Web Dossier Bill Stalled in Hawaii Legislature (would require ISP to keep 2 yrs browsing history)

[The Straight Story]

Web Dossier Bill Stalled in Hawaii Legislature

HONOLULU (CN) - As U.S. congressmen backed away last week from a controversial censorship plan to stop online piracy, Hawaii's House of Representatives put the brakes on a bill that would require Internet service providers to preserve two years of online browsing history.

Submitted on Jan. 20 by Rep. Tom Mizuno and six other Hawaii lawmakers, HB2288 would require companies like AOL, AT&T, Verizon and Yahoo to maintain two years of Internet search history records of all Hawaii residents for "no less than two years."

The bill is barely two pages in length and states: "The required data for the consumer records shall include each subscriber's information and internet destination history information. Destination information shall include any of the following: Internet protocol address, domain name or host name."
Facing enormous opposition from other state representatives, local citizens, attorneys and the ISP Association, the House Committee on Economic Revitalization & Business deferred action on Thursday.
...

"[The United States Internet Service Provider Association] has carefully examined past, more narrowly drafted, data retention proposals and each time has concluded that a uniform retention mandate is certain to present enormous challenges to the Internet service provider (ISP) industry," the group's executive director, Kate Dean, wrote. "These challenges include regulatory burdens, technical complications, significant capital and expense costs, and diversion of capital from innovation. RB 2288 raises all of these concerns [...] Data retention as mandated by RB 2288 would require an entire industry to retain billions of discrete electronic records: records tracking every Internet user's online activities, every online movement. The requirements of HB 2288 go far beyond the data retention legislation currently pending in the U.S. Congress, and well beyond the information which law enforcement would need to conduct investigations into the majority of online criminal activity. The scope of the data retention requirements under RB 2288 are dramatically disproportionate to the utility of the data that would be collected. The impact on consumer privacy of such a mandate is clear."

http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/01/30/43463.htm

[Lionessa]

1. Wouldn't mind them being held 2 years, if they could only be accessed via proper court ordered

search. But with the loose and completely opaque way the administrations of both GWB and BO make this pretty scary.