EFFector Vol. 15, No. 19 June 21, 2002 ren@eff.org
A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation ISSN 1062-9424
EFFector Vol. 15, No. 19 June 21, 2002 ren@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!
Join the call for accountability and openness in government! In a recent letter to Attorney General John Ashcroft, Representatives James Sensenbrenner and John Conyers have asked the Department of Justice to provide a detailed report on the implications and effects of the USA Patriot Act (USAPA). The letter suggests open hearings on the practical application of new law enforcement tools and pointedly asks how the tools relate to recent claims that impending terrorist attacks have been averted.
The 50 point letter asks the DOJ to provide information on the effect of the sweeping powers granted in USAPA, specifically mentioning issues like privacy, electronic surveillance and access to library and bookstore records.
EFF has drafted a letter in support of the inquiry and hearings proposed by Reps. Conyers and Sensenbrenner. It reads as follows:
"Dear (Your Representative),What YOU Can Do:
I am writing to express my support for the letter written by Representatives Conyers and Sensenbrenner urging public review of the USA Patriot Act (USAPA). The letter is available at:
http://www.house.gov/judiciary/ashcroft061302.htm
USAPA was passed in the tumultuous weeks after September 11th and is the most expansive grant of new law enforcement powers in recent history. I encourage you to read and support the Conyers/Sensenbrenner letter.
As a citizen concerned with both civil liberties and national security, I support the letter's call for Congress to evaluate the effectiveness and implications of these new powers. For instance, I am eager to learn how lowering the bar to access library and bookstore records (Section 215) and using foreign intelligence surveillance techniques on U.S. citizens (Sections 206 & 218) have helped the Department of Justice fight terrorism.
Further, I support the Conyers/Sensenbrenner letter's plan for public hearings. It is my belief that good government not only responds to crises, but rigorously and publicly examines those responses to ensure that their implementation has not strayed from their intent.
Thank you for your attention to this matter."
Ren Bucholz
Activist
Electronic Frontier Foundation
ren@eff.org
+1 415 436-9333 x121
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 and privacy online. EFF is a member-supported organization and maintains one of the most-linked-to websites in the world at http://www.eff.org
- end -
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and Privacyactivism recently launched an interactive video game designed to educate players about their privacy and fair use rights. The game highlights how those rights are being trampled by digital rights management (DRM) technologies, online spyware, and data profiling servers.
In Episode 1 of the Carabella Game - The Quest for Tunes, players follow Carabella as she tries to find music by her favorite band while dodging privacy perils and threats to her ability to use and enjoy music that she's bought.
The game is designed to show players how they may forfeit privacy and fair use rights while accessing music online, and how they can protect those rights.
"Individuals aren't always aware that they are releasing personal information when they download software from the Net, or subscribe to a particular service," said Privacyactivism Executive Director Deborah Pierce. "Privacy policies are often vague, and leave users in the dark as to their data collection practices, so the game is designed to spotlight some of these trouble areas and provide tools so people can protect their privacy."
"We created this game to let people know about the impact of digital rights management technologies on their current fair use rights in music," said EFF Volunteer Attorney Gwen Hinze. "While digital music technology offers the promise of more diverse and accessible music, escalating use of digital rights management technology has actually had the effect of limiting our ability to use and enjoy the music we've bought."
For this release:
http://www.eff.org/carabella/20020619_eff_drm_pr.html
Play the game:
http://www.eff.org/carabella
For more information about copyright and fair use:
http://www.eff.org/carabella/copyright-faq.html
Deborah Pierce
Executive Director
Privacyactivism
dsp@privacyactivism.org
+1 415 225-1730
Gwen Hinze
Volunteer Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
gwen@eff.org
+1 415 436-9333 x110 (office)
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 websites in the world:
http://www.eff.org
Privacyactivism was founded to help enable people to make
well-informed decisions both on a personal and societal
level about the importance of privacy. Through a mixture of
education and activism, we hope to show the importance of
privacy as a fundamental human right, not a commodity to be
bought and sold. The Privacyactivism website is located at:
http://www.privacyactivism.org
- end -
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 13:38:46 -0700
To: Jeff Nadler (jeffn@padi.com
From: Cindy Cohn (cindy@eff.org)
Subject: release of members' information
Dear Jeff,
I am a PADI diver and the Legal Director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation. I am extremely knowledgeable about both the legal and regulatory environment surrounding the post 9/11 terrorism investigations. I wrote one of the first publicly available analyses of the Act as it relates to surveillance and have served as a regular commentator in the media on the issue. You can see my analysis of the USA Patriot Act at:
http://www.eff.org/Privacy/Surveillance/Terrorism_militias/20011031_eff_usa_patriot_analysis.html
As you may know, one of the cornerstones of the U.S. Constitutional protections for its citizens is the requirement that law enforcement have some basis for investigating Americans. This idea, often called the prevention of "fishing expeditions" by law enforcement, is rooted in the 4th Amendment, but clearly visible throughout U.S. caselaw both in wartime and in peace. Nothing about the 9/11 attacks changed this bedrock principle; neither Congress nor the Courts have authorized its abandonment.
