ACTA, the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, is a punishing, secretly negotiated copyright treaty that could send ordinary people to jail for copyright infringement. ACTA would establish a new international legal framework that countries can join on a voluntary basis and would create its own governing body outside existing international institution. ACTA has been negotiated in secret during the past few years.
Sounds somewhat worrying to me. ACTA has several features that raise significant potential concerns for consumers’ privacy and civil liberties for innovation and the free flow of information on the Internet legitimate commerce. What is ACTA? document gives details on the agreement. The EU will soon vote on ACTA.
La Quadrature ACTA web page says that ACTA would impose new criminal sanctions forcing Internet actors to monitor and censor online communications. It is seen as a major threat to freedom of expression online and creates legal uncertainty for Internet companies. For some details read La Quadrature’s analysis of ACTA’s digital chapter.
La Quadrature du Net – NO to ACTA video (one side of the view):
The Free Software Foundation (FSF) has published “Speak out against ACTA“, stating that the ACTA threatens free software by creating a culture “in which the freedom that is required to produce free software is seen as dangerous and threatening rather than creative, innovative, and exciting.
ACTA has been negotiated in secret during the past few years. It seem that nobody can objectively tell us what ACTA is going to do. You should oppose it for this exact reason. What exactly it will do is so multi-faceted and so deeply buried in legal speak it requires a book or two to explain.
If you don’t like this you need to do something on that quick. The European Parliament will soon decide whether to give its consent to ACTA, or to reject it once and for all. Based on the information (maybe biased view) I have read I hope the result will be rejection.
Another worrying related thing is Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA). The bill expands the ability of U.S. law enforcement and copyright holders to fight online trafficking in copyrighted intellectual property and counterfeit goods. The bill would authorize the U.S. Department of Justice to seek court orders against websites in U.S. and outside U.S. jurisdiction accused of infringing on copyrights, or of enabling or facilitating copyright infringement. Proponents of the bill say it protects the intellectual property market. Opponents say it is censorship, that it will “break the internet”, cost jobs, and will threaten whistleblowing and other free speech.
I don’t like this SOPA plan at all, because the language of SOPA is so broad, the rules so unconnected to the reality of Internet technology and the penalties so disconnected from the alleged crimes. In this form according what I have read this bill could effectively kill lots of e-commerce or even normal Internet use in it’s current form. Trying to put a man-in-the-middle into an end-to-end protocol is a dumb idea. This bill affects us all with the threat to seize foreign domains. It is frankly typical of the arrogance of the US to think we should all be subject their authority.
749 Comments
Tomi Engdahl says:
Social networks can’t be forced to filter content, rules top EU court
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/02/16/sabam_netlog_ecj_ruling/
Social network operators cannot be forced to filter out content such as copyrighted music, the European Union’s highest court ruled today.
“The owner of an online social network cannot be obliged to install a general filtering system, covering all its users, in order to prevent the unlawful use of musical and audio-visual work,” it confirmed.
Such a system would fail to adequately protect the personal data of social networking users, said the EU Court of Justice (ECJ).
The pro-copyright organisation previously won a court order in 2007, forcing Belgian ISP Scarlet Extended to come up with a filtering system that blocked users from illegally downloading copyrighted material.
In November last year the ECJ ruled that Scarlet should not have to filter copyright-infringing traffic from its service because to do so would invade users’ privacy.
Tomi Engdahl says:
ACTA loses the support of more countries
Bulgaria and the Netherlands say ‘never’
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2152965/acta-loses-support-countries
ENTERTAINMENT CARTEL DARLING ACTA, the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, continues to lose political support in Europe.
Germany has already expressed its concerns, as have a number of other countries including the Czech Republic and Slovakia. Poland has signed it, but is confused about why. That country, like many others in Europe, has recently been the scene of large public protests in opposition to ACTA.
Bulgarian Economy minister Traicho Traikov told reporters this week that he wanted to stop his country from signing the agreement.
Yet Another European Government Drops ACTA
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/02/16/1737226/yet-another-european-government-drops-acta
“The government of Bulgaria, which had already signed ACTA, yesterday reversed itself, and announced that it would not seek ratification of the treaty. This comes after similar moves by Poland, Germany and the Netherlands, and a weekend of massive protests against ACTA across the European continent.”
EconMin Blames Ex EU Commissioner for Bulgaria’s ACTA Involvement
http://www.novinite.com/view_news.php?id=136626
Former EU Commissioner for consumer protection Meglena Kuneva has been blamed by Bulgaria’s Economy Minister Traicho Traikov for failing to protect Bulgarian and EU consumers from ACTA.
“She was the EU Commissioner in charge of consumer protection in the time when all EU member states gave the European Commission a mandate to negotiate on their behalf,” Bulgaria’s Economy Minister stated.
Mass protest rallies against the controversial international Anti-counterfeiting Trade Agreement, ACTA, were organized in 15-16 Bulgarian cities and in 150 cities across Europe Saturday.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Music Industry Mulls Suing Google Over “Pirate” Search Results
http://torrentfreak.com/music-industry-mulls-suing-google-over-pirate-search-results-120216/
The recording industry considers filing a lawsuit against Google for allegedly abusing its dominant market position to distort the market for online music. Industry groups including IFPI and the RIAA want Google to degrade links to “pirate” websites in its search results. IFPI has obtained a “highly confidential and preliminary legal opinion” to see if they can force Google to step up its anti-piracy efforts though a lawsuit.
Tomi Engdahl says:
JotForm.com Gets Shut Down SOPA-Style
http://it.slashdot.org/story/12/02/16/231212/jotformcom-gets-shut-down-sopa-style
In a post on the company blog, JotForm.com cofounder Aytekin Tank alerts users that ‘a US government agency has temporarily suspended’ the jotform.com domain. He explains that it is part of an ‘ongoing investigation’ of content posted to its site by a user
JotForm hosts over two million user-generated forms, and uses software to block fraudulent accounts (65,000 so far), so you can see there’s plenty of opportunity for mischief.
