WorldLII Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback

EPIC Alert

You are here:  WorldLII >> Databases >> EPIC Alert >> 2004 >> [2004] EPICAlert 17

Database Search | Name Search | Recent Articles | Noteup | LawCite | Help

EPIC Alert 11.17 [2004] EPICAlert 17


Volume 11.17 September 10, 2004

Published by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC)
Washington, D.C.

Table of Contents

[1] EPIC Files Briefs in Support of Driver and Financial Privacy
[2] Bill Introduced to Make 9/11 Commission Recommendations Law
[3] Census Bureau Revamps Policy on Data Sharing
[4] EPIC Files Comments on Use of Voter Social Security Numbers
[5] Bush Establishes Civil Liberties Board
[6] News in Brief
[7] EPIC Bookstore: Your Evil Twin
[8] Upcoming Conferences and Events

[1] EPIC Files Briefs in Support of Driver and Financial Privacy

EPIC recently filed two "friend of the court" briefs in leadingprivacy cases. In the first, Kehoe v. Fidelity Federal Bank andTrust, the State of Florida sold more than 500,000 of its citizens'
records from motor vehicle registries without their consent for apenny each to Fidelity Federal Bank. Fidelity used the records, whichprimarily related to individuals who recently bought cars, to sendjunk mail solicitations. Under the federal Drivers Privacy ProtectionAct (DPPA), states are obligated to first obtain the consent ofindividuals before selling their personal information from motorvehicle registries. However, Florida failed to implement the federalrequirement.

At issue in the case is whether a person whose personal informationhas been sold must prove that she was actually harmed in order torecover damages under the DPPA. Relying upon the recently decidedcase Doe v. Chao, in which the Supreme Court held that actual damagesmust be demonstrated under the Privacy Act (see EPIC Alert 11.04), thelower court held that a victim must demonstrate actual harm beforerecovering a default award of $2,500 under the DPPA.

The EPIC brief, which was joined by the ACLU of Florida, argues thatvictims should receive the award by default, as it is a strongdeterrent to indiscriminate release of personal information. EPICdistinguished the Doe v. Chao Privacy Act case from Kehoe, arguingthat the DPPA is one of the few tools available to protect personalinformation from unaccountable commercial entities, such as databrokers and private investigators. EPIC also argued that the DPPA wasenacted to protect individuals from mere disclosure of personalinformation, as such release has led to high-profile stalking,
robbery, and murder incidents.

Florida's failure to shield personal information in government recordshas resulted in a wealth of commercial databases available on Floridaresidents that are not available in other states. For instance,
documents obtained by EPIC indicate that ChoicePoint's lawenforcement-oriented "AutoTrackXP" service includes thirty-six extradatabases on Florida residents. There are also marketing databases onFlorida drivers, such as "SUV Owners of Florida," that are notavailable on other states' residents.

In the second case, EPIC was joined by a coalition of consumer andcivil liberties groups representing 41 million individuals in arguingthat California should be allowed to regulate disclosure of personalinformation among financial institution affiliates. In AmericanBankers Association v. Lockyer, financial institutions sued toinvalidate the strong privacy protections of SB1, California'sFinancial Information Privacy Act. That law requires financialinstitutions to obtain consent of consumers before selling personalinformation to third parties, and allows consumers to opt out ofinformation disclosure among affiliated companies and companies thathave joint marketing agreements. The lower court upheld SB1'sprotections (see EPIC Alert 11.13).

Limiting disclosure of personal information is important because thereis no transparency in the use of the data, and because financialaffiliate structures can be enormous. The coalition brief argues thatSB1's protections are critical because identity theft and fraud arebeing driven by insider access to personal information. The more afinancial institution can exploit information among affiliates, thegreater the risk of fraud. Furthermore, if the court invalidates SB1,
by implication, a broad range of unrelated laws could be affected.

EPIC also argued that allowing exploitation of personal informationamong affiliates would result in three obnoxious data practices:
first, information disclosed to affiliates is not subject totime-tested "fair information practices" that promote accuracy andaccountability. Over time, this could result in a return to unfairpractices that led to passage of the Fair Credit Reporting Act or tonew types of abuses. Second, it could result in "first degree pricediscrimination," a practice where a company uses information todetermine the maximum price that a consumer will pay for a service.
Last, it could result in customer discrimination, practices wherebusinesses either refuse to serve or give disincentives to lessprofitable customers.

