Voluntary for now:
The bill,
proposed by Senators Richard Burr (R-NC) and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA),
would allow internet giants and other companies to share people's
personal information with the US government so it can be analyzed for
signs of lawbreaking – be it computer related or not.
In return, the companies would get legal immunity
from angry customers, although legal action is unlikely because the
businesses and the government don't have to reveal what they have
shared, even with a freedom of information request.
So why do I think the voluntary bit has an expiration date? Because the bill's sponsors say what they expect "good" corporate behavior to be:
Feinstein said organizations won't be forced to reveal citizens'
private lives to Uncle Sam: it won't be mandatory for businesses to hand
over people's private records, she claimed.
"If you don't like the bill, you don't have to do it," Feinstein said.
"So it's hard for me to understand why we have
companies like Apple and Google and Microsoft and others saying they
can't support the bill at this time. You have no reason, because you
don't have to do anything, but there are companies by the hundreds if
not thousands that want to participate in this."
Her colleague Burr said on the floor that he couldn't
understand the opposition to CISA. Businesses against the new law will
put their users at risk, he said, because by not sharing people's
personal information, they will not be given intelligence and heads up
on attacks from the Feds.
"When the companies who are against this get hacked,
they are going to be begging to cooperate with the federal government,"
he opined.
So be a good businessman and join the Electronic Stasi.
""When the companies who are against this get hacked, they are going to be begging to cooperate with the federal government," he opined."
ReplyDeleteThat's a really nice business you got there. Shame if anything happened to it.
Did Feinstein follow If you don't like the bill, you don't have to do it with we have to pass the bill to find out what's in it or if you like the current warrant system for electronic surveillance you can keep it?
ReplyDeleteHow are these people taken seriously by anyone?
I don't trust anything that has Feinstein's stench attached to it.....
ReplyDeleteWe are living in a police state. I keep waiting for people to begin to disappear.
ReplyDeleteWho needs the Constitution when you can use Stingrays when someone thinks it is necessary? Or just wants to listen in without a warrant?
ReplyDeletehttp://apnews.myway.com/article/20151021/us-cell-site-technology-119affce57.html
Our rights seem to be a quaint notion these days.