So, as most of you are aware, the US Senate passed a bill yesterday that, among other things, gives the Telcos immunity against privacy lawsuits they are facing after they (possibly illegally) assisted the US gov't in various wiretapping schemes over the last couple of years. In particular, the liberal blogosphere is up in arms as the fact that Obama voted for the bill.
Really though, I'm not really clear on why some much of the outrage has been focused on the immunity provisions in the bill. Sure, complain all you want about the erosion of civil liberties in our post 9/11 world. I'm right there with you. But when the US gov't goes and tells the telcos to do something, and the US gov't has the ability to significantly harm the business of the companies should we really be getting mad at the telcos when they caved?
Maybe there's something I'm missing here, but shouldn't we be trying to change things by changing the gov't and not by being so focused on the right to sue the Telcos who were just doing what they were told?
-
- harryh (
harryh) wrote,