Wednesday, April 10, 2013
ACLU and EFF still lobby against CISPA as it moves in Congress
Is CISPA (CyberIntelligence Sharing and Protection Act) as “bad” for the Web as SOPA and Protect-IP could have been? Probably not, because language relating to intellectual property was removed and it is about sharing information available through service providers with intelligence or law enforcement agencies in certain cases. Megha Rajagopalan had an article in ProPublica way back in late April of 2012, here.
Yet Electronic Frontuer Foundation continues to lobby against it, link here.
Salon reported April 8 that both EFF and the ACLU were lobbying hard against it, link here.
Electronic Frontier Foundation still maintains that CISPA gas dangerous ambiguities in its terminology, article April 8 by Mark Jaycox (website url) here. The biggest concerns seem to be in legal immunity to service providers in disclosures, but in other areas of Weblaw we need legal downstream immunity, don’t we? (Like Seciton 230).
The debate and the calls for petition continue on Reddit (website url) here.
The ACLU has a CISPA-explainer in its library, here. The most important point (in the third paragraph) seems to be that private companies can share information they gather among themselves. For example, it would be conceivable that a person could have an insurance policy cancelled over CISPA information, or be fired from a job – unlikely, but conceivable.
It could make a person’s “private” activity – maybe even files never shared with anyone – a conceivable “reputation” issue – although I think this is pretty unlikely in practice. I used to hear things back as early as 1993.