Focusing public attention on emerging privacy and civil liberties issues

EPIC Alert 18.07

======================================================================= E P I C A l e r t ======================================================================= Volume 18.07 April 08, 2011 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Published by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) Washington, D.C. http://www.epic.org/alert/epic_alert_1807.html "Defend Privacy. Support EPIC." http://epic.org/donate Submit comments to FTC On Google Buzz and Privacy https://epic.org/fixgoogleprivacy/ ======================================================================= Table of Contents ======================================================================= [1] FTC Announces Proposed Agreement in EPIC Google Buzz Complaint [2] EPIC Urges Increased Oversight for DHS, TSA [3] Google Books Settlement Rejected by Court [4] European Commission Makes Data Protection a Top Priority [5] Supreme Court To Decide Rights of Those Arrested on Minor Offenses [6] News In Brief [7] EPIC Book Review: "American Privacy" [8] Upcoming Conferences and Events TAKE ACTION: Tell the FTC to Fix Google Privacy! - SUBMIT comments here https://www.epic.org/fixgoogleprivacy/ - POST the link on your Facebook Page and Twitter Account! - SUPPORT EPIC http://www.epic.org/donate/ ======================================================================= [1] FTC Announces Proposed Agreement in EPIC Google Buzz Complaint ======================================================================= The Federal Trade Commission has announced a settlement with Google regarding Buzz, the social networking service launched in 2010. EPIC filed a complaint with the FTC, on behalf of Gmail subscribers and other Internet users, after the service launched, alleging that Google had "violated user expectations, diminished user privacy, and contradicted Google's privacy policy." The FTC cited to EPIC's complaint in its announcement, agreeing with EPIC's allegations. The FTC charged that Google violated its own privacy policies by using information provided in connection to Gmail for another purpose - social networking - without obtaining consumers' permission in advance. The FTC also alleged that Google misrepresented that it was treating personal information from the European Union in accordance with the U.S.-EU Safe Harbor privacy framework. "This is the most significant privacy decision by the FTC to date. For Internet users, the FTC decision should lead to higher privacy standards and better protection for personal data," said EPIC Executive Director Marc Rotenberg. The FTC's settlement is far-reaching: it prohibits Google from making future privacy misrepresentations, requires it to implement a comprehensive privacy program, and calls for regular, independent, privacy audits for the next 20 years. The settlement also requires Google to obtain users' consent before any new sharing of user information with third parties. In response to the recent announcement that Google has agreed to adopt a "Comprehensive Privacy Plan," EPIC has launched "Fix Google Privacy," a campaign to encourage Internet users to offer their suggestions to improve safeguards for Google's products and services. Submissions to EPIC will be forwarded to the Federal Trade Commission and considered by the agency as part of the final Privacy Plan. All comments must be sent before May 2, 2011. FTC Announcement http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2011/03/google.shtm FTC Consent Order http://www.epic.org/redirect/040811FTCgoogle_agr.html FTC Analysis to Aid Public Comments http://www.ftc.gov/os/caselist/1023136/110330googlebuzzanal.pdf EPIC: Fix Google Privacy http://epic.org/fixgoogleprivacy/default.php EPIC: Google Buzz Complaint (February 2010) http://epic.org/privacy/ftc/googlebuzz/GoogleBuzz_Complaint.pdf EPIC: Google Buzz Supplemental Complaint (March 2010) http://www.epic.org/redirect/040811EPICgoogle_supcomp.html EPIC: Google Buzz http://epic.org/privacy/ftc/googlebuzz/default.html ======================================================================= [2] EPIC Urges Increased Oversight for DHS, TSA ======================================================================= In a series of Congressional hearings, Representatives took Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officials to task for two particularly unlawful programs. Both televised hearings featured EPIC attorneys as key witnesses. In this first hearing, EPIC testified about the ongoing threat to American liberties posed by the Department's controversial body scanner program. EPIC then gave evidence at a second hearing on the Department's political review process for Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, which has resulted in DHS's systematic failure to meet statutorily-mandated deadlines. At the first hearing, which took place on March 16, 2011, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform questioned the agency's controversial body scanner initiative. Representative Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) chaired the hearing, where EPIC Executive Director Marc Rotenberg urged the Chairman and the rest of his colleagues in Congress to suspend the use of airport body scanners as primary screening devices. Rep. Chaffetz had sponsored a 2010 bill to limit the deployment of body scanners, which received more than 300 votes in the House. EPIC stated that the devices were not effective and were not minimally intrusive, contrary to the agency's testimony at the same hearing. EPIC was joined on the panel by radiation expert Dr. David Brenner, who has frequently pointed out the radiation risks created by these machines. Representatives of the Transportation Security Agency, a federal agency funded by taxpayer dollars and responsible for the body scanner program, originally refused to testify at hearing. Eventually they showed up. The second hearing, challenging the Department's unlawful treatment of open government requests, took place on March 31, 2011. The hearing was the result of information revealed by a whistleblower at the Department of Homeland Security that showed that the Department has been tipping off political appointees to vet FOIA requests as soon as they are filed (often well before the Department responds to them). The FOIA statute does not permit agencies to select requests for political scrutiny, and documents showed that DHS career staff repeatedly questioned the political review policy. In the hearing before the House Oversight Subcommittee on National Security, EPIC Senior Counsel and Open Government Director John Verdi called the program "uniquely harmful" and "unlawful." He pointed both to Supreme Court precedent and to the statistics that detail how the Department has failed to comply with statutorily deadlines for responding to EPIC's FOIA requests 100% of the time. In the wake of the hearings, EPIC continues to pursue its lawsuit in the District of Columbia Court of Appeals to strike down the body scanner program and require opportunity for public comment. EPIC has also requested that a federal court reconsider its earlier decision allowing the Department of Homeland Security to keep secret 2,000 airport body scanner images in an important FOIA lawsuit. The Court relied on a legal theory that was recently struck down by the Supreme Court in Navy v. Milner. EPIC: Marc Rotenberg's Testimony, DHS Body Scanners (Mar. 16, 2011) http://www.epic.org/redirect/040811Rote_test.html EPIC: John Verdi's Testimony, FOIA Oversight (Mar. 31, 2011) http://www.epic.org/redirect/040811Verdi_test.html EPIC: EPIC v. DHS (FOIA - Body Scanners) http://epic.org/privacy/airtravel/backscatter/epic_v_dhs.html EPIC: EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program) http://www.epic.org/redirect/040811EPICvDHS.html 111th Congress: H.R. 2027 (Limits on Use of Full Body Scanners) http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.2027: EPIC: Open Government http://epic.org/privacy/litigation/ EPIC: Litigation under the Federal Open Government Laws 2010 http://epic.org/bookstore/foia2010/default.html ======================================================================= [3] Google Books Settlement Rejected by Court ======================================================================= Judge Denny Chin in the District Court for the Southern District of New York has struck down a proposed settlement between Google and copyright holders that would have imposed significant privacy risks on e-book consumers. Google's proposal would have entitled the company to collect each users' search queries, as well as the titles and page numbers of the books they read. Judge Chin determined that the proposed opt-out settlement was "not fair, adequate and reasonable." He further stated that "the privacy concerns are real" and that "certain additional privacy protections could be incorporated" in a revised settlement. In a February 2010 hearing before the Court, EPIC President Marc Rotenberg explained that this settlement would turn well established safeguards for reader privacy “upside down,” including state privacy laws, library confidentiality obligations, and the development of techniques that minimize privacy intrusions. In September 2009, EPIC moved to intervene in the case as a representative to protect readers’ privacy interests. EPIC also filed a formal, written objection to the proposed settlement that detailed how the proposal “mandate[d] the collection of the most intimate personal information, threaten[ed] well-established standards that safeguard intellectual freedom, and imperil[ed] longstanding Constitutional rights, including the right to read anonymously.” It is unclear at this point whether the parties will try to renegotiate the settlement. The Authors Guild v. Google, Inc., O5 Civ. 8136-DC (SDNY 2011) http://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/cases/show.php?db=special&id=115 EPIC: EPIC’s Objection to the Proposed Settlement (Sept. 8, 2009) http://epic.org/privacy/googlebooks/epic_objections_signed.pdf EPIC: Google Books Settlement and Privacy http://epic.org/privacy/googlebooks/ ======================================================================= [4] European Commission Makes Data Protection a Top Priority ======================================================================= Viviane Reding, European Commission Vice President and European Union Justice Commissioner, has announced that data protection will be her "top legislative priority." She said the Commission will focus on "four pillars" of privacy rights: the "right to be forgotten... transparency... privacy by default... [and] protection