SPECULATION: Jotform was using GoDaddy when this happened, and have decided to move every other domain they own off GoDaddy ASAP. The worry is that GoDaddy is following law enforcement requests without asking any questions. No idea if a court order or not. In either case, Jotform is having to heal with hundred thousands broken accounts because GoDaddy rolled over or because one judge somewhere saw only the law enforcement side of the case. The great majority of Jotform accounts are used for legitimate purposes. This is NOT like MegaUpload. You cannot make the argument that Jotform’s goal is to break any law. They helped a great many businesses. It is pro big corporation actions like this that will hold our economy back, not the threat of a free internet as some politicians believe.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Court of Justice of the European Union
PRESS RELEASE No 11/12
Luxembourg, 16 February 2012
The owner of an online social network cannot be obliged to install a general filtering system, covering all its users, in order to prevent the unlawful use of musical and audio-visual work
Such an obligation would not be respecting the prohibition to impose on that provider a general obligation to monitor nor the requirement that a fair balance be struck between the protection of copyright, on the one hand, and the freedom to conduct business, the right to protection of personal data and the freedom to receive or impart information, on the other
Source: http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2012-02/cp120011en.pdf
Tomi Engdahl says:
Pinterest Might Be Enabling Massive Copyright Theft
http://www.businessinsider.com/pinterest-illegal-faq-2012-2?op=1
Launched about six months ago, the site already has more than 10 million monthly visitors
Pinterest is a social media site that involves “pinning” pictures you like to ‘boards’ that you create. Its users are heavily female
Pinterest is a place where users upload photography – sometimes professional, copyrighted photography – that they found elsewhere on the Internet.
Q: Isn’t that illegal?
A: It’s not clear. Pinterest definitely allows users to post other photographers’ work to the site. But it’s not clear that this is illegal.
In its terms of use, Pinterest actually specifies that users shouldn’t pin photos they don’t own the rights to, a request that is being ignored to an absurd degree. Even if you link and attribute, that does NOT absolve you of the fact that you took someone else’s work and re-appropriated it.
It’s all about complying with the DMCA, or the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
Tomi Engdahl says:
European Parliament will discuss ACTA in public
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2153561/european-parliament-discuss-acta-public
THE ENTERTAINMENT CARTELS’ LETTER TO SANTA, the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) will be discussed in public by the European Union (EU) Parliament next month.
Several EU countries have distanced themselves from ACTA, while others have refused to sign it, and the European MP responsible for guiding its negotiation resigned over it.
“ACTA will be discussed in public in the European Parliament Committee for International Trade for the first time on 1 March.”
“Parliament cannot amend the agreement, but only approve or reject it.”
Tomi Engdahl says:
Eventually all of us will be under this sort draconian rule.
Freedom. It was fun while it lasted.
Canada’s Online Surveillance Bill: Section 34 “Opens Door To Big Brother”
http://news.slashdot.org/story/12/02/19/1755255/canadas-online-surveillance-bill-section-34-opens-door-to-big-brother
Canada’s proposed online surveillance bill looked bad enough when it was introduced, but it gets worse: Section 34 allows access to any telco place or equipment, and to any information contained there — with no restrictions, no warrants, and no review.
Anonymous And Internet Advocates: Where’s Your H.R. 1981 Outrage?
http://www.businessinsider.com/anonymous-and-internet-advocates-wheres-your-hr-1981-outrage-2012-2
Background: H.R. 1981, the nefariously entitled “Protecting Children From Internet Pornographers Act,” is actually a wide-ranging Internet surveillance bill that has no place in the United States of America.
It’s on the fast-track to becoming law, and it’s authored by Rep. Lamar Smith, who created SOPA.
I hope Anonymous and Internet free speech advocates like the EFF will inform their public about H.R. 1981 before it’s too late.
Unlike SOPA, this one isn’t getting the full court press. Almost no one knows about it.
The government has already taken away your right to a trial and attorney under NDAA. Now they want to monitor all of your online activity, and store it for a full year.
Internet Surveillance Bill, WORSE Than SOPA: Explained
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=PBVqm2W56c8#!
Tomi Engdahl says:
UK Government To Demand Data On Every Call, Email, and Tweet
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/02/20/139221/uk-government-to-demand-data-on-every-call-email-and-twee
“The UK government is proposing a law that would require phone and Internet companies to store information on all communications, and hand it to the security services when required. The Communications Capabilities Development Programme (CCDP) abandoned by the last government is back on the table, proposed as a means to increase security, and likely to be pushed through before the Olympics in London, according to reports.”
Tomi Engdahl says:
New code lets websites opt-out of Pinterest.
http://llsocial.com/2012/02/pinterest-offering-code-to-block-pinning/
Pinterest is trying to address copyright issues in a proactive way.
Pinterest now allows websites to opt-out.
We have a small piece of code you can add to the head of any page on your site:
When a user tries to pin from your site, they will see this message:
“This site doesn’t allow pinning to Pinterest. Please contact the owner with any questions. Thanks for visiting!”
Tomi Engdahl says:
Pirate Sites Founders Who Changed The Internet
http://buzzinn.net/pirate-sites-founders-who-changed-the-internet/
The Internet is a place for exchange of different content, mostly inaccessible to arms of the law. When The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and The PROTECT IP Act (Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act, or PIPA) laws were suggested, many sites for sharing files were closed or changed their policy. It seems that the freedom of the global network is slowly shutting down, but we all ask ourselves who are the greatest modern “pirates” on the internet who fight against this?
Tomi Engdahl says:
How the European Internet Rose Up Against ACTA
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/02/europe-acta/
Prime Minister Donald Tusk of Poland sent a letter to his fellow leaders in the EU Friday urging them to reject ACTA, reversing Poland’s course with the controversial intellectual-property treaty, and possibly taking Europe with them.
“I was wrong,” Tusk explained to a news conference, confessing his government had acted recklessly with a legal regime that wasn’t right for the 21st century.
“I was wrong,” Tusk explained to a news conference, confessing his government had acted recklessly with a legal regime that wasn’t right for the 21st century. The reversal came after Tusk’s own strong statements in support of ACTA and condemnation of Anonymous attacks on Polish government sites, and weeks of street protest in Poland and across Europe.
