any company to hand over any information to the USG without due process!

I think you're taking the "opposite" in my initial post more literally than I intended. My point was that if the law seeks to violate certain rights to privacy we believe we have, the law being struck down is not the final solution. The final solution if the rights to privacy we believe we have successfully being codified into law to prevent that bad parts from being practical options in the future. I did not mean to imply that each term in CISPA be logically negated and passed into law.

Re: Civil Liberties Groups Speak Out Against CISPA in Lead Up to Hearings

#74

Post by rayiner »

nitrogen wrote: post #63
rayiner wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They've also got politicians who would love to go to their constituents during campaign season and tell them "Look, I supported clean air!" Because there are people who actually care about clean air. > Contrast this to opposing civil liberties restrictions, which can very easily and effectively be spun by political opponents as leaving America open to terror attacks. Supporting environmental legislation is very eas…

The RIAA/MPAA/News Corp/Disney/etc. own the means of communication to the masses. This is changing with the Internet, which is why they are so opposed to Internet-friendly legislation.

So? When have you ever seen them actually use that to push theirn legislative agenda? Tech companies are far more active in using their status to push politics (e.g. SOPA protest).

Re: Civil Liberties Groups Speak Out Against CISPA in Lead Up to Hearings

#75

Post by chc »

rayiner wrote: post #74
nitrogen wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The RIAA/MPAA/News Corp/Disney/etc. own the means of communication to the masses. This is changing with the Internet, which is why they are so opposed to Internet-friendly legislation.

So? When have you ever seen them actually use that to push theirn legislative agenda? Tech companies are far more active in using their status to push politics (e.g. SOPA protest).

Actually, the MPAA have shoved their legislative agenda down the throats of moviegoers for many, many years now. Why do you think there are still people who make the mistake of calling copyright violations "theft" even after billions of bytes have been wasted on that semantic debate? Because a constant stream of propaganda has been devoted to drawing that connection in all of our minds.

Re: Civil Liberties Groups Speak Out Against CISPA in Lead Up to Hearings

#76

Post by nitrogen »

rayiner wrote: post #74
nitrogen wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The RIAA/MPAA/News Corp/Disney/etc. own the means of communication to the masses. This is changing with the Internet, which is why they are so opposed to Internet-friendly legislation.

So? When have you ever seen them actually use that to push theirn legislative agenda? Tech companies are far more active in using their status to push politics (e.g. SOPA protest).

Pushing their agenda: "You wouldn't download a car"?

Not covering other agendas: basically any news agency ever that only covers one side of a story (e.g. anti-gun-control news stations only reporting positive gun news, pro-gun-control stations only reporting negative gun news, no news stations reporting on anything outside the viewer-driving manufactured hot button issues). Another example, though this is an isolated case, there was a station in Nevada during the 2008 campaign season that only showed the polling numbers of their selected candidates, even though another candidate was polling higher than some of the ones they listed.

Re: Civil Liberties Groups Speak Out Against CISPA in Lead Up to Hearings

#77

Post by meric »

tptacek wrote: post #60
TallGuyShort wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. In my mind, the best possible thing to happen would be a law specifically preventing any American government agency from requiring any company to hand over such information without due process. Sadly, you would think this was already clear enough from the constitution, but there are already enough loop holes that it happens anyway. Another good thing would be for American internet companies to voluntarily adopt a…

CISPA does not require any company to hand over any information to the USG without due process!

He isn't saying CISPA should be opposed, but rather, additional specific legislation to protect individual's data from being retrieved by the government without due process.

Re: Civil Liberties Groups Speak Out Against CISPA in Lead Up to Hearings

#78

Post by tptacek »

meric wrote: post #77
tptacek wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CISPA does not require any company to hand over any information to the USG without due process!

He isn't saying CISPA should be opposed, but rather, additional specific legislation to protect individual's data from being retrieved by the government without due process.

But that is already unlawful.

Re: Civil Liberties Groups Speak Out Against CISPA in Lead Up to Hearings

#79

Post by rayiner »

chc wrote: post #75
rayiner wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So? When have you ever seen them actually use that to push theirn legislative agenda? Tech companies are far more active in using their status to push politics (e.g. SOPA protest).

Actually, the MPAA have shoved their legislative agenda down the throats of moviegoers for many, many years now. Why do you think there are still people who make the mistake of calling copyright violations "theft" even after billions of bytes have been wasted on that semantic debate? Because a constant stream of propaganda has been devoted to drawing that connection in all of our minds.

What "constant stream of propaganda?" I've never seen a movie that tells me to think of copyright violation as "theft." Indeed, the standard "FBI copyright warning" at the beginning of movies calls it infringement.

Re: Civil Liberties Groups Speak Out Against CISPA in Lead Up to Hearings

#80

Post by rayiner »

nitrogen wrote: post #76
rayiner wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So? When have you ever seen them actually use that to push theirn legislative agenda? Tech companies are far more active in using their status to push politics (e.g. SOPA protest).

Pushing their agenda: "You wouldn't download a car"? Not covering other agendas: basically any news agency ever that only covers one side of a story (e.g. anti-gun-control news stations only reporting positive gun news, pro-gun-control stations only reporting negative gun news, no news stations reporting on anything outside the viewer-driving manufactured hot button issues). Another example, though this is an isolate…

> Pushing their agenda: "You wouldn't download a car"?

I'm not sure I've ever seen one of these in a movie or DVD. I sure as hell saw the "kill SOPA" stuff Wikipedia, Google, etc, put up while I was trying to user their service for something else.

Post reply on HN