WorldLII Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback

EPIC Alert

You are here:  WorldLII >> Databases >> EPIC Alert >> 2009 >> [2009] EPICAlert 17

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

EPIC Alert 16.17 [2009] EPICAlert 17

Focusing public attention on emerging privacy and civil liberties issues

EPIC Alert 16.17

EPIC Alert 16.02 (02/10/09)

E P I C A l e r t

Volume 16.17 Sepember 15, 2009
Published by the
Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC)
Washington, D.C.

"Defend Privacy. Support EPIC."

Table of Contents
[1] EPIC's Privacy Report Card on the Administration Gives Mixed Grades
[2] EPIC Moves to Intervene in Google Book Settlement
[3] DHS Okays Suspicion-less Seizure of Laptops
[4] White House Announces New Transparency Policy for Visitor Logs
[5] Congress and Advocates Call for Safeguards in Online Advertising
[6] News in Brief
[7] EPIC Bookstore:
[8] Upcoming Conferences and Events - Join EPIC on Facebook - Privacy Policy - About EPIC - Donate to EPIC - Subscription Information

[1] EPIC's Privacy Report Card on the Administration Gives Mixed Grades

EPIC released its Privacy Report Card for the Obama Administration at a briefing held at the National Press Club. EPIC scored the Administration with an "Incomplete" for Consumer Privacy, A- for Medical Privacy, C+ for Civil Liberties, and a B for Cyber Security.

EPIC's grades were based on a review of the Administration's privacy initiatives. EPIC cited the vacancies on the Federal Trade Commission, the continuation of the Bush Administration's policies on the use of the "state's secrets privilege," the Department of Homeland Security's support for PASS ID, and privacy exemptions for social networking services as areas where the Administration has failed to protect privacy.

EPIC recognized the early work of the Administration to bring greater transparency and openness to the work of the Federal government. They also sited the very strong privacy language for medical health records that is included in the Economic Stimulus Law. However, a number of programs began under the previous Administration have not been challenged or cancelled by the Obama Administration. These programs include the use of National Security Letters, expanding fusion centers, and adoption of 0whole body imaging technology.

A panel of privacy experts offered their own perspective on how the Administration is doing on several key issues including: No-Fly list, border searches of digital devices, state preemption, and behavioral marketing.

The scores given by EPIC did not reflect the public's participation in the online scorecard. The public's privacy report card for the Administration was "F" in all categories.

Report Card:

Public Report Card:

EPIC Press Release:

[2] EPIC Moves to Intervene in Google Book Settlement

On September 4, 2009, EPIC filed papers in federal district court on the proposed settlement between Google, authors, and publishers. The Google Books Settlement would create a single digital library, operated by Google, but currently fails to limit Google's use of the personal information collected. EPIC stated that the settlement "mandates the collection of the most intimate personal information, threatens well-established standards that safeguard intellectual freedom, and imperils longstanding Constitutional rights, including the right to read anonymously." EPIC further warned that the Google Books deal "threatens to eviscerate state library privacy laws that safeguard library patrons in the United States." EPIC has previously participated as a "friend of the court" in many cases involving privacy issues. The Court denied EPIC Intervenor status, but invited EPIC to advocate for readers' privacy as an Objector to the proposed agreement.

The Google Books project began in 2004 as an online research tool and database that permitted access the full or partial text of millions of books. Google entered into agreements with several libraries to digitize books, including books protected by U.S. Copyright law, in those libraries' collections. In 2005, the Authors Guild and several publishers sued Google. The rightsholders alleged that the project's digitization process infringed their copyrights. In response, Google argued that its digitization of the books is permitted under U.S. Copyright law. In 2008, the parties negotiated a proposed settlement. The federal court for the Southern District of New York must analyze the settlement's fairness, and approve or reject the terms. EPIC told the Court that "the proposed settlement profoundly implicates the privacy interests of millions of Internet users, ... yet none of the parties to the agreement represents these interests."

