Comments on: Wi-Fi 'illegal images' politician defends legislation

Nick Lampson, the Democratic politician behind a bill approved by the House that requires reporting of illegal images, says he didn't mean to target wireless access points.

[Penguinisto]

Whoa - waitaminute...

"[i]The real problem, I think, is that Lampson probably drafted this legislation a little too hastily. It didn't go through the normal committee process and was rushed to the floor without the final text being posted until the day after the vote.[/i]"

So let me get this straight... they didn't even know the final text of *** it was that they were [i]voting[/i] on?

Cripes - I think it's high time that we fire all but two Congresscritters right about now...

/P

[suyts]

I'm not sure I'd

keep any. They all seem to have forgotten, "That government is best which governs the least". Sadly, this will prob. become law. With the upcoming elections, what "congresscritter" in their right mind would vote against this bill. In this world of spin, it would be tantamount to a vote for child porn.

[coryschulz]

I personally think....

They use "child pornography" as an excuse to pass obscure laws that give them more power. Didn't Bush try to use child porn as a reason why he required all of Google's search results data? And Google fought back and won and was said to be protecting our private data?

I've spent a decent amount of time on the internet downloading a lot of random stuff (P2P networks) and I've never come across this kiddie porn that they claim is so popular and common. Besides, aren't our politicians and priests the ones who are breaking these laws anyways?

[troppp]

But of Course!

To think, The Real ID Act was originally a response to terrorism issues. Now the buzz word pushing Real ID is "Immigration".

Do we see a trend here or what?

[protagonistic]

RE: Wi-Fi 'illegal images' politician defends legislation

Translation: The congressman is still an idiot.

[firewolf4]

you cant break a law to uphold one

Ok, lets see if we all follow along with the serious LACK of common sence....
as an ISP (or ANY open WiFi network) if you detect kiddie porn being sent across your connection you are to report it to the Cybertipline with the generated IP, the person who's using that IP (Like I can see THAT happening) AND THE IMAGES.
ok, So to possess kiddie porn in a class B federal Felony and transmission of Kiddie Porn is a Class B Federal Felony. So you are supposed to break BOTH Laws or get slapped with a $300,000 Fine. WHAT THE HELL???

[GadgetDon]

This law fixes it

Currently, without this bill, ISPs already must retain the data and
report the violation...but as you say, retaining the data and
providing it to the Cybertipline are illegal.

This bill gives explicit immunity to those retaining and
transmitting for the purpose of retaining.

I'm not sure what I see is so controversial about this bill. If you
know about child pornography you must report it (which is
already the case) and if you do the steps necessary to report it
you won't be breaking the law (which isn't already the case).

Oh, and the Supreme Court has struck down the laws of either
manipulated or non-photographic child pornography as being
treated as child pornography. So the "obscene cartoon" is just
scare tactics.

[thinkjered]

So who's gonna pay for it

Does this guy know ANYTHING about data, protocols, the internet, network connectivity, etc? So everyone that provides internet now needs to either purchase or dedicate a packet analyzer to look for anything that could be child porn, then hire a full-time employee to do a second-level check to see if it actually is, trace the source and check their due diligence records to see if the model is, in fact, underage, then report it?

This is just another half-baked attempt. It reeks of Ted "Tubes" Stevens.

[ralfthedog]

Not quite.

The law does not require you to look for child porn (I never thought I would say that.). The law requires you to report child porn if you find it.

Mr. Perv goes to coffee shop A and surfs to notquitelegal.com. Coffee shop A does not care what he is looking at. They to not packet sniff. They are not breaking the law.

Mr. Perv goes to coffee shop B and serfs to notquitelegal.com. Coffee shop B is running a packet sniffer so they can get everyones credit cards and buy a bunch of 70 inch HDTVs. They see what Mr. Perv is surfing and turn him in. They are legal.

If coffee shop C is also stealing credit cards, but does not turn Mr. Perv in. They are breaking the law.

[ecartman0]

Stupier

Wow just when you think they couldn't get stupider. Well when I received my WiFi router from my ISP it was wide open, not even a stupid attempt to secure. Fixed it but now from my mac I have access to 3 hotspots that are wide open within my range. Do you really think someone who cannot secure their home network knows how to run programs to detect and log intruders? People making laws should at least attempt to educate themselves a LITTLE about the law and its effects.

[GadgetDon]

You don't have to monitor

The law explicitly says that you don't have to monitor what
happens on your connection. It only comes into effect if you are
aware of child pornography, either because you're watching the
uploads that come through your system, or because it was reported
to you (or whatever). This was already the case, though it's been
made more explicit and the fine stiffened.

[gallde]

Don't spy, don't tell

So, you can bet that any muni Wi-Fi from now on will be configured in such a way that no admin can even peek at what is being viewed by the unwashed public, lest they catch an accidental glimpse of something covered by this bill. So much for keeping us safe from terrorism.

[Renegade Knight]

Stupid Law With Stupid Results

This law does nothing to make the world a better place. It does make yet more honest citizens criminals.

All laws have unintended consequences. Some are so obvious that the law should have never been proposed. This is one of them.

[crue24]

It is scary...

While he did state that you don't have to monitor etc., it still opens the door for a zealous D.A. to go after homeowners or small business owners who have open WiFi networks. Especially if there is a significant amount of traffic coming through your network because of the creapy guy next door using your network to avoid having the traffic coming through his. Same deal for small coffee shop owners, etc. that offer WiFi. What are they going to walk around spying on what people are doing to make sure? If they've (unknowingly) got a couple of regular pervs who come in surfing illegal content and an investigation is launched, you think the DA is not going to file charges against the business owner claiming they must have known? Maybe they get off, but probably not before suffering through at least a small legal battle. This type of legislation is going to discourage smaller shops without the IT resources to monitor to simply not offer the service to avoid the risk of potential liability.

The wording seems a bit over reaching to me.

[appledogx--2008]

So, we are all to be little "big brothers"

While I applaud the fight against child porn, I believe that
turning all of us into little "Big Brothers" to spy on everyone else
and report it, smacks of what they told us as children, occured
with those nasty commies in the USSR.

Citizens were encouraged to rat on others by the 'Commies' to
control those who were deviants (then, any who disagreed with
their system). Now, that is exactly what is mandated in the USA!
Our irresponsible representatives apparantly voted a law into
being without even having the final text. That is scary! We need
to take a deep look at what we are defending and how we are
defending it. All these good intentions may someday turn US
into the USSR we so much feared.

[spruceman]

You mean becoming big big brothers

We are far along to way to rivalling the repression that occurred in the former USSR; and we will achieve this as a "representative democracy" thru the scare tactics of fighting terrorism, protecting family values, and morality. I have always felt that the next developed nation to become a totalitarian state would be US and we would do it in the name of freedom. Historically, those who proclaim they are the most free are those who are most enslaved.

[laxmanchip]

Politician in Texas?

No surprise there... Maybe it's something in the water...

[Dr_Zinj]

Incompetent Representative

Rep. Nick Lampson, D-Texas, again takes a knee-juerk reaction, shoots his mouth off (well, his word processor actually) without thinking.

How about we start levying 300 grand fines on politicians who submit, and vote on, poorly written legislation? That's far more dangerous to Americans than a mere 5 billion in child porno.

[chash360]

Amen, no there is a law we should enact

At some point a country should come to a point where all the neccessary laws have been established, and there is little need for politicians to create any new laws. Ask yourself how many new crimes are there? The lastest new, true crime, I believe is discrimination, before that slavery. All the others have been treated as crimes long before the US even existed. There are more laws on the books than anyone person could read in a lifetime, but nearly every crime can be summed up using some of the wording of the 2nd amendment, If you deprive a person of life, liberty or property, without do process of law, or expressed personal consent, then you have probably committed a crime. This covers nearly every crime you can think of (except the bogus 'victimless crimes').

[chash360]

Lets have another law for...

Lets have a very stiff penalty imposed upon any politician that votes on something they have not read! Grounds for dimissal if you ask me.

[novelator]

Just Trying to Score Points

We need to get rid of all these so-called politicians who have obviously run out of meaningful laws to create, and by meaningful laws I mean laws that benefit the American People and not some specific lobby.

I want no more laws abridging my freedom in any way, shape or form. In my 80 hours a week on the Net, I have never inadvertently run across any kiddie porn, but then I'm not wasting my time looking for it either. Unlike our senators and congressmen, I work for my living.

If we the People make the job of senator and congressman part-time, we might balance the budget by not having to pay all those perks and lifetime pensions and such. Besides, we might just attract some employees interested in America for a change. Wouldn't that be a first--at least in my lifetime, it would.



Mari Bushman
www.jigsawpress.com

[chash360]

Select Politicians like Jury Duty

No campaining, no posturing. You get called to duty randomly, if you respond, then you get interviewed by a commitee (to make sure you are qualified, and compotent enough to do the job). Add in some background checks, and check for potential conflicts of interest. Then the people get to vote, on the qualified respondants. Save millions in campaining, and annoying cannidate ads, takes the control away from the mass media, and put it in the hands of the people.

[inachu]

Locking wifi creates lots of lag for gamers

Using anything like WPA and any of the newer derivatives slows down wifi greatly and the longer the password then the greater the lag.

I will not introduce lag to my pc gaming thank you very much!

[chash360]

Passkey protected or not it applies

I saw no wording differentiating the Passkey protected or not, if the general public can access it, it applies.

[inachu]

Explain this to the grandmother who uses wifi

The grandmother will need to take security courses amid her sweater knitting to keep this people off her wifi.

[krosavcheg]

funny you tag this as censorship

Jeff Gerstman was fired from Gamespot because of cnet censorship.

[m.meister]

another rushed bill

This bill reminds me of another one that was rushed out and had
"good intentions": The Patriot Act.

Will we EVER learn from our history of mistakes?

If this bill is so good and so important, it needs a full discussion
and taking time to do it right. Let's focus more on quality and less
on quantity of bills.

[michaelo1966]

Seems fine to me

I don't know what the hoopla is all about. All the law says that if you come across kiddie porn you have to report it or else you're liable. Since not reporting it would probably make you an accessor after-the-fact -- not to mention a total creep -- what's wrong with this? The only flaw I may be able to see is making it clear who you're supposed to report it to: I know the law provides who but not sure people will be able to figure it out. Why not just require people to report it to local law enforcement, then train them to call the appropriate federal authorities? As for things like the "clothed but provocative" provisions let prosecutors and juries sort it out: I'm sure federal prosecutors aren't going to chase down people viewing Gap ads.

[milkjar]

Fine?

He's targeting DRAWINGS for gosh sakes, something that DOESN'T involve any real, flesh-and-blood child being molested and/or used sexually. Photos of real children, yes, go for it all the way, but cartoons? Give me a break.

[ckought]

Well, since I'm not qualified

Since I'm not qualified to determine what "clothed but provocative" is or what "lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value" or who's even a minor (since those things can only be determined by a jury), then I guess I'll just have to report every single image that I come across and let the Feds sort it all out. If everyone follows the law to the letter, then the Feds are going to be his by hundreds-of-thousands of reports daily. That means that they'll be swamped by more than they can process and the real pervs will slip between the cracks (pun not intended).

[Sol999]

Dumb-assed Policiticians

Why do Americans keep electing idiots like this jerk from Texas? Is the US a nation of sheep or idiots or both?

[Sol999]

Stupid Like A Fox?

On second thought maybe the vagueness and idiocy of this law is on purpose. Vague laws can give the government more power since courts can interpret these laws however they please.

Just look at numerous laws such as the Patriot Act. The purpose of all of these laws is to increase the power of government at the expense of all of us.

[chash360]

We do not really elect our politicians...

What we call elections are a joke, its the media (and who ever can pay them the most) that does the real electing. There is no more real freedom of the press (you have to have direct presidential approval to print a newspaper), and they are all owned by a few massive corperations. Same with broadcast TV and Radio. All closely tied to the Tecom giants as well. If you are not willing to protect their interests, you will not get elected, end of story.

[Jimm1]

D/A Pols

We elected this guy as a replacement for Tom Delay. Want the Bug man back?

[dayebreak]

5 Billion? Says Who?

Next chance you get, ask the esteemed Congressman where he got that number, and if he will produce that information to the public. If he directs you to an organization or can not produce any documents in support, then you get an idea of what's going on.