EPIC's Kehoe v. Fidelity Federal Bank and Trust Page:

For more information about drivers privacy, see EPIC's Drivers PrivacyProtection Act and Drivers License Privacy Page:

EPIC's ABA v. Lockyer Page:

For more information about SB1 and preemption of state law, see EPIC'sPreemption Page:

[2] Bill Introduced to Make 9/11 Commission Recommendations Law

A bipartisan group of Senators has introduced a vast 280-page billintended to implement the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. Theproposed legislation, known as the 9/11 Commission ReportImplementation Act of 2004, covers subjects ranging from intelligencereform to information sharing to border and transportation security.

The bill first would establish the National Intelligence Authority, anagency that will incorporate most of the country's existingintelligence agencies. A presidentally-appointed NationalIntelligence Director would advise the President on intelligencematters, oversee most intelligence activities, and would haveauthority over the intelligence budget.

Further, the legislation would drastically change the way governmentagencies share information. The bill requires the President to createan "information sharing network" to exchange broadly defined"terrorism information" between local, state, and federal agencies, aswell as with the private sector "where appropriate." The bill alsoestablishes an advisory council, mandates presidential and agencyreports to Congress, and requires an annual assessment by the GeneralAccounting Office to provide for oversight of the network. However,
the bill envisions very little accountability to the public, statingonly that the advisory council will let the public know about itsactivities "as appropriate and in a manner consistent with theprotection of classified information and applicable law."

The bill proposes a number of changes to transportation security,
including a requirement that the Department of Homeland Securityconsolidate the controversial "no fly" and "selectee" watch lists thatare now used to flag terrorists and keep them off airplanes. Further,
the bill mandates that the agency create an "automated biometric entryand exit data system" to track immigrants and visa holders. Thesystem would link all information systems maintained by federalagencies involved in immigration enforcement.

The legislation includes several measures concerning identificationand screening. The bill requires that all birth certificates, statedrivers' licenses, and identification cards comply with regulationsset by the Department of Homeland Security, including a rule thatlicenses must have "a digital photograph or other unique identifier."
Federal agencies will not be permitted to accept ID cards that do notfollow those standards. Further, the bill establishes a"comprehensive integrated screening system" to verify the identitiesof all people attempting to enter the country, access commerciallyowned critical infrastructure, and travel via transportation systems.
This system is to utilize biometric identifiers to the extent theSecretary of Homeland Security deems "appropriate and feasible."

The legislation also creates a Privacy and Civil Liberties OversightBoard, the members of which will be appointed by the President. TheBoard is tasked with reviewing the government's antiterrorism effortsand advising the President and agencies on civil libertiesimplications of current and future measures. The bill furtherprovides for privacy and civil liberties officers within a number ofagencies.

The time line for the legislation is expected to be a fast one, withbill co-sponsor Senator Joe Lieberman (D-CT) voicing confidence thatthe Governmental Affairs Committee will markup and report the bill tothe Senate floor before the end of the month.

The executive summary of the 9/11 Commission Report Implementation Actof 2004:

The full text of the 9/11 Commission Report Implementation Act of2004:

For more information about the 9/11 Commission's recommendations, seethe EPIC 9/11 Commission Page:

[3] Census Bureau Revamps Policy on Data Sharing

The Census Bureau recently revised its policy on sharing statisticalinformation about "sensitive populations" with law enforcement andintelligence agencies. According to a statement by the Bureau,
"[e]ffective immediately, all special tabulations of data requested bya federal, state or local law enforcement agency or intelligenceagency will require prior approval by the appropriate AssociateDirector at the Bureau whenever the request involves sensitivepopulations, including minority groups." The Census Bureauacknowledged that the policy change was made in response to "recentconcerns about data tabulations provided to law enforcement agenciesthat are now part of the Department of Homeland Security."

EPIC obtained documents in July through the Freedom of Information Actrevealing that the Census Bureau gave the Department of HomelandSecurity Customs and Border Protection Bureau statistical informationon people who identified themselves on the 2000 census as being ofArab ancestry. One tabulation obtained by EPIC showed cities withpopulations of 10,000 or more and with 1,000 or more people whoindicated that they are of Arab ancestry. For each city, thetabulation provided total population, population of Arab ancestry, andpercent of the total population which is of Arab ancestry. A secondtabulation, more than a thousand pages in length, showed the number ofcensus responses indicating Arab ancestry in zip codes throughout thecountry. The responses indicating Arab ancestry were subdivided intoEgyptian, Iraqi, Jordanian, Lebanese, Moroccan, Palestinian, Syrian,
Arab/Arabic, and Other Arab.

