Tech at Night: Barack Obama covering for Lieberman-Collins power grab via CISPA opposition, Darrell Issa does good on Transparency

Posted by Neil Stevens
Thursday, April 26th
RedState.Com

In an example of lucky timing, the GSA scandal proved why Darrell Issa’s DATA act was needed. Transparency in government allows for oversight. So the bill passed the House by voice vote.

I first floated a while back the idea that this sudden, strident CISPA opposition was roote d in a desire to distract the public from the much stronger and more dangerous Lieberman-Collins bill in the Senate. It’ll work with the libertarian left because hey, they’ll believe whatever the left says about eeevil Bushitlerian Rethuglicans. But it disappoints me when the right, including FreedomWorks, is tricked and puts effort into CISPA instead of Lieberman-Collins. Did we learn nothing from Net Neutrality?

But yeah, when the usual whiny groups along with Barack Obama and the administration are joining together to talk exclusively about CISPA but not at all about Lieberman-Collins.

House Republicans may in fact limit the bill in response to the veto threat, but the fact is we need a flexible legal framework to empower the good guys to have information which is critical when countering bad guys who share information all the time.

International attacks are real though. In fact, everyone may want to check into this account by the FBI about a thwarted attack that may still infect your computer.


Let’s do some FCC: They’re already expanding Internet subsidies. Also, while they like to drag their feet on some spectrum sales, one in particular they man aged to approve rather quickly. How coincidental that it’s one that is only happening because FCC rejected an earlier T-Mobile/AT&T deal, eh? Meanwhile, Republicans are on the case of FCC trying to expand its authority again, this time into political speech regulation, even as Chuck Grassley milks all he can to get FCC transparency.

PATENT WARS PAUSED: Hey all. When I started out writing about PATENT WARS, it was fresh and interesting. But, as all this stuff has gotten more and more expansive, with everyone suing or allying with everyone else, it’s becoming too much to cover, and very repetitive. I hope the point is made though, that real patent reform was needed, not the first-to-file mess we passed. So, no more PATENT WARS coverage unless something really big happens.

There’s some more good stuff to cover, but it’s 2am, so… quick hits:

Here we go: Calls to end the light-touch regime of the Telecommunications Act 1996 and replace it with a state-centered model of controlled Internet. Funny how Barry Diller says we need a total rewrite of Internet laws… except when it comes to copyright. Funny, that. Unless it’s all about a power grab, which we know it is, then it makes perfect sense.

Can we please retire Jay Rockefeller? He’s whining about paying too much for the latest in Internet technology even as he pushes for regulation that would only make Internet competition harder. It’s crazy.

Speaking of Internet competition: The desire for a free lunch lives on in the form of Net Neutrality whiners whose goal all along was to get their high-end bandwidth use subsidized by the masses and the taxpayers.

As I’ve been saying all along, state Amazon taxes are unconstitutional, as a Cook County judge ruled this week with respect to the Illinois attempt. If you want interstate sales taxation, you need Congressional involvement in the form of a legal interstate compact. The Marketplace Fairness Act could be a good start to such a deal, assuming it got amended to ensure no national sales tax could ever be imposed through it.

Oh look, The Washington Post is carrying water for Jim DeMint’s opponents as DeMint tries to level the playing field of cable television. Remember Jay Rockefeller’s whining? Regulations biased against cable companies and for broadcast television stations, they’re part of the problem.

North Carolina censoring Internet content. Do you have your blog license?