Feinstein, Franken, Feingold, Schumer and the other 15 Senators Who Voted To Censor The Internet

[Amerigo Vespucci]

The 19 Senators Who Voted To Censor The Internet
from the free-speech-isn't-free dept

This is hardly a surprise but, this morning (as previously announced), the lame duck Senate Judiciary Committee unanimously voted to move forward with censoring the internet via the COICA bill -- despite a bunch of law professors explaining to them how this law is a clear violation of the First Amendment. What's really amazing is that many of the same Senators have been speaking out against internet censorship in other countries, yet they happily vote to approve it here because it's seen as a way to make many of their largest campaign contributors happy. There's very little chance that the bill will actually get passed by the end of the term but, in the meantime, we figured it might be useful to highlight the 19 Senators who voted to censor the internet this morning:

* Patrick J. Leahy -- Vermont
* Herb Kohl -- Wisconsin
* Jeff Sessions -- Alabama
* Dianne Feinstein -- California
* Orrin G. Hatch -- Utah
* Russ Feingold -- Wisconsin
* Chuck Grassley -- Iowa
* Arlen Specter -- Pennsylvania
* Jon Kyl -- Arizona
* Chuck Schumer -- New York
* Lindsey Graham -- South Carolina
* Dick Durbin -- Illinois
* John Cornyn -- Texas
* Benjamin L. Cardin -- Maryland
* Tom Coburn -- Oklahoma
* Sheldon Whitehouse -- Rhode Island
* Amy Klobuchar -- Minnesota
* Al Franken -- Minnesota
* Chris Coons -- Delaware

This should be a list of shame. You would think that our own elected officials would understand the First Amendment but, apparently, they have no problem turning the US into one of the small list of authoritarian countries that censors internet content it does not like (in this case, content some of its largest campaign contributors do not like). We already have laws in place to deal with infringing content, so don't buy the excuse that this law is about stopping infringement. This law takes down entire websites based on the government's say-so. First Amendment protections make clear that if you are going to stop any specific speech, it has to be extremely specific speech. This law has no such restrictions. It's really quite unfortunate that these 19 US Senators are the first American politicians to publicly vote in favor of censoring speech in America.

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101118/10291211924/the-19-senators-who-voted-to-censor-the-internet.shtml

[cleanhippie]

1. There has to be more to this?

Some of the name on that list are expected, but some are quite a surprise.

What are the reasons that people like Franken are in favor of this?

[madmax]

4. Does seem impossible,

I can't fathom Russ Feingold, or Al Franken voting for this - it can't be.

[cleanhippie]

6. The only way this makes any sense is if "censoring the internet" is not really accurate.

I have not read the bill, nor much about it, but what I do see is a very broad definition of "censoring the internet". What are the reasons that Franken and others have given for their support if this. Could it be that the bill, which one might interpret as "censoring the internet", actually does not do that at all?

[blondeatlast]

7. That's what I'm getting, too. I'd really appreciate someon explaining

the pros and cons of the bill--as I unserstand it, it has something to do with copyright issues, too.

[madmax]

13. Went to Al's website

didn't see anything about this - need to search a little more. Or a lot more :crazy:

[hlthe2b]

8. That is my question... Franken? Feingold?

We need more info...

[blondeatlast]

15. Found this at the surprisingly smart Hollywood.com; still somewhat confusing,

but now I see how the likes of Franken and Feingold can oppose it:

What does the bill do? It allows the creation of an internet blacklist of websites that the US Government can seize (if they are located within the United States) or require your internet service provider to block (if they are located abroad). On the surface it sounds scary, until you read the fine print. The Bill amends only Chapter 113 of title 18 of the United States Code which deals EXCLUSIVELY with stolen property. To expand and abuse this bill would require a completely different bill addressing a very different part of the US Code. There is absolutely nothing in the bill that allows the government a redress of questionable content. Even child porn can’t be targeted by this bill. Unless it is copyrighted. Because everything in this bill targets two things – internet piracy and counterfeiting operations. The only thing this bill is going to block access to – because let’s face it, anyone doing these things in the US will have moved operations offshore long before it passes – is the Pirate Bay, Chinese websites selling spoofed pharmaceuticals, and websites streaming pirated movies.

And the Bill certainly won’t stop the flow of pirated goods or halt file sharing. But it will make it harder to do. And by restricting access, the government can choke the flow on things most people agree are wrong. Sites like Reddit and 4Chan will still be able to widely disseminate links to pirated goods because, as the bill stipulates, such a site must be “primarily designed” and “has no demonstrable, commercially significant purpose or use other than, or is marketed by its operator, or by a person acting in concert with the operator, to offer” such materials. In other words, the entire primary purpose of the site must be to infringe on copyrights. So YouTube is more than safe from this, counter to what Demand Progress would like you to believe.

