|
March 22, 2004
CARNIVORE was only an appetizer....
I may be old-fashioned, and I may be prone to overreacting where it comes to things like free speech and the FCC. My numerous posts about Howard Stern are a good example; I tend towards an absolutist, untrammeled view of free speech. BUT.... I think that the ability of citizens to freely communicate is the essence of free speech. The Internet, with all its problems, foibles, spam, viruses, is the pinnacle of human communication right now. More than simply free speech, it is no understatement to call it the highest and best use of free human communication in the history of man. Thus, I feel personally threatened by developments like this: SAN JOSE, Calif. - Before 8x8 Inc. launched an Internet phone service in late 2002, it drafted a business plan, set up its equipment, posted a Web site, and began taking orders from customers. As with most online ventures, U.S. government approval was not needed.That act is known as CALEA. It was passed in 1994, and was intended to regulate the telephone industry, not the Internet (which existed in 1994 when the law was passed, and which was able to blossom and largely transform the United States economy because of this policy of keeping it as free as possible from government regulation). As the article states, law enforcement wants more than what they got in 1994: The Justice Department says that, as the nature of telecommunications changes, [CALEA] is simply not working.To fully understand the details of what is going on, it is necessary to read this. (I read it last night and did not sleep well.) The FBI is attempting to order the FCC to declare most ISPs to be telephone communications providers, thus regulating them in the same way it regulates telephone companies. The petition is 83-pages long, heavy-handed in tone, and reads more like an order than a request -- speaking in terms of getting tough, allowing no extensions, demanding tough enforcement by the FCC (including criminal forfeitures and more). It’s complicated but understanding packet mode switching is the key to understanding the problem – which goes to the nature and heart of the Internet. If you don’t feel like reading all 83 pages, the Center for Democracy and Technology has an excellent position paper here, which explains why the proposal will harm the country by shackling Internet development and interfering with user privacy. I hope I am not overreacting, but I think this may be the biggest threat to the Internet so far. Because the regulation of packet mode switching is not possible without a wholesale rewriting of the very structure of the Internet. Such a drastic and draconian remedy, with the direst possible consequences to free speech and continued economic health of this country, should not, in my opinion be something that should be accomplished by a preemptive bureaucratic surgical strike -- with the following result: the architecture of the Internet will depend on the permission of the F.B.I.Shouldn't such a vast change -- a clear-cutting, really -- of the entire Internet, at least require some congressional legislation? If this CALEA scheme doesn't give the government the power to do that (which it does not), then isn't it a bit irresponsible even to allow the FCC to entertain such a "petition"? The FBI and the FCC might want to do this, but is it their function? I don't think so. I think that even if Congress were to pass a new CALEA law, there'd be plenty of debate, and many would argue that it would be unduly burdensome, a prior restraint of free speech, and a lot of other things. It might be held unconstitutional, as was the Communications Decency Act. But at least in the case of the CDA, Congress had to pass the damned thing. This looks more like a sneaky end-run around the legislative and judicial process to me. And the consequences are far greater. Back to my local newspaper: ....[The petition] argues, in effect, for establishing a government approval process that would be required before any new communications services launch.Foreign companies, of course, would be the direct beneficiaries of the sweeping changes, becase they are not covered. [C]ompanies outside the United States would not have to cooperate.Why the hurry to hamstring American companies without so much as a single debate in Congress? Here's what the foreign companies are already doing: Skype, built by the same people who brought us Kazaa, is a totally distributed peer-to-peer network, with no centralized routing computers. (That's possible in part because Skype calls can only be sent and received by computers—you can't call a friend with an analog phone.) As a result, the company's network looks more like a tangled spider web, and the packets that make up your voice in a Skype call are sent through myriad routes to their destination. Part of the brilliance of the Skype software is that it has learned to use desktop PCs as "supernodes," each sharing some of the load needed to route Skype calls quickly to their destination. From the caller's perspective, this is all invisible: The call just works."Reckless"? What would really be reckless would be to allow wholesale restructuring of the Internet by a small group of bureaucrats. Last night I wrote a very emotional and long-winded post about this thing, and I was so upset I didn't post the draft. I am glad I didn't, because this kind of thing requires much thought and reflection, and by a lot more people than the FBI and the FCC. (Or a few upset bloggers like me.....) Freedom is too important to be left up to the whims of a few bureaucrats. Free communication is increasingly being seen as a "loophole." Yes, free speech. And the FCC. It isn't just whether Howard Stern gets to talk on the radio. It's anyone with a computer. I am reminded of the Clipper Chip showdown, when the government wanted every computer owner who wanted to use encryption to be forced to provide a "back door" to facilitate government snooping. It's one thing if the government has evidence of crime and obtains a warrant. They can then search, and in some cases they might have to work a little harder than in others. But what they want here is to force everyone to make their search as easy as flicking a switch. Should the government be able to prohibit locks on doors which might make it tougher for their agents to break in? Or prohibit flashpaper which self-destructs before police could seize it and read it? Require sewer traps on all plumbing to prevent immediate flushing in the case of drug raids? Force firearms manufacturers to build in mechanisms to render all firearms unfireable if the government suddenly didn't want people to use them? What's the difference in requiring citizens to make their speech freely monitorable? I can't think of a more clear prior restraint of citizens' free speech rights, because the Internet is nothing more than a vast communications network. If you cannot communicate any way you please, then speech is no longer free.
NOTE: For all who are interested, I have many more links on this and related matters, and in the interest of brevity I'll just list them. By STEPHEN LABATON posted by Eric on 03.22.04 at 10:27 PM
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/872 Listed below are links to weblogs that reference CARNIVORE was only an appetizer....:
» Carnival of the Vanities #79 from The Encyclopeteia
Well folks, the Carnival has rolled into town and I'm your sweaty, pot-bellied carny plying the wares of the blogosphere with the electronic barking and begging. The basic gist, for my regular readers, is that bloggers will submit entries that they... [Read More] Tracked on March 24, 2004 02:21 PM
Comments
CARNIVORE, they called it? If it doesn't pry into your files, is it a vegetarian? Syephen or Starn or Storm Malcolmb Anderssonnn the Lesbian-eating pho-loving aesthete-worshipping gu · March 27, 2004 02:55 PM |
|
March 2007
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
March 2007
February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
War For Profit
How trying to prevent genocide becomes genocide I Have Not Yet Begun To Fight Wind Boom Isaiah Washington, victim Hippie Shirts A cunning exercise in liberation linguistics? Sometimes unprincipled demagogues are better than principled activists PETA agrees -- with me! The high pitched squeal of small carbon footprints
Links
Site Credits
|
|
I'm against it!