regardless of data location." Reding noted that the effects of the reform would spill beyond European borders. "[A] US-based social network company that has millions of active users in Europe needs to comply with EU rules. To enforce the EU law, national privacy watchdogs shall be endowed with powers to investigate and engage in legal proceedings against non-EU data controllers whose services target EU consumers." Reding also spoke about the importance of enforcement to ensure a "high level of protection." In order to make consistent enforcement possible, Reding said, "I want to reinforce the independence and harmonise the powers of national data protection authorities in our 27 Member States." Reding has criticized American search giant Google in the past for failing to cooperate with European privacy officials. She stated, "It is not acceptable that a company operating in the EU does not respect EU rules." EPIC President Marc Rotenberg spoke before the European Commission in January to celebrate the 30th anniversary of the opening of Convention 108, the International Privacy Convention, for signature. "The protection of privacy is a fundamental human right," Rotenberg said. "In the 21st century, it may become one of the most critical human rights of all." EPIC has urged the United States to ratify the Convention. Viviane Reding: "Your Data, Your Rights" http://www.epic.org/redirect/040811Reding.html EPIC: EU Data Protection Directive http://epic.org/privacy/intl/eu_data_protection_directive.html International Privacy Convention http://conventions.coe.int/treaty/en/treaties/html/108.htm EPIC: Remarks to the European Commission (Jan. 28, 2011) http://epic.org/privacy/intl/coeconvention/ROTENBERG_COE_Jan28.pdf Access Info: Transparency in the European Union http://www.access-info.org/en/european-union European Union: LIBE Committee http://www.epic.org/redirect/021111LIBEcomm.html EPIC: Privacy & Human Rights http://epic.org/phr06/ ======================================================================= [5] Supreme Court To Decide Rights of Those Arrested on Minor Offenses ======================================================================= The Supreme Court is set to determine if jails can strip search individuals who have been arrested, but not yet convicted of any crime, before they enter general prison populations. The Court has previously rejected a Fourth Amendment challenge to a prison's policy of "visual body cavity searches" for detainees after contact visits with outsiders. However, ten different lower appeals courts have concluded that a detained individual charged with minor offenses cannot constitutionally be strip searched unless the prison has reasonable suspicion to do so. In this case, Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Burlington, the plaintiff alleges that he was subjected to multiple strip and visual body cavity searches, even though his charges were unfounded and eventually dismissed: the plaintiff was arrested based on a faulty bench warrant for a fine he had already paid. After his release, the plaintiff brought a class action lawsuit on behalf of all subjects to arrest forced to strip naked without any reasonable belief that they were in possession of concealed contraband, drugs, or weapons. The suit is based on a law that empowers individual citizens to sue government actors for violating their constitutional rights. EPIC has filed multiple briefs before the U.S. Supreme Court on similar issues, including Herring v. United States, 555 U.S. 135 (2009), in which EPIC argued that the dramatic rise of inaccuracies and incomplete information in law enforcement databases puts individuals at risk and jeopardizes criminal investigations. EPIC is currently set to file an amicus brief in Doe v. Luzerne County, a case about the violation of a government employee's Fourth Amendment rights after her partially covered body was video taped during after a decontamination shower. EPIC is also pursuing a lawsuit before the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals to strike down the Transportation Security Administration's body scanner program. EPIC argued in its briefs that TSA's program violates the Video Voyeurism Prevention Act of 2004, which prohibits the "capture [of] an image of a private area of an individual without their consent, and knowingly does so under circumstances in which the individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy." Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders: Supreme Court Writ of Cert http://epic.org/amicus/florence/Cert%20for%20Florence.pdf Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders: Third Circuit Opinion http://epic.org/amicus/florence/Florence%203d%20Circuit%20Opinion.pdf EPIC: EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program) http://www.epic.org/redirect/040811EPICvDHS.html Video Voyeurism Prevention Act of 2004 http://www.epic.org/redirect/040811VVPA.html EPIC: Herring v. US http://epic.org/privacy/herring/default.html EPIC: Doe v. Luzerne County http://epic.org/amicus/luzerne/default.html ======================================================================= [6] News In Brief ======================================================================= Anderson, Balkin, boyd, Crawford, Kahle, and Turkle Join Advisory Board EPIC has announced the 2011 