The documents also included an e-mail from a Customs and BorderProtection official to a Census Bureau analyst explaining that the lawenforcement agency requested the data to determine "which language ofsignage, based on U.S. ethnic nationality population, would be best topost at the major International airports." In response to thedocuments, EPIC joined a coalition of more than 20 civil libertiesorganizations last month to send a letter to the Department ofHomeland Security, asking the law enforcement agency to explain itsacquisition and use of statistical census data on Arab Americans. Thecoalition also called for a formal documented investigation into thematter and Congressional hearings if necessary.

Census Bureau press release on policy change:

Documents obtained by EPIC from the Census Bureau through the Freedomof Information Act:

For more information on the census and privacy, see EPIC's CensusPrivacy Page:

[4] EPIC Files Comments on Use of Voter Social Security Numbers

The Social Security Administration recently issued public noticeannouncing that it will institute a new routine use for the SocialSecurity Number (SSN), which will allow the agency to verify the name,
date of birth and last four digits of the SSN for state voterregistration purposes under the Social Security Act.

The SSN was created in 1936 as a nine-digit account number assigned bythe Secretary of Health and Human Services for the purpose ofadministering the Social Security laws. SSNs were first intended foruse exclusively by the federal government as a means of trackingearnings to determine the amount of Social Security taxes to credit toeach worker's account. Over time, however, SSNs were permitted to beused for purposes unrelated to the administration of the SocialSecurity system. For example, in 1961 Congress authorized theInternal Revenue Service to use SSNs as taxpayer identificationnumbers.

The new routine use for the SSN is pursuant to provisions of the HelpAmerica Vote Act (HAVA), which is the broadest update of votingprocedures in the United States since the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
HAVA also marks the first time the federal government has asserted arole in the administration of elections through the creation of theElection Assistance Commission.

In its comments, EPIC objected to the new routine use on the groundsthat it may lead to demands that voters produce their Social Securitycards as proof of identity on Election Day. EPIC noted that the SSNwas not created for this purpose, and argued that the expanded usewill expose more users to identity theft or voter fraud. EPIC askedthe agency not to implement the routine use until state electionadministrations agree not to require voters to present their SocialSecurity cards in order to vote in federal elections.

EPIC comments on use of the SSN for voter registration:

For more information about SSN privacy, see the EPIC SSN Page:

[5] Bush Establishes Civil Liberties Board

In an executive order issued August 27, President Bush announced thecreation of the President's Board on Safeguarding Americans' CivilLiberties. The board will be comprised of high-level officials fromthe Office of Management and Budget, and the Departments of Justice,
Treasury and Homeland Security, and will be led by Deputy AttorneyGeneral James Comey and the Department of Homeland Security's UnderSecretary for Border and Transportation Security Asa Hutchinson. Theorder does not provide for outside appointments or membership ofnon-governmental representatives.

The duties of this board of law enforcement and intelligence officialsinclude advising the President on civil liberties policy, requestingreports from federal agencies, and reviewing programs at the requestof the agency in charge of the program. The board's presumedinfluence upon the government's actions affecting civil liberties isseverely constricted by a complete lack of independent investigativepowers. The executive order also omits any mention of public reportsby the board or other transparency.

The board was created at the recommendation of the 9/11 Commission.
However, it is unclear how likely the board is to achieve the 9/11Commission's stated goal of "find[ing] ways of reconciling securitywith liberty, since the success of one helps protect the other . . .
[I]f our liberties are curtailed, we lose the values we are strugglingto defend."

Executive Order establishing the President's Board on SafeguardingAmericans' Civil Liberties:

9/11 Commission Report (see page 412):

For more information about the 9/11 Commission's recommendations, seethe EPIC 9/11 Commission Page:

[6] News in Brief

The Department of Homeland Security has published a notice in theFederal Register announcing that it plans to expand the controversialUnited States Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology(US-VISIT), an already massive program that tracks the travel offoreign nationals to and from the United States. According to thenotice, the program will be implemented at the 50 most highlytrafficked land border ports of entry in the United States early nextyear. Furthermore, the notice states the agency has the authority tocollect biometric data from nonimmigrant visitors who travel to theUnited States through the Visa Waiver Program, as well as Mexicancitizens traveling to and from the United States. The Department ofHomeland Security will accept public comments on US-VISIT's expansionuntil November 1, 2004.

