EFFector Vol. 14, No. 26 Sep. 21, 2001 editors@eff.org
A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation ISSN 1062-9424
EFFector Vol. 14, No. 26 Sep. 21, 2001 editors@eff.org
A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation ISSN 1062-9424
For more information on EFF activities & alerts: http://www.eff.org/
To join EFF or make an additional donation:
http://www.eff.org/support/
EFF is a member-supported nonprofit. Please sign up as a member today!
San Francisco, California - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) urges continued activism against the "Anti-Terrorism Act" (ATA) [a.k.a. "Mobilization Against Terrorism Act" (MATA)], proposed by the US Department of Justice, and related legislation (presently 3 bills), because many provisions of the bills would dramatically alter the civil liberties landscape through unnecessarily broad restrictions on free speech and privacy rights in the United States and abroad. Your urgent action is needed TODAY.
EFF again urges Congress to act with deliberation in approving only measures that are effective in preventing terrorism while protecting the freedoms of Americans.
EFF believes this broad legislation would radically tip the United States system of checks and balances, giving the government unprecedented authority to surveil American citizens with little judicial or other oversight.
Ashcroft's proposed legislation (distributed Sep. 19) comes in the wake of the Senate's hasty passage of the "Combating Terrorism Act" (CTA) on the evening of Sep. 13 with less than 30 minutes of consideration on the Senate floor. On Sep. 20, Rep. Lamar Smith circulated a draft bill very similar to CTA, called the Public Safety and Cyber Security Enhancement Act (PSCSEA). A fourth and more reasoned bill of this nature, from Sen. Patrick Leahy, is expected soon.
The ATA/MATA is currently a draft bill, subject to a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing and briefing on Mon., Sep. 24. The CTA is presently a Senate-passed amendment to a House appropriations bill. It is expected to be voted on in joint conference committee early next week. The only real pressure point on the CTA is the conference committee; whatever emerges will almost certainly pass both houses near-unanimously. PSCSEA's future is uncertain at this point, as is that of Sen. Leahy's (presently unavailble) draft.
To save space, since this issue has two alerts, please see the Web-posted
version of this alert for the sample letters:
NEW: Easier committee contacts! All of the committee members' e-mail addresses (other than Hollings who only provides a web form, and several Represenatives who can only be e-mailed through the WriteRep form) are available as a copy-pasteable block of addresses you can simply paste into the "To:" header in your e-mail program to mail them all at once. Acting on this alert should only take a few minutes. Aren't your civil liberties worth that much time?
Attorney General John Ashcroft distributed the proposed Anti-Terrorism Act/Mobilization Against Terrorism Act to members of Congress after Monday's press conference at which he indicated that, among other measures, he would ask Congress to expand the ability of law enforcement officers to perform wiretaps in response to the terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001. Ashcroft asked Congress to pass anti-terrorism legislation including "expanded electronic surveillance" by the end of this week. The PSCSEA bill appears to be a "backup plan" for S.A. 1562; if it does not pass as part of H.R. 2500, it can be reintroduced separately in slightly different form as a new bill. Sen. Patrick Leahy is also expected to introduce a more moderate proposal sometime early next week.
More analysis and commentary is available in the Web-posted
version of this alert:
For bill texts and analyses, see the EFF Surveillance Archive:
http://www.eff.org/Privacy/Surveillance/
Senator Leahy's testimony on the Combating Terrorism Act:
Why "backdoor" encryption requirements reduce security:
The Electronic Frontier Foundation is the leading civil liberties
organization working to protect rights in the digital world. Founded in
1990, EFF actively encourages and challenges industry and government to
support free expression, privacy, and openness in the information
society. EFF is a member-supported organization and maintains one of the
most linked-to Web sites in the world:
http://www.eff.org
Shari Steele, EFF Executive Director
ssteele@eff.org
+1 415-436-9333 x103
Lee Tien, EFF Senior First Amendment Attorney
tien@eff.org
+1 415-436-9333 x102
- end -
Widespread public outcry has resulted from the circulation of draft legislation titled "Security Systems Standards and Certification Act" (SSSCA) that would require that all future digital technologies include federally-mandated "digital rights management" (DRM) technologies that will enable Hollywood to restrict how consumers can use digital content. The EFF opposes this proposed legislation and urges its members to send their concerns to the sponsoring Senators.
