Not sure how we'll COPE

[Occhidiangela]

Communications Opportunity, Promotion, and Enhancement Act (COPE Act)

This "Congressional Work In Progress" is the subject of some debate. A site called "savetheinternet" that is running an online petition :rolleyes: Yeah, those work . . . NOT!

I understand that there is a lot of "custom and practice" in how the internet is run, and that the FCC and statute have had some trouble staying up to date.

I don't understand why there is such a perceived need to legislate the internet. OK, Big Brother want's to PWN you, but other than that, it's very open nature is IMO ideal for the "thriving on chaos" approach to enetrpeneurship and business, among other things, not to mention freer speech than the Fourth Estate exercises.

Any of you more clued in on this?

A current House Resolution discussed here.

http://www.techlawjournal.com/cong109/bill...rm/20060327.pdf

Some FCC language. Playing catch-up isn't easy, and it is easy to screw up while doing so.

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/atta...CC-05-151A1.pdf

Some tech savvy, and law savvy, folks discuss some of the above in layman's terms.

http://www.techlawjournal.com/topstories...60330b.asp

Me, I am for the more chaotic internet. If the Gov't wants to exploit its features to hunt down pedophiles and other nefarious sorts, I'd rather they did it by getting "net smart" rather than passing more (needless IMO) draconian statutes that play the old "screw everyone for the sake of the 2% club who are abusers and miscreants" game. My experience with zero tolerance BS in school systems, and my experience in the military's version of freqently draconian and counterproductive regulation color my view.

I am not a child pornographer, Congress, please quit treating me and most internet denizens as though we were when you consider internet policies for the FCC.

Your thoughts? This COPE deal potentially influences the future of such places as the Lounge, I think.

Occhi

[Chesspiece_face]

Communications Opportunity, Promotion, and Enhancement Act (COPE Act)

*snip*

Occhi
[right][snapback]110267[/snapback][/right]

Is this the same proposal that the communication giants (verizon, comcast, bellsouth, etc) have been trying to ram through legislation that would allow the corporations to keep tabs on each and every action we make on the internet? As well as allow them to operate their ISPs as if they were private networks? if it is the same proposal than the idea of this being a means to hunt down child pornographers etc is just a red herring.

what this would do is allow the ISP's to control what we can access across their networks. you have road runner for your isp and want to read a news site? well you're choice of sites that they allow access to is CNN.com. if you want to read a news site of a competing company there would be nothing stopping them from limiting your bandwidth while accessing that site or just blocking it completley. also it allows these corporations to create a hierarchal internet giving preferable access to those who pay higher prices. This opens a whole can of worms where they could limit the amount of emails you can send each month, limit what you can access, etc.

"Not happy with your limited internet access and slow speeds while browsing our competitors sites?!? Time to upgrade to our Platinum service. For only 99$ a month you get unlimited email! Full unrestricted access to over 20,000 more websites (*see attached list). And the ability to block unwanted spam mail!"

or in other words we get raked over the coals for the exact same services we have now.

Edit: Yeah it looks like COPE is the same load of crap.

Baltimore Sun Article

Older article from The Nation.

[Chesspiece_face]

A site called "savetheinternet" that is running an online petition  :rolleyes: Yeah, those work . . . NOT!
[right][snapback]110267[/snapback][/right]

When you've got ninja's on your side it just might work.

Ask a Ninja: Net Neutrality

[Drasca]

One more wrinkle to the NSA spying on US citizens scandal:

PDF documents from AT&T attorneys reveal details confirming previous allegations of NSA wiretapping

AT&T attorneys released a legal briefing with three pages of redacted information in a PDF format. Unfortunately for AT&T and the US National Security Agency, the censored information was still readable in many PDF viewing applications. The document was part of the same EFF lawsuit filed back in February of this year.

The document alluded that a room in one of AT&T's switching centers is dedicated to NSA digital eavesdropping -- complete with backup fiber optic splices and monitoring equipment. CNET claims the following is part of the censored text with regard to the NSA room: "Although the plaintiffs ominously refer to the equipment as the 'Surveillance Configuration,' the same physical equipment could be utilized exclusively for other surveillance in full compliance with [the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act]."

This accidental leak of information comes on the heels of a separate document leak incident orchestrated by AT&T insider and whistleblower Mark Klein. Klein claims he spliced fiber optic cable to a room in an AT&T switching center for the NSA. That room, it turns out, is the same room mentioned in the PDF document that was improperly censored.

Cable companies have been quick to jump on the negative press surrounding AT&T and its alleged breach of privacy. Several cable companies including Comcast, Cox and Time Warner, issued statements claiming they will not provide the NSA with unwarranted information.

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=2558

[theo]

http://www.savetheinternet.com/

I signed the petition. :shuriken:

[Drasca]

Eww eww eww eww

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=2968

AT&T's updated policy has an impact on the company's 7 million Internet and video customers

AT&T has a new privacy policy that will go into effect tomorrow. The new policy officially says that the company can access AT&T customer confidential information and is allowed to do whatever it wishes with it. Specifically, it can be used "to protect its legitimate business interests, safeguard others, or respond to legal process." The new policy will allow AT&T to hand over customer data to anyone for any reason. Customers that want to keep using AT&T will have to agree to the new policy after it is enacted. The company will also begin monitoring the viewing habits of its customers, which will allow it to track usage on its U-verse IPTV service.

