Big Telcos Love CISPA; More Immunity For Violating Our Customers Privacy?!? Sign Us Up!

from the of-course-they-like-it dept

It's well known that the big telcos and the federal government have an all-too-cozy relationship when it comes to handing over data on telco customers. This has included ignoring all the rules and going so far as handing over information based on a post-it note given to them by the FBI. The telcos general standpoint has been that they're happy to let the government reach deep into their data -- more or less adding a direct tap on all of us. Congress, however, gift-wrapped them immunity to any lawsuits from all of that kind of stuff. Still, these days, the telcos sure do like not being liable for coughing up their customer's private info to the government, so it should come as little surprise that they're practically shoving each other aside to support CISPA.

Two major trade groups, CTIA and US Telecom, each issued short statements saying that CISPA is a good thing. US Telecom claimed that the bill would make it more efficient to detect, deter and respond to cyberthreats. That would be nice if true, but no one's yet explained how that actually would work in practice. CTIA knows how to play the press, and started its press release by hyping up recent hack attacks. That CISPA likely would have done absolutely nothing to stop those attacks is conveniently ignored.

Meanwhile AT&T and Verizon each offered their own support for the bill, making it clear that protection from liability is the most important thing to them.

The telcos, of course, have nothing to lose and everything to gain from CISPA. It gives them even more freedom from liability in sharing your info, but doesn't present any specific regulatory burdens on them. Of course, shouldn't we be a lot more concerned about the views of the people whose privacy would be violated, than the views of those violating their privacy?


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    icon
    Shadow Dragon (profile), Feb 15th, 2013 @ 9:46am

    Is EFF's on the case?

    Is EFF's on the case? It should be.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 15th, 2013 @ 9:47am

    'shouldn't we be a lot more concerned about the views of the people whose privacy would be violated, than the views of those violating their privacy?'

    of course we should! that's exactly why the 'views of the people' will be totally ignored! after all, how could any good telco be doing it's job if it wasn't ignoring those whose privacy it is supposed to be protecting, the very ones that pay for the services supplied and giving the government carte blanche to conduct more and more surveillance on 'the people', particularly when there is no surveillance needed? i mean, come on!!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    Tyler, Feb 15th, 2013 @ 9:53am

    Re: Is EFF's on the case?

    The White House Petition http://wh.gov/dmY6 against CISPA

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 15th, 2013 @ 10:01am

    If corporations like them, then they are not good bills. Period.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    Eykal, Feb 15th, 2013 @ 10:02am

    Well, going by their own logic, Corporations are people...so they don't get more say in the matter than your average US Citizen. One person one vote, right guys?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 15th, 2013 @ 10:02am

    Wall St vs K St

    I don’t expect the Telcos or any company to protect me from what they want to do. BUT, I DEMAND that MY elected officials represent ME concerning vested interests.

    All too often, we misguidedly point the finger at the company for being self-interested when we should be calling/tweeting/emailing/posting(FB) to DEMAND that our so called Govt do their jobs to ensure the people are “secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects…”.

    Occupy Wall St should have been focused on K St in Wash DC, where the real crime takes place.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 15th, 2013 @ 10:03am

    Are you part of the 1%? Are you in bed with the government? No? Then no privacy for you sorry.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 15th, 2013 @ 10:05am

    Re: Wall St vs K St

    Wash DC has given Monopoly powers to these Telcos, so Wash DC is responsible to ensure my sanctuary.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    identicon
    bystander, Feb 15th, 2013 @ 10:18am

    Re: Re: Is EFF's on the case?

