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