"`(h) Retention of Certain Records- A provider of an electronic communication service or remote computing service shall retain for a period of at least 18 months the temporarily assigned network addresses the service assigns to each account, unless that address is transmitted by radio communication (as defined in section 3 of the Communications Act of 1934).'"
EFF interpretation:
"The data retention mandate in this bill would treat every Internet user like a criminal and threaten the online privacy and free speech rights of every American, as lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have recognized. Requiring Internet companies to redesign and reconfigure their systems to facilitate government surveillance of Americans' expressive activities is simply un-American."
So they're wanting to mandate IP records from ISPs. How does that equate to treating people like criminals and threaten on-line privacy, etc. I thought the default notion was to treat the internet as if it was all out in the open for anyone to see and read.
I actually sympathize with them, but this is very hyperbolic and ridicules the argument, to me. Also, factually incorrect as it would also affect foreigners living in America, irrespective of whether they are in fact, American.
I would equate it to mandating GPS be installed on all new cars for car makers to track.
This bill treats all internet users with suspicion of criminal activity the same way that the TSA assumes everyone might be a threat. It's a minor inconvenience and invasion to many innocent in order to better prosecute the few guilty.
Along the same "slippery slope", it could be argued that the government would do a better job stopping domestic violence by installing cameras in everyone's home. Sure, you're not treated as a criminal, just as someone who could at any moment do criminal things.
A last-minute rewrite of the bill expands the information that commercial Internet providers are required to store to include customers' names, addresses, phone numbers, credit card numbers, bank account numbers, and temporarily-assigned IP addresses, some committee members suggested. By a 7-16 vote, the panel rejected an amendment that would have clarified that only IP addresses must be stored.
"`(h) Retention of Certain Records- A provider of an electronic communication service or remote computing service shall retain for a period of at least 18 months the temporarily assigned network addresses the service assigns to each account, unless that address is transmitted by radio communication (as defined in section 3 of the Communications Act of 1934).'"
EFF interpretation: "The data retention mandate in this bill would treat every Internet user like a criminal and threaten the online privacy and free speech rights of every American, as lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have recognized. Requiring Internet companies to redesign and reconfigure their systems to facilitate government surveillance of Americans' expressive activities is simply un-American."
So they're wanting to mandate IP records from ISPs. How does that equate to treating people like criminals and threaten on-line privacy, etc. I thought the default notion was to treat the internet as if it was all out in the open for anyone to see and read.
I actually sympathize with them, but this is very hyperbolic and ridicules the argument, to me. Also, factually incorrect as it would also affect foreigners living in America, irrespective of whether they are in fact, American.