Yet without giving me or any other of your customers a chance to protect ourselves, you participated willingly in a fishing expedition. There is no way that the FBI had any defensible basis to believe that *all* PADI divers were potential terrorists. They apparently made no efforts to narrow their requests to reflect the folks who they really suspect from the rest of us.
I have also reviewed the letter you sent to Mikki Barry stating that you did so in order to avoid being served by a subpoena and that you received some sort of "assurances" in response from the FBI. Unfortunately, this only increases my concern. Requiring law enforcement to go through processes such as issuance of subpoenas and retrieving the appropriate court orders is our only real protection against fishing expeditions and other law enforcement abuses. I suspect that had you required them to issue a subpoena it would have itself been much narrower than what you voluntarily handed over, since such things must usually be approved by those higher up in the FBI and they face the prospect of having to defend the document before a judge.
Even if such a broad subpoena had been issued, you could have taken further steps to protect your customers. First, you could have notified your customers (including me) that the information was being sought, thus allowing me and thousands of others the opportunity to seek court protection for our private information. I would have gladly done so.
Alternately, you could have sought court review of the subpoena yourself. I have no doubt that the FBI would have narrowed its request significantly, either through court order or voluntarily if faced with the prospect of defending this to the judge.
As for the cost of this, had you contacted EFF or any of the other civil liberties organizations, I'm quite confident that we would have been willing to represent you for free in this matter or locate other free counsel for you.
Instead, you participated in creating an FBI file on me and all the rest of your customers, loyal Americans who have done nothing wrong and who now face the process of increased surveillance by virtue of the fact that we did business with you. As for the "assurances" you received from the FBI about the use of our information, what steps did you take to make those enforceable? If they misuse that information to launch broader surveillance about me unrelated to terrorism, what recourse do I have? What recourse do you have?
And how will you know if they have kept their assurances? What steps did you take to require the FBI to inform you about how they use the information? Did they give you an enforceable description of the scope counterterrorism investigation? Given the USA Patriot Act's requirement of increased information sharing between the FBI and the national security offices, I have great skepticism that the information will only remain with the FBI or that the information will be completely returned to PADI in a timely manner.
I think you have made a grave mistake, the kind that you will become more and more embarrassed about as time goes by. I'm happy to discuss this matter with you further, if you wish.
Cindy
************************************************
Cindy A. Cohn Cindy@eff.org
Legal Director www.eff.org
Electronic Frontier Foundation
454 Shotwell Street
San Francisco, CA 94110
Tel: (415)436-9333 x 108
Fax: (415) 436-9993
- end -
EFF needs your ongoing, regular support. Set up a monthly donation today at https://www.eff.org/perl/join. Even five dollars per month makes a difference! Recurring donations really help pay the bills and add a layer of stability to our operating budget. All you need is a credit card to set it up today!
Kevin McLaughlin
Membership Coordinator
Electronic Frontier Foundation
kevin@eff.org
+1 415 436-9333 x120 (office)
- 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/
Editor:
Ren Bucholz, Activist
ren@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.
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 it via the Web:
http://www.eff.org/pub/EFF/Newsletters/EFFector/current.html
Return to EFFector Newsletters Index
Please send any questions or comments to webmaster@eff.org
![[*]](/Icons/home_blue_icon.gif){kind=icon}
EFF Welcome Page