Big Brother wants to now what you’re doing online.
From CNET this morning:
Hawaii’s legislature is weighing an unprecedented proposal to curb the privacy of Aloha State residents: requiring Internet providers to keep track of every Web site their customers visit.
Its House of Representatives has scheduled a hearing this morning on a new bill (PDF) requiring the creation of virtual dossiers on state residents. The measure, H.B. 2288, says “Internet destination history information” and “subscriber’s information” such as name and address must be saved for two years.
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Introducers: MIZUNO, ITO, MANAHAN, Awana, Har, M. Lee, Nishimoto
dumbest bill i have seen in a long time.
even worse than snax and naps.
Yep. Dumb bill. The only names on it that surprise me are Marilyn Lee and Scott Nishimoto. Sometimes legislators sign on as co-sponsors as a courtesy and without bothering to do due diligence. I ASSUME that explains their signatures.
As Ohia points out downthread, the real author is Kym Pine.
I got an angry phonecall about an hour ago from a high-level guy in the local industry asking, “WTF?” The CNET article suggests the industry has begun mobilizing against the bill. Haven’t heard yet whether they managed to kill it in this morning’s ERB hearing.
If it survives ERB, the next referral is to CPC, headed by Bob Herkes. This will give the opposition a second bite at the apple. This has the potential to provoke an angry mobilization of the tech community, both executives and geeks. And to embarrass several legislators.
And, as Ohia pointed out, the Republican Caucus in the House, who have included this in their Minority Package. I guess it’s a good hybrid position for today’s GOP. Institute authoritarian power, but put it in the private sector.
Where’s Peter Kay, their top techno geek, on this? Or did they not even bother consulting him?
The bill looks much less “dead” than I had thought, according to the Civil Beat account of what was said and by whom:
http://www.civilbeat.com/articles/2012/01/26/14705-opponents-slam-hawaii-effort-to-track-web-usage/
Also, the original CNET story linked in Ian’s article has a link to a newer story written after the hearing. It is clear some of the bill’s supporters are intending to revise the bill and bring it back in about a month.
Frankly, I see nothing in the comments from the prosecutor or legislators which gives me confidence they know squat about the internet business. If this goes through, I suggest we hold an open session in the Capitol Rotunda demonstrating to people how easy it is to set up a proxy-server to totally obscure which websites they visit.
This same committee poses as friends of the high-tech industry, then they do something like this which embarrasses and discredits them to that same business sector they have been sucking up to. Well, your bff thinks you’re dumb and that you NEVER really understood or liked them.
Mizuno , John M. (D)
Hawaii State Capitol, Room 436
Phone 808-586-6050
Fax 808-586-6051
E-Mail: repmizuno@Capitol.hawaii.gov
Ito , Ken (D)
Hawaii State Capitol, Room 432
Phone 808-586-8470
Fax 808-586-8474
E-Mail: repito@Capitol.hawaii.gov
Manahan , Joey (D)
Hawaii State Capitol, Room 421
Phone 808-586-6010
Fax 808-586-6011
E-Mail: repmanahan@capitol.hawaii.gov
The bill’s enabling clause delegates enforcement authority to the State Department of Retaliation.
I can’t read the name… Who wrote this one?
Introducers: MIZUNO, ITO, MANAHAN, Awana, Har, M. Lee, Nishimoto
I thought it was 2012, not 1984?
and I thought this was the United States of America, not North Korea or China.
This appears to be one of at least four bills generated by a briefing on “cybercrime” that was conducted, ostensibly, by the House of Representatives as a whole back in July 2011 but was actually a dog and pony show run by the House Minority and Rep. Kym Pine in particular. Had it been just the Minority, no one would have paid attention, both for cynical political reasons and because the minority caucus is seriously lacking in intellectual/policy/political horsepower.
A virtually identical bill and three others (HB 2206 to 2209) were introduced as part of the House Minority package which can be found here: http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/report.aspx?type=package&key=15&name=House+Minority+Caucus. Had this bill been introduced by Pine and/or other minority members, it would never have been heard and generated no attention whatsoever. So, apparently, it was shopped to John Mizuno who has never encountered media attention — good or bad — that he doesn’t love.
Generally speaking, these measures are poorly conceived with regard to constitutional and legal principles (e.g., authorizing search warrants to be issued on less than probable cause for service in foreign jurisdictions(!)) , not to mention that they are both impractical and unenforceable. Sorry to say, the way this works is that the Minority gets to take credit, if you want to call it that, while Mizuno gets the publicity, and Angus McKelvey Hears the bill (for unfathomable reasons) and kills it (for entirely fathomable reasons or, more likely, punts to Gil-Keith Agaran in House Judiciary to do the dirty work).
And so it goes in the BS building. Uh, that stands for “Big Square,” in case you were wondering.
@Ohia,
The second referral is to CPC, not JUD. I guess Gil could ask for an additional referral, but the best bet is to kill it in Herkes’ committee. Or in the Senate.
Have you heard yet what happened in the Economic revitalization and Business hearing this morning?
As you note below, “deferred,” so likely make-die-dead. At least for now.
You’re right abour the referral (I shoulda looked!) but the point remains the same: B bracket committee chair hears the bill to please somebody and because s/he doesn’t know the meaning of “NO!”, hoping that the A bracket committee will kill the thing off before it takes on a life of its own.
Oh what I would pay for some estrogenous or testicular fortitude in our legislators!
Thanks for catching the bill’s origin’s with the House Republican caucus. Nationwide, John Mizuno and the Democrats who signed on are taking the hit, with the usual language about the Democrat’s inclination towards “socialism” and even one reference I saw to “the People’s Republic of Hawaii.”
Mizuno (and the other Dems) deserve criticism for “authoring” this bill. But as you point out, it was really the Republicans who created this bill. And made passage of it one of their top priorities for the session.
I gotta revise my comments here. The updated CNET story makes it clear Mizuno, McElvey and Pine are determined to revise (and revive) the bill. I strongly recommend the high-tech and civil liberties advocates continue organizing for a full court press and kill this bill when it re-surfaces.
Just got word. The bill was held in committee. We can relax. The downside is that the supporters of the bill escaped the public spanking they deserved and probably would have gotten. Double darn! That’s half the fun!
Per AP”
State lawmakers have tabled a proposal that would have required Internet service providers to retain all Hawaii consumers’ subscriber data and browsing histories for a minimum of two years.
Introduced a way to combat Internet-related crime, House Bill 2288 received support from Honolulu’s police and prosecutor departments and one individual, but was otherwise greeted with vehement opposition at a hearing Thursday.
Opponents of the legislation expressed concerns about privacy and the costs associated with storing such large volumes of data.
Others told House members the sweeping Hawaii proposal made the widely-protested “Stop Online Piracy Act” and “Protect Intellectual Property/IP Act” before look mild by comparison.
The House Economic Revitalization and Business Committee decided to hold off on state action to see what happens with online piracy legislation in Congress.
Thanks, Tim. I saw the AP story on a Washington state website before it was even posted here. The Washington AP story gave Treena Shapiro the byline. So why does the S-A neglect to do so? Would the byline be of more interest to Hawaii readers than to folks in Washington?
i am not raising an argument here, but please note that the Oregonian also does not have Treena’s byline. this is not unusual for newspapers to do with AP stories, especially stories that are relatively short. this is not some kind of deep dark secret snub by the Star-Advertiser, even though Treena once worked for both Star-Bulletin and Advertiser.
I am not accusing them of snubbing her. I am noticing that sometimes they use a byline and other times do not. Beyond the pride a writer might get by having their byline appear, I suggest it also has value, especially for those of us familiar with the subject matter and/or the reporters. I find it helpful knowing which AP reporter is covering an issue I care about. That info is probably my useful for a local reader than, I suspect, to someone in Washington (or Oregon).
These legislators are out of their mind and not representing the real public interest.
Well, the day may come when all those dog and cat photos on your blog will be full of encrypted discussions with only approved insiders having the key.
And you will need to update your blog so that users can upload photos as attachments.
One fundamental problem with *ANY* version of this law: There never will be a guarantee of the total safety of such a massive amount of personal information. Especially when Hawaii state workers would be in charge of it all!
This law is akin to putting the benefits of a few lazy cops ahead of everyone in Hawaii who goes online.
This attempted law should always be dead on arrival — there is no sufficient argument in favor of it. Period. If some legislators and proponents can’t figure that out, they need to start surfing for a new job!
Doesn’t the State of Hawaii have a 43-year-old computer system? It’s just that this sort of legislation reminds me of the invasion of Iraq, where it’s the people who can’t do anything right who are attracted to the most grandiose schemes.