members of the EPIC Advisory Board.They are Ross Anderson, Professor of Security Engineering at Cambridge University, Jack Balkin, Knight Professor at Yale, danah boyd, Senior Researcher at Microsoft Research, Susan Crawford, professor at Cardozo Law School and a Visiting Research Collaborator at Princeton's Center for Information Technology Policy, Brewster Kahle, director and co-founder of the Internet Archive, and Sherry Turkle, Abby Rockefeller MauzĂ© Professor at MIT. The EPIC Advisory Board is a distinguished group of experts in law, technology, and public policy. Press Release: EPIC Announces New Advisory Board Members http://www.epic.org/redirect/040811EPICadboard2011.html EPIC: EPIC Advisory Board http://epic.org/epic/advisory_board.html France Fines Google for Street View Wi-Fi Data Collection The French National Commission for Computing and Civil Liberties has handed down the highest fine it has ever imposed to Google for violations of French privacy rules by Google's Street View cars, which collected e-mails and passwords without notice or consent. The Commission cited the "established violations and their gravity, as well as the economic advantages Google gained," as reasons for imposing the 100,000 Euro fine. France joins the United Kingdom, Canada, Germany, and Spain, which have also conducted similar investigations and determined that Google violated their respective privacy laws. EPIC filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), to investigate possible violations of United States law. In October 2010, the FTC closed an investigation that never really began. On the other hand, the FCC has announced that it will conduct a thorough investigation into the matter. Wall Street Journal: FCC Investigating Google Data Collection http://www.epic.org/redirect/040811WSJ_FCCgoogle.html EPIC: FCC Complaint (May 21, 2010) http://www.epic.org/redirect/040811EPIC-FCCcompl.html FTC Letter to Google (October 27, 2010) http://www.ftc.gov/os/closings/101027googleletter.pdf EPIC: Google Street View http://epic.org/privacy/streetview/ 13th Annual Annenberg-Oxford Media Policy Summer Institute The Comparative Media Law and Policy Program at Oxford University (PCMLP) and the Center for Global Communication Studies at the University of Pennsylvania will host the 13th annual Annenberg-Oxford Media Policy Summer Institute on 4-15 July 2011. The Institute, which will be held at Oxford University, unites international media scholars and professionals to discuss developments in media policy. Some of the topics that will be covered include freedom of information and Internet regulation and convergence. This year, the Institute will have a special focus on media governance and strategic communication in conflict and post-conflict environments in Sudan, Somalia and Bosnia. The deadline to apply is 10 April 2011. Comparative Media Law and Policy Program, Oxford University http://pcmlp.socleg.ox.ac.uk/ Center for Global Communication Studies http://www.global.asc.upenn.edu/ 2011 Annenberg-Oxford Media Policy Summer Institute http://global.asc.upenn.edu/cgi-bin/projects.cgi?id=87&p=main Identity, Privacy and Security Institute Seeks Submissions for PET Awards The Identity, Privacy, and Security Institute at the University of Toronto, which hosts lecture series and research symposiums, is accepting nominations for the annual Privacy Enhancing Technologies (PET) Award. The Institute's mission is to focus on innovative approaches to security that preserve privacy, freedom, and safety of individuals. The PET Award, along with a monetary prize, is presented to researchers who have made an outstanding contribution to privacy enhancing technology at the Privacy Enhancing Technologies Symposium (PETS) every year. All nominations must be submitted to the Institute by April 15. The Identity, Privacy and Security Initiative http://www.ipsi.utoronto.ca/index.html PET Award http://petsymposium.org/award/index.php Privacy Enhancing Technologies Symposium http://petsymposium.org/2011/ Swiss Court Finds Google Street View Violates Privacy Rights Switzerland's top Court ruled against Google's Street View mapping service, forcing Google to blur faces and license plate numbers before putting images on the Internet. The Swiss Court stated, "the interest of the public in having a visual record and the commercial interests of the defendants in no way outweighs the rights over one's own image." Other countries, including the U.K., France, and Spain, have found that Google broke privacy laws when Street View cars collected wi-fi data from private wireless networks. In the U.S., the Federal Communications Commission opened an investigation after EPIC filed a complaint asking the Commission to investigate violations of federal wiretap law and the U.S. Communications Act. Swiss Federal Administrative Court: Judgment (April 6, 2011) http://www.epic.org/redirect/040811Switz_streetview.html Wall Street Journal: FCC Investigating Google Data Collection http://www.epic.org/redirect/040811WSJ_FCCgoogle.html EPIC: FCC Complaint (May 21, 2010) http://www.epic.org/redirect/040811EPIC-FCCcompl.html EPIC: Google Street View http://epic.org/privacy/streetview/ FTC Releases Annual Report, Highlights Consumer Protection The Federal Trade Commission has released the 2011 Annual Report, which emphasized the agency's actions in the consumer