[governance] Tangential / Is Copyright Infringement Now Seen As Terrorism?
Suresh Ramasubramanian
suresh at hserus.net
Mon Mar 4 23:30:39 EST 2013
You will find that are strictly enforced controls about keeping data
within the usa and restricting access only to US citizens with a
mandatory security clearance
--srs (htc one x)
On 5 March 2013 9:45:31 AM Diego Rafael Canabarro
<diegocanabarro at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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?
>
> On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 5:06 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian
> <suresh at hserus.net>wrote:
>
> > 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.
> >
> > What can be considered critical infrastructure is necessarily a broad
> > definition,
> >
> > 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?
> >
> > --srs (iPad)
> >
> > On 04-Mar-2013, at 21:47, Riaz K Tayob <riaz.tayob at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Is Copyright Infringement Now Seen As
> Terrorism?<http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/03/copyright-infringement-now-seen-as-terrorism.html>
> > Posted on March 4,
> 2013<http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/03/copyright-infringement-now-seen-as-terrorism.html>
> > by WashingtonsBlog <http://www.washingtonsblog.com/author/washingtonsblog>
> > Government Uses Law As a Sword Against Dissent
> >
> > We
> reported<http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/02/ter%C2%B7ror%C2%B7ist-noun-anyone-who-disagrees-with-the-government-2.html>last
> year:
> >
> > The government treats copyright infringers as terrorists, and swat teams
> > have been deployed against them. See
> this<http://news.cnet.com/Terrorist-link-to-copyright-piracy-alleged/2100-1028_3-5722835.html>,
> > this<http://techliberation.com/2007/01/17/swat-teams-enforcing-copyright/>,
> >
> this<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversial_invocations_of_the_USA_PATRIOT_Act#Investigating_copyright_infringement>and
> > this <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100129/0630057974.shtml>.
> >
> > As the executive director of the Information Society Project at Yale Law
> > School
> notes<http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/02/enough-already-the-sopa-debate-ignores-how-much-copyright-protection-we-already-have/252742/#bio>
> > :
> >
> > This administration … publishes a newsletter about its efforts with
> > language that compares copyright infringement to terrorism.
> >
> > *The American government is using copyright laws to crack down on
> > political dissent **just like China and
> Russia<http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/12/americas-future-russians-and-chinese-use-copyright-crusade-to-crush-government-criticism.html>
> > **.*
> >
> > We noted last month that the “cyber-security” laws have *very little* to
> > do with
> security<http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/02/the-white-house-is-judge-jury-and-executioner-of-both-drone-and-cyber-attacks.html>
> > .
> >
> > The Verge
> reported<http://www.theverge.com/2013/2/14/3989686/white-house-says-cyber-threats-include-web-site-defacement-ip-theft>last
> month:
> >
> > In the State of the Union address Tuesday, President Obama
> announced<http://www.theverge.com/2013/2/12/3982302/president-obama-signs-cybersecurity-order>a
> sweeping executive
> >
> order<http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/02/12/executive-order-improving-critical-infrastructure-cybersecurity>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.
> >
> > ***
> >
> > “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 *The Verge*. “Such threats
> > include web site defacement, espionage,* theft of intellectual property*,
> > denial of service attacks, and destructive malware.”
> >
> > ***
> >
> > “The EO [executive order] relies on the definition of critical
> > infrastructure found in the Homeland Security Act of 2002,” Hayden wrote.
> >
> > The Homeland Security Act of 2002
> (PDF)<http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/hr_5005_enr.pdf>,
> > 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…”
> >
> > But again, that act doesn’t exactly spell out which infrastructure is
> > considered “critical,” instead pointing to the definition as outlined
> in a 2001
> > bill <http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/5195c>, also passed in
> > response to September 11, which reads:
> >
> > “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.”
> >
> > This is the same exact definition that was originally provided in the
> president’s
> > cybersecurity
> order<http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/02/12/executive-order-improving-critical-infrastructure-cybersecurity>as
> originally published on Tuesday, meaning that the White House appears to
> > be relying to some degree on circular
> reasoning<http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/circular+reasoning>when
> it comes to that definition. Some in Washington, including the
> > right-leaning think tank The Heritage
> Foundation<http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/02/obama-s-cybersecurity-executive-order-falls-short>,
> > are worried that the definition is too broad and “could be understood to
> > include systems normally considered outside the cybersecurity conversation,
> > such as agriculture.”
> >
> > 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 18 different
> industries<http://www.dhs.gov/critical-infrastructure-sectors>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.
> >
> > It’s not just intellectual property. The government is widely using
> anti-terror
> >
> laws<http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/02/government-uses-anti-terror-laws-to-crush-dissent-and-help-big-business.html>to
> help giant businesses … and to crush
> > those who speak out against their abusive
> practices<http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/12/government-and-big-banks-joined-forces-to-violently-crush-peaceful-protests.html>,
> > labeling anyone who speaks out against as a potential bad
> guy<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>
> > .
> > This entry was posted in Business /
> Economics<http://www.washingtonsblog.com/cat/business-economics>,
> > Politics / World
> News<http://www.washingtonsblog.com/cat/politics-and-war-and-peace>.
> > Bookmark the
> permalink<http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/03/copyright-infringement-now-seen-as-terrorism.html>.
> >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> > governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> > To be removed from the list, visit:
> > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> >
> > For all other list information and functions, see:
> > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> > To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
> > http://www.igcaucus.org/
> >
> > Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
> >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> > governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> > To be removed from the list, visit:
> > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> >
> > For all other list information and functions, see:
> > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> > To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
> > http://www.igcaucus.org/
> >
> > Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Diego R. Canabarro
> http://lattes.cnpq.br/4980585945314597
>
> --
> diego.canabarro [at] ufrgs.br
> diego [at] pubpol.umass.edu
> MSN: diegocanabarro [at] gmail.com
> Skype: diegocanabarro
> Cell # +55-51-9244-3425 (Brasil) / +1-413-362-0133 (USA)
> --
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130305/47363f19/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
For all other list information and functions, see:
http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
http://www.igcaucus.org/
Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
More information about the Governance
mailing list