We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
Getting someone's name, address, cell phone number, and email addresses is not the Internet equivalent of wiretapping. The Internet equivalent of wiretapping would be getting the content of your emails and other data that you send and receive.
I'm not a fan of this bill to give these powers to police over ISPs, but it isn't as bad as too many of it critiques make it out to be. It isn't allowing police to warrantlessly get the contents of your email or other data that you send and receive - they can already get that information with a warrent and this bill does not seek to change that requirement.
Connect the dots...
If the powers that be want information about [the owner of] an IP address, then they must already know something about the traffic to or from said IP address, no? They are already armed with data about childporn traffic (their excuse that they're using) and as well with data about wares and media traffic (the excuse they are conveniently not talking about very much are they?) as well as who-knows-what-else traffic, and they want to conveniently (i.e. without all that due process nuisance) correlate these traffic patterns to individuals for further investigation and possible prosecution (legal or other).
Why is it that so many
When you go out to buy, don't show your silver.