The idea of a free and open internet is important, just as the idea of a free and open country is important. But free and open doesn’t mean free from the rule of law. There is no real freedom when your own property can be subject to theft and dissemination without your consent; there can be no freedom when people have no way of redress against those who knowingly do them wrong. That’s not freedom; that’s anarchy. People are going to have a hard enough time arguing against this bill when their arguments are sound, well thought out and air tight. Imagine how hard it is going to be to win fighting from the banks of a slippery slope. When and if someone in Congress decides to take this to another level and censor based upon their dislike of content and I’ll be the first one to line up beside you. But not for this; this one’s pretty clear cut.

http://www.hollywood.com/news/Counterpoint_Senate_Bill_3804/7734145

[PeaceNikki]

16. I was just going to post this. Seems to be a lot of misinformation.

[cleanhippie]

18. Interesting. According to your source, "censoring the internet" is a blatant mischaracterization.

And from what I read, I would agree. Its too bad when something like this gets tagged as something its not.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

19. Because the bill isn't actually censoring the internet, it's just enforcing copyright laws.

The text of the bill defines an infringing website as one that is:

(A) primarily designed, has no demonstrable, commercially significant purpose or use other than, or is marketed by its operator, or by a person acting in concert with the operator, to offer:

(i) goods or services in violation of title 17, United States Code, or enable or facilitate a violation of title 17, United States Code, including by offering or providing access to, without the authorization of the copyright owner or otherwise by operation of law, copies of, or public performance or display of, works protected by title 17, in complete or substantially complete form, by any means, including by means of download, transmission, or otherwise, including the provision of a link or aggregated links to other sites or Internet resources for obtaining such copies for accessing such performance or displays; or

(ii) to sell or distribute goods, services, or materials bearing a counterfeit mark, as that term is defined in section 34(d) of the Act entitled 'An Act to provide for the registration and protection of trademarks used in commerce, to carry out the provisions of certain international conventions, and for other purposes', approved July 5, 1946 (commonly referred to as the 'Trademark Act of 1946' or the 'Lanham Act'; 15 U.S.C. § 1116(d)); and

(B) engaged in the activities described in subparagraph (A), and when taken together, such activities are central to the activity of the Internet site or sites accessed through a specific domain name.<3>


It's not "censoring the internet" any more than copyright laws are censoring publishers, it's just making existing copyright laws enforceable on the internet.

One could make a case that clause B is too broad, but the hysteria about "censoring the internet" is mostly empty rhetoric.

[madmax]

2. Russ?? Franken?? Feinstein?? nt

[blondeatlast]

5. And Kyl and Sessions? Agreeing? Something doesn't add up here. nt

[Arugula Latte]

42. Well, Feinstein isn't surprising.

She pretty much sucks.

[blondeatlast]

3. Can someone offer me a "Dummies" version, pro and con, of this bill?

I'm thoroughly puzzled by the list of "no" votes--I just can't see Feingold and Franken agreeing with my wretched slug slime Kyl on ANYTHING.

I've read two analyses of the bill and I'm still puzzled.

[DCKit]

9. There has to be a reason for this... far more than meets the eye. n/t

[Ian David]

10. Sure. Al Franken voted to "censor the internet." You believe that? REALLY? n/t

[howaboutme]

11. Electronic Foundation opposes this internet censorship bill - Hollywood supports it

"The entertainment industry and their allies in Congress had hoped this bill would be quickly approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee with no debate before the Senators went home for the October recess."

http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/09/victory-internet-censorship-bill-delayed

EFF has consistently supported the rights of individuals over the interests of big business and big government. Can anyone say that about politicians?

[jotsy]

12. Senator from my state had something to say about this.

If I understand the rules and heard Thom Hartmann correctly, he once suggested a single senator has the power to stop legislation.

<http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/11/oregon-senator-vows-block-internet-censorship-bill/>

[PeaceNikki]

14. As I understand it, they didn't actually vote for passage of the bill,

but rather voted in committee to send it to the full Senate - which is arguably "voting for the bill", but not in the sense that most people would use that phrase.

[madmax]

17. It's posted on Huffington Post, also

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/20/the-19-senators-who-voted_n_786369.html

Edit: which leads to OP link... :sigh:

[madmax]

22. Check out the comments on techdirt

This may be bullshit...

