House passed bill to make phone records off-limits to review w/o consent

in APRIL! Unanimously!

http://tech.monstersandcritics.com/news/article_1159004.php/Online_data-broker_bill_passes_in_House

WASHINGTON, DC, United States (UPI) -- In a unanimous vote Tuesday the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 4709, the Law Enforcement and Phone Privacy Protection Act of 2006.

The bill introduced by Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, back in February 2006 would amend Title 18 to provide criminal penalties for fraudulent sale or solicitation of unauthorized disclosure of phone records.

The bipartisan legislation was approved by a vote of 409-0.

'Few things are more personal and potentially more revealing than our phone records,' Smith said in a statement. 'A careful study of these records may reveal details of our medical or financial life. It may even disclose our physical location and occupation -- a serious concern for undercover police officers and victims of stalking or domestic violence.'

If passed in the Senate, the legislation would impose serious criminal penalties against those people who sell, transfer, purchase or receive confidential phone records of a telephony company without prior consent of the customer.

These persons could spend up to 10 years in prison and a fine of up to $500,000.

'We need to pass this bill to demonstrate that we take seriously the obligation to protect the confidentiality of consumer telephone records and to make clear to data thieves that their conduct will result in a felony conviction,' Smith added. 'This legislation supports crime victims, prosecutors, companies and individuals who have been the targets of this fraud.'

BurtWorm! :applause: :applause:

He's got a Democratic opponent this time.

This guy should take a bow:

http://www.thetalentshow.org/archives/002447.html

I would surmise that it was in reaction to the listing of . . .was it General Clark's phone records (??). Seems about then that we were finding out that ANYONE could purchase ANYONE ELSE's phone records. So though the passing of the bill looks to be in response to the NSA stuff, I don't think it's introduction was.

this ball rolling, but wouldn't it apply to any similar situation? Just surmising...

the widespread spying by the NSA, and the telecom's complicity in it.

What are these jerks saying about phone record confidentiality now that their guys in the WH are mining them? Probably not what they said in April.

house that remember that vote.

:rofl:

They could feel the leak of their NSA spy program coming and worse they knew the heat would be enough that it was more important to protect their corporate telecom buddies than the American people.

Rp

tangled up in lies and deceptions they can't keep their nefarious agendas straight. They accidental introduce a bill that will hurt their precious king.

lol

because the President can choose which laws he follows and which ones he ignores, right?

I had someone on dailykos actually tell me that's what the Constitution says. Sheesh.

And anyway, * will just attach a signing statement to it, that the lapdog media will take no notice of, that will say he doesn't have to follow it anyway.

Bet it will die in the Senate, to abet the Pres., rather than to force the Pres to have to do another signing statement - flaunting his belief that he, alone, can dictate law.

This is interesting stuff.