WorldLII Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback

EPIC Alert

You are here:  WorldLII >> Databases >> EPIC Alert >> 2014 >> [2014] EPICAlert 12

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

EPIC Alert 21.12 [2014] EPICAlert 12

EPIC Alert 21.12

======================================================================= E P I C A l e r t ======================================================================= Volume 21.12 June 30, 2014 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Published by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) Washington, D.C. "Defend Privacy. Support EPIC." ========================================================================= Table of Contents ========================================================================= [1] Unanimous Supreme Court Upholds Privacy Rights of Cell Phone Users [2] Obama Renews Unlawful NSA Bulk Record Collection Program [3] EPIC Seeks Records on FTC 'Sign-off' for Facebook Changes [4] Coalition to AG: Review FBI's Massive Biometric Database [5] Appeals Court Releases 'Drone Killing' Memo, EPIC Filed Amicus [6] News in Brief [7] EPIC in the News [8] EPIC Book Review: 'No Place to Hide' [9] Upcoming Conferences and Events ========================================================================= [1] Unanimous Supreme Court Upholds Privacy Rights of Cell Phone Users ========================================================================= The US Supreme Court has ruled unanimously that a warrantless search of a cell phone violates the Fourth Amendment, even when it occurs during a lawful arrest. The Court's decision in Riley v. California makes clear that "a search of the information on a cell phone bears little resemblance to the type of brief physical search" allowed in the past. "Cell phones differ in both a quantitative and a qualitative sense from other objects that might be kept on an arrestee's person," The Court wrote, adding, "Our answer to the question of what police must do before searching a cell phone seized incident to an arrest is accordingly simple - get a warrant." In March 2014, EPIC, joined by 24 legal scholars and technical experts, filed a friend of the court brief in the case, arguing that cell phones contain a wealth of sensitive personal data and that law enforcement can reasonably secure phones while they apply for a warrant to search them. EPIC wrote, "Allowing police officers to search a person's cell phone without a warrant following an arrest would be a substantial infringement on privacy, is unnecessary, and unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment." EPIC's brief was cited twice in the Court's decision. EPIC published a preliminary analysis of the Riley opinion at US Supreme Court: Decision in Riley v. CA (Jun. 25, 2014) EPIC: "Friend of the Court" Brief in Riley v. CA (Mar. 10, 2014) EPIC: Riley v. California EPIC: Blog Post on Riley v. CA (Apr. 29, 2014) EPIC: iPhone/iPad Privacy "Symposium: In Riley v. California, a unanimous Supreme Court sets out Fourth Amendment for digital age," by EPIC President Marc Rotenberg and EPIC Appellate Advocacy Counsel Alan Butler. SCOTUSBlog, June 26, 2014. a-unanimous-supreme-court-sets-out-fourth-amendment-for-digital-age/ "The Supreme Court's Cell Phone Case Went Even Further than Privacy Advocates Had Hoped." New Republic, June 26, 2014. case-went-further-privacy-advocates-hoped ======================================================================== [2] Obama Renews Unlawful NSA Bulk Record Collection Program ======================================================================== The US Attorney General and Director of National Intelligence announced June 20 that President Obama sought a renewal of the court order authorizing the NSA's bulk collection of American telephone records through September 12, 2014. The President has chosen to renew this order despite his promise in March 2014 to end the program, widespread opposition from members of Congress, and the recommendations of expert panels. The Attorney General's statement suggests that "legislation would be required" to end the program, but that the President himself decided to seek renewal of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court order. EPIC and a coalition of 25 organizations had urged the President and the Attorney General to end the NSA's bulk record collection program when the current authority expired on June 20. "The NSA's Bulk Metadata program is simply not effective," the letter argues, adding that the "program has been misused" - statements "further supported by the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board and the President's Review Group, each of which engaged in a detailed review of the Section 215 program's effectiveness." In a December 2013 report, the President's Review Group announced, "Our review suggests that the information contributed to terrorist investigations by the use of Section 215 telephony meta-data was not essential to preventing attacks . . ." Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Chair of the US Senate Judiciary committee, has been even more direct, stating, "[T]he administration has not demonstrated that the Section 215 phone records collection program is uniquely valuable enough to justify the massive intrusion on Americans' privacy." In July 2013, EPIC, joined by dozens of legal scholars and former members of the Church Committee, petitioned the US Supreme Court to end the NSA's bulk collection of telephone records, maintaining that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court exceeded authority when it ordered the production of all domestic telephone records. AG/DNI: Statement on Renewal of Section 215 Program (Jun. 20, 2014) EPIC et al.: Letter to President to End 215 Program (Jun. 17, 2014) PCLOB: Telephone Metadata Report (Jan. 23, 2014) The White House: "Liberty and Security in a Changing World" (Dec. 2013) EPIC: In re EPIC ========================================================================= [3] EPIC Seeks Records on FTC 'Sign-off' for Facebook Changes ========================================================================= EPIC has filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the Federal Trade Commission, seeking records related to Facebook's decision to collect users' Internet browsing history for advertising purposes. Historically, Facebook has collected user data from and Facebook mobile apps. Now, Facebook plans to install cookies and pixel tags in order to collect user data from sites across the web, including when users are not actively signed into Facebook, a dramatic change in the company's data collection practices. Users who object to having their browsing history tracked have been told to opt out of the practice, which requires going to a separate website and downloading an opt-out cookie. Facebook's plan may violate a 2011 Federal Trade Commission order prohibiting Facebook from altering business practices without users' express consent. In 2009 and 2010, EPIC and other consumer privacy organizations filed complaints with the FTC against Facebook's constantly changing privacy policies. As a result of the complaints, the FTC launched an investigation into the impact of Facebook's privacy policy changes on users. In 2012, Facebook signed a Consent Order with the FTC, which requires the company "to take several steps to make sure it lives up to its promises in the future, including by giving consumers clear and prominent notice and obtaining their express consent before sharing their information beyond their privacy settings, by maintaining a comprehensive privacy program to protect consumers' information, and by obtaining biennial privacy audits from an independent third party." Facebook claims that the FTC was briefed about the change beforehand. According to The Wall Street Journal, a Facebook spokesperson said, "We routinely discuss product and policy updates with our regulators - the FTC and the Irish DPC - and this time is no different." Facebook's statements indicate that there were specific communications between the company and the Commission regarding these "updates." EPIC's FOIA request seeks these communications, as well as internal memoranda, email, and meeting notes that express the Commission's view as to whether the change was permissible under the Consent Order. EPIC: FOIA Request to FTC re: Facebook (Jun. 20, 2014) WSJ: "Facebook to Target Ads Based on Web Browsing" (Jun. 12, 2014) about-users-web-browsing-1402561120 The Washington Post: "Facebook draws fire from privacy advocates over ad changes" (Jun. 12, 2014) privacy-experts-say-facebook-changes-open-up-unprecedented-data- collection EPIC: Homepage Item on FTC (Jun. 12, 2014) FTC: Press Release on Final Facebook Settlement (Aug. 10, 2012) EPIC: in re Facebook (Dec. 17, 2009) EPIC: in re Facebook II (May 5, 2010) EPIC: Facebook Privacy EPIC: FTC Facebook Settlement EPIC: Online Tracking and Behavioral Profiling EPIC: Practical Privacy Tools ========================================================================= [4] Coalition to AG: Review FBI's Massive Biometric Database ========================================================================= EPIC, the EFF, the ACLU, Defending Dissent, and a coalition of over 30 other organizations have written to US Attorney General Eric Holder, urging that he immediately conduct a privacy assessment of the FBI's proposed "Next Generation Identification" system. NGI is a massive database that includes biometric identifiers, such as digitized fingerprints and facial images, of millions of Americans. The system is set to go fully operational later in 2014 despite the lack of a required privacy assessment. During a 2012 Senate hearing, the FBI promised to update the privacy assessment of the expanding biometric database, focusing on facial recognition. Earlier in 2014, EPIC filed a Freedom of Information Act Request for the updated Privacy Impact Assessment. The FBI responded that the assessment was still being drafted and thus not available for release. Privacy Impact Assessments are required by law when databases will contain Personally Identifiable Information such as biometric identifiers. NGI's facial recognition technology, in particular, constitutes a serious risk. As the coalition's letter explains, "The facial recognition component of NGI poses real threats to privacy for all Americans, and could, in the future, allow us to be monitored and tracked in unprecedented ways." The letter also states that privacy assessments "are an important check against the encroachment on privacy by the government." EPIC previously sued the FBI to obtain details about the NGI system. According to a FOIA document obtained by EPIC, the FBI accepts a 20% error rate for facial recognition searches of the Next Generation Identification database, a fact not previously made public. In 2013, EPIC obtained documents from the FBI regarding the use of facial recognition on state DMV photos. EPIC et al.: Letter to AG to Review NGI Program (Jun. 24, 2014) EPIC: FOIA Request re: Facial Recognition PIA (Feb. 28, 2014) EPIC: FBI Response to EPIC FOIA request (Mar. 19, 2014) EPIC: FOIA Document on NGI System Requirements (Oct. 1, 2010) EPIC: FOIA Documents: FBI Agreements with State DMVs (2012) ========================================================================= [5] Appeals Court Releases 'Drone Killing' Memo, EPIC Filed Amicus ========================================================================= The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has made public the legal analysis justifying the Obama Administration's controversial "targeted killing" drone program. This is the first time the US government has been forced to release analysis of how it justifies the targeted killing of American citizens, and follows an earlier ruling by the federal appeals court in the case New York Times v. Department of Justice. The government initially argued that the memo, whose author since has been confirmed as a First Circuit judge, could not be disclosed under the Freedom of Information Act because it was a privileged "deliberative" document. The plaintiffs in the case argued that the government had publicly relied on the analysis to defend the program and thus it could not remain hidden as secret law. In 2013, EPIC filed an "friend of the court" brief, supported by seven open government organizations, that maintained that under the FOIA a legal opinion by the Justice Department cannot be a deliberative document. "[W]hen [the White House Office of Legal Counsel] writes a formal opinion, that document is not deliberative or predecisional," EPIC's brief argued. "That document is a decision and law of the Executive Branch." The federal appeals court agreed, and released the opinion to the public. This decision follows EPIC's recent success in EPIC v. NSA, in which the Department of Justice released the full text of NSPD-54, a Presidential Directive that has served as a foundational document for recent US cybersecurity policy and that had been withheld by the Bush and Obama Administrations for more than five years. Second Circuit Court: Opinion in New York Times v. DOJ (Jun. 23, 2014) EPIC: Opinion in New York Times v. DOJ EPIC et al.: "Friend of the Court" Brief in NYT v. DOJ (Apr. 22, 2013) EPIC: EPIC v. NSA - Cybersecurity Authority EPIC: EPIC v. DOJ - Warrantless Wiretapping Program ======================================================================== [6] News in Brief ======================================================================== US Federal Court Upholds 'Right to be Forgotten' for Seized Data A federal appeals court has ruled that the US government violated the Fourth Amendment when investigators searched computer files that had been seized in an unrelated investigation more than two and a half years earlier. The Second Circuit found that the government has a duty to delete all files not responsive to the original warrant and cannot indefinitely retain data "for use in future criminal investigations." This rule imposes a data minimization requirement on law enforcement investigators and is similar also to the EU's much-discussed "right to be forgotten." In 2010, EPIC argued in favor of the data minimization principles adopted by the Ninth Circuit in US v. Comprehensive Drug Testing. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals: Decision in US v. Ganais (Jun. 17, 2014) EPIC: "Friend of the Court" Brief in Ontario v. Quon (Mar 23, 2010) 9th Circuit Court: US v. Comprehensive Drug Testing (Aug. 26, 2009) EPIC: Quon v. City of Ontario, CA EPIC: Code of Fair Information Practices Consumer Reports: Poll on Privacy (May 27, 2014) EPIC: Facebook Privacy EPIC: FTC Facebook Settlement EPIC: Online Tracking and Behavioral Profiling EPIC: Practical Privacy Tools On Privacy, New Survey Places US Attitudes Among EU Countries One of the most comprehensive surveys of privacy ever undertaken finds US attitudes toward privacy remarkably similar to those of Europeans. The survey of 15 countries worldwide on privacy and the tradeoffs consumers are prepared to make placed US attitudes toward privacy squarely in the middle of European countries, roughly between France and Italy (least concerned with privacy) and Germany and the Netherlands (most concerned). The survey looked at current concerns and support for new laws in surveyed countries. According to EMC, "only 27% say there are willing to trade some privacy for greater convenience." A large majority of respondents (81%) expect privacy will decrease in the next five years, and as a result 90% of respondents want new laws to limit the sale of personal data. Concerns over privacy and support for new laws is somewhat greater in the US than in other surveyed countries. EMC: Results of International