So who is techdirt?

Comment:
"Anonymous Coward, Nov 18th, 2010 @ 11:18am
So, whats techdirt's IP address?"

[Subdivisions]

39. nm n/t

[asdjrocky]

20. None of these people have our best interests at heart.

Not one of them. Come on people, where do they get their money?

[blondeatlast]

21. There's another analysis of the bill upthread; it claims "censorship"

is a mischaracterization.

the bill is only blocked in committee, by the way; there's been no Senate vote on the bill.

[PeaceNikki]

23. Right, they didn't actually vote for passage of the bill, but rather voted in committee

to send it to the full Senate - which is arguably "voting for the bill", but not in the sense that most people would use that phrase.

The sky is not falling.

[madmax]

24. This may be something that HuffPo

picked up from the techdirt site and ran with it. :shrug: I will not believe it until Franken and Feingold come out and I hear it from their own lips. Then, I'll freak out.

[Better Believe It]

25. Prominent internet engineers sent a joint letter to Senate opposing the COICA law.

96 prominent Internet engineers sent a joint letter the US Senate Judiciary Committee, declaring their opposition to the "Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act" (COICA). The text of the letter is below.

An Open Letter From Internet Engineers to the Senate Judiciary Committee

September 28, 2010

We, the undersigned, have played various parts in building a network called the Internet. We wrote and debugged the software; we defined the standards and protocols that talk over that network. Many of us invented parts of it. We're just a little proud of the social and economic benefits that our project, the Internet, has brought with it.

We are writing to oppose the Committee's proposed new Internet censorship and copyright bill. If enacted, this legislation will risk fragmenting the Internet's global domain name system (DNS), create an environment of tremendous fear and uncertainty for technological innovation, and seriously harm the credibility of the United States in its role as a steward of key Internet infrastructure. In exchange for this, the bill will introduce censorship that will simultaneously be circumvented by deliberate infringers while hampering innocent parties' ability to communicate.

All censorship schemes impact speech beyond the category they were intended to restrict, but this bill will be particularly egregious in that regard because it causes entire domains to vanish from the Web, not just infringing pages or files. Worse, an incredible range of useful, law-abiding sites can be blacklisted under this bill. These problems will be enough to ensure that alternative name-lookup infrastructures will come into widespread use, outside the control of US service providers but easily used by American citizens. Errors and divergences will appear between these new services and the current global DNS, and contradictory addresses will confuse browsers and frustrate the people using them. These problems will be widespread and will affect sites other than those blacklisted by the American government.

The US government has regularly claimed that it supports a free and open Internet, both domestically and abroad. We can't have a free and open Internet without a global domain name system that sits above the political concerns and objectives of any one government or industry. To date, the leading role the US has played in this infrastructure has been fairly uncontroversial because America is seen as a trustworthy arbiter and a neutral bastion of free expression. If the US suddenly begins to use its central position in the DNS for censorship that advances its political and economic agenda, the consequences will be far-reaching and destructive.

Senators, we believe the Internet is too important and too valuable to be endangered in this way, and implore you to put this bill aside.

The letter is signed by the following:

David P. Reed, who played an important role in the development of TCP/IP and designed the UDP protocol that makes real-time applications like VOIP possible today; former Professor at MIT
Paul Vixie, author of BIND, the most widely-used DNS server software, and President of the Internet Systems Consortium
Jim Gettys, editor of the HTTP/1.1 protocol standards, which we use to do everything on the Web.
Bill Jennings, who was VP of Engineering at Cisco for 10 years and responsible for building much of the hardware and embedded software for Cisco's core router products and high-end Ethernet switches.
Steve Bellovin, one of the originators of USENET; found and fixed numerous security flaws in DNS; Professor at Columbia.
Gene Spafford, who analyzed the first catastrophic Internet worm and made many subsequent contributions to computer security; Professor at Purdue.
Dan Kaminsky, renowned security researcher who in 2008 found and helped to fix a grave security vulnerability in the entire planet's DNS systems.
David Ulevitch, CEO of OpenDNS, which offers alternative DNS services for enhanced security.
John Vittal, Created the first full email client and the email standards.
Esther Dyson, chairman, EDventure Holdings; founding chairman, ICANN; former chairman, EFF; active investor in many start-ups that support commerce, news and advertising on the Internet; director, Sunlight Foundation
Brian Pinkerton, Founder of WebCrawler, the first big Internet search engine.
Dr. Craig Partridge, Architect of how email is routed through the Internet, and designed the world's fastest router in the mid 1990s.
David J. Farber, helped to conceive and organize the major American research networks CSNET, NSFNet, and NREN; former chief technologist at the FCC; Professor at Carnegie Mellon; EFF board member.
John Gilmore, co-designed BOOTP (RFC 951), which became DHCP, the way you get an IP address when you plug into an Ethernet or get on a WiFi access point. Current EFF board member.
Karl Auerbach, Former North American publicly elected member of the Board of Directors of ICANN, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers.
Paul Timmins, designed and runs the multi-state network of a medium sized telephone and internet company in the Midwest.
Lou Katz, I was the founder and first President of the Usenix Association, which published much of the academic research about the Internet, opening networking to commercial and other entities.
Walt Daniels, IBM’s contributor to MIME, the mechanism used to add attachments to emails.
Gordon E. Peterson II, designer and implementer of the first commercially available LAN system, and member of the Anti-Spam Research Group of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF).
John Adams, operations engineer at Twitter, signing as a private citizen
Alex Rubenstein, founder of Net Access Corporation. We are an Internet Service Provider for nearly 15 years, and I have served on the ARIN AC.
Roland Alden, Originator of the vCard interchange standard; builder of Internet infrastructure in several developing countries.
Lyndon Nerenberg, Author/inventor of RFC3516 IMAP BINARY and contributor to the core IMAP protocol and extension.
James Hiebert, I performed early experiments using TCP Anycast to track routing instability in Border Gateway Protocol.
Dr. Richard Clayton, designer of Turnpike, widely used Windows-based Internet access suite. Prominent Computer Security researcher at Cambridge University.
Brandon Ross, designed the networks of MindSpring and NetRail.
James Ausman, helped build the first commercial web site and worked on the Apache web server that runs two-thirds of the Web.
Michael Laufer, worked on the different networks they dealt with including the Milnet, other US Govt nets, and regional (NSF) nets that became the basis of the Internet. Also designed, built, and deployed the first commercial VPN infrastructure (I think) as well as dial up nets that were part of AOL and many other things.
Janet Plato, I worked for Advanced Network and Service from 1992 or so running the US Internet core before it went public, and then doing dial engineering until we were acquired by UUNet. While at UUnet I worked in EMEA Engineering where I helped engineer their European STM16 backbone.
Thomas Hutton, I was one of the original architects of CERFnet - one of the original NFSnet regional networks that was later purchased by AT&T. In addition, I am currently chair of the CENIC HPR (High Performance Research) technical committee. This body directs CENIC in their managment and evolution of Calren2, the California research and education network.
Phil Lapsley, co-author of the Internet Network News Transfer Protocol (NNTP), RFC 977, and developer of the NNTP reference implementation in 1986 ... still in use today almost 25 years later.
Stephen Wolff. While at NSF I nurtured, led, and funded the NSFNET from its infancy until by 1994 I had privatized, commercialized, and decommissioned the NSFNET Backbone; these actions stimulated the commercial activity that led to the Internet of today.
Bob Schulman , worked on University of Illinois’ ANTS system in the Center for Advanced Computation in 1976 when ANTS connected a few hosts to the ARPAnet.