Many in Europe, and especially the former Soviet-controlled countries like Poland, are sensitive to anything that smacks of censorship. Activists in places like Poland and Germany saw the specter of authoritarian control in both the secretive imposition of ACTA and in the possible consequences of its technical provisions. The American architects of ACTA, not having had the recent experience of oppression, seem to have often been tone-deaf to the European fears.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Timeline: The super sketchy history of ACTA
http://digg.com/newsbar/topnews/timeline_the_super_sketchy_history_of_acta
Tomi Engdahl says:
Acta: EU court to rule on anti-piracy agreement
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17125469
The European Union’s highest court has been asked to rule on the legality of a controversial anti-piracy agreement.
EU trade head Karel De Gucht said the court will be asked to clarify whether the treaty complied with “the EU’s fundamental rights and freedoms”.
Acta is set to be debated by the European Parliament in June.
Tomi says:
ACTA will kill people
‘Piracy’ treaty is branded a murderer by the Pirate Party
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2155038/acta-kills-people?WT.rss_f=Home&WT.rss_a=ACTA+will+kill+people
THE UK Pirate Party has issued a call to arms to the internet industry, asking it to come together to defeat the draconian Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) before that starts killing people.
“Criticism of ACTA has often focused on the harm it will do to the Internet, but that doesn’t address one of the most important issues that ACTA presents: the fact that it will kill sick people in developing countries by denying them access to affordable generic drugs – whilst doing nothing to address the issue of unsafe counterfeit medications,” said Phil Hunt, the UK Pirate Party’s foreign policy spokesman.
Tomi Engdahl says:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091028/0306106704.shtml
YouTube Taking Down Public Domain Works?
from the make-it-stop dept
In the past couple of days I’ve received emails from two separate people who found that public domain material they put on YouTube was taken down to companies claiming ownership of the work. In both cases, the stories seem pretty ridiculous, and for all the complaining that copyright holders do about how awful it is that they need to “police” their own content on YouTube, it seems like those who are getting hurt are people who are putting up public domain material and getting shut down — often with little recourse.
Haint and Littia note that they can’t issue a counternotice, because Rumblefish never sent a DMCA notice which they can counter
reader Stephen Pate sent over his own story of having his entire YouTube account suspended. He’s not entirely sure why, but believes it has something to do with video he posted of the recent “crash on the moon.” The video was taken directly from NASA’s live broadcast, which NASA makes clear is not covered by copyright.
YouTube Identifies Birdsong As Copyrighted Music
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/02/26/2141246/youtube-identifies-birdsong-as-copyrighted-music?
“I make nature videos for my YouTube channel, generally in remote wilderness away from any possible source of music. And I purposely avoid using a soundtrack in my videos because of all the horror stories I hear about Rumblefish filing claims against public domain music. But when uploading my latest video, YouTube informed me that I was using Rumblefish’s copyrighted content, and so ads would be placed on my video, with the proceeds going to said company. This baffled me. I disputed their claim with YouTube’s system — and Rumblefish refuted my dispute, and asserted that: ‘All content owners have reviewed your video and confirmed their claims to some or all of its content: Entity: rumblefish; Content Type: Musical Composition.’ So I asked some questions, and it appears that the birds singing in the background of my video are Rumblefish’s exclusive intellectual property.”
Of course I’m also sure that none of this has anything to do with the fact that YouTube gets a cut of those ad proceeds. And that a small user posting original content would probably opt not to insert ads, such that YouTube would be then getting a cut of zero.
YouTube’s revenue is now all about their deals with other content providers, because their ad revenue is going to stay pretty stable (or go up)
This story, about Rumblefish claiming to represent the owner of the rights to a birdsong makes me sick. I think the target of our anger should be Rumblefish entirely. They’re the bullies. They’re the bad guys.
Tomi Engdahl says:
How ACTA will take down the Internet, healthcare, and farming [Infographic]
http://digg.com/newsbar/topnews/how_acta_will_take_down_the_internet_healthcare_and_farming_infographic
ACTA won’t just destroy the way the web works. It’ll deny millions of people access to cheap, generic drugs and make it even easier for Monsanto to sue innocent farmers.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Anti ACTA petition hits European Parliament
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2155775/anti-acta-petition-hits-european-parliament
A PETITION drafted in opposition to the draconian Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) has ended up in the hands of the European Parliament, and it has a lot of signatures.
We are impressed to see that 2.5 million people have signed the Avaaz petition that asks that ACTA be rejected. The size of the protest, and no doubt the weight of the petition, has surprised the European Parliament, where the general reaction is that they must take the decision much more seriously now.
Tomi Engdahl says:
The Internet Blueprint Wants You To Crowdsource Digital Laws
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/02/29/0318251/the-internet-blueprint-wants-you-to-crowdsource-digital-laws
“Are you fed up with anti-piracy acts that use scorched-earth tactics, like SOPA and PIPA — or secretly negotiated agreements like ACTA? Do you wonder why we the people don’t propose our own laws”
“Public Knowledge has debuted the Internet Blueprint, a site for those technologically and politically inclined to gather ideas…and eventually submit them to sympathetic politicians.”
http://www.internetblueprint.org/
http://www.internetblueprint.org/content/curb-abuses-copyright-takedowns
When it comes to takedown notices, it often seems like alleged infringers are assumed guilty until proven innocent. The process that allows content owners to remove allegedly infringing content from websites is far too often abused. Even in cases where there is no infringement, the content is usually removed immediately, taken down for a minimum of 10 days, and is sometimes never replaced.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Ireland Signs Controversial ‘Irish SOPA’ Into Law; Kicks Off New Censorship Regime
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120229/13541517916/ireland-signs-controversial-irish-sopa-into-law-kicks-off-new-censorship-regime.shtml
Remember how EMI sued the Irish government for failing to pass a SOPA-like law that will force ISPs to act as copyright cops and censor and block access to websites that the entertainment industry doesn’t like? Well, apparently, the end result is that the Irish government has now signed the bill into law. This happened despite widespread protests in Ireland against the bill.
That still means that copyright holders can petition to force ISPs to block all access to various websites, and as we’ve seen in other countries in Europe, you can bet that the major record labels and studios will be doing just that very soon (if they haven’t already) — though their track record on properly calling out infringement isn’t very good.
Of course, the end result is that the government appears to be trying to move in two different directions at once.
On the one hand, it’s catering to the legacy entertainment industry interests and hindering the internet as the platform that enables new business models…. while at the same time paying lip service to how it has to increase such innovation.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Verisign seizes .com domain registered via foreign Registrar on behalf of US Authorities.
http://blog2.easydns.org/2012/02/29/verisign-seizes-com-domain-registered-via-foreign-registrar-on-behalf-of-us-authorities/
That is a truly scary quote but we’ll emphasize that: “The indictment focuses on the movement of funds outside the U.S.” and that you can’t just “flout US law” by not being in the US. What also needs to be understood is that the domain bodog.com was registered to via a non-US Registrar, namely Vancouver’s domainclip.
We all know that with some US-based Registrars (*cough* Godaddy *cough*), all it takes is a badge out of a box of crackerjacks and you have the authority to fax in a takedown request which has a good shot at being honoured. We also know that some non-US registrars, it takes a lot more “due process-iness” to get a domain taken down.
But now, none of that matters, because in this case the State of Maryland simply issued a warrant to .com operator Verisign, (who is headquartered in California) who then duly updated the rootzone for .com with two new NS records for bodog.com which now redirect the domain to the takedown page.
The larger picture: root monopolies and the need to replace ICANN
ICANN needs to make this their problem, because it very much is. If ICANN isn’t going to stand up, and vigorously campaign for global stakeholder representation in these matters, than they are not only abdicating any responsibility in the ongoing and escalating crackdown on internet freedom, they are also abdicating their right to govern and oversee it.
Tomi Engdahl says:
RIAA CEO Hopes SOPA Protests Were a ‘One-Time Thing’
http://www.internetevolution.com/author.asp?section_id=466&doc_id=239958&
he claimed that Wikipedia and Google tricked the greater Internet public into believing that SOPA and PIPA were bad
sounds a lot like Mr. Sherman isn’t a big fan of informing the public. Better to let everyone believe that opposing SOPA is the equivalent of supporting foreign criminals.
Further, essentially chalking this up to a stubborn wrinkle in his plans, he says, “Hopefully that was a one-time experience that came from a lot of different things coming together where a lot of different people came to the conclusion that this was a terrible piece of legislation.”
In other words, hopefully next time people will only be privy to the message of legislators and lobbyists — you know, the ones who never misinform the public for political gain.
Tomi Engdahl says:
The hopes the SOPA protests were a ‘one-time experience’ is easy enough to accomadate:
Stop pressing for draconian censorship legislation and this will never happen again.
I was hoping SOPA was the one time thing. But it most probably won’t be.
It’s just a matter of time. Like any bad law, they can just keep bringing it up again and again and again and again, a hundred times a year if they want. All they need is one single success, and then it’s too late to go back ever again. They just need to wear people down until it can juuuuuuust slide through people’s defenses, and then it’s over and done with.
Remember… a thousand failures and a single success is still fully successful.
They keep making slight changes and resubmitting them over and over until the public becomes apathetic and finally passing it.
Hopefully as long as you try passing this crap, some people we’ll keep protesting.
Remember the Blue Ribbon campaign in the early years of the web? The SOPA protest was essentially the latest version of that strategy, where content providers across the web banded together against Hollywood’s lobbies.
If there are enough interested in opposing, the protests will only get bigger and bigger.
The next protest won’t be about SOPA, but rather about the new bill!
Source:
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/03/01/2235222/riaa-ceo-hopes-sopa-protests-were-a-one-time-thing
Tomi Engdahl says:
Two of the UK’s largest internet service providers (ISPs) have lost their appeal against the controversial anti-piracy measures in the Digital Economy Act (DEA).
Following a failed appeal last year against the DEA, in which four out of five grounds for appeal were unsuccessful, the two ISPs had argued that the anti-piracy measures were “inconsistent with European law” and would breach the privacy of their customers, as well as driving up costs for providers and consumers.
Source: http://www.techweekeurope.co.uk/news/bt-and-talktalk-appeal-against-digital-economy-act-fails-65065
Tomi Engdahl says:
RIAA chief: ISPs to start policing copyright by July 12
http://news.cnet.com/8301-31001_3-57397452-261/riaa-chief-isps-to-start-policing-copyright-by-july-12/
Comcast, Time Warner and Verizon are among the ISPs preparing to implement a graduated response to piracy by July, says the music industry’s chief lobbyist.
The country’s largest Internet service providers haven’t given up on the idea of becoming copyright cops.
Last July, Comcast, Cablevision, Verizon, Time Warner Cable and other bandwidth providers announced that they had agreed to adopt policies designed to discourage customers from illegally downloading music, movies and software. Since then, the ISPs have been very quiet about their antipiracy measures.
Cary Sherman, CEO of the Recording Industry Association of America, said most of the participating ISPs are on track to begin implementing the program by July 12.
Supporters say this could become the most effective antipiracy program ever. Since ISPs are the Internet’s gatekeepers, the theory is that network providers are in the best position to fight illegal file sharing. CNET broke the news last June that the RIAA and counterparts at the trade group for the big film studios, had managed to get the deal through–with the help of the White House.
“Each ISP has to develop their infrastructure for automating the system,” Sherman said. They need this “for establishing the database so they can keep track of repeat infringers, so they know that this is the first notice or the third notice.
The program, commonly referred to as “graduated response,” requires that ISPs send out one or two educational notices to those customers who are accused of downloading copyrighted content illegally. If the customer doesn’t stop, the ISP is then asked to send out “confirmation notices” asking that they confirm they have received notice.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Indie Musician George Barnett had enough of the record companies’ activities and decided to put a new album to The PirateBay.
“Now you can download my album torrent for 17 days,” Barnett writes.
The musician points out that the album download from The PirateBay is completely legal: “I own the rights and master. And I can do whatever the fuck I want, “Barnett boasts.
geobarnett: The first few days of the album release have been amazing. Thanks to all the pirates. Forget the rhubarb, it’s all about the music, ALWAYS x
Sources:
http://www.tietoviikko.fi/kaikki_uutiset/nyt+riitti+levyyhtiot++artisti+laittoi+itse+musiikkinsa+vertaisverkkoon/a790515?s=r&wtm=tietoviikko/-15032012&
http://www.georgebarnett.co.uk/
http://www.myspace.com/georgebarnett_myspace
http://thepiratebay.se/torrent/7094393/George_Barnett_-_17_Days_%282012%29
Tomi Engdahl says:
The ACTA awareness and debate has finally heated up. But in such a huge, convoluted and deliberately complex document, how can you determine for yourself whether it’s good or bad? It turns out that there’s a very straightforward way to tell.
