The Stop Online Piracy Act was proposed in January of 2012. SOPA was a legislative act that attempted to prevent piracy through DNS blocking and censorship. The legislation caused the protest and blackout of multiple online internet services including Reddit, 4Chan, Google, Wikipedia, Mozilla, and Tumblr. Now, internet users are faced with another possible challenge called the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, or CISPA. CISPA was quickly passed by the House of Representatives on April 26th, 2012, and is now being processed through the Senate (Beadon). CISPA's purpose is to promote national cybersecurity through allowing private companies and the federal government to exchange users' private information, including emails and text messages, with complete legal immunity and one hundred percent anonymity. To some, CISPA appears as SOPA 2.0, another attempt to further limit American rights and privacy. Meanwhile, to others, CISPA appears as a milestone that needs to be reached in order to advance technologically and improve the nation's security. CISPA's purpose appears noble, but the current version of the legislation at least requires a revision due to its privacy invading policies, vague terminology, possible restrictions of internet freedom, and violation of the Fourth Amendment.
Many people, including some business leaders such as Reddit's and Mozilla's founders, are disappointed with the flawed form that CISPA possessed when it was rushed through the House of Representatives. In an interview with CNN on May 7th, 2012, Alexis Ohanian, the CEO of Reddit, stated that he refuses to purchase Facebook's stock because of its support for CISPA (Greenberg). In addition, CISPA puts the people's privacy at significant risk be...
... middle of paper ...
...ialBeat, 4 May 2012. Web. 5 May 2012.
“CISPA: Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act.” LuminConsulting. Lumin Interactive, 2011. Web. 5 May 2012.
Fildes, Jonathan. “Stuxnet worm 'targeted high-value Iranian assets.'”BBC. BBC News, 26 September 2010. Web. 14 May 2012.
Franklin, Sharon. “CISPA Lacks Protections for Individual Rights.” Chicago Tribune. N.p., 19 April 2012. Web. 5 May 2012.
Greenberg, Andy. “Mozilla Slams CISPA, Breaking Silicon Valley's Silence on Cybersecurity Bill.” Forbes. Forbes.com, 1 May 2012. Web. 5 May 2012.
Greenberg, Andy. “Reddit's Founder Says He Won't Buy Facebook's Stock Due To Its CISPA Support.” Forbes. Forbes.com, 7 May 2012. Web. 7 May 2012.
PopVox. PopVox. PV, 2012. Web. 5 May 2012.
“See What They're Saying.” U.S. House of Representatives PERMANENT SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE. N.p., 2012. Web. 5 May 2012.
After the horrendous terrorist attack on the New York Trade Center a new Bill was passed by congress shortly after September 11, 2004. This bill is known as The Domestic Security Enhancement Act also called Patriot Act 2. This bill was designed as a follow-up to the USA Patriot Act to work in increasing government surveillance, detention and other law enforcement powers while reducing basic checks and balances on such powers. By the beginning of the year 2003 a draft of the legislation was available. Amongst the most severe problems the bill diminishes personal privacy by removing checks on government power, diminishes public accountability by increasing government secrecy, and diminishes corporate accountability under the pretext of fighting terrorism. Also the bill undermines fundamental constitutional rights of Americans under overboard definitions of “terrorism” and “terrorist organization” or under a terrorism pretext. Furthermore, unfairly targets immigrants under the pretext of fighting terrorism. (http://www.aclu.org/Safeand Free/SafeandFree.cfm?ID=11835&c=206)
...till need to care more about the people’s privacy. I also agree with Apple’s CEO’s position that is why I strongly agree with this article.
Edward Snowden is America’s most recent controversial figure. People can’t decide if he is their hero or traitor. Nevertheless, his leaks on the U.S. government surveillance program, PRISM, demand an explanation. Many American citizens have been enraged by the thought of the government tracing their telecommunication systems. According to factbrowser.com 54% of internet users would rather have more online privacy, even at the risk of security (Facts Tagged with Privacy). They say it is an infringement on their privacy rights of the constitution. However, some of them don’t mind; they believe it will help thwart the acts of terrorists. Both sides make a good point, but the inevitable future is one where the government is adapting as technology is changing. In order for us to continue living in the new digital decade, we must accept the government’s ability to surveil us.
