2008-01-17T22:21:56Z opencongress.org tag:opencongress.org,2007:/bill/comments/40310 2008-01-17T22:21:56Z tag:opencongress.org,2008-01-17:/comment/272 susanpcrawford There is a lot to like in this bill *except* its punishment of US businesses. The "sense of Congress" that free expression online is a high priority - that would be very useful in a number of fora. The encouragement of negotiations/relationships that further this openness is positive too (although likely impossible to enforce). Country reports on Internet openness would be useful. We get this from OpenNet.net, but more standardized information would be helpful. But the limitations on businesses are silly. SEC. 203. TRANSPARENCY REGARDING SEARCH ENGINE FILTERING. Any United States business that creates, provides, or hosts an Internet search engine shall provide the Office of Global Internet Freedom, in a format and with a frequency to be specified by the Office, with all terms and parameters used to filter, limit, or otherwise affect the results provided by the search engine that are implemented-- (1) at the request of, or by reason of any other direct or indirect communication by, any foreign official of an Internet-restricting country; or (2) to comply with a policy or practice of restrictions on Internet freedom in an Internet-restricting country. That's a tech mandate if there ever was one. And, for goodness sake, companies limit searches all the time for all kinds of reasons. So although I'd like to see encouragement of the free flow of information around the world, and there are some helpful things in this bill, it also seems quite unworkable - and unnecessarily punitive. 2008-01-17T00:14:51Z tag:opencongress.org,2008-01-17:/comment/239 marknoble This bill expresses the noble goal of increasing global Internet freedom through increasing federal bureaucracy, oversight, and reporting for US businesses. The penalties suggested are large enough to be burdensome for the smallest of Internet providers, while small enough that most large corporations could readily ignore them. Individuals in the US have a vast array of free software available to help people in restrictive nations bypass such controls, as such this bill would do nothing more effectively than concerned individuals are already able to do. 2008-04-28T18:55:42Z tag:opencongress.org,2008-04-28:/comment/10999 bluethunder I wrote a diary urging people to support the bill: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/4/28/185058/103/328/505131 2008-04-28T19:04:08Z tag:opencongress.org,2008-04-28:/comment/11000 sarahbrand "companies limit searches all the time for all kinds of reasons" The very portion of the bill you quoted specifically says that businesses only have to report filters that are implemented to comply with government restrictions on Internet freedoms. Reporting those filters should not be terribly difficult. 2008-01-17T00:14:51Z tag:opencongress.org,2008-01-17:/comment/240 marknoble This bill expresses the noble goal of increasing global Internet freedom through increasing federal bureaucracy, oversight, and reporting for US businesses. The penalties suggested are large enough to be burdensome for the smallest of Internet providers, while small enough that most large corporations could readily ignore them. Individuals in the US have a vast array of free software available to help people in restrictive nations bypass such controls, as such this bill would do nothing more effectively than concerned individuals are already able to do.