The Department of Homeland Security's notice on the expansion ofUS-VISIT:
For more information about US-VISIT, see EPIC's US-VISIT Page:

EPIC joined three other civil liberties groups in filing an amicusbrief on September 2, encouraging the First Circuit Court of Appealsto overturn the controversial ruling that an e-mail provider thatallegedly read messages intended for its users did not break federalwiretapping laws. The June decision of a three-judge panel held thatformer Interloc vice president Bradley Councilman did not violate theWiretap Act because the e-mails were intercepted while temporarilystored on the hard drive of the company's server -- for as little as afraction of a second -- rather than while in transit. The brief,
filed by the Center for Democracy and Technology and joined also bythe Electronic Frontier Foundation and the American LibraryAssociation, argues that this decision fails to recognize the intentof Congress to protect the privacy of electronic communications, andcreates serious constitutional questions under the Fourth Amendmentguarantee against unreasonable search and seizure.

The amicus brief:
Full decision of the three-judge panel in United States v. Councilman:
For more information about interception of communications, see EPIC'sWiretapping Page:

The Department of Justice has asked the Ninth Circuit Court of Appealsto seal from public view its arguments supporting an unpublishedfederal regulation requiring passengers to show identification beforeboarding an airplane, stating in court papers that disclosure "wouldbe detrimental to the security of transportation." The agency alsoseeks to present its arguments outside the presence of appellant JohnGilmore and his counsel. Gilmore is challenging the dismissal of hiscase in March by a federal district court.

EPIC has filed an amicus brief in Gilmore v. Ashcroft, arguing thatmeaningful judicial review is necessary to prevent the government fromimposing a secret, vague law upon the public in violation ofconstitutional due process rights.

Gilmore v. Ashcroft web site:

EPIC's amicus brief in Gilmore v. Ashcroft:
For more information about air travel privacy, see EPIC's PassengerProfiling Page:

REPORT FINDS DRAMATIC INCREASE IN GOVERNMENT SECRECY, a coalition of more than 30 civil libertiesgroups promoting less secrecy and more democracy in government, hasreleased a report finding that the federal government has become moresecretive under the current administration, despite increased publicdemand for information. According to the report, the U.S. governmentcreated 60 percent more secrets last year than it did in 2001, thelargest jump in at least a decade, as well as spent the largest amountlast year alone
-- $6.5 billion -- securing classified information. Thefederal government is also keeping more information classified,
spending $120 dollars maintaining current secrets for every dollar itspent to release old secrets last year, compared to less than $20 peryear maintaining secrets for every dollar declassifying them from1997-2001. In 2003, the government declassified only one-fifth thenumber of pages that it declassified in 1997.

Meanwhile, demand for information from the government is rising.
Freedom of Information Act requests have more than tripled from1998-2003, while federal resources processing these requests have notincreased. Agencies without backlogged FOIA requests decreased from12 to 7 last year. report on government secrecy:

The Public Voice, a project of the Electronic Privacy InformationCenter, has launched a monthly newsletter called The Megaphone. EPICestablished the Public Voice project in order to promote the voice ofNon-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) in decisions affecting thefuture of the Internet. The project facilitates NGO participation inpolicy making on issues ranging from privacy and free expression toconsumer protection and Internet governance, and policy processes suchas the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS). The Megaphonehighlights recent developments in these areas and provides informationon Public Voice events. It also includes a list of upcoming NGOconferences and policy events as well as useful resources. Tosubscribe to The Megaphone, send an e-mail to thepublicvoice

The Public Voice:

The Megaphone online archive:

[7] EPIC Bookstore: Your Evil Twin

Bob Sullivan, Your Evil Twin: Behind the Identity Theft Epidemic (JohnWiley & Sons 2004).

Investigative reporter Bob Sullivan's Your Evil Twin is an excitingand thorough work covering the forces behind and consequences ofidentity theft. Sullivan fully develops the nuances of identitytheft, showing how clever individuals can easily take advantage ofcredit practices that are premised on a "grant first, ask questionslater" business model. His survey of the crime covers credit cardfraud, the problem of new accounts being opened in victims' names, andthe worst-case scenario, criminal identity theft, where the impostoruses the victim's identity in altercations with the police.

Sullivan highlights new, more daring forms of identity theft,
including criminals who buy new automobiles on others' credit,
criminals who hijack hundreds of online auction accounts, and eventhose who send authentic-looking solicitations to individuals in orderto get them to divulge personal information. He also shows how thiscrime is more serious than previously thought -- identity theft is nowrecognized as a principal source of funding for individuals wishing tocommit crimes of terrorism against the country.

The first chapter of the book, which covers the spectacular crimespree of identity thief James Rinaldo Jackson, is online at

- Chris Jay Hoofnagle

EPIC Publications:

"The Public Voice WSIS Sourcebook: Perspectives on the World Summit onthe Information Society" (EPIC 2004). Price: $40.

This resource promotes a dialogue on the issues, the outcomes, and theprocess of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS). Thisreference guide provides the official UN documents, regional andissue-oriented perspectives, as well as recommendations and proposalsfor future action, as well as a useful list of resources and contactsfor individuals and organizations that wish to become more involved inthe WSIS process.

"The Privacy Law Sourcebook 2003: United States Law, InternationalLaw, and Recent Developments," Marc Rotenberg, editor (EPIC 2003).
Price: $40.

The "Physicians Desk Reference of the privacy world." An invaluableresource for students, attorneys, researchers and journalists who needan up-to-date collection of U.S. and International privacy law, aswell as a comprehensive listing of privacy resources.

"FOIA 2002: Litigation Under the Federal Open Government Laws," HarryHammitt, David Sobel and Mark Zaid, editors (EPIC 2002). Price: $40.

This is the standard reference work covering all aspects of theFreedom of Information Act, the Privacy Act, the Government in theSunshine Act, and the Federal Advisory Committee Act. The 21stedition fully updates the manual that lawyers, journalists andresearchers have relied on for more than 25 years. For those wholitigate open government cases (or need to learn how to litigatethem), this is an essential reference manual.

"Privacy & Human Rights 2003: An International Survey of Privacy Lawsand Developments" (EPIC 2002). Price: $35.
This survey, by EPIC and Privacy International, reviews the state ofprivacy in over fifty-five countries around the world. The surveyexamines a wide range of privacy issues including data protection,
passenger profiling, genetic databases, video surveillance, ID systemsand freedom of information laws.

"Filters and Freedom 2.0: Free Speech Perspectives on Internet ContentControls" (EPIC 2001). Price: $20.

A collection of essays, studies, and critiques of Internet contentfiltering. These papers are instrumental in explaining why filteringthreatens free expression.

"The Consumer Law Sourcebook 2000: Electronic Commerce and the GlobalEconomy," Sarah Andrews, editor (EPIC 2000). Price: $40.
The Consumer Law Sourcebook provides a basic set of materials forconsumers, policy makers, practitioners and researchers who areinterested in the emerging field of electronic commerce. The focus ison framework legislation that articulates basic rights for consumersand the basic responsibilities for businesses in the online economy.

"Cryptography and Liberty 2000: An International Survey of EncryptionPolicy," Wayne Madsen and David Banisar, authors (EPIC 2000). Price:

EPIC's third survey of encryption policies around the world. Theresults indicate that the efforts to reduce export controls on strongencryption products have largely succeeded, although severalgovernments are gaining new powers to combat the perceived threats ofencryption to law enforcement.

EPIC publications and other books on privacy, open government, freeexpression, crypto and governance can be ordered at:

EPIC Bookstore

"EPIC Bookshelf" at Powell's Books

[8] Upcoming Conferences and Events

Ninth National HIPAA Summit. September 12-14, 2004. Baltimore, MD.
For more information:

Public Voice Symposium: Privacy in a New Era: Challenges,
Opportunities and Partnerships. Electronic Privacy InformationCenter, European Digital Rights Initiative (EDRi), and PrivacyInternational. September 13, 2004. Wroclaw, Poland. For moreinformation:

The Right to Personal Data Protection -- the Right to Dignity. 26thInternational Conference on Data Protection and Privacy Commissioners.
September 14-16, 2004. Wroclaw, Poland. For more information:

Health Privacy Seminar. Riley Information Services. September 17,
2004. Ottawa, Ontario. For more information:

Public Workshop on Traffic Data Retention. DG Information Society andDG Justice and Home Affairs. September 21, 2004. Brussels, Belgium.
For more information:

Protection of Children Online and Review of the Safe HarbourAgreement. British Institute of International and Comparative Law2004 Data Protection Research and Policy Group Series. September 22,
2004. London, UK. For more information:

Online Privacy: Choice of Law. British Institute of International andComparative Law Data Protection Research and Policy Group. September23, 2004. London, UK. For more information:

Nethead/Bellhead: The FCC Takes on the Internet. Cardozo Law SchoolFlorsheimer Center for Constitutional Democracy and the Yale LawSchool Information Society Project. September 28, 2004. New York,
NY. For more information:

