3 ms·
Except nothing in the bill obliges the ISP to monitor for copyright holders, which would run significant costs for them both in terms of systems and personnel.
by kylemaxwell 15y ago
Except nothing in the bill obliges the ISP to monitor for copyright holders, which would run significant costs for them both in terms of systems and personnel. The ISP is not a cybersecurity provider for rights holders under the definitions of the proposed statute.
Please don't be condescending in actually linking a Wikipedia article on unintended consequences, by the way. That's not necessary for civil, rational debate.
- pwg 15y agohttp://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120410/12180518442/cispa-is-really-bad-bill-heres-why.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120410/12180518442/cispa-...
- kylemaxwell 15y agoAnother flawed analysis. Again, while imperfect, this bill simply does not contain any provision that obliges anyone to do anything. I don't disagree that it can be improved, but CISPA isn't even close to SOPA: no blocking requirements, no facilities for intervening with advertisers or payment providers, etc.