The Patriot Act has been under scrutiny and opposition since its creation following 9/11. When 9/11 struck it was clear that Americas intelligence was lacking in some specific way, but it was translated that America needed greater allowance for gathering information. The Patriot Act was signed on October 26, 2001, very close to 9/11. It can be concluded that the Patriot Act was signed with such extreme ability’s applied, because of how close it was signed after 9/11. The Act Greatly expands the liberty’s if law enforcement in their efforts to gather information, which in turn imposes on the privacy of the American people. The FBI has the ability to study any citizen suspected of terrorism, and has access to all their information. Wire Taps and other invasive action are allowed and granted by the Patriot Act. Was the Patriot Act signed to quickly? Are its measures to extreme? When is the line drawn on how much power the government can have? Is the Patriot Act effective enough that it is necessary? Should we as Americans willing to trade freedom for safety? Can the Patriot Act effectively stop or hinder terrorist attacks; has its stopped enough attacks to be validated? Another question is does America want a government that has that much power, how much are we as Americans willing to sacrifice, and how much more liberty’s is the government going take. If the government can pass the patriot act, what other legislation can they pass? In reality it all comes down to the American people, we are democracy but do we have the power in are hands? When finding all these questions one asks do we need an act that is in fact this controversial? Is the Patriot Act a necessary evil? To find this answer we have to answer all the questio...
...ompanies’ databases without our awareness—much less our approval—the more deeply the Net is woven into our lives the more exposed we become. In order to stop online tracking, we have to take personal responsibility for the information we share and modify our privacy settings. We have to get bills and regulations passed by congress so laws can be made to limit corporations from tracking and sharing our personal formation and discipline and take action upon any corporation that does not abide by the rules.
Domestic Surveillance Citizens feeling protected in their own nation is a crucial factor for the development and advancement of that nation. The United States’ government has been able to provide this service for a small tax and for the most part it is money well spent. Due to events leading up to the terrifying attacks on September 11, 2001 and following these attacks, the Unites States’ government has begun enacting certain laws and regulations that ensure the safety of its citizens. From the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978 to the most recent National Security Agency scandal, the government has attempted and for the most part succeeded in keeping domestic safety under control. Making sure that the balance between obtaining enough intelligence to protect the safety of the nation and the preservation of basic human rights is not extremely skewed, Congress has set forth requisites in FISA which aim to balance the conflicting goals of privacy and security; but the timeline preceding this act has been anything but honorable for the United States government.
Intelligence collection and apprehension of criminals have occurred for many years; however, with the exception of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, these actions were performed by different organizations. Nonetheless, roles and responsibilities have changed since the attacks on September 11, 2001. Intelligence-led policing and the National Criminal Intelligence Sharing program were incorporated, and fusion centers were established to help gather intelligence from different levels of the government. Although law enforcement at the local, state, and tribal levels aid in intelligence collection, it is important to ensure that intelligence gathered to protect national security and law enforcement intelligence are kept separately. Even though law enforcement operations can strengthen intelligence operations and vice versa, complications can arise when the two actions are combined. Government agencies must also ensure that sensitive and secret information does not leak or is not compromised when sharing intelligence. Therefore the purpose is to describe intelligence and law enforcement operations, discuss the expectations of prevention and punishment, and discuss the benefits and consequences of combining law enforcement and intelligence operations.
Part of the allure of the Internet has always been the anonymity it offers its users. As the Internet has grown however, causing capitalists and governments to enter the picture, the old rules are changing fast. E-commerce firms employ the latest technologies to track minute details on customer behavior. The FBI's Carnivore email-tracking system is being increasingly used to infringe on the privacy of netizens. Corporations now monitor their employees' web and email usage. In addition to these privacy infringements, Internet users are also having their use censored, as governments, corporations, and other institutions block access to certain sites. However, as technology can be used to wage war on personal freedoms, it can also be employed in the fight against censorship and invasion of privacy.
...egulation, Facebook will be compelled to respond to their requests. Consumers are recognizing the threat to their control and in the same way in the past have come up with ingenious ways to protect themselves they will continue to stand up for their rights that will ultimately affect company policies.
