(Photo: EFF.org)

CISPA, the cyber-privacy bill facing opposition from open Internet advocates, passed the House of Representatives today with a vote of 287 for, 127 against and 18 abstaining. The bill will now move on to the Democrat-controlled Senate, where it may face a tougher fight. President Obama has also threatened to veto the bill in its current form.

If passed, CISPA would give the U.S. government the ability to obtain personal user data from Internet companies without a court-ordered warrant.

(Photo: Comcast)

What's in your inbox? Some risque dirty talk? Maybe a handful of regretful messages about how hammered you were last night? If a law enforcement-backed proposal going before a House subcommittee today gets passed, wireless companies will be one step closer to having to store all of your text messages, sexy or not.

The bill is backed by law enforcement agencies, which argue that text messages can serve as key pieces of evidence in cases, particularly related to "domestic violence, stalking, menacing, drug trafficking, and weapons trafficking." Cops want wireless companies to store your text messages so that they can have access to them in the event that any crime occurs. This is similar to a wireless provider recording phone calls and storing the audio files.

The House is working to update the 1986 Electronic Communications Privacy Act, and today's hearing will focus on whether or not a bill like this one should be tacked on to the act. The Justice Department itself requested yesterday that any update to the ECPA allows the government access to Facebook messages and Twitter DMs.

How long before they're subpoenaing Snapchats?

JOBS Act supports via Angel List

Ready your startups, the early stage investing climate is about to go into overdrive. This afternoon, the JOBS Act (or Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act) passed in the House with an overwhelming vote of 380-41. Next, the bill moves to President Obama, who is expected to sign it into law.

It's been a bit of a bumpy ride. The JOBS Act originally passed in the House a few weeks ago with a 390-23 vote a couple weeks ago. The Senate's version of the bill, called the CROWDFUND Act (or Capital Raising Online While Deterring Fraud and Unethical Non-Disclosure Act), added a number of safeguards for investors and passed last week 73-26. The JOBS Act was then revised to reconcile with the Senate's bill, which is why the final version had to move back to the House for another vote. 

As the Washington Post reports, President Obama's support for the bill "has put him at odds with frequent allies, including labor unions and consumer and regulatory groups." Although the bill has been buoyed by overwhelming support from the tech community, "Critics say that the changes would allow firms to avoid disclosing crucial financial information and elude government oversight, opening the door to fraud and investor abuse," adds the Post.

We detailed some of the crucial changes the bill will bring about, including increasing the 500-shareholder cap up to 2,000 investors before companies have to disclose their financials and allowing unaccredited investors to contribute limited amounts to small companies via crowdfunding platforms.

For a more thoughtful take on what this means for the startup world from a veteran tech investor, check out Rick Webb's incisive column from earlier today.

It's worth noting, however, that Mr. Webb isn't the only techie with misgivings.

@naval @katedmitchell I for one think this Jobs act is a terrible idea and sec would neuter it big time. Cc @davewiner

— Om Malik (@om) March 27, 2012

Mr. Winer's response? Cross your fingers.

@om @naval @katedmitchell -- actually I read that it was neutered before it passed. In any case, nothing can be done now. Hope for the best.

— Dave Winer ☮ (@davewiner) March 27, 2012

Some familiar faces among AngelList's petition to pass the JOBS Act. (via angel.co/jobs-act/thank-you)

Update: On March 27th, the House passed a reconciled version of the JOBS Act, which includes the provisions from the Senate's CROWDFUND Act, detailed below.

This afternoon, the Senate passed the Crowdfund Act by a resounding 73-26 vote. If you've been following the JOBS Act, which has won support from venture capitalists and founders alike (for evidence, just scroll down to this petition's list of supporters), the Crowdfund Act is the Senate's version of the JOBS bill, which now includes the requirement that startups looking to raise capital do so from SEC-approved websites.

The JOBS Act, short for  Jumpstart Our Business Startups, centered around rolling back some investor protections in the name of making it easier for small businesses to raise capital.

Although the JOBS bill passed in the House in a 390-23 vote a couple weeks ago, because legislators were successful in amending a number of "more stringent safeguards for investors," the Crowdfunding Act will need to be reconciled with the JOBS Act and head back to the House, rather than to President Obama for approval, reports Politico.

The debate surrounding the legislation was whether rolling back protections would lead to fraud. The tech community overwhelming argued that regulations such as the 500-shareholder, being able to publicly discuss raising funds, and using crowd-funding platforms were holding them back. The amendments in the Crowdfund Act are designed to protect non-accredited investors, or as TechCrunch calls 'em, "Your Mom."

If it passes in the House, what will it mean for startups?

On Fortune.com, Dan Primack has a nice breakdown of the relevant changes to existing SEC regulations:

Shareholder Rule

Currently, once you hit the 500 shareholder cap, companies have to make their financials public. This bill would increase the threshold to 2,000 shareholders, which Mr. Primack calls an improvement, but "just as arbitrary."

Crowdfunding Platforms

Mr. Primack calls this the "Kickstarter-for-equity provision," which would enable platforms like WeFunder, which has been waiting for Congressional approval, to let startups issue shares in exchange for equity.

"This basically is for companies that either are too small for traditional angel/VC funding, or companies that are unable to secure such capital. In other words, we're probably talking about a proliferation of thousands of lousy companies. But if just one or two become the next Facebook, then the trade-off is worth it."

Well, either that or the Enron of startups swindles money from regular folks and no one gets to write articles about how Silicon Valley "is the opposite of Goldman Sachs," anymore.

As one commenter noted in our post about WeFunder, the concept opened up opportunities, but "It sounds like you forgo the control that comes with a larger individual investment, as well as those juicy preferred dividends that come with many Series A investments (great news for the startup though!!)."

General Solicitation

Currently, Regulation D prohibits issuers, which includes privates companies and some VC and private equity funds, from "general solicitation" of investors. The new bill says sayonara to that restriction although only accredited investors can participate in Regulation D offerings. On the one hand, it means you won't have to wait for a leak to the press to find out that Chris Sacca is raising a new fund. On the other hand, take a look at the charges the SEC recently brought against Felix Investments to get a picture of how quickly things can turn into a boiler room scenario.

Reducing Costs of Going Public

Perhaps you've noticed that hot startups from Zynga to LinkedIn to Groupon and soon Facebook have gone public recently? Well Congress hasn't. This provision is to address what Mr. Primack calls "the imaginary IPO crisis." Thus to reduce the costs of going public, the bill proposes reducing investor protections, such as one that prohibits analysts at investment banks from offering pre-IPO research on their own clients. As Mr. Primack noted earlier:

"Going public is not supposed to be a cakewalk. We've already been through an IPO environment where all you needed was a clever URL and a fuzzy mascot, and the results weren't pretty."

Protection for Investors

One of the amendments to the bill that passed today will require companies raising up to $1 million to share their financials with prospective investors. The same amendment would prevent investors with less than $100,000 in annual income from putting more than 5 percent of their income into a crowdfunded security. You can thank Congress later, Mom.