"While your account information may be personal to you, these records constitute business records that are owned by AT&T," is the official statement from AT&T. AT&T "does not access, read, upload or store data contained in or derived from private files without the member's authorization," has also been enacted with the new policy.

The policy change comes at a time when many privacy advocates are already angered with AT&T after it was disclosed that the company has helped the National Security Agency (NSA) eavesdrop on U.S. citizens. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) both currently have lawsuits pending against AT&T. In AT&T's defense, the company claims that the changes have been in the works since December 2005, but

[Munkay]

"While your account information may be personal to you, these records constitute business records that are owned by AT&T,"

I love this reasoning. "Well sir, yes your information is private and confidential, but see if we write it down on this piece of paper over here, see like its written on your service contract, its a business record. We own all our own business records. So you see sir, its not your information, its our information on our business records."

:wacko:

[Chesspiece_face]

Down with net neutrality! So everyone can have their own personal intranets.

DUHHHHHHHHH

Don't forget people: this isn't a truck! there are tubes involved.

[--Pete]

Hi,

Don't forget people: this isn't a truck! there are tubes involved.

Anyone who *wants* public office is by that desire a poor choice for any office. But with sufficient ignorance and arrogance, any jackass can be (and most are) a Senator. Then they get to make decisions about matters that are so far beyond their mental abilities it's like letting the baby drive the family car.

But who are the bigger idiots? The jackasses we've voted for, or us for voting for them?

Once again, a country gets the government it deserves. An ignorant, apathetic, self centered, avaricious people will get just the scum that fills fifty state and one national capitols in what was once a great country. If ignorance begets ignorance, then I for one fear for future generations.

--Pete

[Occhidiangela]

Down with net neutrality! So everyone can have their own personal intranets.

DUHHHHHHHHH

Don't forget people: this isn't a truck! there are tubes involved.

If he had compared the Internet to pipelines, oil distribution networks, and data warehouses, he would have had a more credible in analogy for all of his technical dumbacity. ;)

Occhi

PS: dumbacity is the opposite of sagacity. :rolleyes:

[Drasca]

Hurray for the good guys!

A federal judge has rejected a motion by the US government and AT&T to dismiss a lawsuit against AT&T, which was accused by the Electronic Frontier Foundation of assisting the National Security Agency in eavesdropping on Americans. The lawsuit was originally filed against AT&T on January 31, 2006. The US government attempted to have the lawsuit thrown out because it potentially jeopardized the war on terror and may unintentionally reveal state secrets. The decision by a US District Court Judge in San Francisco will allow the EFF's class action lawsuit against AT&T to continue.

Free speech and privacy issues arose when it was disclosed that AT&T apparently opened up its telecommunications facilties so that the NSA could use them while spying on phone conversations and e-mails of millions of American citizens.

"AT&T cannot seriously contend that a reasonable entity in its position could have believe that the alleged domestic dragnet was legal," US District Court Judge Vaughn Walker said.

A Justice Department spokesman said the administration was reviewing the ruling before making its next step.

"The compromise between liberty and security remains a difficult one...but dismissing this case at the outset would sacrifice liberty for no apparent enhancement of security."

``It might appear that none of the subject matter in this litigation could be considered a secret given that the alleged surveillance programs have been so widely reported in the media,'' Walker said.

The state secrets defense, first recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court in a McCarthy-era lawsuit, has been increasingly and successfully invoked by federal lawyers seeking to shield the government from court scrutiny.

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3433
--Daily tech report
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews...gy/15084345.htm
--Original rejection article
http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/att/308_ord..._to_dismiss.pdf
--official orders of US State District Court for Northern California in 72 pages

That judge seems competent, and I am so ($*&(*& glad, because having liberties taking from under me without knowledge nor court challenge to balance federal power is just insane.

[Drasca]

One step back:President Bush Blocks Probe into NSA Wire Tapping

A report in the Washington Post said that President Bush blocked an internal investigation into the controversial NSA wire tapping program that was being put together by the Office of Professional Responsibility. The OPR launched an investigation into the NSA wire tapping program to see whether or not there were questionable activities. The wire tapping program was launched after 9/11 but Congress and the Bush administration has been arguing over its legality since.

According to the OPR, this type of block is a first in all of American history, and suspicion has mounted in regards to President Bush's decision. "Since its creation some 31 years ago, OPR has conducted many highly sensitive investigations involving Executive Branch programs and has obtained access to information classified at the highest levels," said OPR chief lawyer H. Marshall Jarrett in a memorandum. Jarret said that "in all those years, OPR has never been prevented from initiating or pursuing an investigation."

Some government officials say that Bush's decision to block the investigation is unusual. The OPR is part of the Justice Department. Because of the decision, the OPR was forced to drop the investigation on the NSA tapping program, which many government officials and outsiders previously stated was extremely controversial. The Bush administration allowed the NSA tapping program to conduct its business without first acquiring warrants from the Justice

Another grab of power by exec branch removing counterbalances via self investigation. I'm growing up, and the world is far more insane than I've ever previously imagined.

[kandrathe]

Another grab of power by exec branch removing counterbalances via self investigation. I'm growing up, and the world is far more insane than I've ever previously imagined.

Oh, well, you never met J. Edgar Hoover then either.