EPIC Alert 18.22
E P I C A l e r t
Volume 18.22 November 10, 2011
Published by the
Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC)
"Defend Privacy. Support EPIC."
Table of Contents
 The Public Voice Hosts Civil Society Conference in Mexico
 Privacy Experts Convene for Commissioners, OECD Meetings
Court Hears Oral Arguments in 4th Amendment GPS Case
 EPIC Urges Court to Demand Radiation Docs, Public Comment from DHS
Files FTC Complaint re: Verizon Privacy Changes
 News in Brief
 Book Review: 'Taking Liberties'
 Upcoming Conferences and
TAKE ACTION: KWTK! - Know What Facebook Knows! Demand Your Data!
- WATCH the Video: http://epic.org/redirect/102511-kwtw-video.html
- DEMAND Your Facebook Data: http://epic.org/redirect/102511-kwtw.html
- READ the Facebook Complaint: http://epic.org/redirect/102511-fb.html
- SUPPORT EPIC: http://www.epic.org/donate/
 The Public Voice Hosts Civil Society Conference in
The Public Voice coalition hosted "Privacy is Freedom,"
a privacy and
consumer protection conference on October 31 in Mexico City. The event
was held in conjunction with the 33rd Data
Protection and Privacy
Commissioners Conference, and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation
and Development's annual symposium
and celebration of the 30th
anniversary of the OECD Privacy Guidelines.
The Public Voice conference addressed the challenges associated
the promotion of privacy rights worldwide, with an emphasis on
developments in Latin America. International panels of privacy
examined such topics as "Cultures and Privacy Around the World,"
"Children's Online Privacy," and the "Right to Forget."
featured real-time video streaming in English and Spanish, Twitter and
Facebook feeds in English, Spanish and French,
and a multilingual
"virtual meeting" to include participants who wished to retain their
Participation at the conference
was fueled by civil society
representatives from 16 countries, including Brazil, Tunisia, the UK,
France, and China. EPIC Associate
Director Lillie Coney chaired the
event, which was EPIC and the Federal Institute for Access to
Information and Data Protection
(IFAI). Many NGOs from Latin America,
Europe, and the United States helped organize the event.
EPIC established The Public Voice
Coalition in 1996 to promote public
participation in decisions concerning the future of the Internet. The
Public Voice has pursued
issues ranging from privacy and freedom of
expression to consumer protection and Internet governance. In
cooperation with the OECD,
UNESCO, and other international
organizations, the Public Voice has brought civil society leaders face
to face with government
officials for constructive engagement about
current policy issues. Public Voice events have been held in many
cities around the
world, including Buenos Aires, Cape Town, Dubai, Hong
Kong, Honolulu, Jerusalem, Kuala Lumpur, Madrid, Ottawa, Paris,
and Wroclaw. The 2012 Public Voice conference will be held
The Public Voice
The Public Voice: Conference 2011: "Privacy is Freedom"
The Public Voice: Prepared Conference Opening Remarks (Bi-Lingual)
The Public Voice: 2011 "Cultures and Privacy Around the World" Video
 Privacy Experts Convene for Commissioners, OECD Meetings
The Mexican Federal Institute for Access to Information
Protection (IFAI) hosted the 33rd International Conference of Data
Protection and Privacy Commissioners in Mexico City.
high-level officials from government, particularly privacy, agencies,
and private and non-governmental organizations
worldwide. In her
opening remarks IFAI President Jacqueline Peschard emphasized the need
to apply privacy laws to new business
practices and to consider the
growing concentrations of personal data held by a few in the private
The privacy commissioners'
conference promotes the goal of cross-border
collaboration and the development of international privacy norms. The
focused on the challenges faced by international
policymakers and global citizens in an increasingly networked and
advanced world, and featured open sessions on topics
including "Observation, Analytics, Innovation and Privacy" and "The
for Data Protection Law in Latin America, Asia, and Africa."
The hosting of the conference by the Mexican Data Protection Agency
also marked a significant milestone in the history of the annual
meeting of privacy officials. This was the first time the
was held in Latin America, an acknowledgement of the
recent adoption of comprehensive privacy legislation in Mexico and
role of the IFAI. Mexican President Felipe Calderon
welcomed conference attendees to the nation's capital and spoke
about the importance
of protecting privacy in the modern age.
Other top officials from the Mexican government described privacy
as a fundamental human
right and commended the work of IFAI.
The OECD also held a one-day symposium on privacy and interoperability
that focused on three
international frameworks for privacy protection -
the OECD Privacy Guidelines, the EU Data Protection Directive, and
of Europe Convention 108. Efforts are underway to
strengthen all three frameworks. At the OECD, the focus is now on
and enforcement of the Privacy Guidelines. The
revised EU Data Directive will likely include new enforcement powers,
review, and coverage of criminal justice ("third pillar")
data systems. At the Council of Europe, the aim is to both update
and to expand coverage. Uruguay, the host of
the 2012 Privacy Commissioners' meeting, is the most recent
nation to ratify the Privacy
As evidenced during the week of privacy meetings, much of the world
is moving toward stronger, harmonized standards
protection. Still, the position of the United States remains unclear.
The architect of the "Fair Information Practices"
undergirds many of the international agreements had little to offer
conference attendees beyond "self-regulation"
and a long delayed
"white paper." The country that helped push through the OECD Privacy
Guidelines now struggles to enact the principles
in its own laws. The
European Union, which has repeatedly urged the US to update its privacy
laws to take account of new business
practices, has new allies.
EPIC's Executive Director Marc Rotenberg and Associate Director Lillie
Coney attended both conferences.
ICDPPC: 33rd Annual Conference
OECD: 2011 Privacy Conference
EPIC: European Union Data Protection Directive
 Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in 4th Amendment
The United States Supreme Court heard arguments
November 8 in US v.
Jones, a case set to determine whether the warrantless police use of a
GPS tracking device violates the Fourth
Evidence against defendant Antoine Jones was gathered from a tracking
device placed on the underside of Jones' car.
The collected GPS
location data was central to the government's case, and the defendant
challenged his conviction based on the
lack of a valid warrant. A
three-judge appeals panel for the DC Circuit held that "the use of the
GPS device violated [Jones']
'reasonable expectation of privacy,' and
was therefore a search subject to the reasonableness requirement of the
The arguments before the Court concerned the two interrelated aspects
of Jones' Fourth Amendment challenge: whether persistent
constitutes a "search" and also whether the installation of a GPS
tracking device on a private vehicle is an unconstitutional
US Deputy Solicitor General Michael R. Dreeben argued on behalf of the
United States, stressing that "[w]hat a person
seeks to preserve as
private . . . is a subject of Fourth Amendment protection. But what he
reveals to the world, such as his movements
in a car on a public
roadway, is not." Defense Counsel Stephen Leckar argued that "[w]hat
has been seized is [Mr. Jones'] data.
Data is seized that is created
by the GPS."
EPIC filed a "friend of the court" brief in the case October 3, warning
that "it is
critical that police access to GPS tracking be subject to a
warrant requirement." Supported by 30 legal scholars and technical
experts, EPIC argued that 24-hour GPS surveillance by law enforcement
constitutes a "search" under the Fourth Amendment. EPIC's
brief urged the
Court to consider the ubiquity of GPS technology and the privacy
implications of its unchecked use by law enforcement.
"If the Court
overturns the decision below," the brief states, "it would severely
restrict the privacy interests of drivers by
continuous, surreptitious tracking and monitoring of individuals
operating privately-owned vehicles."
EPIC: US v. Jones
US Supreme Court: Oral Argument Transcript, US v. Jones (Nov. 8, 2011)
DC District Appeals Court: Ruling on US v. Jones (Aug. 2010)
EPIC: Amicus Brief in US v. Jones (Oct. 3, 2011)
EPIC: Locational Privacy
 EPIC Urges Court to Demand Radiation Docs, Public Comment
EPIC filed a motion for summary judgment October
31 in EPIC v. DHS, a
pending Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the Department of
Homeland Security for information about the radiation risks posed by
airport body scanners. EPIC's
initial Freedom of Information Act
request was filed in July 2010, but the agency failed to respond until
EPIC filed suit in DC District Court in early 2011.
lawsuit resulted in the disclosure of over a thousand pages of
documents, including studies detailing danger zones around the scanners
and proper limits of employee exposure. Though the agency initially
withheld radiation emission facts, EPIC was able to force disclosure.
EPIC's motion asks the Court to force the agency to disclose further
documents containing radiation testing results, agency fact
body scanner radiation risks, and an image produced by the machines.
EPIC also filed papers in federal court October
28, seeking to enforce
an order that requires the Department of Homeland Security to provide
greater detail about the body scanner
program. As a result of EPIC's
lawsuit against DHS, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the
agency violated federal law
when it installed body scanners in airports
for primary screening without first soliciting public comment. In July,
the Court ordered
Homeland Security to "promptly" seek public comment,
but the agency has failed to respond.
The Court's July 2011 decision holds
that "the TSA has not justified
its failure to initiate notice-and-comment rulemaking before announcing
it would use AIT scanners
for primary screening. None of the exceptions
urged by the TSA justifies its failure to give notice of and receive
such a rule, which is legislative and not merely
interpretive, procedural, or a general statement of policy." The Court
"Few, if any regulatory procedures impose directly and
significantly upon so many members of the public."
EPIC v. DHS: Full Body
Scanner Radiation Risks
EPIC: Motion for Summary Judgment (Oct. 31, 2011)
EPIC: Motion to Enforce Order on DHS (July 15, 2011)
DC Circuit Court: Opinion on EPIC v. DHS (July 15, 2011)
EPIC: Petition for Review in EPIC v. DHS (May 2009)
EPIC: Motion for Emergency Stay of Body Scanner Program (July 2010)
EPIC: EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanners)
 EPIC Files FTC Complaint over Verizon Privacy Changes
EPIC has filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission,
that Verizon Wireless has engaged in unfair and deceptive trade
practices in violation of consumer protection law. Verizon
recently changed its business practices, which now include revealing
detailed personal information about its customers
- including location
data, web browsing and search histories, and demographic data - to
third parties. Even customers who previously
signed long-term contracts
with the company are affected. EPIC's complaint also charges that
Verizon Wireless has failed to establish
adequate techniques to
de-identify its customers.
Verizon Wireless previously promised users, 88 percent of whom are
long-term contracts, that the company would provide "clear
and meaningful notice" and obtain users' "affirmative consent" before
collecting their web browsing data. The company also represented to
users that it would not collect or disclose users' location
demographic information, or mobile device usage information. Verizon's
subsequent changes not only disclose those details
but do so without
affirmative user consent.
Verizon Wireless claims that the information it discloses cannot be
used to personally
identify users. However, the FTC recognizes location
data as personally identifiable information. EPIC's complaint also
and Netflix as companies that released improperly anonymized
data sets consisting of users' Web search terms and video ratings,
to discover that such information was in fact personally identifiable.
"Such practices are unfair and deceptive, contrary
to the privacy and
security interests of Verizon Wireless customers, and actionable by the
Federal Trade Commission," EPIC's complaint
states. The complaint asks
the FTC to "require Verizon Wireless to immediately cease its unfair
and deceptive data collection and
disclosure practices," and to require
that the company "implement an opt-in consent model for all future
changes to the company's
data collection and disclosure practices."
EPIC: Complaint to FTC Against Verizon (Oct. 28, 2011)
Verizon: Data Disclosure Policy
EPIC: Locational Privacy
 News in Brief
Institute of Medicine: Health Information Technology Still Not Safe
According to a study conducted by the Institute of Medicine,
errors and defects in electronic health records pose threats to patient
safety, and can even result in death. To combat
the problem, the
Institute recommends the establishment of an investigative agency, to
be charged with examining and charting the
safety performance of
electronic health records in use, according to a press release from the
National Academies panel. The Institute
also recommends that clauses
purported to "hold harmless" electronic health record suppliers be
removed from their sales contracts.
Although experts in the medical
field acknowledge that the study is a positive step in regulating
health information technology,
The New York Times reports that some
experts believe the Food and Drug Administration should regulate the
safety of electronic
health records. EPIC participated in a 2009 IOM
study on Privacy and Medical Research.
Institute of Medicine: Study on Technology
and Patient Safety
National Academies: Press Release on IOM Study (Nov. 8, 2011)
NY Times: Article on Digital Health Records Safety (Nov. 9, 2011)
IOM: Study on Medical Records Safety (Jan. 2009)
EPIC: Medical Record Privacy
Congress, #KWTK Press Facebook to Disclose Secret Profiles
US Representatives Joe Barton (R-TX), Edward Markey (D-MA), Marsha
Blackburn (R-TN), and Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) have sent a letter to
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, requesting information on Facebook's
retention practices. The October 28 letter asked in-depth questions
about the types of personal data that Facebook collects
as well as
Facebook's data storage, retention, and deletion policies, and
requested that Facebook provide the committee with relevant
within 15 days of the letter's receipt. The inquiry followed a news
report that a single Austrian Facebook user requested
and obtained more
than 1,200 pages of his own personal data from the company, including
information he had previously deleted.
As part of its new "Know What
They Know" ("KWTK") campaign, EPIC is now urging Facebook users to
obtain their complete "data dossiers."
Bipartisan Privacy Caucus: Letter to Mark Zuckerberg (Oct. 29, 2011)
EPIC: Facebook Privacy
WSJ: 'Europeans to Facebook: "Where's my data?"' (Sept. 29, 2011)
FTC Enforces COPPA Against Kids' Facebook-Like Web Site
The Federal Trade Commission has settled a complaint against Web
Skid-e-kids after the owner violated both the Commission's Children's
Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) Rule and the Web
5,600 children without obtaining prior parental
consent. The settlement
bars future violations of COPPA and misrepresentations about the
collection and use of children's information.
It also requires site
owner Jones O. Godwin to destroy information collected in violation of
the Rule, and to allow for oversight
of future Web sites. Godwin was
also directed to pay a $100,000 fine, which will be reduced to $1,000
if he complies with the order's
oversight provision. Skid-e-kids is a
social networking site that allows children ages 7-14 to create
profiles, upload pictures
and videos, and become friends with and send
messages to other members. COPPA requires that Web site operators
consent before they collect, use or disclose personal
information from children under 13. EPIC's complaints against
facial recognition system and changes to its privacy
settings are still pending before the FTC.
Federal Trade Commission: Settlement
FTC: Judgment Against Skidekids.com (Nov. 9, 2011)
EPIC: Complaint Against Facebook's Facial Recognition System
EPIC: Complaint Against Facebook's Privacy Policies
EPIC: Kids' Online Privacy
Justice Department Revises FOIA Proposal, But Problems Remain
In response to widespread criticism from EPIC and other open-government
groups, the Department of Justice has agreed to withdraw one of its
proposed Freedom of Information Act revisions, which would have allowed
the agency to make misrepresentations about the existence of documents
subject to the FOIA.
In extensive comments to the Justice Department,
EPIC stated that the agency's proposal would undermine the FOIA and is
to law as well as the views expressed by President Obama and
Attorney General Holder. EPIC also pointed to proposed changes that
would place new burdens on FOIA requesters, make it more difficult to
qualify for educational and news media fee status, allow
Department to terminate FOIA requests, and even destroy records subject
EPIC: Comments to DoJ on FOIA
Changes (Oct. 18, 2011)
DoJ: Notice of Proposed FOIA Revisions (Sept. 19, 2011)
EPIC: Open Government
FTC's Final Google Buzz Settlement Fails to Adopt Proposed Safeguards
The Federal Trade Commission has finalized a settlement
over Google Buzz, the social network service launched by Google in
early 2010. The Commission's action against Google
previous complaint, filed on behalf of GMail subscribers and other
Internet users. The Google Buzz settlement is
far-reaching and bars
Google from future privacy misrepresentations, requires Google to
implement a comprehensive privacy program,
and calls for regular,
independent privacy audits for the next 20 years. However, the
Commission failed to adopt any of the recommendations
the 30--day public comment process, which generated hundreds of
comments. In a letter to EPIC and to others who
the FTC wrote "the Commission has determined that the public interest
would best be served by issuing the
Decision and Order in final form
without any modifications."
EPIC: Google Buzz Complaint
FTC: In Re Google Buzz, Decision and Order (Oct. 13, 2011)
FTC: Response to EPIC's Google Buzz Settlement Comment (Oct. 13, 2011)
EPIC: In re Google Buzz
EPIC: Fix Google Privacy
EPIC, Tech Experts Urge Gov't 'Common Rule,' De-identification Research
In extensive comments to the US Department of Health
Services, Professor Latanya Sweeney, Director of Harvard University's
Data Privacy Lab, EPIC, Patient Privacy Rights,
and 50 data privacy
researchers warned the agency that medical privacy standards for
de-identification are "gravely inadequate"
and that proposed changes
to the Common Rule would deprive the public and policymakers of
information about the risks of re-identification.
The coalition urged
support for stronger techniques for de-identification based on recent a
dvances in theoretical computer science.
Earlier in 2011, EPIC filed a
"friend of the court" brief in the US Supreme Court case IMS Health v.
Sorrell, warning that the
de-identification technique adopted by data-
mining companies was not sufficient to protect patient privacy.
Data Privacy Lab Comments (Oct. 26, 2011)
Data Privacy Lab: Proposed Changes to the Common Rule
DHHS: Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
Harvard Center for Computation and Society: Comments (Oct. 26, 2011)
EPIC: IMS Health v. Sorrell Amicus Brief
EPIC: IMS Health v. Sorrell
EPIC: Privacy and The Common Rule
EPIC: Medical Record Privacy
Report: Internet Privacy Tools Generally Fail to Protect Privacy
A recent report by Carnegie Mellon University finds that Internet
privacy tools designed to protect consumers from online behavioral
advertising are ineffective because they are too difficult to
understand and configure. CMU researchers investigated whether users
could protect themselves from online tracking by utilizing
settings on popular Web browsers Firefox and Internet Explorer. The
report also analyzed the efficacy of four privacy
Adblock Plus and IE9 Tracking Protection. The researchers determined
that the browser settings are too confusing
for users to make informed
decisions on how to use them most effectively. Further, unbeknownst to
most users, Internet privacy
tools' default settings largely fail at
blocking online tracking. "Users' expectations and abilities are not
supported by existing
approaches," the report concludes, adding that
researchers' "results suggest that the current approach for advertising
self-regulation through opt-out mechanisms is fundamentally
Carnegie Mellon University CyLab: Usability Study (Oct.
EPIC: Online Tracking and Behavioral Profiling
 EPIC Book Review: 'Taking Liberties'
"Taking Liberties: The War on Terror and the Erosion of American
Democracy," Susan N. Herman
In her stunning new book, ACLU president Susan Herman personalizes the
erosion of post-9/11 US civil liberties into intimate, horrifying
stories of Americans caught in the high beams of the so-called "war on
terror." Herman never lets her audience forget that assaults
on the US
Constitution are intimately connected to the fate of individual
Americans inadvertently ensnared in the vast, desperate sweep of recent
Some of these wrenching and infuriating stories (the former football
player locked in solitary confinement after converting
to Islam) are
familiar to most readers of this book. Others (the college student
detained and interrogated for five hours because
Arabic flash cards
were found in his carry-on) have been less publicized. Herman is a
good storyteller and a good moralist; each
vignette drives home at
least one aspect of the "war on terror's" frenzied overreaching.
Herman faults both how post-9/11 policies
have been "stretched and
exploited" to their breaking points, and the fundamental secrecy and
circularity of such policies, which
result in Americans forbidden to
know what charges are being brought against them or even see evidence
of their wrongdoing.
expected, the George W. Bush Administration is the book's primary
malefactor. Herman, however, does not absolve Obama's continuation
Bush-era policies; similarly she blames the Clinton Administration for
taking the "baby steps" necessary to create and implement
surveillance state of 2011. In fact, Herman is surprisingly sympathetic
to Bush et al.'s desperate scramble to create a new
framework in order to prevent what were perceived as imminent attacks
on US soil. As every chapter points out,
however, policies created out
of fear and good intentions quickly spiral out of control.
Herman stresses the personal and intimate
aspects of her stories by
including photographs of her subjects, as well as copies of official
documents, including the now-infamous
"naked" body scanner
images. It's another means of "putting a human face" on large policy
issues, including what an acquaintance
of hers called "'that Guantanamo
stuff'" and "'that Patriot Act stuff'."
In less skilled hands, "Taking Liberties" might leave
readers with a
feeling of infuriated hopelessness. That's not what Herman wants; an
emboldened citizenry is more willing than an
embittered one to affect
change. Having galvanized her readers, she finally urges them to
action: "If we want to keep our privacy,
our freedom of speech and
thought, and our right to talk back to the government, we need to
recommit ourselves to . . . doing
our own part to protect and defend
the Constitution. After all," she concludes, "any worthwhile
relationship takes work."
-- EC Rosenberg
"Litigation Under the Federal Open Government Laws 2010," edited by
Harry A. Hammitt, Marc Rotenberg, John A. Verdi, Ginger McCall,
S. Zaid (EPIC 2010). Price: $75
Litigation Under the Federal Open Government Laws is the most
comprehensive, authoritative discussion of the federal open access
This updated version includes new material regarding President Obama's
2009 memo on Open Government, Attorney General Holder's
March 2009 memo
on FOIA Guidance, and the new executive order on declassification. The
standard reference work includes in-depth
analysis of litigation under:
the Freedom of Information Act, the Privacy Act, the Federal Advisory
Committee Act, and the Government in the Sunshine Act. The fully updated
2010 volume is the
25th 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).
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
law, including: identity theft, government data mining and electronic
surveillance law, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
intelligence sharing, RFID tags, GPS, spyware, web bugs, and more.
Information Privacy Law, Second Edition, builds a cohesive
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
75 countries around the world. The report outlines legal protections,
new challenges, and important issues and events relating
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).
reference guide provides the official UN documents, regional and
issue-oriented perspectives, and recommendations and proposals
future action, as well as a useful list of resources and contacts for
individuals and organizations that wish to become more
involved in the
"The Privacy Law Sourcebook 2004: United States Law, International
and Recent Developments," Marc Rotenberg, editor (EPIC 2005). Price:
The Privacy Law Sourcebook, which has been called the "Physician's Desk
Reference" of the privacy world, is the leading resource
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 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:
 Upcoming Conferences and Events
Securing Our Rights in the Information-Sharing Era. San Francisco, CA,
1-2 December 2011. For More Information:
More Surveillance, More Security? The Landscape of Surveillance in
Europe and Challenges to Data Protection and Privacy. Brussels,
January 2012. For More Information:
Computers, Privacy, & Data Protection 2012: European Data Protection:
Coming of Age. Brussels, Belgium, 25-27 January 2012, Call
Abstracts Deadline 1 June 2011. For More Information:
Join EPIC on Facebook and Twitter
Join the Electronic Privacy Information Center on Facebook and Twitter:
Join us on Twitter for #privchat, Tuesdays, 11:00am ET.
Start a discussion on privacy. Let us know your thoughts.
Stay up to date
with EPIC's events.
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
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 http://www.epic.org 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.
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 18.22 ------------------------