The regulations, require IISPs to "provide [users with] clear and complete information on software functions and other information" and obtain their consent prior to conducting "operations on user terminals such as downloading, installation, running, upgrading or uninstallation of software".
IISPs are prohibited from deceptive, misleading or forceful practices that convince users to "download, install, run, upgrade and uninstall software" and are required to give users a method for uninstalling software that is at least as "convenient" as the method for installation. IISPs are generally barred from "leaving executable codes or other unnecessary files on user terminals after the software is uninstalled".
Effective from 15th March 2012Under the new regulations IISPs are not allowed to collect personal data about users nor pass that information on to others without consent "unless it is otherwise provided by laws or administrative regulations". When permission has been granted, IISPs are still required to "clearly inform users of the methods, contents and purposes for collecting and processing the personal information of users". They are banned from collecting any personal information that is "unnecessary for providing services" and cannot use the data it has "for purposes other than providing services".
The regulations require that IISPs keep personal information "properly" and take immediate "remedial measures" if data is, or could be, "divulged".
In circumstances where users upload data to services provided by IISPs those companies must "strengthen system security protection, protect the security of information uploaded by users according to law, and guarantee the use, modification and deletion of the information uploaded by users".
http://www.out-law.com/en/articles/2012 ... nto-force/
Sopa and PIPA now in their graves, but is this a move against ACTA, as the Chinese are unlikely human rights activists...?
http://www.infowars.com/obama-signs-glo ... than-sopa/A country known for its enforcement of harsh Internet censorship policies like China could demand under the treaty that an ISP in the United States remove content or terminate a website on its server altogether. As we have seen from the enforcement of similar copyright policies in the US, websites are sometimes targeted for no justifiable reason.
The groups pushing the treaty also want to empower copyright holders with the ability to demand that users who violate intellectual property rights (with no legal process) have their Internet connections terminated, a punishment that could only ever be properly enforced by the creation of an individual Internet ID card for every web user, a system that is already in the works
Internet ID card for every web user?
Proposers White House Cyber Security Adviser/'cyber czar', Howard Schmidt and Commerce Secretary Gary Locke (Chinese Ex-Washington Governor)
Read more: http://digitaljournal.com/article/313517#ixzz1pIadaArb
http://digitaljournal.com/article/313517
EDIT: UPDATED:
http://www.commerce.gov/about-commerce/ ... gary-lockeGary Locke resigned as Secretary of Commerce on August 1, 2011 to become the U.S. Ambassador to the People's Republic of China.
Gary Locke was appointed by President Obama as the 36th Secretary of Commerce and sworn into office on March 26, 2009.
At the Department of Commerce, Locke is charged with helping implement President Obama's ambitious agenda to turn around the economy and put people back to work. In particular, Locke is the administration’s point person for achieving the President’s National Export Initiative, which seeks to double U.S. exports by 2015, in support of several million American jobs
Something doesn't add up, here...(note the dates of the Locke references!)
http://shanghaiist.com/2012/01/18/china ... y_lock.php
Internet freedom war will be continued by activists and governments alike, it seems - the truth will out....
Be lucky!
Aitch