Saturday, 21 February 2009


Texas Republicans (one Senate, one House) want 2-year internet logging

c|net news:

Republican politicians on Thursday called for a sweeping new federal law that would require all Internet providers and operators of millions of Wi-Fi access points, even hotels, local coffee shops, and home users, to keep records about users for two years to aid police investigations.

The legislation, which echoes a measure proposed by one of their Democratic colleagues three years ago, would impose unprecedented data retention requirements on a broad swath of Internet access providers and is certain to draw fire from businesses and privacy advocates.
[The Senate and House versions both contain] the same language: “A provider of an electronic communication service or remote computing service shall retain for a period of at least two years all records or other information pertaining to the identity of a user of a temporarily assigned network address the service assigns to that user.”  Translated, the Internet Safety Act applies not just to AT&T, Comcast, Verizon, and so on--but also to the tens of millions of homes with Wi-Fi access points or wired routers that use the standard method of dynamically assigning temporary addresses.
Of course, there’s the usual excuse...
“While the Internet has generated many positive changes in the way we communicate and do business, its limitless nature offers anonymity that has opened the door to criminals looking to harm innocent children,” U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, a Texas Republican, said at a press conference on Thursday. “Keeping our children safe requires cooperation on the local, state, federal, and family level.”

If Republicans ever want to regain their reputation for favoring limited government, they must stop advocating this kind of big-brother nonsense.  What lover of freedom calls for keeping two-year records of your internet use?

Well, it appears that’s just fine with these guys.

And as I have said before, it is time we stopped giving them the benefit of the doubt.

Congress is full of lawyers.  Congressional staffs are full of lawyers.  Lawyers are supposed to be able to figure out what their words mean.  Therefore, we must assume that the scope and impact of these bills is intentional.

Republicans used to be able to tell the difference between “protecting the children” and “giving the police and prosecutors everything they ask for, without considering the impact on individual liberty and privacy.”  But noooo....

Thanks a bunch, Cornyn.  Good job, Smith.  Should have left it to the Democrats.

And I hereby pledge $100 to the first real Republican who wants to run against either of you clowns in the next primary.

Naming names:
The Senate and House versions, and their sponsors:
S.436 “to amend title 18, United States Code, to protect youth from exploitation by adults using the Internet, and for other purposes.”
Sponsor:  Sen John Cornyn [TX] • Cosponsors: None

H.R.1076 “to amend title 18, United States Code, to protect youth from exploitation by adults using the Internet, and for other purposes.”
Sponsor:  Rep Lamar Smith [TX-21] • Cosponsors: None

Via: Slashdot

(NOTE:  THOMAS links fixed 090320.)

Posted by: Old Grouch in Rants at 00:07:48 GMT | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 497 words, total size 6 kb.

1 I think Mr. Steele has to, instead of trying to get new people in with a hip hop makeover, try to make the GOP an incubator of libertarian and small government conservative candidates.

I have a wi-fi setup with WPA2 protection under a massive password.  Meaning the darn thing is mine, and only mine.  No one piggybacks it: there's plenty of dumb neighbors with wide open wi-fi's to suck off of to make mine the path of most resistance.  But yet I'd have to keep a log.

Posted by: mts1 at 02/21/09 02:44:01 (ST8IM)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
72kb generated in CPU 0.0134, elapsed 0.1857 seconds.
53 queries taking 0.1769 seconds, 209 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.