3 ms·

How certain are you of this. My understanding is that regulating the telecommunications industry did make it easier to order both tap-and-traces and pen registe

How certain are you of this. My understanding is that regulating the telecommunications industry did make it easier to order both tap-and-traces and pen registers and that it helped to hold open the legislative door for CALEA, the Stored Information Act and others. Furthermore, much of the Bush-era expansion of internet surveillance apparatus was done by legislating internet communications under telecommunication law.

themoonbus 12y ago
Net neutrality isn't a blanket term for "anything the government does relating to the Internet", it's focused on a specific issue. I guess you could argue that net neutrality would make it easier to pass pro-surveillance laws, but I'm having a difficult time connecting the two.
- xnull 12y ago
  > Net neutrality isn't a blanket term for "anything the government does relating to the Internet", it's focused on a specific issue. Of course. > I guess you could argue that net neutrality would make it easier to pass pro-surveillance laws, but I'm having a difficult time connecting the two. The argument wouldn't be that net neutrality itself would make it easier. The argument would be that the regulation - especially if the folds ISPs under telecommunication laws or equivalents - could result in the import of large portions of legislation pertaining to communications access programs. Much of this has actually already been done at the ISP level and the (surveillance) struggle seems mostly focused on the application layer. So I guess I might agree that it may not bolster surveillance capabilities - if only for the fact that ISPs have already been mostly captured.