The mere fact of storing that classified information makes the computer part of the "critical infrastructure of a country"? How to deal with the fact that R&D in the US is heavily conducted by contractors? Are the computers of RAND, Lockheed Martin, and Raytheon part of the critical infrastructure of the US? And if those computers are located abroad?<br>

<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 5:06 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:suresh@hserus.net" target="_blank">suresh@hserus.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">

<div dir="auto"><div>The proposal to set up a clearinghouse for Internet threat data is actually a good one.  And seems to have nothing to do with either copyright infringement.</div><div><br></div><div>What can be considered critical infrastructure is necessarily a broad definition,</div>

<div><br></div><div>The article doesn't connect the dots between that and copyright infringement. IP theft .. what do you call it when a computer network is penetrated and  the plans for a new fighter plane, control data for a dam or power plant, blueprints for a new industrial process etc stolen?<br>

<br>--srs (iPad)</div><div><div class="h5"><div><br>On 04-Mar-2013, at 21:47, Riaz K Tayob <<a href="mailto:riaz.tayob@gmail.com" target="_blank">riaz.tayob@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite">

<div>
  

    
  
  
    <h1><a href="http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/03/copyright-infringement-now-seen-as-terrorism.html" target="_blank">Is
        Copyright Infringement Now Seen As Terrorism?</a></h1>
    <div> <span>Posted
        on</span> <a href="http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/03/copyright-infringement-now-seen-as-terrorism.html" title="5:13 am" rel="bookmark" target="_blank"><span>March 4,
          2013</span></a> <span>by</span> <span><a href="http://www.washingtonsblog.com/author/washingtonsblog" title="View all posts by WashingtonsBlog" target="_blank">WashingtonsBlog</a></span>
    </div>
    <div>
      <h3 style="color:#000099">Government Uses Law As a Sword Against
        Dissent</h3>
      <p>We <a title="reported" href="http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/02/ter%C2%B7ror%C2%B7ist-noun-anyone-who-disagrees-with-the-government-2.html" target="_blank">reported</a>
        last year:</p>
      <blockquote>
        <p>The government treats copyright infringers as terrorists, and
          swat teams have been deployed against them. See <a title="this" href="http://news.cnet.com/Terrorist-link-to-copyright-piracy-alleged/2100-1028_3-5722835.html" target="_blank">this</a>, <a title="this" href="http://techliberation.com/2007/01/17/swat-teams-enforcing-copyright/" target="_blank">this</a>, <a title="this" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversial_invocations_of_the_USA_PATRIOT_Act#Investigating_copyright_infringement" target="_blank">this</a> and <a title="this" href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100129/0630057974.shtml" target="_blank">this</a>.</p>


        <p>As the executive director of the Information Society Project
          at Yale Law School <a title="notes" href="http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/02/enough-already-the-sopa-debate-ignores-how-much-copyright-protection-we-already-have/252742/#bio" target="_blank">notes</a>:</p>


        <blockquote>
          <p>This administration … publishes a newsletter about its
            efforts with language that compares copyright infringement
            to terrorism.</p>
        </blockquote>
      </blockquote>
      <p><b>The American government is using copyright laws to crack
          down on political dissent </b><b><a title="just like China
            and Russia" href="http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/12/americas-future-russians-and-chinese-use-copyright-crusade-to-crush-government-criticism.html" target="_blank">just
            like China and Russia</a></b><b>.</b></p>
      <p>We noted last month that the “cyber-security” laws have <a title="very little to do with security" href="http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/02/the-white-house-is-judge-jury-and-executioner-of-both-drone-and-cyber-attacks.html" target="_blank"><em>very
            little</em> to do with security</a>.</p>
      <p>The Verge <a title="reported" href="http://www.theverge.com/2013/2/14/3989686/white-house-says-cyber-threats-include-web-site-defacement-ip-theft" target="_blank">reported</a>
        last month:</p>
      <blockquote>
        <div>In the State of the Union address Tuesday, President Obama
          <a title="announced" href="http://www.theverge.com/2013/2/12/3982302/president-obama-signs-cybersecurity-order" target="_blank">announced</a>
          a sweeping <a title="executive order" href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/02/12/executive-order-improving-critical-infrastructure-cybersecurity" target="_blank">executive order</a> implementing new
          national cybersecurity measures, opening the door for
          intelligence agencies to share more information about
          suspected “cyber threats” with private companies that oversee
          the nation’s “critical infrastructure.” The order is
          voluntary, giving companies the choice of whether or not they
          want to receive the information, and takes effect in four
          months, by June 12.</div>
        <p>***</p>
        <p>“Cyber threats cover a wide range of malicious activity that
          can occur through cyberspace,” wrote Caitlin Hayden,
          spokeswoman for the White House National Security Council, in
          an email to <em>The Verge</em>. “Such threats include web
          site defacement, espionage,<strong> theft of intellectual
            property</strong>, denial of service attacks, and
          destructive malware.”</p>
        <p>***</p>
        <p>“The EO [executive order] relies on the definition of
          critical infrastructure found in the Homeland Security Act of
          2002,” Hayden wrote.</p>
        <p><a title="The Homeland Security Act of 2002 (PDF)" href="http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/hr_5005_enr.pdf" target="_blank">The Homeland Security Act of 2002 (PDF)</a>,
          passed in the wake of the September 11, 2001 terror attacks,
          was what created the Department of Homeland Security. At that
          time, the US was still reeling from the attacks and Congress
          sought to rapidly bolster the nation’s defenses, including
          “critical infrastructure” as part of its definition of
          “terrorism.” As the act states: “The term ‘terrorism’ means
          any activity that involves an act that is dangerous to human
          life or potentially destructive of critical infrastructure or
          key resources…”</p>
        <p>But again, that act doesn’t exactly spell out which
          infrastructure is considered “critical,” instead pointing to
          the definition as outlined in a <a title="2001 bill" href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/5195c" target="_blank">2001 bill</a>, also passed in response to
          September 11, which reads:</p>
        <blockquote>
          <p>“The term “critical infrastructure” means systems and
            assets, whether physical or virtual, so vital to the United
            States that the incapacity or destruction of such systems
            and assets would have a debilitating impact on security,
            national economic security, national public health or
            safety, or any combination of those matters.”</p>
        </blockquote>
        <p>This is the same exact definition that was originally
          provided in the <a title="president’s
            cybersecurity order" href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/02/12/executive-order-improving-critical-infrastructure-cybersecurity" target="_blank">president’s
            cybersecurity order</a> as originally published on Tuesday,
          meaning that the White House appears to be relying to some
          degree on <a title="circular reasoning" href="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/circular+reasoning" target="_blank">circular reasoning</a> when it comes to that
          definition. Some in Washington, including the right-leaning
          think tank <a title="The Heritage Foundation" href="http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/02/obama-s-cybersecurity-executive-order-falls-short" target="_blank">The Heritage Foundation</a>, are worried
          that the definition is too broad and “could be understood to
          include systems normally considered outside the cybersecurity
          conversation, such as agriculture.”</p>
        <p>In fact, the Department of Homeland Security, which is one of
          the agencies that will be sharing information on cyber threats
          thanks to the order, includes <a title="18 different
            industries" href="http://www.dhs.gov/critical-infrastructure-sectors" target="_blank">18 different industries</a> in its own label
          of “critical infrastructure,” from agriculture to banking to
          national monuments. There’s an argument to be made that
          including such a broad and diverse swath of industries under
          the blanket term “critical” is reasonable given the overall
          increasing dependence of virtually all businesses on the
          internet for core functions. But even in that case, its
          unclear how casting such a wide net would be helpful in
          defending against cyber threats, especially as there is a
          limited pool of those with the expertise and ability to do so.</p>
      </blockquote>
      <p>It’s not just intellectual property.  The government is widely
        using <a title="anti-terror laws" href="http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/02/government-uses-anti-terror-laws-to-crush-dissent-and-help-big-business.html" target="_blank">anti-terror
          laws</a> to help giant businesses … and to <a title="crush
          those who speak out against their abusive practices" href="http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/12/government-and-big-banks-joined-forces-to-violently-crush-peaceful-protests.html" target="_blank">crush
          those who speak out against their abusive practices</a>,
        labeling anyone who speaks out against as a <a title="potential
          bad guy" href="http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/12/the-fbi-drowning-in-counter-terrorism-money-power-and-other-resources-will-apply-the-term-terrorism-to-any-group-it-dislikes-and-wants-to-control-and-suppress.html" target="_blank">potential
          bad guy</a>.</p>
    </div>
    <div> This entry was posted in <a href="http://www.washingtonsblog.com/cat/business-economics" title="View all posts in Business / Economics" rel="category
        tag" target="_blank">Business / Economics</a>, <a href="http://www.washingtonsblog.com/cat/politics-and-war-and-peace" title="View all posts in Politics / World News" rel="category
        tag" target="_blank">Politics / World News</a>. Bookmark the <a href="http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/03/copyright-infringement-now-seen-as-terrorism.html" title="Permalink to Is Copyright Infringement Now Seen As
        Terrorism?" rel="bookmark" target="_blank">permalink</a>. </div>
  

</div></blockquote></div></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>____________________________________________________________</span><br><span>You received this message as a subscriber on the list:</span><br><span>     <a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org" target="_blank">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a></span><br>

<span>To be removed from the list, visit:</span><br><span>     <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a></span><br><span></span><br><span>For all other list information and functions, see:</span><br>

<span>     <a href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance" target="_blank">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a></span><br><span>To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:</span><br><span>     <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a></span><br>

<span></span><br><span>Translate this email: <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t" target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a></span><br></div></blockquote></div><br>____________________________________________________________<br>


You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
     <a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br>
To be removed from the list, visit:<br>
     <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a><br>
<br>
For all other list information and functions, see:<br>
     <a href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance" target="_blank">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a><br>
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:<br>
     <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br>
<br>
Translate this email: <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t" target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br>Diego R. Canabarro<div><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"><span style="vertical-align:top;text-align:left"><a href="http://lattes.cnpq.br/4980585945314597" target="_blank">http://lattes.cnpq.br/4980585945314597</a></span> </font><br>

<br>--<br>diego.canabarro [at] <a href="http://ufrgs.br" target="_blank">ufrgs.br</a></div><div>diego [at] <a href="http://pubpol.umass.edu" target="_blank">pubpol.umass.edu</a><br>MSN: diegocanabarro [at] <a href="http://gmail.com" target="_blank">gmail.com</a><br>

Skype: diegocanabarro<br>Cell # +55-51-9244-3425 (Brasil) / +1-413-362-0133 (USA)<br>--<br></div>