President Obama threatens veto of CISPA
According to a statement from +The White House, if CISPA reached President +Barack Obama's desk in its current form, he would veto the bill. As we posted previously, the administration expressed its displeasure with CISPA, but today's statement are their strongest words to date.

CISPA, says the White House, would allow the government and the intelligence community unfettered access to Americans’ personal information and data, sacrificing individuals’ personal privacy and civil liberties. The White House also believes that CISPA would allow private companies to share users’ information with one another — unhindered by adequate supervision or transparency — while simultaneously shielding them from lawsuits that spring up as a result of that information sharing. #CISPA is still expected to easily pass the Republican controlled House on Friday, but then it will have to go before the Senate, which is under control of the Democrats. Ah, politics!!

For the entire statement, see the main link below. For more juicy details, the possible effects of the plethora of amendments, as well as reactions from the sponsors, please see +Alex Fitzpatrick's report at +Mashable http://mashable.com/2012/04/25/obama-veto-cispa/

More at +Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2012/04/25/whitehouse-sounds-the-death-knell-for-cispa-with-veto-threat/

Read + Share + Voices = Solutions
24
5
Monique Jacobse's profile photoInternet Freedom Movement's profile photoJeff Dishman's profile photoMichael Long's profile photo
15 comments
 
So ... is this the same kind of "I'm going to VETO this" as the President did with NDAA?
 
+Cara Schulz I hope he stands his ground on this one, no matter what other legislation is bundled with it.
 
+Cara Schulz Almost. Also with NDAA, he threatened a veto in "its current form". When the changes were made that he liked, he signed it. NDAA is a yearly military appropriations and provisions thing that's been around since the Kennedy administration, not a bill or law, and this fall it will come around again. By threatening a veto on CISPA, he's sending a message to the Senate that when it gets there, they better hack it to pieces.
Anyway, glad to see this statement.
 
Was this before or after Sheila Jackson Lee's amendment to monitor federal networks?
 
Yes, the President has threatened to veto CISPA -- in its current form. However, CISPA's primary sponsors still plan on slapping on some patches (excuse me, amendments) and to proceed towards Friday's vote.

Unfortunately, many of those amendments have their own issues. One even offers -- I kid you not -- a promise to "develop" policies and procedures that will protect individual privacy and civil liberties... after the bill is passed.

It's okay. Trust us.

More at http://www.iSights.org/2012/04/president-obama-threatens-to-veto-cispa-authors-brush-off-threat.html
 
If the people let him down once more, he'll drop it again - this is no job for one man alone - FAITH!!!
 
No premature champagne corks popping here +Cara Schulz!! The final version of whatever it ends up being called should be interesting...
 
I like how they clarify the democratic party vs vs republican... As if we didn't know both are sharing space in the same corporate pockets
 
CISPA is NOT about copyright control. It's about privacy. CISPA is about encouraging every internet company to feed personal information and transactions to the government and to the NSA.

Does the government really need the ability to build a national database of every site you visit? Record every tweet and SMS and email you send and receive, and to whom? Maintain copies of every credit card transaction?

CISPA makes it legal. This isn't about downloading a few songs or a movie. This is about big brother knowing everything about everyone... and using it to their own advantage.

http://www.iSights.org/2012/04/obama-wants-sanctions-on-governments-who-repress-or-monitor-their-citizens.html
 
Make no mistake: CISPA is about private interests wrapped in a cyber security scare tactic. Remember that it includes corporate interests and not just the government. Plus under the bill the content hosters are shielded from lawsuits as long as they cooperate. Seriously: does anyone believe Facebook is backing this out of concern of "cyber security"? Please. Facebook backs the bill because it essentially makes them lawsuit proof.

Basically it gives any random industry the right to request data from social networks, ISPs, and anyone else in the internet (that's hosted in the US at least) in an effort to "discover" their pirated data, and said providers can quietly comply knowing a bill protects them from being sued when sharing said information. Heck they could automate it.

Find me a security organization that backs CISPA and Ill think otherwise. Microsoft, Oracle? They got product they can sell if this passes.
 
What I find alarming is the fact that the NSA already has the domestic spy programs in place and operating before any legislation to make them legal.
Add a comment...