Privacy Survey (June 2014) EMC: Privacy Survey Global Results (June 2014) EMC: Press Release on Survey (Jun. 12, 2014) EPIC: Public Opinion on Privacy Canadian High Court: Internet Privacy Protected by Constitution The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that Canadian police conducted an unconstitutional search when they used an IP address to obtain subscriber information from an Internet Service Provider without legal authorization. The Court also found Canada's personal information protection law does not require ISPs to disclose subscriber information to law enforcement. The Court's analysis described information privacy as "control over, access to and use of information" and stressed that "anonymity may be the foundation of a privacy interest that engages constitutional protection against unreasonable searches and seizures." Two recent opinions from the European Court of Justice have firmly established the right of information privacy in EU law. EPIC has also urged the US Supreme Court to recognize the right of information privacy and also to safeguard the right of anonymity. Canadian Supreme Court: Ruling in R. v. Spencer (Jun. 13, 2014) EPIC: "EU High Court Strikes Down Data Retention Law" (Apr. 14, 2014) EPIC: Brief to US Supreme Court in NASA v. Nelson (Aug. 9, 2010) EPIC: Brief to Supreme Court in Watchtower v. Stratton (Nov. 2001) EPIC: NASA v. Nelson EPIC: Watchtower Bible v. Stratton EPIC: Internet Anonymity EPIC: Search Engine Privacy EPIC, Civil Society Urge OECD to Examine 'Dominant Internet Firms' Speaking at a recent high-level meeting on Internet Policy Making, EPIC President Marc Rotenberg urged the OECD to examine the impact "dominant Internet firms" may have on the future of innovation and freedom. Citing the Charter of the OECD Civil Society Council, Rotenberg said, "Dominant Internet firms are moving to consolidate their control over the Internet. It is vitally important for the OECD to develop a better understanding of the challenge industry consolidations pose to the open Internet." The OECD is well known for the International Privacy Guidelines and is currently updating the Security Guidelines, which establish a global framework for managing cyber risks. A Ministerial meeting will be held in Mexico in 2016. OECD: Recs on Principles for Internet Policy Making (Dec. 2011) Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) CSISAC: Seoul Declaration (Jun. 16, 2008) OECD: 2013 Privacy Guidelines OECD: Security Guidelines FTC Ignores Public Comments on Safe Harbor Settlements The Federal Trade Commission has settled charges against 14 companies that misrepresented compliance with the EU-US Safe Harbor privacy arrangement. In response to the FTC's request for public comment on the pending settlements, EPIC recommended that the Commission: (1) require the companies to comply with the Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights, (2) publish the companies' consent order compliance reports as they are submitted, and (3) strengthen the sanctions against a DNA testing firm, whose misrepresentations puts genetic information at risk. However, the FTC declined to make any changes. EPIC has stated previously that the Commission's ongoing failure to modify consent orders in response to public comments is "contrary to the interests of American consumers." An Irish Court has recently asked the European Court of Justice to determine whether the Safe Harbor Arrangement still provides adequate protection for EU consumers. FTC: Press Release on Safe Harbor Agreement (Jun. 25, 2014) EU-US Safe Harbor Agreement EPIC: Comments to FTC on Safe Harbor (Feb. 20, 2014) EPIC: Letter from FTC re: Safe Harbor (Jun. 25, 2014) EPIC: Comments to FTC re: MySpace Privacy (Jun. 8, 2012) EPIC: Letter to FTC re: Facebook Settlement (Dec. 27, 2011) EPIC: EU Data Protection Directive EPIC: Federal Trade Commission ======================================================================== [7] EPIC in the News ======================================================================== "US-German 'cyber dialogue' begins amid spying tensions." EurActive, June 27, 2014. dialogue-begins-amid-spying-tensions-303135 "NSA queried phone records of just 248 people despite massive data sweep." The Guardian, June 27, 2014. data-2013-report "Symposium: In Riley v. California, a unanimous Supreme Court sets out Fourth Amendment for digital age," by EPIC President Marc Rotenberg and EPIC Appellate Advocacy Counsel Alan Butler. SCOTUSBlog, June 26, 2014. a-unanimous-supreme-court-sets-out-fourth-amendment-for-digital-age/ "Fire Chat is hot app in repressive countries." NPR's "Marketplace," June 26, 2014. repressive-countries "The Supreme Court's Cell Phone Case Went Even Further than Privacy Advocates Had Hoped." New Republic, June 26, 2014. case-went-further-privacy-advocates-hoped "Google removes search results under 'right to be forgotten' rules." Financial Times, June 26, 2014. html#axzz35xztgWFf "About That Creepy Biometric Database, FBI, We'd Like to Know a Bit More." Reason, June 26, 2014. database-fbi "High Court Ruling On Search Warrants Is Broader Than Cellphones." NPR's "All Things Considered," June 25, 2014. search-warrants-is-broader-than-cellphones "Supreme Court cellphone ruling a big win