Days before EPIC's filing, Federal Trade Commission Chairman John Liebowitz issued a statement, calling attention to privacy concerns and the vast amount of consumer information that could be collected. The Chairman expressed the Commission's commitment to evaluating the privacy issues presented by Google Books, a sentiment that was echoed by Commissioner Pamela Jones Harbour in her statement. In a separate letter, FTC Consumer Protection Director David C. Vladeck urged Google to address consumer privacy concerns and to limit the secondary use of user data.

In July, the Department of Justice announced an investigation into Google's proposed settlement with book publishers and authors. The Department "determined that the issues raised by the settlement warrant further inquiry," and noted that commentators have "expressed concern that aspects of the settlement agreement may violate the Sherman
[anti-trust] Act." The announcement followed the European Commission's notice of a similar investigation. The European Commission met on September 7, 2009 to examine the proposed settlement.

EPIC has a long history of opposing actions that consolidate data concerning users' online habits. On April 20, 2007, EPIC and other privacy groups filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission, requesting that the agency open an investigation into the proposed Google/Doubleclick merger. EPIC identified specific privacy threats arising from the heightened ability of the merged company to record, analyze, track, and profile Internet users' activities. The Department of Justice later scuttled Google's proposed deal with Yahoo based on similar privacy concerns. The Department's probe focused on Google's growing power in advertising.

EPIC's Motion to Intervene:

EPIC Google Books Settlement and Privacy:

Google Books Settlement:

FTC Chairman John Liebowitz's Statement Concerning the Google Books Settlement:

FTC Commissioner Pamela Jones Harbour's Statement Concerning the Google Books Settlement:

FTC Consumer Protection Director David C. Vladeck's Letter Concerning the Google Books Settlement:

[3] DHS Okays Suspicion-less Seizure of Laptops

On August 25, 2009, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released a Privacy Impact Assessment for searching electronic devices possessed by travelers at U.S. borders, determining that it maintains the right to search and seize all data on electronic devices carried across the border. Currently the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) have broad powers to search travelers, including United States citizens, who cross the U.S. border. The 51-page study was designed to determine how searches of the contents of electronic devices compared to physical searches of travelers' belongings.

When it comes to searching physical possessions, CBP and ICE are authorized to conduct warrantless searches and investigations of travelers to determine whether they are carrying contraband or entering the country illegally. These searches are authorized even in the absence of any reasonable suspicion. The new Assessment clarifies the government's belief that this authorization extends not just to physical possessions, like briefcases and backpacks, but also to the data stored on electronic devices. The Assessment acknowledges that the privacy implications of searching electronic devices are broader than those of searching physical possessions, in large part because of the large amounts of data that may be stored on travelers laptops, PDAs, cell phones, and other devices, as well as the potentially sensitive nature of the information. The study goes on to discuss the various methods by which the two agencies may look at travelers' data: examination with the traveler present, "detention," of a device which may last for up to five days, seizure of a device with probable cause, and retention of data copies.

The Assessment identifies six privacy risks associated with these activities: "(1) travelers may need additional information regarding the authority to conduct border searches; (2) the traveler may be unaware of the viewing or detention of his/her information by CBP and ICE; (3) personally identifiable information may be detained where it is not needed; (4) PII may be misused by CBP and ICE officers; (5) CBP and ICE may disclose PII to other agencies that may misuse or mishandle it; and (6) new privacy risks may arise as the technology involved in this activity is ever-changing."

The study determines that the first risk is not a problem in the face of "overwhelming precedent." But the agency came to this conclusion - that there is no risk - because it is treating precedent referring to physical searches as if it automatically applies to electronic searches.

According to the assessment, the only way for the agency to address the last risk factor is for it to conduct ongoing scrutiny, and the study calls for regular reassessment.

The rest of the Assessment attempts to identify possible ways to mitigate the second through fifth. DHS identifies various ways to improve transparency, individual participation, purpose specification with accompanying use limitations, minimization procedures, data integrity, security, and accountability, for both CBP and ICE. The primary change now being implemented is to clarify signage at ICE and CBP search points to inform travelers that their electronic devices are subject to search and copy. However, the overall effect of the Assessment is a reiteration of the DHS position that all electronic border searches are legal even without reasonable suspicion.

While they purport to conform to the standards set in the Privacy Act of 1974, these policies fail to conform to the intent of the Act by continuing to allow broad access to all of travelers' data without any reasonable suspicion. The policies also allow the agencies to share this information with third parties if they need those third parties' assistance with accessing or translating the data, a practice which puts travelers at increased risk of identity theft.

Department of Homeland Security - Privacy Impact Assessment: search.pdf

Customs and Border Patrol - Search Authority

EPIC - Air Travel Privacy:

EPIC - Privacy Act of 1974:

EPIC - Passenger Profiling:

EPIC - Identity Theft:

[4] White House Announces New Transparency Policy for Visitor Logs

On September 4, 2009, the White House announced a new policy to release the records of White House visitors, an initiative that is intended to promote open government. In a released statement, President Obama described the initiative:

"For the first time in history, records of White House visitors will be made available to the public on an ongoing basis. We will achieve our goal of making this administration the most open and transparent administration in history not only by opening the doors of the White House to more Americans, but by shining a light on the business conducted inside it. Americans have a right to know whose voices are being heard in the policymaking process."

Under the policy, the White House will release information on all individuals who come to the White House for an appointment, a tour, or to conduct official business, with certain exceptions for confidential or particularly sensitive meetings. For example, the White House will not release access records that implicate national security or records from meetings with prospective Supreme Court nominees. It will also withhold the records from purely personal guests of the first or second families.

The White House also promised not to release visitors' personal information or information that implicates law enforcement concerns. The personal information that the policy will protect includes such data as dates of birth, social security numbers, and contact phone numbers. Law enforcement concerns will prevent the White House from releasing records that may implicate the personal safety of the staff of the Executive Office of the President, such as their daily arrivals and departures.

EPIC has spoken with White House representatives and informed them of the possible privacy risks of this new policy. The policy would disclose the names of tourists and other visitors who are not meeting with government officials. This information is not necessary to promote the open government objectives set forth in this policy and could create unnecessary privacy risks, which should be considered by the White House.

In a related matter, EPIC recently filed a request to the Department of Homeland Security under the Freedom of Information Act, seeking information regarding meetings between the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Chief Privacy Officer, Mary Ellen Callahan, and third parties. In the spirit of the new policy announced by the White House, that information should be available to the public. However, DHS' response to the request was heavily redacted, obscuring much of the information that, by analogy, would be available under the White House policy. EPIC is appealing the redactions and seeking more complete records.

White House Transparency Policy:

White House Press Release on Transparency Policy:

EPIC's Open Government Page:

[5] Congress and Advocates Call for Safeguards in Online Advertising

This week, Rep. Rick Boucher (D-Va.), chairman of the House Communications, Technology and the Internet Subcommittee, announced that he is drafting a bill that would impose strict rules on websites and advertisers regarding the use of consumer information. This important legislation comes at a time when online behavioral marketing techniques are being scrutinized for the unauthorized use of consumer data. One of these techniques involves deep-packet inspection, which enables Internet Service Providers to intercept virtually all of their customers' Internet activity, including web surfing data, email, and peer-to-peer downloads.

Boucher's goal in drafting the web-privacy bill is "to ensure that consumers know what information is being collected about them on the Web and how it is being used, and to give them control over that information." Boucher, who is working with Reps. Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) and Bobby Rush (D-Ill.) on the bill, attempts to strike a balance between the interests of privacy watchdogs and of websites and advertisers in assessing the default standard for websites to monitor and gather consumer data. The bill would impose different standards on websites for different types of consumer data. Websites that collect information for targeted advertising should allow consumers the opportunity to opt out of having their online activity tracked. Further, websites would be obligated to offer a detailed description of how the information is collected, disclosed, and used. On the other hand, websites collecting sensitive personal information, including medical or financial data or other personally-identifiable information, would be required to have users opt in before tracking their interests.

This bill follows several pieces of significant online privacy legislation, such as the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act, but is the first to regulate online advertising. While many privacy watchdogs welcome the bill, others, such as Adonis Hoffman, Senior Vice President and Counsel of the American Association of Advertising Agencies, do not believe that legislation is necessary because the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) already calls for self-regulation in the area of online advertising, which Hoffman says "the industry is taking quite seriously." FTC Commissioner Jon Leibowitz, however, warns that the "[i]ndustry needs to do a better job of meaningful, rigorous self-regulation, or it will certainly invite legislation by Congress and a more regulatory approach by our commission."

EPIC's Page on Deep Packet Inspection and Privacy:

EPIC's Page on Children's Online Privacy Protection Act:

FTC's Self-Regulatory Principles for Online Behavioral Advertising:

FTC Staff Revises Online Behavioral Advertising Principles (Comments of Chairman Liebowitz):

Comments of Congressmen and Privacy Advocates:

[6] News in Brief

Trade Commission Prohibits Robocalls

As of September 1, 2009, The Federal Trade Commission has prohibited commercial telemarketing calls to consumers. The agency amended the Telemarketing Sales Rule, which was authorized under is the Telemarketing and Consumer Fraud and Abuse Prevention Act. The Rule, which imposes a penalty of $16,000 per call, has been expanded to cover sellers and telemarketers who transmit prerecorded messages to consumers who have not agreed in writing to accept such messages. The new rule does not prohibit informational messages or calls by politicians, banks, telephone carriers, and charities. EPIC has urged the Federal Communications Commission to require strong privacy safeguards for telephone customers' personal information, and protect wireless subscribers from telemarketing. For more information, see EPIC Telemarketing and Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

FTC Press Release Regarding Rule Prohibiting Unwanted Robocalls:

Telemarketing and Consumer Fraud and Abuse Prevention Act:

EPIC Page on Telemarketing and Telephone Consumer Protection Act:

Following Canadian Investigation, Facebook Upgrades Privacy

The Canadian Privacy Commissioner issued a report last month raising concerns over Facebook business practices. The Office asked the social networking firm to cease the sharing of user information with application developers, clarify the policy on deactivation and deletion of accounts, protect the personal information of non-users, and "memorialize" the account of deceased users. In complying with the Commissioner's report, Facebook will include new notifications, update its Privacy Policy, and implement technical changes to enable more user control over information accessed by third-party applications. Facebook also faces a lawsuit by five users filed in California's Orange County Superior Court, alleging that Facebook violated several California privacy laws. EPIC had previously raised similar concerns about the use of Facebook data by application developers.

Canadian Privacy Commissioner Report:

News Release: Facebook Agrees to Comply:

Facebook's Proposed Privacy Upgrades:

EPIC's Facebook Page:

EPIC's Social Network Privacy Page:

Government Explores New Techniques for Authentication

At the Gov 2.0 Conference in Washington, D.C. this week, the Obama Administration announced that the public websites for certain government agencies would begin participating in a pilot program using the OpenID and Information Card joint authentication systems. The agencies include the Center for Information Technology, National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and related agencies." The system should allow for citizens to use services on those websites by logging in with accounts that they may already have from other OpenID participating web sites, including Yahoo, PayPal, Google, and America Online, among several others. According to the providers' press release, the system will allow users to choose a qualifying identity provider that will supply authentication credentials on their behalf. Depending on settings and requirements, theoretically this will allow for users to participate with varying levels of anonymity or identification.


Information Card:

OpenID and Government:

Open ID Press Release:

Congress Explores Reliability of Forensic Techniques

On September 9, 2009, the Senate Judiciary Committee conducted a hearing regarding the reliability of forensic techniques. According to a congressionally-mandated report by the National Research Council, there are "serious deficiencies in the nation's forensic science system," and "major reforms and new research" are needed. In 2008, EPIC submitted an amicus brief to the Supreme Court in Herring v. United States in which EPIC explained how government databases are becoming increasingly unreliable and urged the Court to "ensure an accuracy obligation on law enforcement agents who rely on criminal justice information systems." EPIC's brief was cited by Justice Ginsburg, writing for four Justices in dissent.

Senate Judiciary Hearing Information:

National Research Council News Release:

EPIC's Page on Herring v. United States:

EPIC's Page on Genetic Privacy:

E-Verify Screening is now Mandatory for Federal Government Contracts

Starting Tuesday, September 8, 2009, all federal government contractors must verify their employees' eligibility to work in the United States using E-Verify, an electronic security system implemented by the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration. Employers will continue collecting employee information from an I-9 form, including two forms of identification, but are now required to run this information against the E-Verify system, which is linked to the DHS and Social Security Administration databases. If there is an inconsistency between the employee's information and the E-Verify system, the employee has eight working days to challenge it. The program has been challenged several times, including once by the US Chamber of Commerce, and come under scrutiny because of the likelihood of inaccuracies in the databases and the system's failure to identify those employees who are illegally using others' valid names and numbers.

EPIC's Page on Spotlight on Surveillance:

US Chamber of Commerce Testimony Challenging E-Verify:

USCIS E-Verify Page:

Secretary Napolitano's Announcement of Mandatory E-Verify Screenings for Federal Contractors:

New Report on Government Secrecy Released

The 2009 Secrecy Report Card, from, chronicles slight decreases in government secrecy during the last year of the Bush-Cheney Administration. The report, released by a coalition of more than 70 open government advocates, also provides an overview of the Obama Administration's proposed transparency policies. Among the issues discussed are the Open Government Directive, Classified Information, the Freedom of Information Act memo, signing statements, and the state secrets, doctrine.'s 2009 Secrecy Report Card:

EPIC's Page on Open Government and Transparency:

[7] EPIC Bookstore: Cass Sunstein's "The Second Bill of Rights"

Cass Sunstein's book explores one of the little known or discussed bold proposals of President Franklin D. Roosevelt: a second bill of rights. In policy and politics few ideas are new, but often take time to find fertile ground for growth.

The notion that Americans needed a second bill of rights grew from the deprivation caused by the Great Depression and the resulting existential struggle of democracy against fascism. It is easy to forget how close this world came to losing democracy. It would have died under the heel of fascism if the United States had not the capacity or will to fight. People - not only in Europe, but also in the United States - desperately wanted leaders who would bring an end to their suffering caused by the global depression. As a result, Churchill, Roosevelt, Stalin, Hitler, and Mussolini emerged as leaders. Hitler and Mussolini, as fascists, appeared to be bringing an end to high unemployment and want, which made many in the United States desire that same system of government for themselves: to be free from fear of starvation, want, and a lack of basic needs was an irresistible force. What was not understood very well in the beginning was how Fascism was able to accomplish so much in such a very short period of time. By abolishing the judicial and legislative branches of government the executive branches in those nations became all powerful. Their goal was not about providing for the needs of all, but to motivating their people through fear. The government's use of aggression in the form of political, social, and economic sanctions against citizens who were deemed undesirable, seemed rationale the majority of people living in those nations. Once basic liberties and freedoms had been suppressed the fascist regimes turned their aggression outward.

The Second World War became the ultimate test of democracy. If democracy was to survive, it not only had to win a global war, but it also had to secure itself and future generations from the temptation to pursue forms of government or policies that would corrupt its foundational principles of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. In the depths of the depression and the rise of the Fascist state, in June and July of 1940, President Roosevelt proposed a declaration of human rights for the US. He proposed the protection of the government should extend to "certain freedoms:" freedom of information, freedom of religious liberty, freedom of expression, freedom from fear, and freedom from want. His definition of what it required is still part of today's dialogue on human rights. These principles are included in the constitutions of major governments that emerged following World War II, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights ratified by most of the nations of the earth including the United States, and is agreed to by most members of the United Nations.

The relevance Roosevelt's proposed new Bill of Rights, as reiterated in the book by Cass Sunstein, are the enumeration of basic necessities of American political and economic life: equal opportunity, employment, security, end of special privilege, civil liberties, and scientific progress toward higher standards of living. These have been the over arching issues in our post 9/11 world. We have seen a single definition of security that allowed special privilege for some (those who could afford a Registered Travel ID), the undermined of civil liberties (warrantless wiretap surveillance of telephone calls, national ID, and secret government watchlist programs), that suppressed freedom of information (secrecy in all actions of government, no bid contracting, rules of secrecy expanded to include legal memorandum that purportedly rationalized government action) and that hindered scientific progress (increased travel restrictions making it difficult for scientific conferences to be held in the US, coupled with arrest and prosecution of researchers attending conferences in the US under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act meant that many of the important discussions in a wide range scientific and engineering innovation did not happen in this country).

As the nation contends with one of the issues that Roosevelt promoted as an important freedom under his proposed new bill of rights, that is, access to adequate and affordable health care, it is important to note that 60 years after his proposal this nation still has not exhausted the wealth of wisdom shown by one of the world's greatest leaders. The look back offered by this book is of value especially for the reminder that desperate people may be tempted to do desperate things, but it takes leadership to stay the course and serve as the morale compass for our nation.

--Lillie Coney

EPIC Publications:

"Litigation Under the Federal Open Government Laws 2008," edited by Harry A. Hammitt, Marc Rotenberg, John A. Verdi, and Mark S. Zaid (EPIC 2008). Price: $60.

Litigation Under the Federal Open Government Laws is the most comprehensive, authoritative discussion of the federal open access laws. This updated version includes new material regarding the substantial FOIA amendments enacted on December 31, 2007. Many of the recent amendments are effective as of December 31, 2008. The standard reference work includes in-depth analysis of litigation under Freedom of Information Act, Privacy Act, Federal Advisory Committee Act, Government in the Sunshine Act. The fully updated 2008 volume is the 24th edition of the manual that lawyers, journalists and researchers have relied on for more than 25 years.

"Information Privacy Law: Cases and Materials, Second Edition" Daniel J. Solove, Marc Rotenberg, and Paul Schwartz. (Aspen 2005). Price: $98.

This clear, comprehensive introduction to the field of information privacy law allows instructors to enliven their teaching of fundamental concepts by addressing both enduring and emerging controversies. The Second Edition addresses numerous rapidly developing areas of privacy law, including: identity theft, government data mining and electronic surveillance law, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, intelligence sharing, RFID tags, GPS, spyware, web bugs, and more. Information Privacy Law, Second Edition, builds a cohesive foundation for an exciting course in this rapidly evolving area of law.

"Privacy & Human Rights 2006: An International Survey of Privacy Laws and Developments" (EPIC 2007). Price: $75.

This annual report by EPIC and Privacy International provides an overview of key privacy topics and reviews the state of privacy in over 75 countries around the world. The report outlines legal protections, new challenges, and important issues and events relating to privacy. Privacy & Human Rights 2006 is the most comprehensive report on privacy and data protection ever published.

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

This resource promotes a dialogue on the issues, the outcomes, and the process of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS). This reference guide provides the official UN documents, regional and issue-oriented perspectives, and recommendations and proposals for future action, as well as a useful list of resources and contacts for individuals and organizations that wish to become more involved in the WSIS process.

"The Privacy Law Sourcebook 2004: United States Law, International Law, and Recent Developments," Marc Rotenberg, editor (EPIC 2005). Price: $40.

The Privacy Law Sourcebook, which has been called the "Physician's Desk Reference" of the privacy world, is the leading resource for students, attorneys, researchers, and journalists interested in pursuing privacy law in the United States and around the world. It includes the full texts of major privacy laws and directives such as the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Privacy Act, and the OECD Privacy Guidelines, as well as an up-to-date section on recent developments. New materials include the APEC Privacy Framework, the Video Voyeurism Prevention Act, and the CAN-SPAM Act.

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

A collection of essays, studies, and critiques of Internet content filtering. These papers are instrumental in explaining why filtering threatens free expression.

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

EPIC Bookstore

EPIC also publishes EPIC FOIA Notes, which provides brief summaries of interesting documents obtained from government agencies under the Freedom of Information Act.

Subscribe to EPIC FOIA Notes at: https:/

[8] Upcoming Conferences and Events
2nd International Action Day "Freedom not Fear - Stop the Surveillance Mania" Demonstrations, Events, Privacy Parties, etc., in many countries. Worldwide, September 12, 2009. For more information:

Pan-European Dialogue on Internet Governance (EuroDIG), Geneva, Switzerland, September 14-15, 2009. For more information: "Practical Approaches to Privacy in Health Reform," Deven McGraw of the Center for Democracy and Technology, Seventeenth National HIPAA Summit in Washington, DC, September 16, 2009. For more information:

World Summit on the Knowledge Society WSKS 2009, Crete, Greece, September 16-18, 2009. For more information:

Gikii, A Workshop on Law, Technology and Popular Culture, Institute for Information Law (IViR), University of Amsterdam, September 17-18, 2009. For more information:

"The Net will not forget," European conference on ICT and Privacy, Copenhagen, Denmark, September 23-24, 2009. For more information:

"Secure Telework and Remote Access", Ari Schwartz, Telework Exchange Town Hall Meeting, Washington, DC, September 24, 2009. For more information:

3rd International Conference "Keeping Children and Young People Safe Online," Warsaw, Poland, September 29-30, 2009. For more information:

"6th Communia Workshop: Memory Institutions and Public Domain" Barcelona, Spain, October 1-2, 2009. For more information:

Engaging Data Forum, MIT, October 12-13, 2009. For more information:

10th German Big Brother Awards, Bielefeld, Germany, October 16, 2009. For more information:

eChallenges 2009, Istanbul, Turkey, October 21-23, 2009. For more information:

Big Brother Awards Switzerland, Zurich, Switzerland, October 24, 2009. Deadline for nominations: August 31, 2009. For more information:

3rd European Privacy Open Space, Vienna, Austria, October 24-25, 2009. For more information:

Austrian Big Brother Awards Vienna, Austria, October 25, 2009. Deadline for nominations: 21 September 2009. For more information:

Free Culture Forum: Organization and Action, Barcelona, Spain, October 29 - November 1, 2009. For more information:

Free Society Conference and Nordic Summit, Gothenburg, Sweden, November 13-15, 2009. For more information:

3rd European Privacy Open Space, Vienna, Austria, October 24-25, 2009. For more information:

Global Privacy Standards in a Global World, The Public Voice, Madrid, Spain, November 3, 2009. For more information:

31st International Conference of Data Protection and Privacy Commissioners, Madrid, Spain, November 4-6, 2009. For more information,

UN Internet Governance Forum, Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt, November 15-18, 2009. For more information:

Privacy 2010, Stanford, March 23 - 25, 2010. For more information:

Join EPIC on Facebook

Join the Electronic Privacy Information Center on Facebook


Start a discussion on privacy. Let us know your thoughts. Stay up to date with EPIC's events. Support EPIC.

Privacy Policy

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

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

About EPIC

The Electronic Privacy Information Center is a public interest research center in Washington, DC. It was established in 1994 to focus public attention on emerging privacy issues such as the Clipper Chip, the Digital Telephony proposal, national ID cards, medical record privacy, and the collection and sale of personal information. EPIC publishes the EPIC Alert, pursues Freedom of Information Act litigation, and conducts policy research. For more information, see or write EPIC, 1718 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 200, Washington, DC 20009. +1 202 483 1140 (tel), +1 202 483 1248 (fax).

Donate to EPIC

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

Your contributions will help support Freedom of Information Act and First Amendment litigation, strong and effective advocacy for the right of privacy and efforts to oppose government regulation of encryption and expanding wiretapping powers.

Thank you for your support.

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.

END EPIC Alert 16.17


WorldLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback