SOPA isn't dead, just renamed: PCIPA

[Lunar Templar]

Hyperbole aside, this really isn't anything remotely close to SOPA.

If they do add elements of SOPA into it, and rumours DO NOT COUNT, then it'll be worth panicking over.

Tekkaman Dead here is right. from what i've read, it seems to do, or want to do, what it says on the tin

I strongly advise anyone who is concerned to read the bill before freaking out. It isn't very long and only section 4 is relevant to the internet anyway.

Spoiler

SEC. 4. RETENTION OF CERTAIN RECORDS BY ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION SERVICE PROVIDERS.
(a) In General- Section 2703 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
'(h) Retention of Certain Records-
'(1) A commercial provider of an electronic communication service shall retain for a period of at least one year a log of the temporarily assigned network addresses the provider assigns to a subscriber to or customer of such service that enables the identification of the corresponding customer or subscriber information under subsection (c)(2) of this section.
'(2) Access to a record or information required to be retained under this subsection may not be compelled by any person or other entity that is not a governmental entity.
'(3) The Attorney General shall make a study to determine the costs associated with compliance by providers with the requirement of paragraph (1). Such study shall include an assessment of all the types of costs, including for hardware, software, and personnel that are involved. Not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this paragraph, the Attorney General shall report to Congress the results of that study.
'(4) In this subsection--
'(A) the term 'commercial provider' means a provider of electronic communication service that offers Internet access capability for a fee to the public or to such classes of users as to be effectively available to the public, regardless of the facilities used; and
'(B) the term 'Internet' has the same meaning given that term in section 230(f) of the Communications Act of 1934.'.
(b) Sense of Congress- It is the sense of Congress--
(1) to encourage electronic communication service providers to give prompt notice to their customers in the event of a breach of the data retained pursuant to section 2703(h) of title 18 of the United States Code, in order that those effected can take the necessary steps to protect themselves from potential misuse of private information; and
(2) that records retained pursuant to section 2703(h) of title 18, United States Code, should be stored securely to protect customer privacy and prevent against breaches of the records.
(c) Transition Rule- The amendment made by this section shall not apply until 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act to a provider of an electronic communications service that does not, on that date of enactment, have in effect a system of retention of records that complies with the requirements of that amendment.
(d) Study-
(1) The Attorney General, not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, shall complete a study of providers affected by section 2703(h) of title 18, United States Code.
(2) Such study shall include--
(A) the privacy standards and considerations implemented by those providers as they comply with the requirements of section 2703(h); and
(B) the frequency of any reported breaches of data retained pursuant to section 2703(h).
(3) The Attorney General shall, upon the completion of the study, report the results of the study to Congress.

quoted Gummy cause they haz a link and part of the bill

 

[him over there]

This bill is stupid, but not for the reasons it will be fought. It will be a waste of time and a minor attack on privacy to come up with very little information to stop child pornographers. It could be useful in other kinds of cases, but not for fighting child pornography. Essentially, it seems like they are requiring your ISP to monitor you in the same way telephone service providers have to monitor your calls. It will not stop the vast majority of child pornographers from doing what they do, as they use certain methods to keep themselves from being monitored in the way this bill will monitor them. It really isn't as bad as some people are saying it is, but it will probably not wind up being that useful in the long run.

Edit- When I say this bill is stupid, I mean it could never accomplish its goal. If they renamed it to something more along the lines of what it would actually do, which is to create another source of information for authorities to use to track down criminals under investigation, that would make it all cool with me.

Holy Shit Intelligence! Not to belittle the other posters in this thread but I thought we wouldn't degrade to knee jerk reactions about things that we could educate ourselves about by clicking a button a few times. Not that the reaction isn't understandable, this has been proposed by the same man who brought forth PIPA and SOPA but this thread seems to be littered with tactlessness.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

This bill is stupid, but not for the reasons it will be fought. It will be a waste of time and a minor attack on privacy to come up with very little information to stop child pornographers. It could be useful in other kinds of cases, but not for fighting child pornography. Essentially, it seems like they are requiring your ISP to monitor you in the same way telephone service providers have to monitor your calls. It will not stop the vast majority of child pornographers from doing what they do, as they use certain methods to keep themselves from being monitored in the way this bill will monitor them. It really isn't as bad as some people are saying it is, but it will probably not wind up being that useful in the long run.

Edit- When I say this bill is stupid, I mean it could never accomplish its goal. If they renamed it to something more along the lines of what it would actually do, which is to create another source of information for authorities to use to track down criminals under investigation, that would make it all cool with me.

