This [1] is the letter linked to in the article that is evidence they support CISA, correct?
Maybe it's because I can't read legalese very well, but this looks like tech companies asking congress to codify our rights for the digital age, and to provide a well defined legal framework for those rights to exist within. I'm not really seeing support for sweeping powers of spying; it seems like they're asking for the opposite in fact. Again, I may be misreading that.
It's not as much legalese but trying to hide a wolf in sheep clothing.
They put other legislations around (I did not inspect them, so can't comment) and among them (in the center so person skimming it might miss it) they put: "Cyber Threat Information Sharing Legislation". They don't mention which bills they are referring to and they made sure that acronym doesn't match CISPA. If you search it you will find that there's no legislation with that name, and the only results you get are CISPA.
Why those companies want CISPA? Because it removes all liability from them when they share the data without a warrant. Basically we no longer will be able to sue them for violating our privacy.
> Why those companies want CISPA? Because it removes all liability from them when they share the data without a warrant. Basically we no longer will be able to sue them for violating our privacy.
Nothing in CISPA allows them to violate their EULA.
If they had EULAs that violated your privacy in the first place, then that's a problem between you and the company, independent of CISPA.
Once that would become a law they no longer even have to mention it in the EULA, because it takes precedence. In addition to that all companies would be doing it so it's not like you can "vote with your wallet".
So I'm still not following why EULA has to do with anything in this context.
Or, for EU people, it’s a problem between the company and your government, and you can force the company to change the EULA, which in turn means they have to change their policies or lose in court, like Facebook.
EULA is something that is imposed by the company, it is totally optional but companies use it to restrict you what you can do with their product or service. They could mention that they would send data about you, or they could just say they have to follow US laws.
The letter calls for "Cyber Threat Information Sharing Legislation" without specifying _which_ bill. But given that CISA is the only such bill in front of Congress, it looks like Apple has endorsed the bill (without technically endorsing it). Given the specifity of the other bills the letter mentioned, and how publicly unpopular CISA is, this seems like a massively spineless move.
If Apple is serious about privacy they should clarify and affirmatively oppose CISA.
Maybe it's because I can't read legalese very well, but this looks like tech companies asking congress to codify our rights for the digital age, and to provide a well defined legal framework for those rights to exist within. I'm not really seeing support for sweeping powers of spying; it seems like they're asking for the opposite in fact. Again, I may be misreading that.
1: http://www.bsa.org/~/media/Files/Policy/data/09142015CongLea...