Unlike SOPA, however, CISPA operates under the guise of national cybersecurity as opposed to economic concerns, but CISPA’s overly broad language could be used for surveillance or censorship because the bill lacks sufficient restrictions
. Supporters of CISPA will be quick to discourage comparisons of CISPA to SOPA considering the former was economic and the later is concerned with security (and considering “SOPA” has pretty much developed into something of a slur). While this is true, both bills would could have similarly devastating effects on the Internet and the people who hang out and do business there.
The fact that CISPA-related information exchanges are only reviewed for validity after the fact, instead of being carefully considered beforehand
, is only part of the problem. CISPA also has very, very broad protections in place for anyone who shares anything relating to cybersecurity. First of all, CISPA sharing supersedes any and every other privacy law, federal and state, meaning anything that might be considered private otherwise is suddenly not when cybersecurity is involved
Second, anyone who does or doesn’t
do stuff with CISPA-shared data is protected from pretty much anything. Basically, anyone acting “in good faith” is exempt from both civil and
federal suits regarding any information they’ve shared or regarding any actions they took — or failed to take — based on any cybersecurity information they may have received. So even if someone shares something they shouldn’t have, or over-reaches based on some juicy dish they got, they’re in the clear so long as it’s decided they were acting in good faith