If ACTA doesn’t change anything, why are they pushing for its passage as if their life depended on it?
If the copyright industry is pushing for its life for something to pass, while pretending it’s not a change at all, and preventing lawmakers from understanding the concepts defined, what do you think it contains?
This is the industry that thinks it’s reasonable for legislators to give them the power to kill a legal competitor in a foreign country by killing their income, website, and advertising at the pointing of a finger.
This is the industry that thinks it’s reasonable that they should be legislated to the top of search results, and their free competitors downranked by law.
This is the industry that demands under threat of law – a private industry – to wiretap an entire population, just to see if they do something that industry doesn’t like, and if so, censor that population’s communications at will.
This is the industry that argues that citizens should be actively prevented from exercising their fundamental rights, such as freedom of speech and expression, if that may possibly interfere with that industry’s business.
This is the industry that uses child pornography as a legal ram to pave the way for their own censorship
This is the industry that planted rootkits on people’s music CDs
Read more at
http://falkvinge.net/2012/01/28/the-only-thing-you-need-to-know-about-acta/
Tomi Engdahl says:
Court Orders RapidShare to Filter User Uploads
http://torrentfreak.com/court-orders-rapidshare-to-filter-user-uploads-120315/
A Higher Regional Court in Germany has ruled that file-hosting service RapidShare must proactively filter thousands of files uploaded by its users. The Court confirmed three separate verdicts by a lower court, in cases that were started by book publishers and a music rights group. RapidShare has yet to decide whether it will appeal the verdicts, and informs TorrentFreak that there’s also positive news to report.
While a written copy of the verdict has not yet been made public, the book industry celebrated the outcome as a landmark victory.
“Internet sites can no longer avoid their responsibilities, and profit from copyright infringing uploads of anonymous users,” says Alexander Skipis, chief executive of the German Booksellers Association.
RapidShare is irked by this early celebration, which its spokesman Daniel Raimer describes as unprofessional.
“We consider it as unprofessional to assess a judgement before the written reasons for the judgment are available. Only then you can determine which party can indeed celebrate a verdict as a success,” Raimer told TorrentFreak.
It’s worth nothing that the German verdicts appear to contradict an earlier ruling by the highest European court. In February the European Court of Justice ruled that hosting sites can’t proactively filter copyrighted content as that would violate the privacy of users and hinder freedom of information.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Op-ed: Imminent “six strikes” Copyright Alert System needs antitrust scrutiny
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/03/op-ed-imminent-six-strikes-copyright-alert-system-needs-antitrust-scrutiny.ars
With the “Copyright Alert System” going into operation over the next few months, major American ISPs will start sending out “strikes” to users accused of infringing copyrights online. Sean Flaim, who has just completed extensive research on the topic, argues that the system has real benefits—but it needs close supervision. The opinions expressed here do not necessarily represent those of Ars Technica.
Eight months ago, content owners and Internet service providers (ISPs) agreed to the Copyright Alert System, a “six-strike” plan to reduce copyright infringement by Internet users. Under the system, ISPs will soon send educational alerts, hijack browsers, and perhaps even slow/temporarily block the Internet service of users accused of online infringement (as identified by content owners). At the time it was announced, some speculated that the proposed system might not be legal under the antitrust laws. Were they right?
Tomi Engdahl says:
Australian Govt Censors Notes From Secret Anti-Piracy Talks
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/03/19/020221/australian-govt-censors-notes-from-secret-anti-piracy-talks
It looks as if the Australian Government *really* doesn’t want the public to know what’s going on in its closed doors talks with ISPs and the content industry. The Attorney-General’s Department has applied the black marker to almost all of the information contained in documents about the meetings released under Freedom of Information laws. The reason? It wouldn’t be in the ‘public interest’ to release the information.
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://freedom-to-tinker.com/
Copyright enforcement in the digital era has been an ongoing game of cat-and-mouse. As new technologies emerge for storing and transmitting creative works, content creators struggle to identify the best response. The content industry has employed different tactics over time — including technological copy protection, litigation against infringers, and collaboration with Internet Service Providers (ISPs).
In August of 2011, some members of the content industry signed an historic Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with some of the largest ISPs, agreeing to a “graduated response” system of policing. ISPs agreed to notify their subscribers if allegedly infringing activity was detected from their connection and, if infringement continued after multiple warnings, to impede access.
Meanwhile, a wave of “copyright troll” litigation has continued to sweep the country and burden the courts. Use of takedown notices under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act has continued to evolve
Tomi Engdahl says:
Google Defends Hotfile (and Megaupload) in Court
http://torrentfreak.com/google-defends-hotfile-and-megaupload-in-court-120319/
Google has filed a brief at a federal court in Florida defending the file-hosting site Hotfile in its case against the MPAA. The search giant accuses the movie companies of misleading the court and argues that Hotfile is protected under the DMCA’s safe harbor. Indirectly, Google is also refuting claims being made by the US government in the criminal case against Megaupload.
According to Google, the movie studios are misleading the court by wrongfully suggesting that Hotfile is not protected by the DMCA.
“Without the protections afforded by the safe harbors, those services might have been forced to fundamentally alter their operations or might never have launched in the first place,” Google writes in the brief.
Google continues to say that the DMCA specifically states that service providers such as Hotfile can’t lose their safe harbor protection because they refuse to filter content upon request from the movie companies.
“It guards against any claim that a service provider loses the safe harbor by failing to ‘adopt specific filtering technology’ or any other technique suggested by copyright owners for affirmatively seeking out possible infringement occurring on its service.”
Both the MPAA and the US Government claim that it’s wrong for Hotfile to delete links but keep the actual files on their servers, but Google disagrees.
“But, in this respect, Hotfile did exactly what the DMCA demands, and plaintiffs’ takedown notices cannot be used to charge the service with knowledge of allegedly infringing material that those notices did not specifically identify.”
