Since When Is Copyright Law a Matter of National Security?

Some UN bigwigs sitting in Europe have been, for some time now, trying to write up a lovely little ditty about Copyright Law called "Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement." I'd love to tell you what it will do. Except I can't. See, the Bush Administration refused to release the particulars of this agreement. So, of course, Barack Obama, with all his promises of greater transparency would correct that little error, right?

Nope. Instead, they took it one step further. When a FOIA Request was recently submitted by a privacy advocate, not only did the Obama Administration refuse the request, they then proceeded to declare that the details of this copyright treaty are a national security secret.

According to CNET News:

President Obama's White House has tightened the cloak of government secrecy still further, saying in a letter this week that a discussion draft of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement and related materials are "classified in the interest of national security pursuant to Executive Order 12958."
The 1995 Executive Order 12958 allows material to be classified only if disclosure would do "damage to the national security and the original classification authority is able to identify or describe the damage."

What a very intriguing turn of events. This same document is being circulated openly to Entertainment Industry executives and lobbyists of all kinds, and it's a state secret? What, pray tell, is the damage that would be caused by revealing what's being done to subvert... excuse me... "adjust" Copyright Law? Could it be provisions that mirror the 3-strikes laws that were recently attempted in both New Zealand and France? This is lovely. All it takes is someone ACCUSING you of copyright violations 3 times, and you could lose all right to have an Internet connection at home. Just an accusation. No trial, no finding of guilt, no investigation of any kind. Just the accusation.

And that, apparently, needs to be protected as a national security secret? I really, really want to hear how Obama thinks this compares with his promises of government transparency. Because right now, all I see if toadying up with corporate bullies who love suing 90-year-old grandmas for multi-hundres-of-thousands of dollars for alleged (not even proven, just alleged) file sharing.

I can't wait to see where this is going. Or, then again, maybe I should.

The Trouble with Web 2.0

It’s nice to imagine a world joined in cyber friendliness and everyone getting along.  There’s a vision there that even I like, of borders fading and of people learning to accept diversity and other lifestyles.

But the recent hullaballoo with Twitter and Facebook… especially Facebook… should teach us that The Web isn’t altruistic.  It takes resources to operate a Web presence (I’m not so sure that Web “site” is a valid term with the way these things cross boundaries, but that’s subject matter for another post).  It’s not enough to have 10,000 followers on Twitter or 1,000 friends on Facebook.  Now you’ve got them.  Now what?

That’s not an easy question to answer, is it?  Twitter’s been offered money by people wanting to be listed on its homepage.  Facebook wants to use your profile information in its ads… even if you don’t want to be part of Facebook anymore.  It’s time to find the business model that makes these presences viable, for the long haul.  Unless we’re ready for a virtual bubble to burst.

Is Government Evil? Doing This It Is!

As I make a shot at getting my voice heard, it occurs to me that technology is not an island unto itself. You cannot discuss technology without discussing the culture it can (and frequently does) create. Unfortunately, there is always a class of people left behind, that doesn't understand the new culture, and while I don't claim to be hip to that culture, I think I at least "get it" when it comes to the prevailing attitudes toward that technology and culture.

One such issue is trying to raise its ugly head. A group of genius politicians and "law enforcement" jackboot thugs has been making the rounds in Washington D.C. for some years now about the anonymity of the Internet and how hard it is to track wrongdoers online. Their "solution"? Make you keep logs of anyone and everyone who uses your WiFi.

CNET just recently ran a story on the latest efforts. Don't let the title put you at ease. See, it's NOT just ISP's these two bills will affect. From the story:

Each contains 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. (That method is called Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol, or DHCP.)

So... Quick, tell me everyone who has ridden in your car for the last two years. Where did they get on? When? Where did they go? Remember, the bills, as quote above, would require you, under federal law, to "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."

Think about that long and hard. Think about how, if your Wireless Router is turned off, those logs just disappear. That tornado that knocks out your power lines can now turn you into a federal criminal at the same time that it wipes out your house.

Lovely, eh? And why, pray tell, are some people ready to do this? According to Republican Senator John Cornyn from Texas:

"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."

See, the police need to catch bad guys. But now they want YOU to do their policework for them. AND, think about it, since these little wireless routers don't retain these logs, what do you think is next? Automatic Upload of that information, of course.

I hear Big Brother calling out. And he doesn't care about donkeys or elephants. There are politicians in BOTH parties wanting to do this.