Noel D. Humphreys, As a lawyer I worked on the American Bar Association committee that drafted guidelines for use of public key encryption infrastructure in the early days of the internet.
Ramaswamy P. Aditya, I built various networks and web/mail content and application hosting providers including AS10368 (DNAI) which is now part of AS6079 (RCN), which I did network engineering and peering for, and then I did network engineering for AS25 (UC Berkeley), followed and now I do network engineering for AS177-179 and others (UMich).
Haudy Kazemi, Implemented Internet connections (from the physical lines, firewalls, and routers to configuring DNS and setting up Internet-facing servers) to join several companies to the Internet and enable them to provide digital services to others.
Mike Meyer, I helped debug the NNTP software in the 80s, and desktop web browsers and servers in the 90s.
Richard S. Kulawiec, 30 years designing/operating academic/commercial/ISP systems and networks.
Michael Alexander, I have been involved with networking since before the Internet existed. Among other things I was part of the team that connected the MTS mainframe at Michigan to the Merit Network. I was also involved in some of the early work on Email with Mailnet at MIT and wrote network drivers for IP over ISDN for Macintosh computers.
Gordon Cook, I led the OTA study between 1990 and 1992 and since April 1992 have been self employed as editor publisher of the cook report.
Thomas Donnelly, I help support the infrastructure for the world’s most widely used web server control panel.
Peter Rubenstein, I helped design and run the ISP transit backbone of AOL, the ATDN.
Owen DeLong, I am an elected member of the ARIN Advisory Council. I am the resource holder of record on a number of domains. I have been active on the internet for more than 20 years. I was involved in getting some of the first internet connections into primary and secondary schools before commercial providers like AT&T started sponsoring events like Net-Day.
Erik Fair, co-author, RFC 1627, RFC 977, former [e-mail].
Tony Rall, I was involved in providing Internet access to the IBM corporation - from the late 80s until last year. I worked within the company to ensure that Internet access was as "open" and transparent as possible.
Bret Clark, Spectra Access. We are New Hampshire's largest wireless Internet service providers and have built a large footprint of Internet Access for businesses in New Hampshire.
Paul Fleming, Run as33182 as a large hosting provider (5gbps+). develop monitoring software suite.
David M. Kristol, Co-author, RFCs 2109, 2965 ("HTTP State Management") Contributor, RFC 2616 ("Hypertext Transfer Protocol")
Anthony G. Lauck, I helped design and standardize routing protocols and local area network protocols and served on the Internet Architecture Board.
Judith Axler Turner, I started the first NSF-approved commercial service on the Internet, the Chronicle of Higher Education's job ads, in 1993.
Jason Novinger , I was the Network Administrator for Lawrence Freenet, a small wireless ISP in Lawrence, KS.
Dustin Jurman, I am the CEO of Rapid Systems Corporation a Network Service Provider, and Systems builder responsible for 60 Million of NOFA funding.
Blake Pfankuch, Over the years I have implemented thousands if not tens of thousands of webservers, DNS servers and supporting infrastructure.
Dave Shambley, retired engineer (EE -rf-wireless- computers) and active in the design of web site and associated graphics.
Stefan Schmidt, I had sole technical responsibility for running all of the freenet.de / AS5430 DNS Infrastructure with roughly 120.000 Domains and approximately 1.5 million DSL subscribers for the last 9 years and have been actively involved in the development of the PowerDNS authoritative and recursive DNS Servers for the last 4 years.
Dave Skinner, I was an early provider of net connectivity in central Oregon. Currently I provide hosting services.
Richard Hartmann, Backbone manager and project manager at Globalways AG, a German ISP.
Curtis Maurand, founder of a small internet company in Maine in 1994. started delivering low cost broadband to municipalities and businesses before acquired by Time-Warner.
James DeLeskie, internetMCI Sr. Network Engineer, Teleglobe Principal Network Architect
Bernie Cosell, I was a member of the team at BBN that wrote the code for the original ARPAnet IMP. I also did a big chunk of the redesign of the TELNET protocol .
Eric Brunner-Williams, I contributed to rfc1122 and 1123, and co-authored rfc2629, Domain Name System (DNS) IANA Considerations, and authored the "sponsored registry" proposal, implemented as .aero, .coop and .museum, and assisted with .cat, authored the privacy policy for HTTP cookies, and contribute to both the IETF and to ICANN.
Nathan Eisenberg, Atlas Networks Senior System Administrator, manager of 25K sq. ft. of data centers which provide services to Starbucks, Oracle, and local state
Jon Loeliger, I have implemented OSPF, one of the main routing protocols used to determine IP packet delivery. At other companies, I have helped design and build the actual computers used to implement core routers or storage delivery systems. At another company, we installed network services (T-1 lines and ISP service) into Hotels and Airports across the country.
Tim Rutherford, managed DNS (amongst other duties) for an C4.NET since 1997.
Ron Lachman , I am co-founder of Ultra DNS. I am co-founder of Sandpiper networks (arguably, inventor of the CDN) I am "namesake" founder of Lachman TCP/IP (millions of copies of TCP on Unix System V and many other other platforms) Joint developer of NFS along with Sun MicroSystems.
Jeromie Reeves, Network Administrator & Consultant. I have a small couple hundred user Wireless ISP and work with or have stakes in many other networks.
Alia Atlas, I designed software in a core router (Avici) and have various RFCs around resiliency, MPLS, and ICMP.
Marco Coelho, As the owner of Argon Technologies Inc., a company that has been in the business of providing Internet service for the past 13 years.
David J. Bowie, intimately involved in deployment and maintenance of the Arpanet as it evolved from 16 sites to what it is today.
Scott Rodgers, I have been an ISP on Cape Cod Massachusetts for 17 years and I agree that this bill is poison.
William Schultz, for the past 10 years I've worked on hundreds of networks around the US and have worked for a major voice and data carrier. I do not agree with Internet censorship in any degree, at all.
Rebecca Hargrave Malamud, helped advance many large-scale Internet projects, and have been working the web since its invention.
Kelly J. Kane - Shared web hosting network operator. Tom DeReggi, 15yr ISP/WISP veteran, RapidDSL. Doug Moeller, Chief Technical Officer, Autonet Mobile, Inc.
David Boyes, Operations Coordinator, SESQUInet, First mainframe web server, First Internet tools for VM/CMS, Caretaker, NSS1, Caretaker ENSS3, Author, Chronos Appt Management Protocol, Broadcast operator, IETF telepresence, IETF 28/29
Jim Warren, I was one of Vint Cerf’s grad students and worked for a bit on the early protocols for the old ARPAnet ... back before it became the DARPAnet
Christopher Nielsen, I have worked for several internet startups, building everything from email and usenet infrastructure to large-scale clusters. I am currently a Sr. Operations Engineer for a product and shopping search engine startup.
David Barrett, Founder and CEO of Expensify, former engineering manager for Akamai. I helped build Red Swoosh, which delivers large files for legitimate content owners, and was acquired by Akamai, which hosts 20% of the internet by powering the world's top 20,000 websites.
David Hiers, I have designed dozens of Internet edge networks, several transit networks, and currently operate a VOIP infrastructure for 20,000 business subscribers.
Jay Reitz, Co-founder and VP of Engineering of hubpages.com, the 60th largest website in the US with 14M monthly US visitors.
Peter H. Schmidt, I co-founded the company (Midnight Networks) that created the protocol test software (ANVL) that ensured routers from all vendors could actually interoperate to implement the Internet.
Harold Sinclair, design, build, and operate DNS, Mail, and Application platforms on the Internet.
John Todd, I invented and operate a DNS-based telephony directory "freenum.org" which uses the DNS to replace telephone numbers.
Christopher Gerstorff, technician for a wireless broadband internet provider, Rapid Systems, Inc.
Robert Rodgers, Engineer at Juniper and Cisco. Worked on routers and mobile systems.
Illene Jones, I have had a part in creating the software that runs on the servers.
Brandon Applegate, I have worked in the ISP sector since the mid-1990s as a network engineer.
Leslie Carr, Craigslist Network Engineer
Doug Dodds, wrote several pieces of software for ARPANet in the 1970s, including BBN TENEX User Telnet and the HERMES email system.
Jamie Rishaw, Formerly, network architect to Big-10 Universities, the Dalai Lama, NFL and Playboy. Currently active in DNS Security steering and planning, and Global Network Operations.
Jeff Hodges, Protocol Architect: LDAPv3, SAML, Liberty Alliance ID-FF ID-WSF
Bob Hingen, worked at BBN and helped build the Arpanet and early Internet. I have been very active in the IETF and am the co-inventor of IPv6.
David M. Miller, CTO / Exec VP for DNS Made Easy (largest IP Anycast Managed Enterprise DNS Provider in the world by number of domain names served).
Ben Kamen, started an Atari based BBS in 1982 and has worked with networks ever since.
Brian Lloyd, key contributor to the Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) used by with modems to connect to the Internet; co-wrote the California Department of Education's, K-12 Network Technology Planning Guide in the early 1990s
Steven Back, network administrator for many domain names related to medical studies
Brad Templeton, founder of ClariNet Communications, the world's first ".com" company and the net's first online newspaper; EFF board member.
Subsequent signatories:
Edward Henigin, CTO of Texas.net (San Antonio's first ISP founded in 1994), Data Foundry (Data Center outsourcing), Giganews (#1 ranked Usenet provider) and Golden Frog (Encryption service).
Related Issues: The COICA Internet Censorship and Copyright Bill