Tomi Engdahl says:
Google Files Amicus Brief in Hotfile Case; MPAA Requests It Be Rejected
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/03/20/0053244/google-files-amicus-brief-in-hotfile-case-mpaa-requests-it-be-rejected
“Google has once again stood up in court for the rights of users and services online, this time defending Hotfile from copyright infringement accusations”
The MPAA, naturally, has requested that the amicus brief be rejected by the court: “Google’s proposed brief appears to be part of a systematic effort by Google, itself a defendant in ongoing copyright infringement cases, to influence the development of the law to Google’s own advantage”
Isn’t this what the MPAA and RIAA have been trying to do with SOPA/PIPA and all these other bills? I guess it’s only ok when they do it though.
Tomi Engdahl says:
“The MPAA claims $58 billion in actual U.S. economic losses and 373,000 lost jobs due to piracy. Where are these numbers coming from? Rob Reid puts these numbers into perspective in this TED Talk, leaving us even more puzzled about the math behind copyright laws.
The numbers behind the Copyright Math
http://blog.ted.com/2012/03/20/the-numbers-behind-the-copyright-math/
Tomi Engdahl says:
German court: Rapidshare must HUNT for dodgy pirate links
Site expected to be ‘proactive’ in preventing copyright infringement
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/03/21/rapidshare_ordered_to_proactively_prevent_users_from_linking_to_pirated_content/
The operators of a file-hosting website must search for and pro-actively prevent material identified as copyright-infringing from being uploaded by users, a court in Germany has ruled.
The court made the ruling after considering separate cases brought against Rapidshare by music rights group GEMA and book publishers De Gruyter and Campus. Previously a regional German court had held that Rapidshare was under an obligation to monitor the copyright status of all musical works made available on its site.
The court made the ruling after considering separate cases brought against Rapidshare by music rights group GEMA and book publishers De Gruyter and Campus. Previously a regional German court had held that Rapidshare was under an obligation to monitor the copyright status of all musical works made available on its site.
The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has previously ruled that internet service providers (ISPs) and social networking websites cannot be forced by national courts into broadly filtering internet users’ activity to identify copyright infringing material.
Tomi Engdahl says:
MPAA Wants Megaupload User Data Retained for Lawsuits — Updated
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/03/mpaa-megaupload-user-litigatio/
Hollywood studios want a federal judge to preserve data on all the 66.6 million users of Megaupload, the file-sharing service that was shuttered in January due to federal indictments targeting its operators.
The Motion Picture Association of America is requesting Carpathia, Megaupload’s Virginia-based server host, to retain the 25 petabytes of Megaupload data on its servers, which includes account information for Megaupload’s millions of users. That’s according to a newly surfaced court filing in the Megaupload prosecution in connection to charges of racketeering and criminal copyright infringement.
The MPAA said it wanted to have that data because it might sue Megaupload and others for contributing to copyright infringement.
“If there’s evidence of a frequent infringers, high volume infringers, who are able to continue that operation despite knowledge by Megaupload, that could point to evidence that was involved in this infringing campaign,” Gantman said.
Similar user data was part of the Grokster and Napster civil lawsuits.
A hearing on the matter is set for next month. Federal authorities have said they have copied some, but not all of the data, and said Carpathia could delete the 25 million gigabytes of Megaupload data it is hosting.
Carpathia said it is spending $9,000 daily to retain the data, and is demanding a federal judge relieve it of that burden. Megaupload, meanwhile, wants the government to free up some of the millions in dollars of seized Megaupload assets to be released to pay Carpathia to retain the data for its defense and possibly to return data to its customers.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Online video is overtaking physical sales
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2163210/online-video-overtaking-physical-sales
MOVIE WATCHING AMERICANS are spending money on video streaming and downloaded film services, so much so that online sales there have overtaken physical ones.
“The year 2012 will be the final nail to the coffin on the old idea that consumers won’t accept premium content distribution over the Internet,” said Dan Cryan, senior principal analyst for broadband and digital media at IHS.
“In fact, the growth in online consumption is part of a broader trend that has seen the total number of movies consumed from services that are traditionally considered ‘home entertainment’ grow by 40 percent between 2007 and 2011, even as the number of movies viewed on physical formats has declined.”
The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) is telling us that global box office sales have increased by three per cent since 2010
The MPAA is one of the bodies that supported the Stop Online Piracy Act, and recently its chairman criticised firms that opposed it and accused them of seeking nothing more than publicity by muddying the debate waters.
“Some technology business interests are resorting to stunts that punish their users or turn them into their corporate pawns, rather than coming to the table to find solutions to a problem that all now seem to agree is very real and damaging,” said Dodd.
“It is an irresponsible response and a disservice to people who rely on them for information and use their services.”
Tomi Engdahl says:
Sarkozy: Jail those who browse terror websites
http://news.yahoo.com/sarkozy-jail-those-browse-terror-websites-182328946.html
PARIS (AP) — France’s president proposed a sweeping new law Thursday that would see repeat visitors to extremist web sites put behind bars — one of several tough measures floated in the wake of a murderous shooting spree.
Sarkozy, who is only a month away from an election, argued that it was time to treat those who browse extremist websites the same way as those who consume child pornography.
“Anyone who regularly consults Internet sites which promote terror or hatred or violence will be sentenced to prison,” he told a campaign rally in Strasbourg, in eastern France. “Don’t tell me it’s not possible. What is possible for pedophiles should be possible for trainee terrorists and their supporters, too.
Sarkozy, who is only a month away from an election, argued that it was time to treat those who browse extremist websites the same way as those who consume child pornography.
“Anyone who regularly consults Internet sites which promote terror or hatred or violence will be sentenced to prison,” he told a campaign rally in Strasbourg, in eastern France. “Don’t tell me it’s not possible. What is possible for pedophiles should be possible for trainee terrorists and their supporters, too.
Journalists and lawyers are concerned.
“Trying to criminalize a visit — a simple visit — to a website, that’s something that seems disproportionate,” said Lucie Morillon, who runs the new media bureau of journalists’ watchdog group Reporters Without Borders.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Microsoft Censors Pirate Bay Links in Windows Live Messenger
http://torrentfreak.com/microsoft-censors-pirate-bay-links-in-windows-live-messenger-120324/
The Pirate Bay is not only the most visited BitTorrent site on the Internet, but arguably the most censored too. Many ISPs have been ordered to block their customers’ access to the website, and recently Microsoft joined in on the action by stopping people sharing its location with others. Microsoft’s Windows Live Messenger (MSN) now refuses to pass on links to The Pirate Bay website, claiming they are unsafe.
