One year ago today, internet users of all ages, races, and political stripes participated in the largest protest in internet history, flooding US Congress with millions of emails and phone calls to demand they drop the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) — a dangerous bill that would have allowed corporations and the govenrment to censor larger parts of the web.
But the price of freedom is eternal vigilance, and the fight for internet freedom continues. Here’s a look at the top five issues SOPA activists should focus on next:
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is the first line of defence against the numerous, persistent attacks on internet freedom. We may have all teamed up to trounce SOPA a year ago, but the fight’s not over. And the EFF knows what’s coming over the horizon better than anyone else.
Stop The Trans Pacific Partnership
After the historic collapse of SOPA, the content industry has claimed it wants to shy away from anymore excessive legislation that could potentially censor the Internet. Instead, it has turned its attention to the international stage. The Trans-Pacific Partnership, better known as TPP, is the latest multilateral trade agreement carrying abusive copyright provisions that the United States, on behalf of Hollywood and major copyright-holding interests, is forcing onto citizens of other countries.
Unfortunately, the treaty is being negotiated in complete secrecy and with no democratic oversight, so we don’t even know exactly what these countries have been debating. Fortunately, drafts of the agreement have leaked, and it’s at least clear TPP would force countries to drastically lengthen their copyright terms, restrict fair use, institute digital locks to keep people from sharing information, and place greater burdens on websites hosting content. You can read a detailed explanation here. This infographic shows how TPP will affect countries around the world.
Please go to our action center to tell your representative in Congress to demand transparency surrounding TPP negotiations.
Demand Patent Reform
Recently, the US’ broken patent system has proven to be one of the biggest threats to innovation online. Big tech companies have been locked in billion dollar legal patent wars that do nothing for the consumer. Last year, Google and Apple spent more on patent suits than they did research and development. Meanwhile, untold numbers of patent lawsuits (and even mere threats of suits) involve patent trolls, those who sue start-ups for vague patents that can destroy their business before it gets started.
Luckily, people are starting to notice. Noted US Appeals Court Judge Richard Posner called the US patent system “chaos” and said there are too many patents in America, as he dismissed a prominent case involving Apple and Motorola. The SHIELD Act, written Rep. Peter DeFazio, along with co-sponsor Rep. Jason Chaffetz, would help put an end to a lot of the problems we’ve been noting for years now.
Reforming Draconian Computer Crime Law
The internet has been in mourning this week as one of its true innovators and pioneers, Aaron Swartz, took his own life at the age 26. He was, of course, an early developer of the RSS specification, Creative Commons, Reddit and a multitude of other projects. Notably, the SOPA protests likely would not have happened without him. He founded Demand Progress, one of the groups which organised the blackout.
At the time of his death, Aaron was facing a relentless and unjust prosecution under the outdated and draconian Computer Fraud and Abuse Act for the supposed “crime” using MIT’s computer network to download millions of academic articles from the online archive JSTOR, allegedly without “authorisation”. For that, he faced 13 felony counts (pdf), which carried the possibility of decades in prison and crippling fines. His case would have gone to trial in April.
EFF, along with a multitude of other groups, have taken a bill written by Rep. Zoe Lofgren and written the first draft of what we hope will become known as “Aaron’s Law” — which will go a long ways in preventing a similar situation from happening to a freedom fighter like Aaron again.
Stop The New Internet Surveillance Law
There are rumours that the Obama Administration will propose a far-reaching new internet surveillance law, dramatically expanding the the Communications Assistance to Law Enforcement Act (CALEA), which forces US telephone companies to build a wiretap-friendly backdoors into all their technology — but not social networks and other web-based communications services.
The White House and the FBI have not released what is in the proposed legislation, but one report states the FBI wants to require internet companies, like Google, Facebook and Twitter to build the same type of backdoors for real-time government surveillance. This not only poses a threat to privacy, but internet security and innovation as well.
Protect Mobile Phone Location Data
Mobile phone location data is some of the most sensitive data one can possibly send out. Your mobile phone sends a signal back to cell towers every seven seconds; that data, mapped out over days or weeks, can show “an intimate portrait of a person’s familial and professional associations, political and religious beliefs, even health status,” as the New York Times put it.
The US government made a staggering 1.3 million requests for that sort of data last year — and the government believes they can get it without a warrant. The GPS Act, a bill introduced by Sen. Ron Wyden would force US law enforcement to get a warrant for this data.
Meanwhile, app developers have also been sucking up users’ location information, many times without the user being aware of that collection. It paints just as intimate a picture of people’s lives as government tracking does. To that end, Sen. Al Franken has introduced a bill to restrict and regulate the practice so users are better informed and protected when giving this type of information to private companies. In addition, EFF has also written a Mobile Privacy Bill of Rights, serving as a best practices guide that developers should follow when writing applications for mobile phones.
Republished from the Electronic Frontier Foundation