http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/09/open-letter

[howaboutme]

26. Senators PROTECTING entertainment interests and

not our interests....that's what this is about. Any time you institute censorship you can be assured it will be abused for politics and commercial interests. Be assured you will see little from MSM on this. Just like Citizens United decision, this bill is in their interests. There are no controls on this based upon what I have read and I suspect nevarious motives that extend beyond entertainment industry.

The Electronic Foundation EFF.org has an absolutely impeccable record and undisputed history of defending individual rights and privacy against big money regardless of politics. How many Senators have such a record regardless of party?

[PeaceNikki]

28. They didn't vote on PASSAGE of the bill, so chill out.

[howaboutme]

30. Chillout and wait until they pass it? Isn't that what they want?

This is about protecting the role of Hollywood and big media as our predominant source of information. Their ultimate agenda is to expand their ability to copyright anything and everything and expand their rights to enforcement.

Most importantly it is about limiting internet content, news, information, and discussion to what the establishment approves. The battle against net neutrality was similar in nature but on another plane. This is even more insidious because it can block content instead of just limiting bandwidth.

To those who believe that just because some Democratic Senators voted for it, it must be OK, you need to do some serious research. It is totally about censorship that will benefit the establishment and status quo and potentially such sites as DU.

[PeaceNikki]

34. The COICA bill requires that a court find the “rogue website is dedicated to infringing activity"

DU is not nor ever will be dedicated to such activity.

[howaboutme]

35. Does RIGHTHAVEN jog your memory?

The EFF.org that strongly opposes this bill also supports DU in the defense against copyright infringement claimed by RIGHTHAVEN.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/09/righthaven-sham/

EFF opposes this bill for the underlying reasons of copyright abuse that will only become more prevalent and harmful to those of us who want unbiased unfettered content.

The media companies would prefer to copyright your every thought and spoken word so that everything would be off the table except their agenda.

[PeaceNikki]

36. I get that.

But, as I said, it hasn't fucking passed. And it won't. The votes were not for PASSAGE as many have implied.

[howaboutme]

37. Potential for abuse to "the many" is immense, while the beneficiaries are few but powerful

I believe the intent of the original post wasn't so much about passage, but why in the world would anyone support this bill (left or right)?

It is about controlling the internet and that flies directly in the face of what most Americans and most Democrats support. There are only two groups that could support this - John Poindexter's TIA and the big media. Everyone else will be a potential victim of it.

Can you accept that the potential for abuse to "the many" is immense, while the beneficiaries are few but powerful?

[PeaceNikki]

38. I don't support this bill.

In fact, I have a couple rants in my journal about the thuggery of the RIAA.

What I want to clarify is that the 19 votes were not to PASS this. I think the statement "Feinstein, Franken, Feingold, Schumer and the other 15 Senators Who Voted To Censor The Internet" is wholly untrue.

[howaboutme]

40. I'm glad to hear that

because there are some on DU that appear to support it.

Can there be any doubt that the Senators listed on OP must support it, or they would not have voted for it? Regarding the OP, not liking the way something is worded is not the same as it being untrue. The original post was true even if some on DU see it as over hyped or non-PC.

[PeaceNikki]

41. I would really like to withhold judgement on the committee votes right now.

Feingold (my Senator... for now :() is a staunch supporter of civil liberties and I'd really like to hear what he has to say on this bill. Franken, too. Sadly, Feingold's not made any statements about anything since the very VERY depressing election.

[howaboutme]

43. Potentially harmful to DU

Added because I omitted harmful to in last sentence.

Just a point of clarification.

[madmax]

27. This is a BFD

All manner of media are controlled by corporations and those with mega bucks. The only resource I have, that we all have where we can go 'outside' the constraints of our MSM is the internet.

Before DU and all the rest I read the UK Guardian which always reported 'our news', especially about Gore v. Bush with a different perspective and opinion. My only connection to reality as I saw it during those dark days.

No Internet Censure of any kind. Now way, no how. :mad:

[sally cat]

29. Prepare for the rationalizing of this to begin. Anything can be rationalized with enough effort.

[defendandprotect]

31. Sad ... surprised to see Whitehouse on that list ... amazing!

Long and worrisome list!

[pnorman]

32. Here's a relevant DU thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9595567

[howaboutme]

33. John Poindexter would be proud

Those that have always wished to control the message to the people will be proud of this bill and it meshes nicely with "Total Information Awareness".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_Awareness_Office

Why would we attempt to rationalize this bill by saying "they just want to protect their copyrights" or the "internet needs to be legal"?

Today the media and corporations are attempting to gain copyright control over everything from our genes to the spoken word and by our government establishing systems that limits accessibility to information under the guise that it is copyrighted, is not in the peoples' interest. Limiting anything except pollution, graft and corruption usually works against the people.

[ProSense]

44. You think these Senators are trying to destroy our democracy? n/t

[JackRiddler]

46. You think you can ask a more loaded question?

[howaboutme]

47. You might wish to ask them

Unlike the Senators I never would have voted the way they did. Most organizations that have historically and unambiguously supported policies that favored a strong USA democracy oppose this bill. Logic would say that if they voted for it perhaps they have other more important and conflicting interests.

[Better Believe It]

45. Civil Liberties and Human Rights Advocates Oppose COICA

October 26, 2010

Letter from Human Rights Advocates and Press Freedom Organizations
Human rights advocates and press freedom organizations express concern about domestic and global censorship problems in COICA.

