CISPA is SOPA's Bigger Badder Big Brother

It seems some people in the government are bent on poaching internet information. Another bill is on the hill this week that is stirring internet privacy advocates to cry foul and warn people that this one could be worse than its predecessors SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) and PIPA (Protect IP Act).

The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) claims to be different. Though it loosely mentions intellectual property, the bill’s author U.S. Representative Michael Rogers (R-MI) says that its purpose is to stop foreign threats aimed at American government and businesses.

The problem internet advocates have is the vague language of the potential law and how it can easily be exploited to encroach on the civil liberties of users across the country. The way it is currently written, companies can monitor users’ activity, including personal correspondence, emails, even social media and then turn the information over to the government. The bill fails to specify what branch of the government is to receive the information or what they are allowed to do with it.

Summing it up, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) voiced its concern about the bill stating, "The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act would create a cybersecurity exception to all privacy laws and allow companies to share the private and personal data they hold on their American customers with the government for cybersecurity purposes. Beyond the potential for massive data collection authorization, the bill would provide no meaningful oversight of, or accountability for, the use of these new information-sharing authorities."

While large companies like Google and Wikipedia have not backed the protest against CISPA as fervently as they did against SOPA, a grass roots movement of individuals is growing online. More than 680,000 signed a petition addressed to congress entitled "Save the Internet from the US." Opposition for the bill is expected to rise as the vote draws closer and awareness increases.

While the bill has 111 supporters in congress, the White House has issued a statement saying it does not support the legislation and will vote no when the opportunity arises. Without mentioning CISPA specifically, National Security Council spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden said “…while information sharing legislation is an essential component of comprehensive legislation to address critical infrastructure risks, information sharing provisions must include robust safeguards to preserve the privacy and civil liberties of our citizens. Legislation without new authorities to address our nation’s critical infrastructure vulnerabilities, or legislation that would sacrifice the privacy of our citizens in the name of security, will not meet our nation's urgent needs.”

It’s clear that the government is moving forward with more regulations and laws regarding internet activity but users are letting them know they won’t relinquish their privacy rights without a fight. The key to making both parties happy will be very precise wording outlining intent and accountability.  Until then this cyber battle will wage on no matter what anacronym it goes by.