CISPA, or The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, a governmental program that would help to monitor online activities, has returned for the second time to be voted on by the House of Representatives on the 23rd and 24th of October. Although the act has already been turned down due to its violation of privacy, the House Intelligence Committee feels CISPA's second coming is necessary. Although several major changes have been made to the CISPA amendments, house members feel the new restrictions that would keep the government from utilizing the act for personal security purposes were left purposefully manipulable. despite the immediate negative reviews from the House of Representatives, CISPA will continue to push through the voting process. In order to protest the unconstitutional act, CEO's from websites such as Reddit, and Twitter are using their popular websites to spread the word of CISPA leaving it even more disliked than before.
I completely agree that CISPA is unconstitutional as the internet, like any other form of communication can be private if preferred. Although the House Intelligence Committee pleads that the act was formulated to create a safer internet, the loose rules lead myself and house members to believe that the government will inevitably be involved leading to a more-so regulated internet. I am all for a government that positively enhances public affairs and functions, however monitoring the activity on large websites such as Facebook and Twitter definitely crosses my line that divides a controlling government from a helping one. I also find that monitoring the internet will not come close to solving the problems CISPA has been designed to eradicate.
To read more, see: http://mashable.com/2013/04/16/cispa-vote-this-week/
I agree that leaving the amendments vague and open to interpretation is unconstitutional and leaves too much leniency, I feel like if a bill like this needs to be passed it should be specific and direct with its intentions and directives.
ReplyDelete