October 26, 2010
Chairman Patrick J. Leahy
Ranking Member Jeff Sessions
United States Senate United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510 Washington, DC 20510

Re: Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA)

Dear Chairman Leahy and Ranking Member Sessions:

The undersigned advocates and human rights and press freedom organizations write to express our deep
concern about S. 3804, the “Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act” (COICA). While we
sympathize with the underlying goals of S. 3804, we believe that key provisions in the bill will result in serious
unintended consequences for freedom of expression and human rights on the Internet, undermining global
Internet freedom abroad. We urge you to refrain from moving this legislation until these issues are fully
examined and addressed.

In its essence, the bill would enshrine in US law a legal process that would force Internet service providers (ISPs)
to block certain communications based on content, oblige registry operators to lock domains for the entire
world, and create an extrajudicial blacklist of suspected content—setting a precedent that we believe would
reverberate around the globe. Over forty countries now filter or block content on the Internet to some degree,
and that number is growing. Even more problematic, filtering is no longer the sole province of pariah states;
liberal democracies like Australia are also considering mandatory filtering regimes.1 Historically, the United
States has been the bulwark against censorship and government imposed blocking of Internet content. If the
United States sets the precedent that any country can order the blocking of a domain name of a foreign website
or seize such a domain (thus taking down content for the world), it will forfeit the high ground in this global
debate, and the effort to secure the rights of Internet users and citizen journalists around the world to speak
and access legal content may be irreparably harmed.

The human rights community has strongly condemned countries that use the tactics proposed in COICA to take
down content for a site’s global user base. In Turkey, for example, YouTube has been blocked for several years
because it refuses to disable access to content illegal under local law for the site’s global user base.2 Advocates
in Turkey have been working to rescind this order. Yet this bill would ratify global content blocking by allowing
the Attorney General with a court order to direct a registry operator or registrar located in the US to disable
access to a domain name for the global Internet. While the technical mechanisms for achieving this may vary,
the effect is the same: COICA would stand for the proposition that countries have the right to insist on removal
of content from the global Internet in service to the exigencies of domestic law. Nothing in principle would limit
application of this approach solely to copyright infringement.

COICA could also lead many states, including liberal democracies, to adopt similar policies directed at US
content, taking it down worldwide. Content that is fully protected under the First Amendment remains proscribable in other countries, such as hate speech in France and Germany, and local access to such speech
remains a frustration for governments in those countries.3 And of course, COICA’s approach could be misused in
countries where the rule of law is weak or entirely absent. As Microsoft’s recent experiences in Russia have
revealed, governments can exploit copyright laws as a pretext for suppression of political speech in other parts
of the world.4 Further, once the US sends the green light, the use of domain locking or ISP domain blocking to
silence other kinds of content considered unlawful in a given country—from criticism of the monarchy in
Thailand to any speech that “harms the interests of the nation” in China—could metastasize, impacting bloggers,
citizen journalists, democracy movements, human rights advocates, and ordinary users all over the world. For
countries already engaged in ISP blocking, US precedent would legitimize the actions of their governments,
undermining the US government’s ability to criticize such practices. And the precedent that domain locking or
blocking can be encouraged through an extrajudicial blacklist only intensifies this risk.

Finally, directing ISPs to block content through DNS tampering directly undermines the US government’s
commitment to advancing one global Internet. In her February speech at the Newseum, Secretary of State
Clinton decried the development of “a new information curtain [] descending across much of the world,” and
declared the United States’ support “for a single Internet where all of humanity has equal access to knowledge
and ideas.”5 If many other countries adopt COICA’s approach—and there is little doubt that they will—it will
worsen the balkanization of the Internet, where the information any individual can access will depend entirely
on where that individual sits. Freedom of expression and association are universal rights; further balkanization
of the Internet undermines these rights and threatens the potential of the Internet as a powerful tool for
advancing human rights and democracy.

In all, this bill is in tension with current US foreign policy and could have grave repercussions for global human
rights and the free and open Internet. We sympathize with frustration over copyright enforcement in a global
environment, but Congress must not enact COICA (S. 3804) without fully addressing its impact on other core US
values and policy objectives. We look forward to working with you to identify ways to address legitimate
concerns about copyright infringement without undermining Internet freedom and user rights.

Respectfully submitted,

American Civil Liberties Union
Center for Democracy & Technology
Electronic Frontier Foundation
Freedom House
Human Rights First
Human Rights Watch
Rebecca MacKinnon
Reporters Sans Frontières
World Press Freedom Committee

https://www.eff.org/files/filenode/coica_files/COICA_hu...