Bill Would Give President Emergency Control of Internet, August 28, 2009 (cnet) Internet companies and civil liberties groups were alarmed this spring when a U.S. Senate bill proposed handing the White House the power to disconnect private-sector computers from the Internet. A Senate source familiar with the bill compared the president's power to take control of portions of the Internet to what President Bush did when grounding all aircraft on Sept. 11, 2001. The source said that one primary concern was the electrical grid, and what would happen if it were attacked from a broadband connection. Probably the most controversial language begins in Section 201, which permits the president to "direct the national response to the cyber threat" if necessary for "the national defense and security." The White House is supposed to engage in "periodic mapping" of private networks deemed to be critical, and those companies "shall share" requested information with the federal government. Translation: If your company is deemed "critical," a new set of regulations kick in involving who you can hire, what information you must disclose, and when the government would exercise control over your computers or network.
Prediksi ZetaTalk 5 Sept. 2009: (Terjemahan bebas) Internet tidak dibenci sebanyak ditakuti pihak penguasa. Internet telah menjadi alat perdagangan dan bisnis, demikian pula fungsi-fungsi pemerintahan, dengan demikian, tidak dapat dimatikan begitu saja tanpa dampak mengerikan pada perekonomian. Tindakan ini akan sama saja dengan Darurat Militer, tidak dapat dipertahankan. Maka, para pihak penguasa macet bersama penyebaran informasi yang terjadi hampir secara instan, "going viral", kata orang. Mereka telah menemukan informasi yang merupakan ancaman bagi kendali pihak penguasa yang menyebarluaskan informasi menyesatkan, namun praktek ini telah dikenali dan mudah diidentifikasi oleh orang awam. Hanya orang-orang yang teramat sangat bodoh dan mudah percayalah yang mudah dibohongi oleh informasi menyesatkan.
US Relinquishes Control of the Internet, September 30, 2009 (guardian) After complaints about American dominance of the internet and growing disquiet in some parts of the world, Washington has said it will relinquish some control over the way the network is run and allow foreign governments more of a say in the future of the system. ICANN - the official body that ultimately controls the development of the internet thanks to its oversight of web addresses such as .com, .net and .org - said today that it was ending its agreement with the US government. The deal, part of a contract negotiated with the US department of commerce, effectively pushes California-based ICANN towards a new status as an international body with greater representation from companies and governments around the globe. ICANN had previously been operating under the auspices of the American government, which had control of the net thanks to its initial role in developing the underlying technologies used for connecting computers together.
Internet Inches Closer to 'Internationalisation', November 16, 2009 (breitbart)
The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) has opened the application process, ending the exclusive use of Latin characters for website addresses. With the introduction of "internationalised" domain names (IDNs), scripts such as Chinese, Korean or Arabic will eventually be usable in the last part of an address name - the part after the dot, as in .com and .org.
FCC Commissioners Support Open Internet Rule, October 22, 2009 (reuters) U.S. communications regulators voted unanimously to support an open Internet rule that would prevent telecom network operators from barring or blocking content based on the revenue it generates. The proposed rule now goes to the public for comment until Jan. 14, after which the Federal Communications Commissions will review the feedback and possibly seek more comment. A final rule is not expected until the spring of next year. The vote came despite a flurry of lobbying against the net neutrality rule by telecommunications service providers like AT&T Inc., Verizon Communications Inc and Qwest Communications International Inc, which say it would strip them of the ability to manage their networks effectively and would stifle innovation and competition. The rule would prevent operators from discriminating against any legal content a third party wants to deliver to consumers on their networks, though it allows for "reasonable" network management to unclog congestion, clear viruses and spam, and block unlawful content like child pornography or the transfer of pirated content.
Twitter Chief Tells Murdoch: Internet Paywall Will Not Work, November 19, 2009 (guardian) In recent weeks Murdoch has launched a vitriolic attack on Google and other web companies, accusing them of "stealing" content created by his titles, including the Times and the Sun. Management at News International is working on plans to introduce an online paywall next spring and prevent stories from being linked to by sites such as Google News.
Stop Online Piracy Act: The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) is a United States bill introduced by U.S. Representative Lamar S. Smith (R-TX) to expand the ability of U.S. law enforcement to fight online trafficking in copyrighted intellectual property and counterfeit goods. Provisions include the requesting of court orders to bar advertising networks and payment facilities from conducting business with infringing websites, and search engines from linking to the websites, and court orders requiring Internet service providers to block access to the websites. The law would expand existing criminal laws to include unauthorized streaming of copyrighted content, imposing a maximum penalty of five years in prison. Proponents of the legislation state it will protect the intellectual-property market and corresponding industry, jobs and revenue, and is necessary to bolster enforcement of copyright laws, especially against foreign-owned and operated websites. Claiming flaws in present laws that do not cover foreign-owned and operated websites, and citing examples of "active promotion of rogue websites" by U.S. search engines, proponents assert stronger enforcement tools are needed.
Five Key Senators Abandon Online Ppiracy Bills Amid Web Protests, January 18, 2012 (thehill) Congressional support for controversial online piracy legislation eroded dramatically in the face of an unprecedented online protest supported by tech titans such as Google, Wikipedia and Facebook.Namun upaya elit penguasa AS tidak berhenti, masih ada amandemen Senate Bill 1867, yang terkait keamanan cyber yang lebih tinggi, yaitu tentang kolaborasi antara Departemen Pertahanan dan Keamanan dengan Departemen Dalam Negeri.
Senate Passes Controversial Defense Bill, December 2, 2011 (thenewamerican) One amendment seemed to pass without issue: Senator McCain's amendment to provide for greater cyber-security collaboration between the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security. In other words, not only is all of the United States a battlefield, but so is the Internet.
Komentar ZetaTalk 21 Jan. 2012 tentang SOPA: (Terjemahan bebas) Telah kami prediksikan bahwa, meskipun ada banyak orang dari kalangan elit yang ingin memblokir atau mengendalikan internet, upaya-upaya semacam itu akan gagal. Alasan utama kegagalan upaya-upaya semacam itu adalah luasnya penggunaan internet dalam perdagangan dan industri, dan oleh badan-badan pemerintah termasuk Departeman Pertahanan dan Keamanan. Lalu ada sifat internet itu sendiri, yang dirancang untuk dapat melewati setiap pemblokiran, karena menemukan banyak rute. Jika kabel-kabelnya dipotong, paket-paket data akan dikirim melalui banyak rute lain, dan meskipun akan terlambat sampai beberapa detik, tetap saja akan sampai sesuai ekspektasi. Alasan terkecil atas kegagalan diberlakukannya darurat militer internet adalah protes publik. Namun hal ini muncul, setidaknya dipermukaan, sebagai alasan kegagalan undang-undang SOPA.
Apa yang ada di balik protes terkoordinasi oleh raksasa-raksasa seperti Google adalah profit, karena langkah-langkah kejam yang disyaratkan oleh industri film dan musik di Hollywood akan memerlukan upaya ekstra di pihak perusahaan-perusahaan search engine. Namun protes publik terhadap hilangnya akses ke informasi yang disediakan oleh raksasa-raksasa seperti Wiki dan Google, serta kerugian dari jejaring sosial yang disediakan oleh situs-situs seperti Facebook merupakan keguncangan bagi para pembuat undang-undang itu. Website sekarang telah dipandang sebagai entitas sakral/suci. Ancaman apapun oleh Hollywood untuk menahan dukungan kampanye dibayang-bayangi oleh ancaman serangan balik dari publik di poll-poll. Semuanya demi kebaikan!"
The bills were designed to stop piracy of copyrighted music, movies, and television shows. But critics including Google, Twitter, and some of the original architects of the Internet itself, say the legislation could censor the Internet, hobble online innovation and change what made the Internet what it is today. ... Critics say the bills effectively give copyright holders the power to cripple sites they've accused of piracy, without proving that those websites are actually dedicated to spreading pirated content. With the power to block a website’s domain, delist it from search results, and force advertisers to stop doing business with them, critics fear copyright holders will be given a powerful tool to force websites out of existance. (NYtimes)
Reaksi Para Penentang SOPA
[Serangan DOS] Access to websites of several pro-SOPA organizations and companies such as RIAA, CBS.com, and others was impeded or blocked with denial of service attacks which started on January 19. Self-proclaimed members of the "hacktivist" group Anonymous claimed responsibility and stated the attacks were a protest of both SOPA and the United States Department of Justice's shutdown of Megaupload on that same day. (Wikipedia)
Wikipedia Blackout: 11 Huge Sites Protest SOPA, PIPA On January 18 (huffingtonpost)
On January 18, over 7,000 websites -- including Wikipedia and Google -- will protest anti-piracy legislation currently making its way through Congress. Sites in opposition to the measures will either "going dark" or post information to educate visitors about bills H.R. 3261, the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), and S. 968, the PROTECT IP Act (PIPA), two pieces of legislation meant to curb copyright infringement. While many may support the bills' intentions, opponents and civil libertarians are worried that their passage would give the government powerful censorship tools that could threaten free speech.
Wikipedia to go Dark, Google to Join Protest Against Anti-Piracy Bill, January 17, 2012 (foxnews) White House has raised concerns about anti-piracy bill. The U.S. House of Representatives will resume work next month on a controversial bill aimed at stopping online piracy of movies, music and other content. The debate escalated when White House officials raised concerns that the legislation could make businesses on the Internet vulnerable to litigation and harm legal activity and free speech.
A Political Coming of Age for the Tech Industry, January 17, 2012 (NYtimes) Under the proposed legislation Web sites big and small could be responsible for monitoring all material on their pages for potential violations - an expensive and complex challenge. Current law requires Web sites with copyright-infringing content to take it down if copyright holders ask them to, leaving the rest of the site intact. Google, which owns YouTube and other sites, received five million requests to remove content or links last year, and it says it acts in less than six hours if it determines that the request is legitimate. Legislators have already agreed to delay or drop one ire-inducing component of the bills, Domain Name System blocking, which would prevent access to sites that were found to have illegal content.
Bagaimana Internet Didukung Server Dunia
Keberadaan internet sesungguhnya dipertahankan oleh server-server yang ada secara fisik di seluruh dunia. Server-server ini sudah pastinya tidak dimiliki satu sosok saja, misalnya satu individu atau satu pemerintahan saja (AS atau Israel, misalnya). Sistem internet telah dirancang sedemikian rupa sehingga informasi yang akan dikeluarkan di internet memiliki banyak rute ke tempat-tempat tujuan. Kalau satu rute diblokir, masih ada rute lainnya. Hampir-hampir tidak dapat dihentikan, seperti luapan air.
Negara memang dapat melarang akses ke situs-situs tertentu melalui provider-provider yang memblokir situs-situs tersebut (yang tentunya menentang aturan internet terbuka). Ini seperti yang telah terjadi di negara-negara represif seperti Cina dan Saudi Arabia, misalnya. Namun, di sanapun masih ada gateway-gateway tempat mengalirnya seluruh lalu lintas internet dari dan ke negara-negara itu.