FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR
Tech at Night: Free Press wants worse Internet for us, Public Knowledge is fine with global Internet regs, evaluating Cybersecurity laws
Texas takes on Google as the state comes after the corporation on antitrust grounds. I’m not sure this is a good idea, any more than it was a good idea for the Clinton administration to go after Microsoft, but it’s probably even dumber for Google to obstruct the investigation.
Also filed under bad idea: taking yet another FCC loss in court as reason to give more power to the Obama FCC.
Even worse is the ITU/UN plan to take over the Internet, which some say we must take seriously. the whole WCIT process attempting to do this is flawed, so while it’s good even the FCC sees the problem, it’s interesting that The George Soros-funded Free Press only objects to the forum, not the concept.
Spies and Internet attackers are determined, even attacking old software like AutoCAD to send data to China. Laws won’t change that. They can only prosecute the offenders. Even dumber than passing bad cybersecurity laws though? suing victims like LinkedIn.
And let’s be clear: CISPA is not the danger when it comes to bad cybersecurity bills, nor is the McCain-lead coalition’s SECURE IT bill. The Lieberman-Collins Cybersecurity bill is the real threat. Drop to the bottom lines: only one bill regulates and costs industry, threatening innovation and harming security even as it grows government.
The mask slips when the radicals speak. Verizon exposes the true anti-customer, anti-market agenda of the George Soros-funded Free Press when it points out “Free Press has asserted that it would be a “good thing” if the company’s customers experienced service quality degradation due to increased congestion because that might cause Verizon Wireless to lose customers to other wireless providers. Free Press’ goal of creating “disaffected Verizon customers” by preventing unused spectrum from being put to use to serve those customers is not only extraordinarily bad public policy, but, of course, is not the standard the Commission applies to the review of proposed license assignments.”