Millions of people all around the world are using Smartphones, like iPhones, which turns out to be crucial part of our lives. We are using them not only for calling but we also store unbelievably huge amount of personal information. We have there all our contacts, calls and messages and all our pictures that we save and keep in the phones. A
In recent years, many possible plans to enact government regulation to improve cybersecurity have been suggested. Most recently, in 2017, then U.S. president Barack Obama implemented the Cybersecurity National Action Plan (CNAP). The plan would have invested $19 billion in cybersecurity by gathering experts to make recommendations in regards to cyber security, help secure the government IT group, and encourage more advanced security measures (Daniel 1). However, while CNAP does present a way to solve the problem, it just adds another program that attempts to enhance cybersecurity: “It is the multiplicity of programs and division of responsibility that diminishes their effectiveness. At least eleven federal agencies bear significant responsibility for cybersecurity” (Cohen 1). Every so often, another cybersecurity program will be established, but former plans are seldom removed. This leads to a large amount of departments to share responsibility, which creates general confusion and limits each department’s power. Furthermore, widespread government regulation may weaken cybersecurity. Many fear that any regulation would not be flexible enough and would instead allow easier hacking (Ridge 3). If every system in the entire nation had the same security measures, it would be much easier to break into as by breaking into one system, a hacker a could break into everything.
Cyber Space Law Right now there is a very interesting war being waged in the court rooms across America. It is a battle for the rights of citizens on the Internet. The Internet is a fairly new medium gaining wide popularity in 1994. Because of its incredible growth in popularity in a very short amount of time it has been hard to regulate. The first act to come out regarding the Internet and Freedom of Speech was PL 99-508 the Electronic Communications and Privacy Act of 1986 . This act consisted of two parts, title I and title II. Title I - Interception of Communications and Related Matters. Basically takes the existing laws and updates them to include computers. Where before it was illegal to intercept private telephone calls, it now says it is illegal to intercept private computer transmissions. It also includes a provision to make it legal to intercept public radio transmissions like it is with public radio programs. It also allows Internet Service Providers to keep a log of who called and their activity on-line to protect themselves. Title II - Stored Wire and Electronic Communications and Transactional Records Access. This provision adds sections to Title 18 of the United States Code (USC). In section 2701 - Unlawful Access to Stored Communications; it makes it a federal offense to hack into a computer system. Actually what it says is that it is not illegal to gain access but once you do gain access, by mistake or intention, it is illegal to continue to access the computer system. This crime is punishable by $5000 or up to six months in jail. Section 2703 of USC Title 18 is the section that instructs Internet Service Providers to keep a back-up record of your activities on-line with a court order from a government entity. Then after the government notifies the individual in question, the material is either used by the agency or is destroyed. Probably the biggest battle yet over the first amendment rights so far has been the Communications Decency Act or CDA. In March 1995 Senator Jim Exon introduces legislation to criminalize online publication of any material deemed "obscene, lascivious, filthy or indecent." This legislation was attached to a larger and popular Telecommunications Reform Bill. The Senate and the House voted to approve the Telecommunications Reform Bill in February 1996.
Internet privacy and security has become the concern of many individuals throughout recent years. There are a very limited amount of laws that have been enacted to combat computer or cyber related crimes. This has become an issue because as the internet grows increasingly popular so does the criminal and immoral behavior that abounds on it. With these crimes gaining in impact, effectiveness, and frequency, there needs to be more repercussions for these crimes. The United States government needs to increase restrictions on the amount and type of data on individuals from the internet, to prevent the government from invading privacy of citizens and to prevent companies from storing browser histories of individuals, to then sell that information to ad agencies and other companies.
These reasons above are why my personal opinion is that SOPA should not be passed due to the fact that it would go against many of our rights including the first amendment. Whether it is the fact that online piracy can’t be stopped, the first amendment is being violated, or the government is becoming an overly powerful system, SOPA should not be passed to allow these things. So my personal question to you is, do you truly want to live in a world where all the information being shared is constantly monitored and edited by the government, or do you want to live in a world where you know that what your viewing is the way it is happening in the real world and you know it is one hundred percent true? Think about it and choose wisely.
The nation has become dependent on technology, furthermore, cyberspace. It’s encompassed in everything we deliver in our daily lives, our phones, internet, communication, purchases, entertainment, flying airplane, launching missiles, operating nuclear plants, and implicitly, our protection. The more ever-growing technology empower Americans, the more they become prey to cyber threats. The United States Executive Office of the President stated, “The President identified cybersecurity as one of the top priorities of his administration in doing so, directed a 60-day review to assess polices.” (United States Executive Office of the President, 2009, p.2). Furthermore, critical infrastructure, our network, and internet alike are identified as national assets upon which the administration will orchestrate integrated cybersecurity policies without infringing upon and protecting privacy. While protecting our infrastructure, personal privacy, and civil liberties, we have to keep in mind the private sector owns and operates the majority of our critical and digital infrastructure.