4 ms·
After observing the mountains of opposition to EARN IT on large tech sites like Reddit and HN, I am starting to believe the "banning encryption" meme was starte
by president 6y ago
After observing the mountains of opposition to EARN IT on large tech sites like Reddit and HN, I am starting to believe the "banning encryption" meme was started by tech companies to cripple the bill even though the word "encryption" isn't mentioned anywhere in the bill text. Guessing they are not liking the fact that the bill would force sites to be liable for illegal user-submitted content on their websites:
"(3) MATTERS ADDRESSED.—The matters addressed by the recommended best practices developed and submitted by the Commission under paragraph (1) shall include—
(A) preventing, identifying, disrupting, and reporting child sexual exploitation;
(B) coordinating with non-profit organizations and other providers of interactive computer services to preserve, remove from view, and report child sexual exploitation;
(C) retaining child sexual exploitation content and related user identification and location data;
(D) receiving and triaging reports of child sexual exploitation by users of interactive computer services, including self-reporting;
(E) implementing a standard rating and categorization system to identify the type and severity of child sexual abuse material;
(F) training and supporting content moderators who review child sexual exploitation content for the purposes of preventing and disrupting online child sexual exploitation;
(G) preparing and issuing transparency reports, including disclosures in terms of service, relating to identifying, categorizing, and reporting child sexual exploitation and efforts to prevent and disrupt online child sexual exploitation;
(H) coordinating with voluntary initiatives offered among and to providers of interactive computer services relating to identifying, categorizing, and reporting child sexual exploitation;
(I) employing age rating and age gating systems to reduce child sexual exploitation;
(J) offering parental control products that enable customers to limit the types of websites, social media platforms, and internet content that are accessible to children; and
(K) contractual and operational practices to ensure third parties, contractors, and affiliates comply with the best practices."
- thephyber 6y agoFrom the EFF (a civil liberties organization, not a tech company) coverage: > We’ve explained how the EARN IT Act could be used to drastically undermine encryption. Although the bill doesn’t use the word “encryption” in its text, it gives government officials like Attorney General William Barr the power to compel online service providers to break encryption or be exposed to potentially crushing legal liability. > The bill also violates the Constitution’s protections for free speech and privacy. As Congress considers the EARN IT Act—which would require online platforms to comply with to-be-determined “best practices” in order to preserve certain protections from criminal and civil liability for user-generated content under Section 230 (47 U.S.C. § 230)—it’s important to highlight the bill’s First and Fourth Amendment problems. [1] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/03/earn-it-act-violates-constitution https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/03/earn-it-act-violates-c...
- president 6y ago> could be used to drastically undermine encryption That doesn't mean that is what's going to happen. The potential actions to be taken would still take in recommendations from provider input as stated in the bill. All the chatter online seems to speak definitively as if is the latter.
- thephyber 6y agoI don't disagree that there is only a probability, but I think you are ignoring the very likely possibility that this is part of a multi-facet pressure campaign on social media companies by this president, his attorney general, and the Congress critters who are sponsoring this legislation. Using vague wording in legislation is a "bad code smell". Giving the authority to the DoJ (who is both a partisan, nominated official, and is very biased in the prosecution of those whoa re accused of breaking this law. I don't put any credence in "still take in recommendations from provider input"; I assume Congress and the DoJ can ignore any and all feedback if they choose to make a partisan show of a specific case/issue (and they have when it comes to encryption unlocking phones of terrorists, child sexual abusers, and drug dealers).