Whatever Microsoft’s reason for monitoring private conversations and then swallowing Pirate Bay links, the Redmond-based company’s censorship policies are not very consistent.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Kim Dotcom Alleges Studios Wanted to Work With Megaupload
http://entertainment.slashdot.org/story/12/03/27/0156216/kim-dotcom-alleges-studios-wanted-to-work-with-megaupload
“In a recent story that is beating around the nets, Kim Doctcom has fired back at studios with emails that make for some interesting reading
Dotcom says Hollywood studios once courted Megaupload
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/03/dotcom-says-hollywood-studios-once-courted-megaupload.ars
Dotcom is now speaking out about his case as he continues to fight extradition to the United States. On Monday, TorrentFreak posted one of the most in-depth interviews Dotcom has done since his arrest. Dotcom told TorrentFreak he can “refute pretty much each and every claim in the indictment.”
Several senior Megaupload employees, including Dotcom himself, are alleged to have uploaded copyrighted songs to the site. The government likely focused on these allegations because the legal issues seem clear-cut. Distributing entire copyrighted works without permission is almost always illegal, and the DMCA’s safe harbor doesn’t apply.
But Dotcom argues the story isn’t as simple.
Dotcom speculated many of these users were using their Megaupload accounts to engage in non-infringing uses, such as deployed soldiers sharing personal video with family and friends back home. The Electronic Freedom Foundation is fighting to get legitimate Megaupload users access to their files.
Most strikingly, Dotcom revealed that Megaupload received friendly overtures from several major Hollywood studios. E-mails supplied to TorrentFreak show employees at Disney, Warner Brothers, Turner Broadcasting, and Fox all e-mailed Megaupload between 2008 and 2010 seeking assistance.
Kim Dotcom Fires Back: Raises Questions About US’s Evidence, Shows Studios Were Eager To Work With Megaupload
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120326/11013718248/kim-dotcom-fires-back-raises-questions-about-uss-evidence-shows-studios-were-eager-to-work-with-megaupload.shtml
After the US shutdown of Megaupload, we noted that there were serious issues with the indictment, in that the US Attorneys seemed to make all sorts of leaps of logic to make their case, and it suggested that they had come into the case with a pre-determined idea (take the site down), and then cherry picked and distorted evidence to make the case. For example, we noted that the indictment used the lack of a search engine on Megaupload to indicate that it was a “criminal conspiracy,” because it was “hiding” the infringement on the site. But that made little sense, considering that previous cases had found that having a search engine was an indication of inducement, and made a site against the law. The US government seemed to be saying that having search is inducement, but not having search makes you a conspiracy. That’s crazy.
Tomi Engdahl says:
European Parliament will vote on ACTA today
Must decide on whether it requires more inspection
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2163939/european-parliament-vote-acta
THERE WILL BE A VOTE in the European Parliament today over the future of the draconian Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement.
The European Parliament will hold a vote today to decide whether referring ACTA to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) is the right thing to do.
If the vote says that it needs that sort of inspection, then that is what ACTA will get. If it gets a no then the European Parliament will be free to vote on it this summer. It has no power to change the treaty and can only approve it or reject it.
Advocacy group La Quadrature du Net is hoping that it votes against ECJ involvement.
“If the EU Parliament gives in to these technocratic tricks, it will give up on protecting EU citizens. Enough is known about ACTA to justify working towards its rejection without having to wait for the opinion of the ECJ,”
Tomi Engdahl says:
European Parliament votes against ACTA legal review
Quick vote this June could kill treaty
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/03/27/european_parliament_votes_acta_review/
The European Parliament (EP) has voted overwhelmingly not to refer the controversial Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) for judicial review, but instead to strike while the iron is hot and vote on the treaty this June.
The vote means that ACTA will now come before the EP in a straight vote in June, and a no vote would obviate the entire treaty.
“If ACTA dies in European Parliament, then it’s a permakill, and the monopoly lobbies will have to start fighting uphill,” blogged Rick Falkvinge, founder of the Swedish Pirate Party. “If ACTA passes, the same monopolists get tons of new powers to use, and close the door for the foreseeable future behind the legislators for a very necessary reform of the copyright and patent monopolies.”
Pro- and anti-ACTA forces now have a clear deadline to work towards, and will be marshaling their forces to mobilize support.
Tomi Engdahl says:
RapidShare Declared Legal In Court, With a Twist
http://torrentfreak.com/rapidshare-declared-legal-in-court-with-a-twist-120327/
In the aftermath of the Megaupload shutdown, people have been keeping a close eye on court cases involving other file-hosting services, RapidShare included.
A Higher Regional Court in Germany has ruled that file-hosting service RapidShare operates legally in Germany. The verdict is the result of a long-standing legal battle between the Swiss-based file-hosting service and music rights group GEMA. It’s not all good for RapidShare though, as the company now has to monitor external websites for incoming links to infringing files.
The court further ruled that RapidShare has no obligation to proactively monitor files that are uploaded by its users. Instead, the company has to monitor external sites that link to copyrighted files on RapidShare, and ensure these files become inaccessible.
This is not a problem according to the cyberlocker.
“That is exactly what RapidShare has already been doing for many years. If the Anti-Abuse Team identifies a download link on such pages which results in a file that has clearly been published illegally being on the company’s servers, the file in question is immediately blocked.”
The eventual decision of the Supreme Court may have massive implications. Not only for RapidShare, but also for the many other file-hosting services that operate in Germany.