Use this sample letter to the Senators or modify it, and send to:
The Honorable Fritz Hollings
Washington, D.C.
125 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
+1 202-224-6121
+1 202-224-4293 (fax)
To send e-mail, use the form at:
and
The Honorable Ted Stevens
United States Senate
522 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
+1 202-224-3004
+1 202-224-2354 (fax)
senator_stevens@stevens.senate.gov
and most importantly, your own legislators.
You can get your legislators' contact information from Project Vote Smart:
or the House:
and Senate:
websites. You can also look up your Representative with this form:
Dear Sen./Rep. [Surname]:
I am writing to express my grave concern about the draft Hollings/Stephens copyright legislation, "Security Systems Standards and Certification Act" (SSSCA), principally authored by the Walt Disney corporation. This bill, would force virtually all consumer electronics to include mandatory "digital rights management" (DRM) copy-prevention and use-control mechanisms to "protect" all digital content (whether copyrighted or not), and essentially destroy completely the public's already endangered fair use rights, first sale doctrine, and public domain rights. I urge you to oppose this legislation.
Congress and the courts have always struck a careful balance between preserving incentives for authors while ensuring public access to our cultural heritage. The SSSCA represents an outright assault against this balanced view of copyright. Under the SSSCA, Congress would abdicate its responsibility to protect the public's interest in copyright, leaving content owners to dictate terms to technology companies behind closed doors. The public would be left with no voice in this process, and with crippled technologies that permit only the uses that Hollywood has the unilateral ability to control.
Under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), University professors and visiting foreign programmers are already being legally threatened by the music industry and even criminally prosecuted at the behest of software companies for what always have been and should be legal activities such as research and making proprietary formats more accessible. The DMCA was a major step backwards for both the public side of the copyright bargain and the rights of scientists and researchers to study and report on computer security.
Hollywood forces are now hoping that this "DMCA 2" will reach even further, creating a direct federal mandate that DRM systems be included in every technology that interacts with digital content. Please do not let this happen. I urge you to vote AGAINST SSSCA when introduced. The pendulum has already swung too far away from the public interest.
Sincerely,
[Your name & address]
(Be sure to correct the salutation - use EITHER Sen. or Rep., and use the correct name.)
This drive to stop this "DMCA 2" copyright land-grab is part of a larger campaigns to empower the creative community in the digital age by protecting the public's access to and use of audiovisual technologies.
Check the EFF CAFE campaign website regularly for additional
alerts and news:
The draft legislation, "Security Systems Standards and Certification Act" (SSSCA) is being developed by Senators Fritz Hollings (D-SC) and Ted Stevens (R-AK) with the assistance of the Walt Disney Company. A draft of the measure was leaked to the press two weeks ago. If enacted, the proposed SSSCA would forbid the making, selling or trafficking in any "interactive digital device" that fails to include federally-mandated "Digital Right Management" (DRM) copy-prevention systems intended to protect all digital content (whether copyrighted or not).
The SSSCA's scope is breathtakingly broad, forcing technology companies to add support for copy and use restrictions into virtually all future digital technology. This would include not only all software, PCs, hard drives, CD-Rs and other computer peripherals, but also many non-PC technologies like cellular phones, TiVos, set-top boxes, video game consoles, digital watches, CD players, MP3 players, GPS receivers, ATM machines, digital cameras, digital photocopiers, and fax machines. Although existing devices are grandfathered under the statute, all future models of these devices would have to be revised to incorporate federally-mandated technology intended to help Hollywood control how its content may be used by consumers. The SSSCA also applies to anyone who sells or distributes these digital technologies, and to anyone who bypasses or modifies any DRM systems in them. Those who violate the SSSCA would face civil fines and criminal penalties.
