Of course corp love and lobbied the idea/TPP because then they
     don't have publicly shamed products or spend money to fix them
     and can let tax sponsored chilling force work for them.

   ​Which would, then, put "cyber" onto the same LEA principal as doors --
   namely,​ the onus is on oneself to stay honest when passing by an
   open/unsecured door, knowing full well the riches exposed within are
   ripe for the "criminal element" to plunder.
   We readily blame the owner for not securing their home/car/whatever
   when theft occurs.  We don't hear weekly roll-ups of five-finger
   discounted items, nor of items which may have "fallen off the truck."
   Change the theft to one based on bits, and it's front page news ...
   seemingly because it's so much more nefarious but really only because
   it's still a novelty in the Mind of the Many.
   Why aren't people indignant about the extra costs associated with
   theft? Which makes cyber related costs rather trivial.
   [1]http://money.cnn.com/2010/10/18/news/economy/store_theft_drain_on_yo
   ur_wallet/
   The point being, inequality will allows foster theft.  Prisons will
   never deter the Desperate nor Ruthless.  Since the System clearly
   benefits overall from the inequality, and by extension the propagation
   of prisons, this is a condition likely to continue - even probably
   survive The Revolution:  Jail being seen as the barricade against
   "Them."
   -daniel

References

   1. http://money.cnn.com/2010/10/18/news/economy/store_theft_drain_on_your_wallet/