It’s imperfect, but CISPA isn’t the devil in disguise

When it comes to outrage over the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act of 2011, or CISPA, don’t believe the hype (not all of it, at least).

The Electronic Frontier Foundation and hacktivist group Anonymous might have overblown the potential ramifications of the bill, but that doesn’t mean it’s well-written. CISPA still needs work to clear up what, exactly, it allows for, but strong congressional and industry support might make it a lot harder to stop than was the Stop Online Piracy Act of 2011, or SOPA, that created an online firestorm earlier this year. The criticism that, by including a provision for the protection of intellectual property, CISPA is little more than a less-conspicuous form of the draconian SOPA bill seems misguided. CISPA is vague and unnecessarily broad, but it’s not SOPA. In fact, the very same Internet companies that were so adamantly opposed to SOPA might support CISPA. Facebook already does. So does outspoken SOPA critic Darrell Issa (R-CA).

Here’s why.

• CISPA is actually good, in theory.
• CISPA doesn’t require service providers to do anything.
• I’m not certain the inclusion of intellectual property protection was driven by ulterior motives.