And who gets to define the particulars of the DRM systems? According to the SSSCA, Congress will rely on technology companies and content companies to select DRM systems based on criteria set by Congress. If the industries are unable to agree, federal bureaucrats will choose. The public is not invited to participate, nor do the criteria set out in the SSSCA require the preservation or protection of fair use, first sale, the public domain, or any of the other rights reserved for the public by copyright law.
In the American legal tradition, Congress and the courts have always struck a careful balance between preserving incentives for authors while ensuring public access to our cultural heritage. The SSSCA represents an unvarnished attack on this balanced view of copyright. Under the SSSCA, Congress would abdicate its responsibility to protect the public's interest in copyright, leaving content owners to dictate terms to technology companies behind closed doors. The public would be left with crippled technologies that permit only the uses that Hollywood unilaterally permits.
The freedom to innovate, without the shackles of burdensome government mandates, has been the engine that has driven the information revolution. Now at the behest of powerful business interests, Congress threatens to shut this engine down by forcing technological innovators to beg permission from the content industries before introducing new tools and products.
As illustrated by the threats made to Professor Felten's research team by the record companies, as well as the criminal prosecution of Dmitry Sklyarov, the DMCA was a major step backwards for both the public side of the copyright bargain and the rights of scientists and researchers who seek to study and report on computer security. Apparently unsatisfied with this, Hollywood forces are now hoping that the SSSCA will reach even further, creating a direct federal mandate that DRM systems be included in every technology that interacts with digital content.
The draft of the proposed SSSCA legislation can be viewed at:
Fred von Lohmann, EFF Senior Intellectual Property Attorney
fred@eff.org
+1 415-436-9333 x123
Will Doherty, EFF Online Activist / Media Relations
wild@eff.org
+1 415 436 9333 x111
- end -
Electronic Frontier Canada (EFC) on Friday submitted comments in response to the Canadian Consultation Paper on Digital Copyright Issues (CPDCI), known colloquially as the "Canadian DMCA". EFF assisted in drafting the comments and was a co-signatory, along with several concerned Canadian technology companies.
The Departments of Industry Canada and of Canadian Heritage issued the Consultation Paper to seek public input about whether Canada should prohibit the circumvention of technological restrictions used on copyrighted works, as the United States has done with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). In light of the U.S. experience with the DMCA, including the threats against Princeton Professor Ed FeltenÕs team of researchers and the arrest of Russian programmer Dmitry Sklyarov, the joint EFC/EFF comments urge Canadian lawmakers not to enact a similar law. In the United States, the DMCAÕs anti-circumvention provisions have upset the balance between copyright owners and the public, as well as chilling free speech and scientific research. The EFC/EFF comments urge Canadian lawmakers, at a minimum, to include exceptions to preserve these crucial Canadian public priorities from the over-reaching demands of the American copyright industries.
The Consultation Paper also asks whether Canada should impose a Ònotice and takedownÓ obligation on Canadian ISPs and other network intermediaries in exchange for a Òsafe harborÓ from copyright liability. The joint EFC/EFF comments recommend that any Òsafe harborsÓ from copyright liability must protect consumer privacy and the end-to-end architecture of the internet. The U.S. experience with Ònotice and takedownÓ suggests that such procedures, if not carefully limited, can be abused by copyright owners to stifle free expression and compromise the privacy of consumers.
The EFC/EFF comments can be found at:
Comments submitted by others can be viewed at:
Replies to the comments already submitted may be sent to the Departments of
Industry Canada and of Canadian Heritage until October 5, 2001. Additional
information about the Canadian copyright reform process can be found at:
- end -
Radio EFF proudly presents a set of five new programs on a variety of
core EFF cases and campaigns. You can find them all at:
http://www.eff.org/radioeff/
Program One: DVD-CCA v Bunner: Oral Arguments
Location: California State Court of Appeals (6th
Appellate Circuit) San Jose, CA
Date: August 23, 2001
Downloadable MP3 (O)pen Audio:
http:// radio.eff.org/ radio_shows/ rfc8.mp3
Summary: Oral arguments in the appeal of the January 2000 preliminary injunction banning dozens of netizens from posting DeCSS under a California state trade secret misappropriation claim.
