from the how-many-roads dept
Five Years Ago
This week in 2020, we looked at how the DHS was surveilling journalists who published leaked documents and how they obtained the encrypted messages of protestors. The FCC was trying to pretend Trump’s executive order about social media wasn’t ridiculous, and one commissioner who suggested it was unconstitutional was rapidly withdrawn from renomination. The TikTok situation got more insane with Trump demanding that the government get a “substantial cut” of any sale of the platform, and with a new executive order banning TikTok and WeChat. And Josh Hawley introduced his latest attack on Section 230, while a judge rejected Devin Nunes’s SLAPP suit over an Esquire article.
Ten Years Ago
This week in 2015, the latest TPP leak showed the US standing firm on its position that companies should be free to abuse patents and copyrights, and equally firm in its opposition to the public domain, as well as pushing to ensure the agreement killed any future version of Aereo. Overall, the text was clear in repeatedly requiring stronger copyright while making public rights voluntary. We also had some questions about CISA, shortly before the Senate punted their vote on the bill into September. And there was a lot of insanity around the idea of “material support” for terrorism, with NSA apologists saying Apple was providing it by encrypting your data, and James Comey saying even retweets can count as material support.
Fifteen Years Ago
This week in 2010, lawmakers working on the latest attempt to create a federal journalism shield law were trying to ensure it didn’t apply to Wikileaks, while the Pentagon was taking a head-in-the-sand approach by blocking Wikileaks access to troops, and we compared some of their reaction to the RIAA’s reaction to Napster. Speaking of the RIAA, they were also sending takedown notices over music Radiohead gave away for free, while ASCAP released the latest video in its laughable propaganda campaign, and the FBI was trying to claim that Wikipedia couldn’t display its logo. We pressed the New York Times on an absurd claim about the cost of counterfeiting, and tried to dispel the false dichotomy of “creators” versus “consumers” in copyright discussions.