protection and anti-trust areas. The agency highlighted its work on privacy, data security, and technology and noted the settlement of several privacy cases, including Echometrix, Lifelock, Twitter, and U.S. Search. EPIC filed a complaint with the Commission concerning Echometrix, and still has complaints pending regarding Facebook's unfair and deceptive trade practices and Google's cloud computing services. FTC: Annual Report http://ftc.gov/os/2011/04/2011ChairmansReport.pdf FTC: Echometrix Agreement http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2010/11/echometrix.shtm FTC: Lifelock Agreement http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2010/03/lifelock.shtm FTC: Twitter Agreement http://ftc.gov/os/caselist/0923093/100624twitteragree.pdf FTC: U.S. Search Agreement http://www.ftc.gov/os/caselist/1023131/110325ussearchdo.pdf EPIC: Echometrix http://epic.org/privacy/echometrix/ EPIC: FTC Facebook Complaint http://www.epic.org/redirect/040811EPIC-FTCcompl_fb.html EPIC: FTC Facebook Complaint II http://epic.org/privacy/inrefacebook/EPIC_Facebook_Supp.pdf EPIC: FTC Cloud Computing Complaint (March 17, 2009) http://epic.org/privacy/cloudcomputing/google/ftc031709.pdf EPIC: Federal Trade Commission http://epic.org/privacy/internet/ftc/ EPIC v. DOJ: Warrantless Wiretapping Memos Disclosed Pursuant to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit by EPIC against the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Justice Department has turned over two legal memos concerning the Bush-era warrantless wiretapping program. EPIC pursued the matter by filing a FOIA request for the memos within hours after the The New York Times reported on the wiretapping program in 2005. The memos, dated November 2, 2001 and May 6, 2004, contain portions of the Bush Administration's justifications for the program, but are heavily redacted. The Obama Administration withheld three other memos in their entirety. EPIC: EPIC v. DOJ http://epic.org/privacy/nsa/foia/ New York Times: Bush Lets U.S. Spy on Callers Without Courts http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/16/politics/16program.html DOJ: Memorandum for the Attorney General (Nov. 2, 2001) http://epic.org/privacy/nsa/foia/OLC_131_FINAL.pdf DOJ: Memorandum for the Attorney General (May 6, 2004) http://epic.org/privacy/nsa/foia/OLC_54_FINAL.pdf DOJ: Letter Re: EPIC v. DOJ (Mar. 18, 2011) http://epic.org/privacy/nsa/foia/OLC_Cover_Letter.pdf EPIC: Wiretapping http://epic.org/privacy/wiretap/ EPIC: Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) http://epic.org/privacy/terrorism/fisa/ ======================================================================= [7] EPIC Book Review: "American Privacy" ======================================================================= "American Privacy: The 400-Year History of Our Most Contested Right," Frederick S. Lane http://www.epic.org/redirect/040811AmericanPrivacy.html In "American Privacy," Frederick Lane makes the case that Americans have a right to privacy that has consistently been eroded. Lane's comprehensive history takes the reader from the postal service to the Patriot Act in order to reveal the "story of that [privacy] right and the grave threats to its continued existence." The only solution to this problem, Lane argues, is the creation of a Federal Privacy Protection Agency to oversee the privacy practices of the government and the private sector. Lane begins by providing proof that the Founding Fathers held strong beliefs in privacy. He answers critics' claims that privacy is nowhere to be found in the Constitution by arguing that "there is little question that [the Founders] were motivated in large part by the belief that the British Crown was illegally infringing on private affairs." He goes on to explain that "private autonomy" was a significant factor throughout the Constitutional debates. The scope of "American Privacy" is far-reaching, covering the history of privacy across centuries and over party lines. Lane is equally adept at making the minutiae of Colonial history come alive as he is at explaining the legal intricacies of the debate over warrantless wiretapping. "American Privacy" examines topics that will be familiar to readers, such as the McCarthy era and Watergate, but also covers less familiar areas, including the controversy over the annual census and the development of the credit card. Lane traces the history of post-Watergate privacy legislation and the court battles over the scope of 4th Amendment protections. Lane concludes with the recognition that threats to privacy come not just from Governmental overreaching, but also from the unregulated consumer marketplace. He envisions a Federal privacy agency that would engage primarily in four areas: "the protection... of the Fourth Amendment, the monitoring and regulation of governmental data practices... and corporate data practices, and the education of the public." The clear picture that emerges from Lane's narrative is one of a country where the right to privacy is constantly under assault. By compiling such an in-depth and detailed historical and legal record, Lane manages to be thorough and fair while driving home the importance of fighting back against this assault in order to preserve our democracy. In the end, Lane returns to the most important lesson of all, reminding us that protecting privacy requires a "continued commitment to the spirit and intent of the U.S. Constitution." -- Sharon Goott Nissim ================================ EPIC Publications: "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 http://epic.org/bookstore/foia2010/ 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. http://www.epic.org/redirect/aspen_ipl_casebook.html 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. http://www.epic.org/phr06/ 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. http://www.epic.org/bookstore/pvsourcebook 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. http://www.epic.org/bookstore/pls2004/ 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. http://www.epic.org/bookstore/filters2.0 A collection of essays, studies, and critiques of Internet content filtering. These papers are instrumental in explaining why filtering threatens free expression. ================================ EPIC publications and other books on privacy, open government, free expression, crypto and governance can be ordered at: EPIC Bookstore http://www.epic.org/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: http://mailman.epic.org/mailman/listinfo/foia_notes ======================================================================= [8] Upcoming Conferences and Events ======================================================================= "Internet and the Law: Contentious Issues and Emerging Solutions." Massachusetts Bar Association, Cambridge, MA, 8 April 2011. For More Information: http://hlsorgs.com/internetlaw/. "The Future of Privacy in the Age of Google." National Conference for Media Reform, Boston, MA, 8-10 April 2011. For More Information: http://conference.freepress.net/session/492/future-privacy-age-google. "Smart Grid Policy Summit." Utilities Telecom Council, Washington, D.C., 11-12 April 2011. For More Information: http://summit.utc.org/. "National Security Since 9/11: New Norms for a New Decade?" Journal of National Security Law and Policy at Duke University, Durham, NC, 14 April 2011. For More Information: http://chesney.jnslp.com/2011/02/10/nationalsecuritylaw-save-the-date- for-dukes-annual-national-security-law-conference/. "Transforming to a Smarter Electric Power Grid." Michigan State University, Deaborn, MI, 18-19 May 2011. For More Information: http://ipu.msu.edu/programs/MIGrid2011/. "The Tenth Workshop on Economics of Information Security." The George Mason University, 14-15 June 2011. For More Information: http://weis2011.econinfosec.org/index.html. "Computers, Freedom, and Privacy 2011." Georgetown Law Center, Washington D.C., 14-16 June 2011. For More Information: http://www.cfp.org/2011/. ICANN Board Meeting. Singapore. 19-24 June 2011. For More Information: http://www.icann.org/. EPIC Public Voice Conference. Mexico City, Mexico, 31 October 2011. For More Information: http://www.thepublicvoice.org/. ======================================================================= Join EPIC on Facebook ======================================================================= Join the Electronic Privacy Information Center on Facebook http://facebook.com/epicprivacy http://epic.org/facebook Start a discussion on privacy. Let us know your thoughts. Stay up to date with EPIC's events. Support EPIC. ======================================================================= Privacy Policy ======================================================================= The EPIC Alert mailing list is used only to mail the EPIC Alert and to send notices about EPIC activities. We do not sell, rent or share our mailing list. We also intend to challenge any subpoena or other legal process seeking access to our mailing list. We do not enhance (link to other databases) our mailing list or require your actual name. In the event you wish to subscribe or unsubscribe your e-mail address from this list, please follow the above instructions under "subscription information." ======================================================================= About EPIC ======================================================================= The Electronic Privacy Information Center is a public interest research center in Washington, DC. It was established in 1994 to focus public attention on emerging privacy issues such as the Clipper Chip, the Digital Telephony proposal, national ID cards, medical record privacy, and the collection and sale of personal information. EPIC publishes the EPIC Alert, pursues Freedom of Information Act litigation, and conducts policy research. For more information, see 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: http://www.epic.org/donate Your contributions will help support Freedom of Information Act and First Amendment litigation, strong and effective advocacy for the right of privacy and efforts to oppose government regulation of encryption and expanding wiretapping powers. Thank you for your support. ======================================================================= Subscription Information ======================================================================= Subscribe/unsubscribe via web interface: http://mailman.epic.org/mailman/listinfo/epic_news Back issues are available at: http://www.epic.org/alert The EPIC Alert displays best in a fixed-width font, such as Courier. ------------------------- END EPIC Alert 18.07 ------------------------