Arguing for Andrew Bunner: David Greene, Executive Director of the 1st Amendment Project. Arguing for the DVD-CCA: Robert Sugarman, Weil Gotshal & Manges
Running Time: 40:35
Program Two: Free Dmitry: Outside the Bail Hearing
Location: California State Superior Court in San Jose, CA
Date: August 13, 2001
Downloadable MP3 (O)pen Audio is available at:
http:// radio.eff.org/ radio_shows/ dmitry.mp3
Summary: Messages to all who support the "Free Dmitry" and "Reform the DMCA" movements from Shari Steele, EFF Executive Director and Joe Burton, Dmitry's lead defense attorney. Several protesters also explain why they feel the DMCA dangerously places the protection of property above liberty.
Running Time: 7:36
Program Three: Free Dmitry: Anti-DMCA Protest
Guests: Nine protesters share their stories from the front lines
Date: July 30, 2001
Location: San Francisco, CA
Downloadable MP3 (O)pen Audio is available at:
http:// radio.eff.org/ radio_shows/ rfc5.mp3
Summary: Over 100 people gathered at the US Federal building in downtown San Francisco to protest for the release of Dmitry Sklyrov, who is the first scientist to be arrested and jailed under criminal provisions of the DMCA. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 endows publishers with new rights to exercise and exert control over your private and personal experience of copyrighted works.
Running Time: 5:54
Program Four: The Emerging Rules of Cyberspace
Speaker: Robin D. Gross, EFF Staff Attorney for Intellectual Property
Date: February 6, 2001
Location: Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI
Downloadable MP3 (O)pen Audio is available at:http:// radio.eff.org/ radio_shows/ robin1.mp3
Summary: The threat to freedom of expression presented by excessive copyright protections in the digital age.
Running Time: 26:31
Program Five - Coming Soon : Audio from EFF's 1st annual Share-In Music Festival that was held on September 8th in San Francisco's Golden Gate Park.
Share-In Information is available at:
- end -
EFF would like express our gratitude to Rebirth and Development, Inc. with a special thnk you to Kenneth Peralta for their donation of a large wooden conference table that allows us to work even more effectively.
Rebirth and Development, Inc. is working on setting up a documentary film makers resource facility. EFF appreciates their generosity and support.
- end -
EFFector is published by:
The Electronic Frontier Foundation
454 Shotwell Street
San Francisco CA 94110-1914 USA
+1 415 436 9333 (voice)
+1 415 436 9993 (fax)
http://www.eff.org/
Editors:
Katina Bishop, EFF Education & Offline Activism Director
Stanton McCandlish, EFF Technical Director/Webmaster
editors@eff.org
To Join EFF online, or make an additional donation, go to:
http://www.eff.org/support/
Membership & donation queries: membership@eff.org
General EFF, legal, policy or online resources queries: ask@eff.org
Reproduction of this publication in electronic media is encouraged. Signed articles do not necessarily represent the views of EFF. To reproduce signed articles individually, please contact the authors for their express permission. Press releases and EFF announcements & articles may be reproduced individually at will.
To subscribe to or unsubscribe from EFFector via the Web, go to:
To subscribe to EFFector via e-mail, send to majordomo@eff.org a message BODY (not
subject) of:
subscribe effector
The list server will send you a confirmation code and then add you to a
subscription list for EFFector (after you return the confirmation code;
instructions will be in the confirmation e-mail).
To unsubscribe, send a similar message body to the same address, like
so:
unsubscribe effector
(Please ask listmaster@eff.org to manually remove you from the list if this does not work for you for some reason.)
To change your address, send both commands at once, one per line (i.e., unsubscribe your old address, and subscribe your new address).
Back issues are available at:
http://www.eff.org/effector
To get the latest issue, send any message to effector-reflector@eff.org
(or er@eff.org),
and it will be mailed to you automatically. You can also get, via the Web:
Return to EFFector Newsletters Index
Please send any questions or comments to webmaster@eff.org
![[*]](EFFector, Vol_ 14, No_ 18; Aug_ 8, 2001_files/home_blue_icon.gif){kind=icon}
EFF Welcome Page