« Copyfight Quote of the Day |
Main
| How Do We Preserve "Essence of Library"? »
August 18, 2005
More on the Mother of Acrimonious Acronyms
Posted by
Marcia Coyle has the best piece yet on why applying CALEA to the Internet is a terrible idea: Wiretap the Net? Not So Fast (previous Copyfight coverage: The Mother of Acrimonious Acronyms).
Here's a bit that will be sure to interest librarians who've been fighting PATRIOT Section 215 and the Broadcast Flag:
There are a number of collateral consequences to the FCC's order, said Perkins Coie's Gidari, counsel to education, library and other associations that opposed the FCC's decision.
"I don't think the commission had a clue that what they were saying affected other facilities-based providers," he said.
"A lot of companies and organizations make broadband available to their work force, students, faculties, researchers and others. That's why Congress holds hearings, to determine impact. The commission put out an order only carriers would pay attention to," Gidari said.
"The notion a librarian would have to do a wiretap and is subject to felony penalties if she discloses it, is amazing," he said.
"That's what CALEA requires -- you have to have a security office, security procedures. In truth, that won't happen because the library will be closed because it has no budget for this. That's why this issue is important."
Applying CALEA to the Internet is in many ways like a combo 215/Broadcast Flag -- in short, it's a technology mandate to make it easier for the government (and others) to spy on people. The kicker is that it's not the government, but, rather, the "information service providers" and the customers/patrons/surveillance subjects themselves who will pay for it.
(Cross-posted @ Deep Links.)
Comments (4)
+ TrackBacks (0) | Category: Privacy
- RELATED ENTRIES
- › Apple Jumps Into iBooks - With Hobnailed Boots
- › On the Dissent in Golan v Holder
- › Jonathan Coulton on Megaupload/Piracy
- › Stallman on E-Book Evils & Privacy
- › Admin Update
- › Joe Konrath Claims USD 100,000 E-book Profits in Jan
- › Nate Anderson vs the MPAA
- › SF vs SF Ideas
1. Crosbie Fitch on August 18, 2005 2:51 PM writes...
Well, it is actually fairer if the ISPs and their customers pay for the wiretap, rather than the population at large (via taxation).
However, a fairer way to charge doesn't necessarily mean the idea is sensible.
Permalink to Comment2. Donna on August 18, 2005 3:01 PM writes...
Yep, you're right -- either way you pay. Only with the providers paying, it's an extra kick in the knees to/tax on innovation.
Permalink to Comment3. Ralph T. Gerwing on August 19, 2005 3:38 AM writes...
This may be hard to interpret.
Permalink to CommentTherefor the document is...
" general reference purposes only and should not be relied upon for a full and complete understanding of the CALEA statute. Carriers and others seeking to know how they are affected by CALEA should consult the statute and relevant FCC rules, Orders, and other publications, as well as rules and other documents published by the United States Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).
http://www.fcc.gov/calea/ "
In reference to (others). This is a part that may be hard to enforce, or make sure people not authorized will not cause abuse.
The resulting penalties fines and/or imprisonment of violations may still not be fully addressed. The freedom of the internet may be part of the caveat.. Use with understaning of an open media.
The value part of CALEA is.. an inclusion for the
industry to partisipate.
rtg.
4. Branko Collin on August 19, 2005 5:03 AM writes...
If this were a good law/rule, then why should libraries be exempt? I don't understand the "why won't anybody think of the poor librarians" argument. And if this were a bad law/rule, raising this argument would only give its proponents something inconsequential to respond to.
Permalink to Comment