    Thats the list they are going to start with once they push this through. I mean those people signed to say they dont want thi right? So what are they trying to hide?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 15th, 2013 @ 10:27am

    Re:

    No, remember, voting is an exercise of free speech and money is free speech. Thus, each dollar grants you one vote.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 15th, 2013 @ 10:54am

    Will the boards of the Telcos have their accounts flagged so that their details are not released when the government wants them, or have they forgotten that they are also customers with regard to phone use?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    identicon
    uselessEFF, Feb 15th, 2013 @ 11:02am

    the EFF is useless. Did the stop the 6 strikes scheme from becoming a reality. No of course not.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 15th, 2013 @ 11:14am

    They have everything to gain from this, including a PR nightmare. That's the one thing they're not immune to if they even make an example of a few.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 15th, 2013 @ 11:16am

    again mike, you blame them for not telling you exactly how they plan to stop threats.....tell the criminal how you protect yourself and he figures out how to steal from you, hence why we don't tell how we will protect ourselves, your littel freedom idea that you need to know everything, makes the country weaker, you must supprot the terrorists who want to overthrow us by the way you act

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  15.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 15th, 2013 @ 12:09pm

    Linked 'its press release' is broken, you forgot an equal sign between href and "

    its press release

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  16.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 15th, 2013 @ 12:12pm

    Re:

    also your comment system fails at processing html properly, escaping < and >

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  17.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 15th, 2013 @ 2:25pm

    Re:

    Six strikes was NOT put in place by legislation, it is a private agreement between corporations. Washington only applied pressure, read threats, to help the agreement along.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  18.  
    icon
    charliebrown (profile), Feb 15th, 2013 @ 2:41pm

    Captain Obvious

    Sorry for stating the obvious, but of course we won't hear from the people who's privacy may be violated: They don't have money so "nobody" gives a shit!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  19.  
    icon
    anarcho (profile), Feb 15th, 2013 @ 5:23pm

    The Target Of CISPA

    Congress has a specific target in mind, but that does not mean you should not be concerned about your privacy. I posted this on my blog, this is an excerpt, you should keep in mind that their primary concern is to subvert democracy in any form:

    "The greater threat [to privacy] is from the attacker coming in and trying to make something public that shouldn't be." - John Engler, Business Roundtable

    I think this is a complete sidestep to the issue, the issue is that these companies and the government do not want anything they do which is wrong and damaging to individuals and public exposed. They want a free pass so that no conscience can see the light of day, they want to penalize anyone who exposes their activity regardless of who they have harmed with their activity, both corporations and the government - they want to throw accountability to the wind so they can do as they please with no penalty. They don't want to be accountable to the people, whose public funds they use (they want to be public "servants" while they make you serve like slaves). The "cyber-crime" is just a side issue, they put something having to do with harming children to make the other activity (exposing their dirty activity by pulling it out of cyberspace) look really heinous by written association (they always use kids to stand behind, like they care), and threw in foreign espionage activity for good measure.

    As an example, we can see what representative Rogers wants, by what he wanted done to Bradley Manning - death penalty for treason, or to endlessly torture someone to death - specifically for pulling their recorded activity off of the internet for all to see (the evidence), they want to criminalize it with severe penalties. They not only want impunity for needless wars, but impunity for those who supply what is needed for the war - corporations, and this is just one example, it can virtually be anything harmful to the public. They want to keep the propaganda machine going with no exposure (corporations/government, does not matter which or both).

    They want to do what they are doing to Julian Assange as a matter of course - big time, for anyone else who wants to expose corporate or government activity in a similar manner. They want to criminalize dissent if it exposes their activity, whereas an individual can be investigated and evidence be brought against them for criminal activity, they do not want any person(s) to uncover what they do (government, corporations) and make them pay a penalty (I can understand why, because they are congenital thieves and mass murderers!). The issue is that we have both a criminal government and corporations. They want to resume assassinations and imprisonments on a large scale against dissent, against anyone who opposes the corporate/government (they are virtually indistinguishable at this point, it is like a revolving door out of corporations into government and back again).

    They want you to be quiet, they want you to die without a whimper as they enact their fascist policies (because that is what fascism is, the complete melding of business and government - and the consequent attempts to silence protest by any means necessary), because that is what this is - it is a fascist bill, it is a Nazi bill. They want you to remain silent as they plunge a knife into democracy - don't let them do it!!!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  20.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 16th, 2013 @ 8:40am

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This