AWKWARD ZOMBIE

The United States Congress is attempting to reintroduce a bill called CISPA, or the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act. This is bad because it would give multiple entities such as the US government, private security agencies, and private companies unlimited access to your information AND unlimited sharing of said information with other groups under the guise of protecting the country. As well, these organizations don't have to tell you about it. They also face zero legal risk or zero monetary cost.

This isn't like SOPA. SOPA would have made websites police their entire userbase at great cost to themselves. CISPA, on the other hand, just lets them share your info with everyone with no real downside for their profit margins or work force.

This violates the 4th Amendment of the United States Constitution along with the court precedents set by Katz v. United States and United States v. Warshak.

Here, have an infographic.

Here's a website you can go to with a petition that you can sign and a list of House Intelligence Committee phone numbers you can call (provided you live in the states indicated).

I can't stress how utterly dangerous this bill is.

Man, they just do not GIVE UP on this, do they?

No, they don't. That's why everyone who uses the Internet can't grow complacent. It sucks that there are people out there who think that the Internet is safe after the whole anti-SOPA movement succeeded.

I like how they try and hide what they are trying to really do by making it look like they are trying to "protect" us.

Can they actually try and make legislation in direct conflict with legal precedence and the constitution?

Well as part of the system of checks and balances in the United States government, each section of the legislative branch (House and Senate) has to vote and pass the bill. Then the Supreme Court has to vote on whether or not it's legal. Then the President has to look at it and decide on vetoing or signing. If there's a veto, there has to be a two-thirds majority vote in both the House and the Senate to get the President to actually sign it.

So in short, the legislative process is specifically meant to make passing laws very difficult, and I think this is one of those kinds of laws that such a process was meant to block. An added bonus (or maybe intentional?) is that while the process is going on, word can spread among the people and they can express their concerns.

Short version: yes.

Long version: Any law can technically be passed, whether it goes against precedent or not, and only after it has been can it be challenged in court. And even if it goes against precedent or the Constitution, it has to go to court before being struck down. Meaning one single judge could dismiss all complaints and say it's fine.

Why are they so desperate to get these laws passed now all of a sudden? Its not like the Internet actually poses a threat to a democratic goverment, not more than any other form of media.

cheddar. It should be obvious.

Yeah. This is especially cheddar-oriented on both sides because the companies can just turn over your info without facing legal action or time-consuming content deletion like with SOPA.

I just find it odd that there's this sudden mad rush to get the Internet under control. Before its just been a matter of random lawsuits against really obvious offenders, why this sudden obesssion? Its not going to work anyway, the real offenders know how to avoid detection.

It isn't about the real offenders, it's about control.

The worst part is that I agree with most of the media companies grievances, if people decided to not pay for my products en masse and still use them, Id be furious too. So now we're essentially stuck in this retarded war between giant media conglomerates and pseudo-thieves who try to cover up the fact taht what theyre doing is wrong behind a smokescreen of justification.