WIRED reports that Rep. Chris Cox (R-CA) has introduced a bill that would establish an Office of Global Internet Freedom to foster development of censorship-busting technology for users in countries including China and Saudi Arabia (Fighting Net Censorship Abroad). The House bill, HR 5524, is co-sponsored by Rep. Tom Lantos (D-CA). Text of the bill can be found on the webpage of the House Policy Committee which Cox chairs (Global Internet Freedom Act [PDF]). Read the press release (Bipartisan, Bicameral Bill Stops Internet Jamming). Read the policy statement (Tear Down This Firewall). The Senate is expected to introduce its own version of the bill soon, sponsored by John Kyl (R-AZ) and Ron Wyden (D-OR).
Sounds good, right? Read on for the glaring loophole that turns this bill into $100,000,000.00 pork:
(e) LIMITATION ON AUTHORITY. - Nothing in this Act shall be interpreted to authorize any action by the United States to interfere with foreign national censorship for the purpose of protecting minors from harm, preserving public morality, or assisting with law enforcement aims.
I have news for the Congressman. It is really, really difficult to distinguish between issues of "public morality" and political dissent in repressive regimes. Ask Saudi Arabia (where the moral and political are the same thing) and China (which frequently justifies its censorship on the basis of "public morality"). It is even harder (i.e., impossible) for anti-censorship technology to distinguish between "public morality" and political dissent, so what sort of technology does this law permit the US to develop? My guess would be, "None." Looks good in press releases though.
And don't get me started on "legitimate law enforcement aims" or protecting the children.