That's exactly it. Once again, congress is legislating something they don't understand. I think it was mentioned earlier in the thread, but child pornographers (and pretty much all serious criminals/other people who want to be completely anonymous on the web) do all of their illegal stuff with TOR, which was developed by naval intelligence to provide a secure network on the internet. It was eventually released for public use, and one of the first things it got used for was illegal activity. Anyway, those IP logs? Yeah, useless for tracking people using TOR -- which means the bill is useless at its stated goal. This is another case of claiming you're trying to stop something by attacking something that is completely unrelated, but might seem related on the surface.

I think there are a whole lot of bills that would be great if they simply renamed them and were honest about what the bill will actually do. This bill is one of them. It could help fight crimes, just not child pornography. Seeing as there seems to be nothing in the bill that makes it explicitly about child pornography other than the name, I support this bill. I also support it being renamed. How about the IPALA Internet Provider Address Log Act. I think that is both better and far easier to pronounce as an acronym.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

This bill is stupid, but not for the reasons it will be fought. It will be a waste of time and a minor attack on privacy to come up with very little information to stop child pornographers. It could be useful in other kinds of cases, but not for fighting child pornography. Essentially, it seems like they are requiring your ISP to monitor you in the same way telephone service providers have to monitor your calls. It will not stop the vast majority of child pornographers from doing what they do, as they use certain methods to keep themselves from being monitored in the way this bill will monitor them. It really isn't as bad as some people are saying it is, but it will probably not wind up being that useful in the long run.

Edit- When I say this bill is stupid, I mean it could never accomplish its goal. If they renamed it to something more along the lines of what it would actually do, which is to create another source of information for authorities to use to track down criminals under investigation, that would make it all cool with me.

Holy Shit Intelligence! Not to belittle the other posters in this thread but I thought we wouldn't degrade to knee jerk reactions about things that we could educate ourselves about by clicking a button a few times. Not that the reaction isn't understandable, this has been proposed by the same man who brought forth PIPA and SOPA but this thread seems to be littered with tactlessness.

I like to read. I think that is the difference. And I have very strong opinions about having opinions. If you don't know what you're talking about, you don't have an opinion about it, you have an opinion about your very false idea about it.

 

[Gearhead mk2]

This is sure to pass because every half-baked, embarrassing, columbine-was-caused-by-Doom, hyperactive parent will stop reading at "Protecting Children" and throw everything they have at it's critics. Why is everyone trying to take over the internet?

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

I think I'm glad I don't live in the US. Seriously, this isn't SOPA or PIPA, it's not going to shut down the internet. It's an invasion of privacy, yes, but it's not going to blow shit up. Plus this one doesn't seem to have any effect outside of the US.

 

[razer17]

Now, I'm not talking about ACTA; that's an international group of laws that's already passed in over a dozen countries after being secretly negotiated in back rooms without public input, and is just awaiting ratification in the EU before going into effect. America passed it back in November, I believe. I'm talking about the Protecting Children from Internet Pornographers Act of 2011.

S

I'm sorry, but after a mistake like that it's pretty hard to take this seriously. ACTA is not a law. You can not be prosecuted under "ACTA". Also, it stopped being private like 2 years ago, and while shady that they did keep it a secret, the latest versions are free for all too see. ACTA doesn't technically go into effect. If the EU ratifies it, it will be in the same position as the US, China and other countries that have already signed it, which is to say, nothing will have changed. IF your going to make a thread about politics and laws, please do some fact checking.

Now for PCIPA. I will admit that I have not read it. I am going solely on the information you have given. If it will truly only be used for child porn, good. If entertainment companies or whoever can sue to get this information = VERY VERY BAD. I am not against holding private data, as long as it can't be misused. Tracking down paedo's isn't misuse. Tracking down a pirate is. Also, this doesn't affect the whole world like SOPA did, so it's a lot harder to care.

 

[StBishop]

OP

You may with to edit in this:

I strongly advise anyone who is concerned to read the bill before freaking out. It isn't very long and only section 4 is relevant to the internet anyway.

Spoiler

SEC. 4. RETENTION OF CERTAIN RECORDS BY ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION SERVICE PROVIDERS.
(a) In General- Section 2703 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
'(h) Retention of Certain Records-
'(1) A commercial provider of an electronic communication service shall retain for a period of at least one year a log of the temporarily assigned network addresses the provider assigns to a subscriber to or customer of such service that enables the identification of the corresponding customer or subscriber information under subsection (c)(2) of this section.
'(2) Access to a record or information required to be retained under this subsection may not be compelled by any person or other entity that is not a governmental entity.
'(3) The Attorney General shall make a study to determine the costs associated with compliance by providers with the requirement of paragraph (1). Such study shall include an assessment of all the types of costs, including for hardware, software, and personnel that are involved. Not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this paragraph, the Attorney General shall report to Congress the results of that study.
'(4) In this subsection--
'(A) the term 'commercial provider' means a provider of electronic communication service that offers Internet access capability for a fee to the public or to such classes of users as to be effectively available to the public, regardless of the facilities used; and
'(B) the term 'Internet' has the same meaning given that term in section 230(f) of the Communications Act of 1934.'.
(b) Sense of Congress- It is the sense of Congress--
(1) to encourage electronic communication service providers to give prompt notice to their customers in the event of a breach of the data retained pursuant to section 2703(h) of title 18 of the United States Code, in order that those effected can take the necessary steps to protect themselves from potential misuse of private information; and
(2) that records retained pursuant to section 2703(h) of title 18, United States Code, should be stored securely to protect customer privacy and prevent against breaches of the records.
(c) Transition Rule- The amendment made by this section shall not apply until 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act to a provider of an electronic communications service that does not, on that date of enactment, have in effect a system of retention of records that complies with the requirements of that amendment.
(d) Study-
(1) The Attorney General, not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, shall complete a study of providers affected by section 2703(h) of title 18, United States Code.
(2) Such study shall include--
(A) the privacy standards and considerations implemented by those providers as they comply with the requirements of section 2703(h); and
(B) the frequency of any reported breaches of data retained pursuant to section 2703(h).
(3) The Attorney General shall, upon the completion of the study, report the results of the study to Congress.

(Emphasis mine)

So they're required keep a record of your IP address. Not your internet activity. As for name, address, bank account and credit card numbers: they're your ISP. They already have all that because you pay them for internet service. And if they don't then this bill will not require them to obtain it.

And then I read Section 2703 of title 18 (which this is an amendment to) and discovered that the government needs a court order to access the information, just like all the other records a company keeps.

Excuse me while I find something worth getting upset about, because this has been very disappointing on that front.

It's pretty much the exact post which you're talking about at the end of the OP where you say

[...] please, if you have any information I don't have, include it in your replies; I'd rather be proven a fool than have people be misled on my account.

I'm not trying to call you a fool at all OP but this does negate much of the terror people are likely feeling when reading the original post.

 

[Orks da best]

Oh one of THESE threads again. Hooray! I swear the internet has fucking become a modern day Chicken Little lately. Give it a rest people. These bills haven't had a shred of a chance of sticking since they started flinging them at the wall like a monkey flinging it's own crap.

Never mind being passed into law, when one of these bills actually passes a vote in either the house or senate THEN it might be time to begin to think about worrying. As it stands right now none of them have even made it as far as to be put up for a vote. Yet the internet collectively runs around screaming about the end of days. The internet as a whole is in desperate need of some perspective.

I like the internet as much as the next person and these bills would be pretty horrible IF they had a chance of passing. They don't though! Like every other fucking bill before them this is just lip service to the entertainment lobbyists. Life is too god damned short to be walking around constantly looking for the next fucking boogey man that's going to "destroy the internet".

it not so much as that they have a chance to pass(though that is likely) its more or less the governemtn being ingorant, and not stoping trying to censor the internet.

 

[Guilherme Zoldan]

Okay I gotta give my two cents. This bill was around before the whole SOPA and PIPA mess, its probably not a replacement or renaming of those bills.

That being said it is an infringment on privacy and all so fuck that shit.

 

[renegade7]

Oh one of THESE threads again. Hooray! I swear the internet has fucking become a modern day Chicken Little lately. Give it a rest people. These bills haven't had a shred of a chance of sticking since they started flinging them at the wall like a monkey flinging it's own crap.

Never mind being passed into law, when one of these bills actually passes a vote in either the house or senate THEN it might be time to begin to think about worrying. As it stands right now none of them have even made it as far as to be put up for a vote. Yet the internet collectively runs around screaming about the end of days. The internet as a whole is in desperate need of some perspective.

I like the internet as much as the next person and these bills would be pretty horrible IF they had a chance of passing. They don't though! Like every other fucking bill before them this is just lip service to the entertainment lobbyists. Life is too god damned short to be walking around constantly looking for the next fucking boogey man that's going to "destroy the internet".

Sensational journalism...sadly, sometimes even the good guys do it =/

 

[nsqared]

damn. Lamar Smith needs to... well, i'll leave that up to you guys. People need to realize that this does much more than get rid of Child porn, just like they needed to realize what SOPA was and that it was going to do much more than stop online piracy.
HERE WE GO AGAIN!!

 

[Drop_D-Bombshell]

Putting Protect Children in a bill is a automatic pass move.

i have a cunning plan... Protect Children from Unregistered Paedophiles Act. Basically, it requires all children to be in their own country for 18 years. No adults allowed. After 18 years, people realise it was a stupid idea that only passed because of its name.

....Get your ass in Congress and get that passed! I would spend money to see it get the green light xD

 

[AngleWyrm]

My thoughts are that anything sold in America as Anti-Sex (but Pro-Gay) will pass, no matter what is actually written on the paper. Americans are idiots.

 

[Treblaine]

They decided to throw the word "children" in there just to get the conservative housewife vote.. How petty..

All the wisdom of the world I'm sure can be found in 5-second Simpson clips.

 

[Treblaine]

Now, I'm not talking about ACTA; that's an international group of laws that's already passed in over a dozen countries after being secretly negotiated in back rooms without public input, and is just awaiting ratification in the EU before going into effect. America passed it back in November, I believe. I'm talking about the Protecting Children from Internet Pornographers Act of 2011.

S

I'm sorry, but after a mistake like that it's pretty hard to take this seriously. ACTA is not a law. You can not be prosecuted under "ACTA". Also, it stopped being private like 2 years ago, and while shady that they did keep it a secret, the latest versions are free for all too see. ACTA doesn't technically go into effect. If the EU ratifies it, it will be in the same position as the US, China and other countries that have already signed it, which is to say, nothing will have changed. IF your going to make a thread about politics and laws, please do some fact checking.

Now for PCIPA. I will admit that I have not read it. I am going solely on the information you have given. If it will truly only be used for child porn, good. If entertainment companies or whoever can sue to get this information = VERY VERY BAD. I am not against holding private data, as long as it can't be misused. Tracking down paedo's isn't misuse. Tracking down a pirate is. Also, this doesn't affect the whole world like SOPA did, so it's a lot harder to care.

Don't count on that staying just for child protection.

Evidence my be retained by a company for any reason but "conditional evidence" is extraordinarily rare, if they have it and the law can get to it then they will use it. If the ISPs are forced to hold the data for catching pedos that won't stop a judge in copyright case writing a subpoena for them to hand that data over for a copyright lawsuit. The ISP can't object by saying "No no no, we only held this to catch pedos!" the courts don't care, if they have it then they must hand it over if the judge thinks the (copyright) law has been violated.

Really the legislators can make all the excuses in the world the fact remains that your ISP will be legally required to spy on their customers, ALL OF THEM, and that data could be obtained by subpoena or warrant.

I think this goes against the spirit of the 4th amendment that the entire populace should not be treated like suspects and while this isn't a search it is borderline breach of privacy. I think if the ISPs on their own initiative keep track of IP with Name for their business running then that is different from preparing a case file on every customer for the lawmen.

I guarantee you, such a treasure trove will not be ignored, every DA will be pestering judges to get access to this data and could very easily become standard procedure for investigation, even background checks.

 

[oktalist]

So they're required keep a record of your IP address.

the government needs a court order to access the information

While we're volunteering to give up our rights with wild abandon, let's add a clause that says hospitals have to keep a record of the DNA of every baby born and every person who receives treatment, and has to surrender that data upon receipt of a properly appointed court order. After all, courts never make mistakes, and our government would never start abusing its power like all those other stupid foreign governments have.

 

[Wintermoot]

dirty move putting "childeren" in the name.
any SANE CP collector/lover would already have stuff like Proxies or TOR to protect his ass.
even if this where to pass it,s not going to change anything in that sense.

 

[Wintermoot]

This is sure to pass because every half-baked, embarrassing, columbine-was-caused-by-Doom, hyperactive parent will stop reading at "Protecting Children" and throw everything they have at it's critics. Why is everyone trying to take over the internet?

it makes for a great propaganda machine.
control the net control the population.

 

[C F]

Well, this isn't nearly as bad as SOPA/PIPA was. And just because it's co-written by Lamar Smith doesn't mean it's automatically an underhanded attempt to slip SOPA back on the line.

I'll keep an eye on it, but I won't be too miffed if this one passes. It appears to be little more than a matter of mandatory record-keeping. Just so long as the records are kept safe...

Catchy title, though. Not one for subtlety, are we Mr. Smith?