IAPP Privacy and National Security Forum. International Associationof Privacy Professionals. September 30, 2004. Washington, DC. Formore information:

The Internet and the Law -- A Global Conversation. Law & TechnologyProgram, University of Ottawa. Ottawa, Ontario. October 1-2, 2004.
For more information:

2004 Telecommunications Policy Research Conference. National Centerfor Technology & Law, George Mason University School of Law. October1-3, 2004. Arlington, VA. For more information:

Health Privacy Conference. Office of the Information and PrivacyCommissioner of Alberta. October 4-5, 2004. Calgary, Alberta,
Canada. For more information:

IAPP Entertainment and Privacy Forum. International Association ofPrivacy Professionals. October 7, 2004. Los Angeles, CA. For moreinformation:

Privacy and Identity: The Promise and the Perils of a TechnologicalAge. DePaul University Center for Intellectual Property Law andInformation Technology and School of Computer Science,
Telecommunications and Information Systems. October 14-15, 2004.
Chicago, IL. For more information:

2004 Big Brother Awards Switzerland. October 16, 2004. Lucerne,
Switzerland. For more information:

DRM 2004: The Fourth ACM Workshop on Digital Rights Management.
Association for Computing Machinery Special Interest Group onSecurity, Audit and Control. October 25, 2004. Washington, DC. Formore info:

2004 Big Brother Awards Austria. October 26, 2004. Vienna, Austria.
For more information:

Private and Private International Law Issues Raised by ElectronicCommerce. The Hague Conference on Private International Law, theNetherlands Government and the International Chamber of Commerce.
October 26-27, 2004. The Hague, Netherlands. For more information:

IAPP Privacy and Data Security Academy & Expo. InternationalAssociation of Privacy Professionals. October 27-29, 2004. NewOrleans, LA. For more information:

Privacy and Security: Seeking the Middle Path. Office of theInformation & Privacy Commissioner of Ontario; Centre for InnovationLaw and Policy, University of Toronto; and Center for AppliedCryptographic Research, University of Waterloo. Toronto, Ontario,
Canada. October 28-29, 2004. For more information:

2004 Big Brother Awards Germany. October 29, 2004. Bielefeld,
Germany. For more information:

The 2004 Isaac Pitblado Lectures: Privacy -- Another Snail in theGinger Beer. The Law Society of Manitoba, The Manitoba BarAssociation and the University of Manitoba Faculty of Law. November19-20, 2004. Manitoba, Canada. For more information:

National Security, Law Enforcement and Data Protection. BritishInstitute of International and Comparative Law Data ProtectionResearch and Policy Group. December 8, 2004. London, UK. For moreinformation:

Seventh International General Online Research Conference. GermanSociety for Online Research. March 22-23, 2005. Zurich, Switzerland.
For more information:

CFP2005: Fifteenth Annual Conference on Computers, Freedom andPrivacy. April 12-15, 2005. Seattle, WA. For more information:

Subscription Information

Subscribe/unsubscribe via web interface:

Back issues are available at:

The EPIC Alert displays best in a fixed-width font, such as Courier.

Privacy Policy

The EPIC Alert mailing list is used only to mail the EPIC Alert and tosend notices about EPIC activities. We do not sell, rent or share ourmailing list. We also intend to challenge any subpoena or other legalprocess seeking access to our mailing list. We do not enhance (linkto other databases) our mailing list or require your actual name.

In the event you wish to subscribe or unsubscribe your e-mail addressfrom this list, please follow the above instructions under"subscription information."

About EPIC

The Electronic Privacy Information Center is a public interestresearch center in Washington, DC. It was established in 1994 tofocus public attention on emerging privacy issues such as the ClipperChip, the Digital Telephony proposal, national ID cards, medicalrecord privacy, and the collection and sale of personal information.
EPIC publishes the EPIC Alert, pursues Freedom of Information Actlitigation, and conducts policy research. For more information, see or write EPIC, 1718 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite200, Washington, DC 20009. +1 202 483 1140 (tel), +1 202 483 1248(fax).

If you'd like to support the work of the Electronic PrivacyInformation Center, contributions are welcome and fullytax-deductible. Checks should be made out to "EPIC" and sent to 1718Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 200, Washington, DC 20009. Or you cancontribute online at:

Your contributions will help support Freedom of Information Act andFirst Amendment litigation, strong and effective advocacy for theright of privacy and efforts to oppose government regulation ofencryption and expanding wiretapping powers.

Thank you for your support.

END EPIC Alert 11.17


WorldLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback