WorldLII Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback

EPIC Alert

You are here:  WorldLII >> Databases >> EPIC Alert >> 2013 >> [2013] EPICAlert 23

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

EPIC Alert 20.23 [2013] EPICAlert 23

EPIC Alert 20.23

======================================================================= E P I C A l e r t ======================================================================= Volume 20.23 November 27, 2013 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Published by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) Washington, D.C. "Defend Privacy. Support EPIC." ========================================================================= Table of Contents ========================================================================= [1] Supreme Court Declines EPIC's Challenge to NSA Surveillance Program [2] States Reach $17M Settlement with Google Over Privacy Violations [3] Federal Court Awards EPIC $30,000 in Social Media Monitoring Case [4] EPIC Urges FCC to Investigate AT&T's Sale of Consumer Phone Records [5] Government Audit Finds TSA Behavior Analysis Program 'Ineffective' [6] News in Brief [7] EPIC in the News [8] EPIC Book Review: 'Hatching Twitter' [9] Upcoming Conferences and Events TAKE ACTION: Tell Facebook: "Stop Changing Our Privacy Settings!" - READ about the Changes: - LEARN More about Facebook Privacy: - SUPPORT EPIC: ========================================================================= [1] Supreme Court Declines EPIC's Challenge to NSA Surveillance Program ========================================================================= The United States Supreme Court has, without comment, declined to hear EPIC's petition challenging the legality of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court's order authorizing the NSA telephone record collection program. EPIC's petition argued that the FISA court exceeded legal authority when it ordered Verizon to turn over, on an ongoing basis, all domestic telephone call records to the National Security Agency. In response to the Supreme Court decision, EPIC stated, "The surveillance order was clearly unlawful. There is simply no way to establish relevance for the collection of all telephone records on all US telephone customers for an intelligence investigation." The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act makes it very difficult to challenge these determinations, which is why EPIC filed its petition for appellate review directly with the Supreme Court. The petition was distributed to the Justices October 30, along with four "friend of the court" briefs by former Church Committee members and prominent scholars in information law, federal jurisdiction, and constitutional law, all of whom urged the Supreme Court to grant EPIC's petition. EPIC's petition argued that it is "simply not possible that every phone record in the possession of a telecommunications firm could be relevant to an authorized investigation." According to EPIC, such an interpretation would "render meaningless" the "relevance" limitation Congress added to Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act in 2006. Many members of Congress, including the original authors of the USA PATRIOT Act, agree that the government's interpretation is contrary to legislative intent. The "friend of the court" briefs in support of EPIC's case similarly argued that the government's position undermines the purposes of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and threatens Fourth Amendment rights. The US Solicitor General's Office filed a brief in opposition to EPIC's petition on October 11, arguing that the Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to hear the case. Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Representative James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) have introduced the USA FREEDOM Act, which would end the bulk collection program and impose new transparency and oversight rules for the NSA and the FISA Court. The American Civil Liberties Union and other organizations have also challenged the program at the district court level, arguing that the NSA collection program violates the Constitution and the FISA. EPIC will continue to push for reform in this area. US Supreme Court: Denial of Cert in In re EPIC (Nov. 18, 2013) EPIC: In re EPIC Petition to US Supreme Court (Jul. 8, 2013) Order to Verizon re: Telephone Records (Apr. 23, 2013) EPIC: In re EPIC - NSA Telephone Records Surveillance Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI): Text of USA FREEDOM Act (Oct. 29, 2013) ======================================================================== [2] States Reach $17M Settlement with Google Over Privacy Violations ======================================================================== Maryland Attorney General Douglas Gansler and attorneys general in 36 states and the District of Columbia have reached a $17 million settlement with Google over privacy violations. The state of Maryland, which led the investigation during Gansler's 2012-2013 tenure as president of the National Association of Attorneys General, will receive more than $1 million as a civil penalty and Google will be required to change its privacy practices. According to the settlement, Google violated state consumer protection and privacy laws by placing advertising tracking cookies via DoubleClick, a company now owned by Google, on Safari browsers despite telling users that it would honor the default Safari privacy settings. The Federal Trade Commission fined Google $22.5 million in 2012 over similar practices that violated an earlier settlement, itself a result of a 2010 complaint filed by EPIC. The settlement requires Google to: " * Not deploy the type of code used here to override a browser's cookie blocking settings without the consumer's consent, unless it is necessary to do so in order to detect, prevent or otherwise address fraud, security or technical issues. * Not misrepresent or omit material information to consumers about how they can use any particular Google product, service or tool to directly manage how Google serves advertisements to their browsers. * Improve the information it provides to consumers regarding cookies, their purposes, and how they can be managed by consumers using Google's products or services and tools. * Maintain systems designed to ensure the expiration of the third- party cookies set on Safari Web browsers while their default settings had been circumvented." In 2007, EPIC objected to the Google-DoubleClick merger on privacy grounds and specifically warned that Google's use of DoubleClick techniques would lead to impermissible tracking of Internet users. DoubleClick had earlier been subject to a series of class action lawsuits and EPIC previously objected to the proposed Doubleclick settlement. Maryland AG Office: Notice of Google Settlement (Nov. 18, 2013) FTC: Announcement of Google Safari Settlement (Aug. 9, 2013) NAAG: Letter to Google re: Account Consolidation (Feb. 22, 2012) EPIC: Internet Cookies ========================================================================= [3] Federal Court Awards EPIC $30,000 in Social Media Monitoring Case ========================================================================= EPIC has prevailed in a fee dispute with the Department of Homeland Security in an open-government case concerning the government's monitoring of social media. EPIC filed a FOIA request after the agency announced plans to gather information from "online forums, blogs, public websites, and message boards." After the DHS refused to produce documents, EPIC filed suit and obtained more than 500 pages describing the agency program. When the agency subsequently moved to dismiss the case, a federal judge ruled that EPIC had "substantially prevailed." The court noted that EPIC had complied with the "public benefit' factor by making a "contribution to the national conversation." Articles about the documents and EPIC's FOIA work were mentioned in numerous publications, including The Washington Post, FoxNews, Reuters, The Blaze, ComputerWorld, IEEE Spectrum, and Forbes. The court also noted that these documents were "heavily featured" at a Congressional hearing and that "this is the sort of public benefit that FOIA was designed to promote." Earlier, DHS sought to give EPIC a token amount in settlement for what DHS called "a 9-page boilerplate complaint for this simple, straightforward FOIA case." The court had harsh words for the agency, emphasizing that "If FOIA's statutory requirements as applied to this case were so 'simple' and 'straightforward', DHS might have been better served by complying with them--rather than by ignoring statutory deadlines and meeting their legal obligations only upon being served with a complaint in federal court." The case is EPIC v. DHS, No. 11-2261 (D.D.C. Nov. 15, 2013). EPIC: Resolution in Fee Dispute with DHS (Nov. 15, 2013) Washington Post: Article on Social Media Monitoring (Jan. 13, 2012) social-media-dhs-documents-reports Fox News: Article on Social Media Monitoring (Dec. 24, 2011) over-social-media-monitoring-program/ Reuters: Article on Social Media Monitoring (Jan. 11, 2012) websites-idUSTRE80A1RC20120111 The Blaze: Article on Social Media Monitoring (Dec. 28, 2011) twitter-get-the-governments-attention/ ComputerWorld: Article on Social Media Monitoring (Jan. 16, 2012) could_chill_public_dissent_EPIC_warns IEEE Spectrum: Article on Social Media Monitoring (May 29, 2012) to-be-careful-about-the-words-you-use-in-social-media- conversations Forbes: Article on Social Media Monitoring (May 26, 2012) homeland-security-forced-to-release-list-of-keywords-used-to- monitor-social-networking-sites/ US House: Hearing on Social Media Monitoring (Feb. 16, 2012) monitoring-social-networking-and-media-enhancing-intelligence EPIC: EPIC v. DHS Social Media Monitoring ========================================================================= [4] EPIC Urges FCC to Investigate AT&T's Sale of Consumer Phone Records ========================================================================= In a letter to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler, EPIC urged the FCC to determine whether AT&T violated the Communications Act when it sold private consumer call detail information to the Drug Enforcement Administration and Central Intelligence Agency. The letter follows EPIC's previous efforts to obtain the FCC's view on whether Verizon violated the Communications Act when it released consumer call detail information to the National Security Agency. The letter was prompted in part by two New York Times reports. One, released in September 2013, found that AT&T had disclosed private information to federal and local law enforcement and intelligence agencies. The report discusses the Hemisphere project, under which four billion call records per day, including "every call that passes through an AT&T switch-not just those made by AT&T customers," are provided to the government. AT&T grants government officials access to customer proprietary network information ("CPNI") pursuant to administrative subpoenas, which are issued by the DEA and are not subject to judicial oversight. The second, released in early November 2013, found that AT&T sells CPNI to the CIA. According to the report, "[t]he C.I.A. supplies phone numbers of overseas terrorism suspects, and AT&T searches its database and provides records of calls that may help identify foreign associates [.]" AT&T is not under a court order or subpoena to disclose CPNI to the CIA. EPIC's letter explained that AT&T's actions violated Section 222 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which mandates that telecommunications carriers, such as AT&T, protect CPNI. EPIC also informed the Commission that the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners has issued a draft resolution underscoring the crucial role of the FCC in protecting consumer information. Earlier in 2013, EPIC asked the FCC to resolve whether Verizon violated the Communications Act when it released consumer call detail information to the NSA. "The role of carriers like Verizon is particularly important because the structure of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act does not allow for meaningful public oversight or accountability," EPIC argued. Thus, "millions of consumers had no way of knowing that their personal information had been illegally provided to the NSA by Verizon" - yet at the same time, "these consumers are completely dependent on Verizon for the protection of their personal phone records." EPIC: Letter to FCC re: AT&T (Nov. 15, 2013) NARUC: Resolution (Nov. 8, 2013) The New York Times: Hemisphere (Sep. 1, 2013) trove-eclipsing-nsas.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1 The New York Times: CIA (Nov. 7, 2013) call-data.html?pagewanted=1 EPIC: Letter to FCC re: NSA Surveillance (Jun. 11, 2013) FISA: Verizon Order (Apr. 23, 2013) EPIC: Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act EPIC: Clapper v. Amnesty Int'l EPIC: USA PATRIOT Act ======================================================================== [5] Government Audit Finds TSA Behavior Analysis Program 'Ineffective' ======================================================================== The Government Accountability Office has issued a report to Congress finding that the Transportation Security Administration's behavioral analysis program, known as "Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques" (SPOT), is ineffective. The GAO determined that there is no scientifically valid evidence for behavior indicators, and that TSA screeners cannot reliably interpret passenger behavior. The GAO report also notes that the there have been significant concerns over racial and ethnic profiling. Approximately 3,000 TSA officers are currently assigned to the SPOT program, which has cost approximately $900 million since 2007. The GAO recommended the Congress reduce further funding of the program. In testimony before the 9/11 Commission in 2003, EPIC warned, "It is easy to construct a device that can determine whether a person is carrying a gun before he boards an airplane. It is much more difficult to construct a device that can probe his thoughts and determine his intent to commit a crime." Since that time, EPIC has objected to the DHS's practice of assigning threat profiles based on race, ethnicity, and gender. EPIC has also called upon the TSA to undertake a comprehensive audit of the civil rights impact of airport screening policies on racial and religious minorities. Another TSA program, the Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response (VIPR) program also has had its effectiveness called into question for similar reasons. The VIPR program involves warrantless searches at various locations, including festivals, sporting events, and bus stations. Like the SPOT program, the VIPR program lacks performance metrics despite a $100 million dollar budget. In 2007, EPIC submitted comments to the Department of Homeland Security opposing the implementation of Secure Flight, a passenger profiling program that would maintain watch lists of names of individuals suspected of posing a risk to air travel. EPIC warned against the high error rates of watch lists and the lack of redress for travelers on the list. GAO: Report on TSA Behavioral Profiling (Nov. 2013) EPIC: Testimony Before 9/11 Commission (Dec. 8, 2003) EPIC: Comments to DHS re: Automated Targeting System (June 21, 2012) EPIC: Letter to DHS re: TSA Racial Profiling Audit (Dec. 1, 2011) US House: Report on TSA (Sept. 2012) EPIC: Comments to DHS re: Secure Flight (Sept. 24, 2007) ======================================================================== [6] News in Brief ======================================================================== EPIC Files FOIA Request with FTC re: Facebook Investigation EPIC has filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the Federal Trade Commission for documents concerning the FTC's recent "investigation" of Facebook's policy changes. The investigation concerned changes to Facebook's Data Use Policy that permit the use of the names, images, and content of Facebook users for commercial endorsement without user consent. Following announcement of the proposed change, EPIC and several several privacy groups wrote to the FTC objecting to the changes as a violation of a 2011 consent order with Federal Trade Commission. Senator Ed Markey (D-MA) also expressed concern about the policy changes. The Commission opened an investigation, which was then quietly closed allowing Facebook to go forward with the changes. EPIC: FOIA Request on FTC Facebook Investigation (Nov. 18, 2013) EPIC et al.: Letter to FTC re: Facebook Policy Changes (Sep. 4, 2013) Sen. Markey (D- MA): Press Release on Facebook Letter (Sep. 11, 2013) EPIC: FTC EPIC: FOIA United Nations Considers Privacy Resolution In response to growing concern over the scope of electronic surveillance, the UN General Assembly is considering a resolution affirming that privacy is a fundamental right. Civil society groups have long urged international organizations to update and strengthen global frameworks for privacy protection. The UN resolution now under consideration is a response to reports that the US conducted surveillance of many foreign leaders, including Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff and German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Brazil and Germany are leading the effort at the United Nations on the privacy resolution. The European Parliament also is pursuing an investigation of the "Mass Surveillance of EU Citizens." The US Congress itself is considering legislation, such as the USA FREEDOM Act, to reign in surveillance activities. UN: Draft Privacy Resolution (Nov. 2013) The Public Voice: 2013 Conference in Warsaw, Poland (Sep. 2013) EU: LIBE Committee Events Sen. Leahy (D-VT): Press Release on USA FREEDOM Act (Oct. 29, 2013) The Public Voice: The Madrid Declaration (Nov. 3, 2009) ======================================================================== [7] EPIC in the News ======================================================================== "The Government's Secret Plan to Shut Off Cellphones and the Internet, Explained." Mother Jones, Nov. 26, 2013. switch-explained "Embracing big brother: How facial recognition could help fight crime." CNN, Nov. 25, 2013. recognition/ "Washington's overall take on data brokers muddled." Politico, Nov. 25, 2013. data-brokers-muddled-100316.html?hp=r4 "The Government Might Finally Have to Explain Its 'Internet Kill Switch Policy," by EPIC Consumer Protection Counsel David Jacobs. Slate, Nov. 25, 2013. switch_government_might_have_to_disclose_its_standard_operating.html "LG Promises to Shut Down TV Spy Ops." E-Commerce Times, Nov. 21, 2013. "Judge Orders Homeland Security to Release Details for Shutting Down Wireless Networks." NextGov, Nov. 20, 2013. security-to-release-details-for-shutting-down-wireless-networks- 131120?news=851707 "Congress and Courts Weigh Restraints on N.S.A. Spying." The New York Times, Nov. 19, 2013. weigh-restraints-on-nsa-spying.html "Google to Pay $17 Million to Settle Privacy Case." The New York Times, Nov. 18, 2013. million-to-settle-privacy-case.html?_r=0 "Supreme Court won't hear challenge to NSA's phone-records collection." The Washington Post, Nov. 18, 2013. challenge-to-spying-program/2013/11/18/9bfcd45a-506c-11e3-9fe0- fd2ca728e67c_story.html "NSA surveillance programs face challenges in court." USA Today, Nov. 18, 2013. federal-court-surveillance-verizon/3581325/ "Feinstein promotes bill to strengthen NSA's hand on warrantless searches." The Guardian, Nov. 15, 2013. nsa-warrantless-searches-surveillance For More EPIC in the News: ======================================================================== [8] EPIC Book Review: 'Hatching Twitter' ======================================================================== "Hatching Twitter: A True Story of Money, Power, Friendship, and Betrayal," Nick Bilton Pop quiz: How do you write the story of a Silicon Valley startup after the cinematic success of "The Social Network"? Anglo-American journalist Nick Bilton tackles this cultural challenge in his new book, "Hatching Twitter: A True Story of Money, Power, Friendship, and Betrayal." From the title alone, Bilton may have already lost; his audience has heard this story before. Even his Author's Note, which opens the book, delivers a deconstructionist caveat about the fallibility of memory and the significance of documentation when reconstructing a reliable record. Bilton writes, "It became apparent in the interviews for the book that people's memories of past events have changed over time." He relates that, in an attempt to compensate for these divergent memories, "In every instance possible I have tried to triangulate timing and location of events using documents I obtained, and, of course, social media." He explains that, to make these calculations, he pored over hundreds of hours of interviews, more than a thousand documents, and tens of thousands of tweets, photos and videos. He also notes, "Any instance of a character's inner monologue or emotional state is based on interviews with that individual and not assumed." Against that backdrop, the story begins with a chapter titled "#START." The chapters in Hatching Twitter are all hashtagged, and where a subchapter tells part of the story from one person's perspective, the subchapter is tagged with an @. The narrative bounces back and forth between the founders' perspectives, moving forward chronologically from Ev Williams' successful sale of Blogger in 2003 through his ousting from Twitter in 2010. If there were a protagonist in this story, it would be Williams. His role in Twitter's development the thread tying together the book's various perspectives. But every person's story is told with the same immaculate detail, including reconstructed conversations, thoughts, feelings, and impulses. Bilton doesn't surrender his narrative voice, however - he fills in the gaps left by divergent memories with editorial remarks about the significance of the moment. In these moments, his background as a New York Times columnist and reporter are most evident. The factors that shape this book - the success of the Facebook story as entertainment, the postmodern reflection on memory in the author's statement, the kitsch of beginning each chapter with a Twitter tag, and the columnist's narrative voice - could easily have ruined this book's chances at success. Those elements could have pulled the book in too many directions for a cohesive story to emerge. But "Hatching Twitter" is fantastic. It's truly a success. Progressing through the narrative, all the divergent factors coalesce to answer that initial question of how the story of Twitter could compete in a Facebook world. The answer is that the book reads like a Twitter feed. The story is as different from the Facebook story as Twitter is different from Facebook (both are Internet social media platforms, but that's about it). The book's similarity to Twitter also explains the author's preface about reconstructed memories. Twitter is a constant stream of recorded memory; dialogue, thoughts, feelings, and impulses. The whole complexity of a person's life can be read in the tweets of an ardent user. And Bilton's gripping prose relates that complexity so effortlessly that it's easy to forget that these aren't fictional characters. That's why Bilton needs to step into the narrative occasionally - to remind the reader that this is a real story. Not just inspired by a real story, but a near-exact replica. "Hatching Twitter"'s success is Bilton's success in recognizing the mountain of obstacles facing the narrator of the Twitter story. Instead of letting those obstacles drag the story apart, Bilton harnesses them into a rich, detailed, faithful account - which is also compulsively readable. -- Julia Horwitz ========================================== EPIC Bookstore ========================================== "Litigation Under the Federal Open Government Laws 2010," edited by Harry A. Hammitt, Marc Rotenberg, John A. Verdi, Ginger McCall, and Mark S. Zaid (EPIC 2010). Price: $75. 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 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). 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, and constitutional values 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: ======================================================================= [9] Upcoming Conferences and Events ======================================================================= "Privacy in the Networked World," featuring EPIC Appellate Advocacy Counsel Alan Butler. Waikoloa, Hawaii, January 26, 2014. 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. 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 and private-sector infringement on constitutional values. 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 20.23------------------------

WorldLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback