News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on CISPA Passes in the House - Full Roll Call. Parent comment

Re:CISPA Passes in the House - Full Roll Call by tptacek on Thursday April 18, 2013 @03:55PM (#5572709)
Please read the bill, not just EFF's summary of the bill. To be covered under CISPA, the information must be stored or transmitted on a protected system, and whatever the violation is, it can't be either a consumer terms of service agreement or a consumer licensing agreement.

Additionally, published content isn't confidential.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:CISPA Passes in the House - Full Roll Call by D9u on Thursday April 18, 2013 @04:15PM (#5572813)
...published content isn't confidential.

Unless you happen to increment a public-facing URL in a numeric fashion...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:CISPA Passes in the House - Full Roll Call by diminoten on Thursday April 18, 2013 @05:19PM (#5573157)
No, that wouldn't do it.

There are just easier ways to string someone up for copyright infringement if you really wanted to than CISPA.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:CISPA Passes in the House - Full Roll Call by u2328 on Thursday April 18, 2013 @08:31PM (#5574054)
I've read the bill, but I'm not a lawyer, so maybe I misunderstood.

Could you please point out the text of the bill that you're describing here?

[ Parent | on HN ]