Tomi Engdahl says:
In the Battles of SOPA and PIPA, Who Should Control the Internet? — When the Internet was created, decades ago, one thing was inevitable: the war today over how (or whether) to control it, and who should have that power. Battle lines have been drawn between repressive regimes and Western democracies
World War 3.0
http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2012/05/internet-regulation-war-sopa-pipa-defcon-hacking
When the Internet was created, decades ago, one thing was inevitable: the war today over how (or whether) to control it, and who should have that power. Battle lines have been drawn between repressive regimes and Western democracies, corporations and customers, hackers and law enforcement. Looking toward a year-end negotiation in Dubai, where 193 nations will gather to revise a U.N. treaty concerning the Internet, Michael Joseph Gross lays out the stakes in a conflict that could split the virtual world as we know it.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Copyright enforcement: Will ISPs beat Fair Use to death with infringement clubs?
http://blogs.computerworld.com/19983/copyright_enforcement_will_isps_beat_fair_use_to_death_with_infringement_clubs
“Graduated Response” is the love-child spawned by the MPAA and the RIAA, but instead of targeting websites like SOPA, it targets individual users. Major ISPs like AT&T, Comcast, Cablevision, Cox, Time Warner Cable, Verizon and others will flag their customers for copyright violations. While RIAA mouthpiece Cary Sherman alleged, each ISP has to do it differently and develop their infrastructure for automating the system on their network, some might call those lies, damn lies. If an ISP isn’t already in bed with the MPAA or RIAA, and doesn’t kowtow to antipiracy measures, then the Center for Copyright Information (CCI) will turn up the heat.
You will be allowed six strikes, alleged copyright infringement violations, before your ISP terminates your account. Or perhaps you will terminate it after ISP “Mitigation Measures” like being throttled down to the speed of frosty molasses on a cold winter day. Ah but the real problem is the Copyright Alert System (CAS) in which “content owners (represented by MPAA and RIAA) will notify a participating ISP when they believe their copyrights are being misused online by a specific computer (identified by its Internet Protocol (‘IP’) address which indicates the connection to the Internet).”
But the EFF asked if this was education or propaganda? The burden of copyright infringement proof should be on content owners, but the “burden-shift violates our traditional procedural due process norms and is based on the presumed reliability of infringement-detection systems that subscribers haven’t vetted and to which they cannot object.”
Tomi Engdahl says:
US Government: There’s Child Porn On the Megaupload Servers Judge!
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/04/04/1226249/us-government-theres-child-porn-on-the-megaupload-servers-judge
“In the ongoing Megaupload saga, Carpathia, the company that hosted Megaupload, is in a tough pickle. The EFF wants the data to remain on the servers so that users can get legitimate data back, the MPAA doesn’t want the servers back, because it will lead to piracy. Megaupload wants to buy the servers to get all the data, but isn’t allowed to as that would have the servers leaving the court’s jurisdiction. The U.S .Government won’t pay Carpathia for the time that the servers are sitting idle and has a new song in its repertoire by announcing yesterday that the servers ‘may contain child pornography,’ which would render them ‘contraband’ and limit Carpathia’s options for dealing with them.”
Tomi Engdahl says:
Business has Europe’s ear over ACTA
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2166263/business-europe-s-ear-acta
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION (EC) has punted contention over the draconian Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) into Europe’s highest court.
In a statement it said it referred the treaty to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) for legal review away from citizen protests. It will also mean a delay to any decision on the treaty by the European Parliament for up to 18 months. The European Union (EU Trade Commissioner was happy though.
“I am very pleased that we are now one step closer to ensuring clarity on ACTA.”
“Most of the criticism against ACTA expressed by people across Europe focused on the potential harm it could have on our fundamental rights. So, a referral will allow for Europe’s top court to independently clarify the legality of this agreement.”
“ACTA simply means that companies and individuals who wish to protect their ideas so as to defend their livelihoods will find it easier to do so in the 38 countries that have signed the treaty,” he said.
Dirk Poot, the Dutch Pirate Party chairman told us that it looks like De Gucht is trying to bypass the democratic process, saying that the ECJ might easily be lead to the wrong conclusion.
Tomi Engdahl says:
The cyber crime department of Russia’s Interior Ministry says it intends to get tough on the country’s ISPs when their customers share copyrighted or otherwise illegal material. Authorities say they are currently carrying out nationwide checks on ISPs’ local networks and could bring prosecutions as early as next month.
Source:
http://torrentfreak.com/russia-moves-to-hold-isps-responsible-for-illegal-file-sharing-120410/
Tomi Engdahl says:
CISPA Is A Really Bad Bill, And Here’s Why
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120410/12180518442/cispa-is-really-bad-bill-heres-why.shtml
The forces behind HR 3523, the dangerous Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act which is going to move forward in Congress at the end of the month, are beginning to get cagey about the growing backlash from the internet community.
CISPA at a Glance
In broad terms, CISPA is about information sharing. It creates broad legal exemptions that allow the government to share “cyber threat intelligence” with private companies, and companies to share “cyber threat information” with the government, for the purposes of enhancing cybersecurity. The problems arise from the definitions of these terms, especially when it comes to companies sharing data with the feds.
Is CISPA the new SOPA?
This is the notion that the reps behind the bill are most desperate to kill. Their primary response is that CISPA has nothing to do with seizing domains or censoring websites, but that’s only true on the surface. The bill defines “cybersecurity systems” and “cyber threat information” as anything to do with protecting a network from:
‘(A) efforts to degrade, disrupt, or destroy such system or network; or
‘(B) theft or misappropriation of private or government information, intellectual property, or personally identifiable information.
It’s easy to see how that definition could be interpreted to include things that go way beyond network security—specifically, copyright policing systems at virtually any point along a network could easily qualify. And since one of the recipients of the shared information would be Homeland Security—the department that includes ICE and its ongoing domain seizures—CISPA creates the very real possibility for this information to be used as part of a SOPA-like crusade to lock down the internet. So while the bill itself has nothing to do with domain seizures, it gives the people behind such seizures a potentially powerful new weapon.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Why Microsoft and Facebook are Pro-CISPA but Anti-SOPA
http://lifehacker.com/5900962
Just months after the internet censorship bills SOPA and PIPA were taken off the floor, a new and similarly scrutinized bill, the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) has been gaining momentum and support from big technology companies like Microsoft, Facebook, IBM, and others. Although the bill is fundamentally different than SOPA it raises many of the same privacy concerns. Let’s take a look at the basics of how it might work and dig into why tech companies are currently supporting the bill.
If passed, CISPA would amend the National Security Act of 1947 to allow government agencies to swap customer data from Internet service providers and websites if that data is a threat to “cyber-security.”