Internet Legislation And The Loss Of American Freedom

In a sense, the bills would create an internet blacklist. These bills did not pass through congress due to mass protest by people. Multiple sites such as Google and Wikipedia had a day of ‘black out’ in order to raise public awareness of these bills, which in turn lead to the protests that prevented these bills from passing. Though the American people were successful in preventing those bills, there were others that were signed without the majority of the public knowing. An example of such a bill is the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). ACTA has a very strict definition of copyright infringement, would require ISPs to monitor all your data traffic, force ISP to remove service from people who infringe copyrights (Solon). This act was approved by congress but was eventually denied by the UN. Whether or not ACTA will still be enforced in the United States is highly doubtful, but it may lead to further legislature advocating internet restriction. Such legislature could be the Trans-Pacific Trade Pact (TPP). With similar writing as ACTA and other internet censorship bills, however, a difference is that it includes pacific countries such as Japan, Mexico, and Australia. While the internet did extended the American peoples

I’m afraid that the issues that had to do with the rights for creators of content (authors of music, books, papers, etc.) to be able to profit from their work without being deprived of their livelihoods due to piracy, was confounded due to the ignorance of law makers about the nature of the Internet (the free flow of ideas, the ability to collaborate with people from all over the world and engage in thoughtful discourse and debate, etc.). Further, the influence of money and pressure being brought upon the government to pass the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA) by very wealthy and influential organizations (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_organizations_with_official_stances_on_the_SOPA_and_PIPA ) created undue pressure to get Congress to act without thoughtful investigation into the

The USA FREEDOM Act, the acronymic title for H.R. 2048, Uniting and Strengthening America by Fulfilling Rights and Ensuring Effective Discipline Over Monitoring Act of 2015, replaced the USA PATRIOT Act (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001), which expired on May 31, 2015. The USA FREEDOM Act was created in response to public backlash against the PATRIOT Act and the NSA, particularly in the wake of Edward Snowden’s whistleblowing release of information about massive surveillance and data gathering.

Several years after the end of the American Revolution the United States Constitution was being drafted by some of the nations most important historical figures. Politicians such as Benjamin Franklin, John Hancock, and George Washington were just three of the thirty-nine who eventually signed the Constitution on September 17, 1787 (“United States Constitution,” 2015, “1787 Drafting,” para. 7). With the birth of the constitution, came the fear that our newly created nation might slip back under control of a monarchy once again. Therefore, on June 8, 1789, in order to combat such a situation, a group of anti-federalists headed by James Madison proposed a series of thirty-nine amendments to be added to the Constitution. These amendments were designed to guarantee a number of personal freedoms, limit the government’s power in judicial and other proceedings, and reserve some powers to the states and the public (“United States Bill of Rights,” 2015, “Introduction,” para. 1). The first ten of the new amendments, arguably the most important of the thirty-nine, were thus labeled the Bill of Rights. Amendments in the Bill of Rights protect freedoms such as the right to bear arms, protection from unreasonable search and seizure, right to due process, right to trail by jury, protection from quartering troops, and finally the First Amendment, the right to freedom of speech, press, religion, peaceable assembly, and to petition the government (“United States

D.) The sales tax liabilities to which the Web site will be exposed. Assume that Ellen will operate the site from her home office in Michigan and that EPE will manufacture the merchandise in Texas. The merchandise will be warehoused at EPE distribution centers in New Jersey, Ohio, and California.

Internet censorship is the control or suppression of the publishing or accessing of information on the Internet. This can include blocking entire websites, blocking parts of certain websites, prohibiting certain search engine keywords, monitoring individual internet use, and punishing individuals for this use. On a smaller scale, companies censor access to certain websites to increase productivity in workers or decrease chances of a sexual harassment lawsuit. Parents may block certain website on their family computers in an attempt to maintain their child’s innocence. On a much larger scale, entire governments can censor or track the Internet use of its constituents.

The internet is a place where people from all over the world can connect with others who have similar interests as well as share information on almost any topic. While the internet has brought us closer together as a global society some people believe that what is on the internet should be censored. While the content of the internet should have to comply with the laws of the country it is being accessed in I do not believe that there should be any further restrictions as to what viewed on the internet.

Today, society is affected by the many advances in technology. These advances affect almost every person in the world. One of the prevalent advances in technology was the invention and mass use of the Internet. Today more than ever, people around the world use the Internet to support their personal and business tasks on a daily basis. The Internet is a portal into vast amounts of information concerning almost every aspect of life including education, business, politics, entertainment, social networking, and world security. (idebate.com) Although the Internet has become a key resource in developing the world, the mass use of Internet has highlighted a major problem, privacy and the protection of individual, corporate, and even government

Many Americans inquire this question concerning their privacy: is government-monitored internet usage constitutional? Is it okay for the U.S. government to view American citizens' email, social media, and internet activity in order to prevent bullying, crimes, and terrorism? These are burning questions that many Americans ask in this digital age. Several Americans wonder if this act of surveillance may become an invasion of privacy and to what extent the government may use these surveillance technologies. Many innocent Americans believe that this viewing of internet usage is breaking the Fourth Amendment of the Bill of Rights, which states that citizens have principal constitutional protection against government spying. If the government begins to view citizens' internet activity, is it a violation of every American's Fourth Amendment rights?

SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) was a bill proposed in the House of Representatives that aimed to tackle the growing problem of online piracy and copyright infringement. It targets foreign-based websites that contain any form of unauthorized copyright-infringing material such as movies or music by giving content-creators the right to stop any US businesses from providing payment services, advertising, or even dealing with prosecuted websites; essentially blacklisting and hiding these websites to any US visitors. The bill is split into two main sections: “Combating Online Piracy”, which provides tools for rights holders to protect their content, and “Additional Enhancements to Combat Intellectual Property Theft.”, which criminal law which as applies to intellectual property rights and increases punishments for leaking government information. SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) was not enacted because of very strong opposing public opinion, its highly broad and unconstitutional policies that restricted speech, and presidential leadership against the bill.

In 1980, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) issued the Guidelines on the Protection of Privacy and Transborder Flows of Personal Data. Commonly known as the OECD Guidelines, they established eight data protection principles for balancing data protection and the free flow of information. Although the OECD Guidelines are recognized by all OECD

Ph.D Cynthia Andrzejczyk, author of The Progressive Writing Text, dove into the world of the five freedoms and Internet security. During the first month of a new year in 1941, President Franklin D. Roosevelt delivered a speech on the Four Freedoms to the 77th Congress of the United States of America (Andrzejczyk 64). Roosevelt’s four freedoms became the lifeline of every citizen. Each of these freedoms have become a basic human fact. These freedoms became the backbone of the United States and are also included in the “United Nations Declaration of Human Rights” (64). All citizens have been given the chance to make their own decisions and increase their quality of life. Everyone is given the tools to be able to achieve each of their dreams, gain more knowledge and globally expand networks.

Forty-five days after the September 11 terrorist attacks on the United States, Congress passed the USA PATRIOT Act, also known as the “Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism” Act, or more simply, the Patriot Act. The Patriot Act was created with the noble intention of finding and prosecuting international terrorists operating on American soil; however, the unfortunate consequences of the Act have been drastic. Many of the Patriot Act’s provisions are in clear violation of the U.S. Constitution—a document drafted by wise men like Benjamin Franklin, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and George Washington in order to protect American rights and freedoms. The Patriot Act encroaches on sacred First Amendment rights, which protect free speech and expression, and Fourth Amendment rights, which protect citizens against “unwarranted search and seizure” (Justice). The Patriot Act authorizes unethical and unconstitutional surveillance of American citizens with a negligible improvement in national security. Free speech, free thinking, and a free American lifestyle can not survive in the climate of distrust and constant fear created by the Patriot Act.

Ph.D Cynthia Andrzejczyk, author of The Progressive Writing Text, dove into the world of the five freedoms and Internet security. During the first month of a new year in 1941, President Franklin D. Roosevelt delivered a speech on the Four Freedoms to the 77th Congress of the United States of America (Andrzejczyk 64). Roosevelt’s four freedoms became the lifeline of every citizen. Each of these freedoms have become a basic human fact. These freedoms became the backbone of the United States and are also included in the “United Nations Declaration of Human Rights” (author? 64). All citizens have been given the chance to make their own decisions and increase their quality of life. Everyone is given the tools to be able to achieve each of their dreams, gain more knowledge and globally expand networks.

Producers of musical content cannot undo the adverse effects that piracy has had on the industry. Because of the internet and the way individuals have manipulated it to obtain music, many people are unwilling to change their habits. Here lies the issue between the producer and the consumer. Acts like the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and PROTECT Intellectual Property Act (PIPA) work against the incentive of many consumers by telling them that they cannot do what maximizes their utility. Producers are thus working against the likings of the consumer. This is wrong.