for digital privacy." Computerworld, June 25, 2014. cellphone_ruling_a_big_win_for_digital_privacy "Supreme court endorses cellphone privacy rights in sweeping ruling." The Guardian, June 25, 2014. cellphones-search "SCOTUS cellphone ruling resonates in NSA fight." Politico, June 25, 2014. fight-108331.html "How Police Are Scanning All Of Twitter To Detect Terrorist Threats." The Huffington Post, June 25, 2014. n_5507616.html "Facebook changes tracking practices -- again." The Fresno Bee, June 25, 2014. facebook-changes.html "Privacy Groups Sound the Alarm over FBI's Facial-Recognition Technology." NextGov, June 24, 2014. over-fbis-facial-recognition-technology/87157/ "Privacy advocates worry about Army blimps over Maryland." Stars and Stripes, June 22, 2014. blimps-over-maryland-1.290116 "Privacy advocates concerned about Aberdeen Proving Ground blimps." The Baltimore Sun, June 21, 2014. surveillance-privacy-20140621_1_aerostats-privacy-advocates-jlens "Privacy Groups Sound the Alarm Over FBI's Facial-Recognition Technology." National Journal, June 24, 2014. over-fbi-s-facial-recognition-technology-20140624 "Privacy groups ask Obama not to renew NSA powers." The Hill, June 17, 2014. obama-not-to-renew-nsa-powers#ixzz35xCThoe3 "On International Privacy: A Path Forward for the US and Europe," by EPIC President Marc Rotenberg. Harvard International Review, June 15, 2014. For More EPIC in the News: ======================================================================== [8] EPIC Book Review: 'No Place to Hide' ======================================================================== "No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the US Surveillance State," Glenn Greenwald "No Place to Hide" is a well-written account of the events surrounding and leading up to the Snowden leaks. Journalist Glenn Greenwald provides a behind-the-scenes look into the largest NSA leak ever, offering clear context for the importance of the revelations about NSA's massive dragnet surveillance machine. The book begins with Snowden's attempts to contact Greenwald. Snowden, under the alias "Cincinnatus," implores Greenwald to install PGP encryption so that the two of them can talk securely. Greenwald, busy and unimpressed with vague allusions to a huge story from an anonymous source, is unmoved initially to set up a secure communication channel. Only at the urging of his close friend Laura Poitras, an independent documentary filmmaker, does Greenwald take these mysterious messages from Cincinnatus seriously. Greenwald and Poitras then journey to Hong Kong to meet Snowden for the first time. During the long flight over, Greenwald digs into the massive cache of NSA documents and describes the heart pounding realization of the magnitude of the leak that was sitting before him: "We had evidence that would indisputably prove all that the government had done to destroy the privacy of Americans and people around the world." The whole scene leading up to their first encounter with Snowden feels like a Hollywood spy movie--an observation Greenwald himself makes. "No Place to Hide" provides an intimate account of Greenwald's first weeks working with Snowden on the initial NSA revelations. But the book is not merely a memoir of Greenwald's initial encounters with Edward Snowden and the whirlwind of their first weeks of collaboration and newsmaking, it is also a book about the importance of privacy in a democratic society, the failures of establishment media, and the demonizing of those who dare to challenge the accepted government narratives. Greenwald lays waste the notion that NSA's surveillance is merely about national security, that the NSA programs have effective oversight, and the notion that if we have nothing to hide then we have nothing to fear. "No Place to Hide" is a gripping narrative about one of the most important political stories of the new century. Greenwald peels back the secrecy of the NSA and reveals an agency that has gone well beyond what is acceptable to the American people. Because "even absent abuse, and even if one is not personally targeted, a surveillance state that collects it all harms society and political freedom in general." --Jeramie D. Scott ======================================= EPIC Book Store ======================================= "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 ======================================================================= Chautauqua Institution Presents "The Digital Self - Current Issues in Privacy Law," featuring EPIC Appellate Advocacy Counsel Alan Butler. Chautauqua, NY: July 7-9, 2014. For More Information: ======================================================================= Join EPIC on Facebook and Twitter ======================================================================= Join the Electronic Privacy Information Center on Facebook and Twitter: 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). ======================================================================= Support 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. ======================================================================= 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 21.12------------------------

WorldLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback