<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
   <title>epic.org</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://epic.org/" />
   <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://epic.org/atom.xml" />
   <id>tag:epic.org,2012://10</id>
   <updated>2012-05-22T15:52:12Z</updated>
   
   <generator uri="http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/">Movable Type 5.12</generator>


<entry>
   <title>Facebook Users Force Vote on Privacy Changes</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://epic.org/2012/05/facebook-users-force-vote-on-p.html" />
   <id>tag:epic.org,2012://10.4711</id>
   
   <published>2012-05-22T15:46:02Z</published>
   <updated>2012-05-22T15:52:12Z</updated>
   
   <summary>Facebook users have registered enough comments on Facebook&apos;s proposed privacy changes to force a vote on the issue. A provision in Facebook&#8217;s Statement of Rights and Responsibilities states that Facebook will allow users to vote on proposed alternatives if more...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>EPIC</name>
      
   </author>
   
      <category term="Top News" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   <category term="156" label="Facebook" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="130" label="Federal Trade Commission" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="128" label="FTC" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="478" label="privacy" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="325" label="Social Network Privacy" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="208" label="Social Networking" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://epic.org/">
      <![CDATA[Facebook users have registered enough comments on Facebook's proposed privacy changes to <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57438782-83/vote-likely-on-facebook-privacy-policy-changes/" target="_new">force</a> a vote on the issue. A provision in Facebook&#8217;s <a href="https://www.facebook.com/legal/terms" target="_new">Statement of Rights and Responsibilities</a> states that Facebook will allow users to vote on proposed alternatives if more than 7,000 users comment on a proposed change. The vote is binding if "more than 30 percent of all active registered users as of the date of the notice vote." Facebook's Data Use Policy accumulated 10,500 comments in English. The group <a href="http://www.europe-v-facebook.org/" target="_new">Europe v. Facebook</a> generated 30,000 comments on the German version of the page. The FTC recently issued a proposed <a href="http://ftc.gov/opa/2011/11/privacysettlement.shtm" target="_new">settlement</a> with Facebook that follows from complaints filed by EPIC and other consumer and privacy organizations in <a href="/privacy/inrefacebook/EPIC-FacebookComplaint.pdf">2009</a> and <a href="/privacy/facebook/EPIC_FTC_FB_Complaint.pdf">2010</a>. The settlement bars Facebook from changing privacy settings without the affirmative consent of users or misrepresenting the privacy or security of users' personal information. For more information, see <a href="/privacy/facebook/">EPIC: Facebook Privacy</a>, and <a href="/privacy/ftc/facebook/">EPIC: FTC Facebook Settlement</a>.]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>Supreme Court Set to Review Wiretap Case</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://epic.org/2012/05/supreme-court-set-to-review-wi.html" />
   <id>tag:epic.org,2012://10.4710</id>
   
   <published>2012-05-21T19:39:17Z</published>
   <updated>2012-05-21T19:42:46Z</updated>
   
   <summary>The Supreme Court has agreed to hear Clapper v. Amnesty International USA, a challenge to the FISA Amendments Act of 2008. The Act expanded the Government&apos;s authority to engage in warrantless surveillance, and followed news of the Bush administration&apos;s program...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>EPIC</name>
      
   </author>
   
      <category term="Top News" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   <category term="186" label="FISA" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="188" label="Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="984" label="Hepting v. AT&amp;T" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="478" label="privacy" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="233" label="wiretapping" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://epic.org/">
      <![CDATA[The Supreme Court has <a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/052112zor.pdf">agreed</a> to hear Clapper v. Amnesty International USA, a challenge to the <a href="/privacy/terrorism/fisa/">FISA Amendments Act of 2008</a>. The Act expanded the Government's authority to engage in warrantless surveillance, and followed news of the Bush administration's program to wiretap international communications. A group of lawyers, journalists, and public interest organizations, who regularly engage in international communications, challenged the new law saying they feared that their private communications would be intercepted. The US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit <a href="http://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/document/Amnesty_Intl_USA_v_Clapper_638_F3d_118_2d_Cir_2011_Court_Opinion">ruled</a> that the case could proceed even though the plaintiffs had not established that they were subject to surveillance. The Government filed a petition for the Supreme Court to hear the case, which was granted today. EPIC recently filed an amicus brief in a Supreme Court case, <a href="/amicus/first-american/">First American v. Edwards</a>, raising similar Article III standing issues in the context of a consumer protection statute. EPIC also filed an amicus brief along with the Stanford Constitutional Law Center and other interested groups, in <a href="/privacy/hepting/">Hepting v. AT&T</a>, a case challenging AT&T's involvement in the FISA warrantless wiretapping program. For more information, see <a href="/privacy/terrorism/fisa/">EPIC: Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)</a>.]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>EPIC Urges the Drug Enforcement Administration to Uphold Privacy Act Protections</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://epic.org/2012/05/epic-urges-the-drug-enforcemen.html" />
   <id>tag:epic.org,2012://10.4709</id>
   
   <published>2012-05-21T19:04:27Z</published>
   <updated>2012-05-21T19:24:56Z</updated>
   
   <summary>In response to a notice of proposed rulemaking, EPIC has submitted comments to the Drug Enforcement Administration of the Department of Justice, urging the agency to uphold Privacy Act protections, and to not claim broad exemptions from the Privacy Act....</summary>
   <author>
      <name>EPIC</name>
      
   </author>
   
      <category term="Top News" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   <category term="974" label="FAA v Cooper" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="478" label="privacy" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="235" label="Privacy Act of 1974" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://epic.org/">
      <![CDATA[In response to a notice of <a href="http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-04-18/pdf/2012-8769.pdf">proposed rulemaking</a>, EPIC has submitted <a href="/privacy/1974act/EPIC-DEA-Priv-Act-Comments-CPCLO-006-2012.pdf">comments</a> to the Drug Enforcement Administration of the Department of Justice, urging the agency to uphold Privacy Act protections, and to not claim broad exemptions from the Privacy Act. The proposed rule would exempt the agency from complying with crucial Privacy Act provisions, including the rights of record access and correction, and the duty to only collect relevant and necessary personal information. The proposed rule would even excuse the agency from any civil liability arising from willful Privacy Act violations. Following the Supreme Court decision in <a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-1024.pdf">FAA v. Cooper</a>, EPIC has <a href="/privacy/1974act/EPIC-Supp-S1732-Priv-Act-Modernization.pdf">set out proposed changes</a> to the Privacy Act that would compensate individuals for provable nonpecuniary harms caused by willful violations of the Privacy Act. For more information, see <a href="/amicus/cooper/">EPIC: FAA v. Cooper</a> and <a href="/privacy/1974act/">EPIC: The Privacy Act of 1974</a>.]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>Federal Appeals Court Backs Justice Department in Voting Rights Dispute</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://epic.org/2012/05/federal-appeals-court-backs-ju.html" />
   <id>tag:epic.org,2012://10.4708</id>
   
   <published>2012-05-18T18:46:49Z</published>
   <updated>2012-05-18T19:03:36Z</updated>
   
   <summary>The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued an opinion rejecting Shelby County, Alabama&apos;s constitutional challenge to the preclearance requirements of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The Court held that Section 5 of the Act, which...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>EPIC</name>
      
   </author>
   
      <category term="Top News" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   <category term="529" label="Crawford v. Marion County Election Board" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="478" label="privacy" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="986" label="voter ID" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="1012" label="voter photo ID" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="639" label="voting" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="675" label="voting and privacy" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="531" label="Voting Privacy" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://epic.org/">
      <![CDATA[The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued an <a href="/privacy/voting/Shelby-County-v-Holder.pdf">opinion</a> rejecting Shelby County, Alabama's constitutional challenge to the preclearance requirements of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The Court held that Section 5 of the Act, which requires "covered jurisdictions" to show that new voting procedures, such as <a href="/privacy/voting/photo-identification.html">Voter ID requirements</a>, are nondiscriminatory before those changes can be put into effect, is constitutional. Shelby County challenged the preclearance requirements after Congress <a href="http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/051006VRAStatReport.pdf">reauthorized</a> Section 5 in 2006. The Department of Justice recently blocked Voter ID laws in <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/justice-dept-rejects-south-carolina-voter-id-law-calling-it-discriminatory/2011/12/23/gIQAhLJAEP_story.html" target="_new">South Carolina</a> and <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304450004577277533241906816.html" target="_new">Texas</a> through the Section 5 preclearance process. EPIC has argued that unreasonable voter ID requirements are an impermissible burden on the right to vote. For more information, see <a href="/privacy/voting/photo-identification.html">EPIC: Voter Photo ID and Privacy</a> and <a href="/privacy/voting/crawford/">EPIC: Crawford v. Marion County</a>.]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>House Approves Amendment to Defense Spending Bill to Limit Defense Drones Surveillance</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://epic.org/2012/05/house-approves-amendment-to-de.html" />
   <id>tag:epic.org,2012://10.4707</id>
   
   <published>2012-05-17T21:41:00Z</published>
   <updated>2012-05-17T21:56:24Z</updated>
   
   <summary>The House of Representatives has approved an amendment, introduced by Congressman Landry (R-LA), to the National Defense Authorization Act to prohibit information collected by Department of Defense drones without a warrant from being used as evidence in court. New legislation...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>EPIC</name>
      
   </author>
   
      <category term="Top News" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   <category term="1022" label="Drone" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="478" label="privacy" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://epic.org/">
      <![CDATA[The House of Representatives has <a href="https://twitter.com/#!/repjefflandry/status/203220495783571456" target="_new">approved</a> an <a href="http://www.rules.house.gov/amendments/LANDRY_097_xml51512090055055.pdf">amendment</a>, introduced by Congressman Landry (R-LA), to the <a href="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:h.r.4310:" target="_new">National Defense Authorization Act</a> to prohibit information collected by Department of Defense drones without a warrant from being used as evidence in court. New <a href="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.R.658:" target="_new">legislation</a> requires the Federal Aviation Administration to develop rules governing the operation of drones in the U.S. National Airspace.  Shortly after passage, EPIC, joined by over 100 organizations, experts, and members of the public, submitted a <a href="/privacy/drones/FAA-553e-Petition-03-08-12.pdf">petition</a> to the FAA requesting a public rulemaking on the privacy impact of drone use in US airspace. The petition is still pending with the agency. For more information, see <a href="/privacy/drones/">EPIC: Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) and Drones</a>.]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>Privacy Board Approved by Judiciary Committee, Vote Moves to Senate</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://epic.org/2012/05/privacy-board-approved-by-judi.html" />
   <id>tag:epic.org,2012://10.4706</id>
   
   <published>2012-05-17T17:52:58Z</published>
   <updated>2012-05-17T18:00:19Z</updated>
   
   <summary>The Senate Committee on the Judiciary has approved President Obama&apos;s five nominees for the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board. The Board is an independent entity charged with ensuring that fundamental rights are protected in the implementation of government programs,...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>EPIC</name>
      
   </author>
   
      <category term="Top News" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   <category term="476" label="cybersecurity" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="478" label="privacy" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://epic.org/">
      <![CDATA[The <a href="http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/" target="_new">Senate Committee on the Judiciary</a> has <a href="http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/hearings/hearing.cfm?id=b89198ecaf08e65a4f8f7f7b03b1ef68" target="_new">approved</a> President Obama's five nominees for the <a href="http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/nominations/112thCongressExecutiveNominations/PrivacyAndCivilLibertiesOversightBoard.cfm" target="_new">Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board</a>. The Board is an independent entity charged with ensuring that fundamental rights are protected in the implementation of government programs, including cybersecurity. Originally convened in 2004, the five seats on the Board have remained <a href="/2010/03/congressional-leaders-press-ob.html">vacant</a> for the past five years. Senator Leahy, the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, <a href="http://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/press_releases/release/?id=0ad6264c-8fd9-41eb-a94d-c70fde659204" target="_new">said</a>, "When we worked to create this board, we did so to ensure that our fundamental rights and liberties would be preserved&#8230;The Senate should move quickly to confirm the nominees to the board so that they can get to their important work." For more information, see <a href="/privacy/cybersecurity/">EPIC: 9/11 Commission Report</a> and <a href="http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=933690" target="_new">"The Sui Generis Privacy Agency: How the United States Institutionalized Privacy Oversight After 9-11."</a>]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>EPIC Supports Geolocation Privacy Act, Suggests Improvement</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://epic.org/2012/05/epic-supports-geolocation-priv.html" />
   <id>tag:epic.org,2012://10.4705</id>
   
   <published>2012-05-16T21:19:25Z</published>
   <updated>2012-05-16T21:23:40Z</updated>
   
   <summary>In a Statement for the Record, EPIC has expressed support for H.R. 2168, the &quot;Geolocational Privacy and Surveillance Act,&quot; which prohibits the interception of location information by private parties and government agents acting without a search warrant. The bill will...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>EPIC</name>
      
   </author>
   
      <category term="Top News" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   <category term="898" label="Locational Privacy" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="478" label="privacy" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://epic.org/">
      <![CDATA[In a <a href="/privacy/location_privacy/EPIC-Location-Privacy-Statement-5-17-12.pdf">Statement for the Record</a>, EPIC has expressed support for <a href="http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr2168ih/pdf/BILLS-112hr2168ih.pdf">H.R. 2168, the "Geolocational Privacy and Surveillance Act,"</a> which prohibits the interception of location information by private parties and government agents acting without a search warrant. The bill will be considered at a <a href="http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/Hearings%202012/hear_05172012.html" target="_new">hearing</a> before the House Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security. EPIC said "as communications technologies evolve, new forms of personal information are generated that require new legal safeguards." EPIC also recommended that Congress adopt purpose-specification and data limitation requirements for data stored by private companies, require affirmative consent prior to the collection of location data, and clarify an exception that permits the interception of location data made available through publicly accessible systems. For more information, see <a href="/privacy/location_privacy/default.html">EPIC: Location Privacy</a>.]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>&quot;Privacy And Security: An Evening Conversation With Leading Experts&quot;</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://epic.org/2012/05/privacy-and-security-an-evenin.html" />
   <id>tag:epic.org,2012://10.4704</id>
   
   <published>2012-05-16T14:30:01Z</published>
   <updated>2012-05-16T14:30:33Z</updated>
   
   <summary>Marc Rotenberg, EPIC Executive Director Stanford Law School and Microsoft Innovation &amp; Policy Center Washington, D.C. May 16, 2012...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>EPIC</name>
      
   </author>
   
      <category term="EPIC Events" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://epic.org/">
      <![CDATA[<p align="left">Marc Rotenberg,<br />
EPIC Executive Director<br />

<p align="left">Stanford Law School and Microsoft Innovation & Policy Center<br />
Washington, D.C.<br />
May 16, 2012</p>]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>FAA Revises Drone License Procedures, Privacy Petition Still Pending</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://epic.org/2012/05/faa-revises-drone-license-proc.html" />
   <id>tag:epic.org,2012://10.4703</id>
   
   <published>2012-05-15T18:07:23Z</published>
   <updated>2012-05-15T18:10:19Z</updated>
   
   <summary>The Federal Aviation Administration has announced new procedures for government agencies that operate drones in the United States. The procedures will streamline the process through which government agencies, including local law enforcement, receive drone licenses. However, the FAA has so...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>EPIC</name>
      
   </author>
   
      <category term="Top News" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   <category term="1022" label="Drone" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="478" label="privacy" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://epic.org/">
      <![CDATA[The Federal Aviation Administration has <a href="http://www.faa.gov/news/updates/?newsId=68004" target="_new">announced</a> new procedures for government agencies that operate drones in the  United States. The procedures will streamline the process through which government agencies, including local law enforcement, receive drone licenses. However, the FAA has so far failed to establish privacy safeguards for drone use. On February 24, 2012, EPIC, joined by over 100 organizations, experts, and members of the public, submitted a <a href="/privacy/drones/FAA-553e-Petition-03-08-12.pdf">petition</a> to the FAA requesting a <a href="/open_gov/Administrative-Procedure-Act.html">public rulemaking</a> on the privacy impact of drone use in US airspace. For more information, see <a href="/privacy/drones/">EPIC: Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) and Drones</a>.]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>EPIC Proposes Update to Privacy Act to Address Recent Supreme Court Decision</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://epic.org/2012/05/epic-proposes-update-to-privac.html" />
   <id>tag:epic.org,2012://10.4702</id>
   
   <published>2012-05-14T20:57:02Z</published>
   <updated>2012-05-14T21:03:16Z</updated>
   
   <summary>Following the recent decision of the Supreme Court in FAA v. Cooper, EPIC has set out proposed changes to the Privacy Act that would compensate individuals for provable nonpecuniary harms caused by willful violations of the Privacy Act. In Cooper,...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>EPIC</name>
      
   </author>
   
      <category term="Top News" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   <category term="974" label="FAA v Cooper" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="478" label="privacy" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="235" label="Privacy Act of 1974" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://epic.org/">
      <![CDATA[Following the recent decision of the Supreme Court in <a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-1024.pdf">FAA v. Cooper</a>, EPIC has <a href="/privacy/1974act/EPIC-Supp-S1732-Priv-Act-Modernization.pdf">set out proposed changes</a> to the Privacy Act that would compensate individuals for provable nonpecuniary harms caused by willful violations of the Privacy Act. In Cooper, the Supreme Court held that the Privacy Act "does not unequivocally authorize" compensatory damages for mental or emotional distress. Justice Sotomayor, joined by Justices Ginsburg and Breyer, wrote in dissent that "the primary, and often only, damages sustained as a result of an invasion of privacy are . . . mental or emotional distress." EPIC recommended that the Privacy Act explicitly define "actual damages" to include provable mental and emotional distress. EPIC's letter follows an earlier request from Senator <a href="http://akaka.senate.gov/" target="_new">Daniel Akaka (D-HI)</a> for comment on S.1732, the <a href="http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112s1732is/pdf/BILLS-112s1732is.pdf">Privacy Act Modernization for the Information Age Act of 2011</a>. For more information, see, <a href="/amicus/cooper/">EPIC: FAA v. Cooper</a> and <a href="/privacy/1974act/">EPIC: The Privacy Act of 1974</a>.]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>EPIC Calls on FTC to Develop Substantive Privacy Protections at Workshop on Mobile Advertising</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://epic.org/2012/05/epic-calls-on-ftc-to-develop-s.html" />
   <id>tag:epic.org,2012://10.4701</id>
   
   <published>2012-05-11T21:52:19Z</published>
   <updated>2012-05-11T21:55:49Z</updated>
   
   <summary>EPIC submitted comments to the Federal Trade Commission for the May 30 workshop on mobile advertising disclosures. EPIC recommended that the agency focus on the development of substantive privacy protections, such as the Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights announced by...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>EPIC</name>
      
   </author>
   
      <category term="Top News" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   <category term="1060" label="Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="130" label="Federal Trade Commission" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="128" label="FTC" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="901" label="mobile" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="478" label="privacy" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://epic.org/">
      <![CDATA[EPIC submitted <a href="/privacy/ftc/EPIC-FTC-Ad-Disclosures-FINAL.pdf">comments</a> to the Federal Trade Commission for the <a href="http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2012/05/dotcom_ma.shtm" target="_new">May 30 workshop</a> on mobile advertising disclosures. EPIC recommended that the agency focus on the development of substantive privacy protections, such as the <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/privacy-final.pdf">Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights</a> announced by the President earlier this year, for mobile services. EPIC also recommended that the workshop address a series of problems with the "notice and consent" approach, as well as the merits of innovative, nonverbal approaches proposed by privacy scholars. The workshop follows an FTC <a href="http://www.ftc.gov/os/2012/03/120326privacyreport.pdf">report</a> calling for privacy legislation and an <a href="http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2012/02/mobileapps_kids.shtm">investigation</a> that documented privacy problems with mobile applications for children. For more information, see <a href="/privacy/internet/ftc/">EPIC: Federal Trade Commission</a>.]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>On Google Spy-Fi, Senator Durbin Calls for Update to Wiretap Law, FCC Chair Agrees Law Should Protect Unencrypted Communications</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://epic.org/2012/05/on-google-spy-fi-senator-durbi.html" />
   <id>tag:epic.org,2012://10.4699</id>
   
   <published>2012-05-11T19:09:20Z</published>
   <updated>2012-05-11T19:14:55Z</updated>
   
   <summary>In a hearing with Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski, Senator Dick Durbin (D. IL.) criticized the agency&apos;s decision to issue a mere $25,000 fine against Google following the investigation of Street View data collection. (Hearing video beginning at 64:20)...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>EPIC</name>
      
   </author>
   
      <category term="Top News" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   <category term="976" label="ECPA" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="134" label="Google" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="1063" label="google street view" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="478" label="privacy" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="777" label="street view" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://epic.org/">
      <![CDATA[In a <a href="http://www.appropriations.senate.gov/ht-financial.cfm?method=hearings.view&id=96023b03-cae8-4807-9ec2-91373974b14d" target="_new">hearing</a> with Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski, Senator Dick Durbin (D. IL.) criticized the agency's <a href="http://transition.fcc.gov/foia/Updated-Release-of-NAL.pdf">decision</a> to issue a mere $25,000 fine against Google following the investigation of Street View data collection. (Hearing video beginning at 64:20) Senator Durbin said that Google's interception and collection of private wi-fi communication was a clear violation of privacy. Chairman Genachowski defended the agency's decision but agreed with the committee chairman that "the law should protect people even if they have unencrypted wi-fi." Senator Durbin said that he would consider changes to the law if that is necessary. Senator Durbin also asked the FCC to provide the legal memoranda supporting the FCC's decision not to find Google guilty of violating the Communications Act. EPIC has a similar <a href="/foia/EPIC-FCC-Google-Request-04-18-12.pdf">FOIA request</a> pending with the agency. For more information, see <a href="/privacy/google/fcc_investigation_of_google_st.html">EPIC: FCC Investigation of Google Street View</a> and <a href="/privacy/ecpa/">EPIC: Electronic Communications Privacy Act</a>.]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>Federal Appeals Courts Sides with NSA, Rejects EPIC&apos;s Arguments that Agency Should Provide Information About Collaboration with Google</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://epic.org/2012/05/federal-appeals-courts-sides-w.html" />
   <id>tag:epic.org,2012://10.4697</id>
   
   <published>2012-05-11T17:32:20Z</published>
   <updated>2012-05-16T13:42:33Z</updated>
   
   <summary>The DC Circuit Court of Appeals ruled today the National Security Agency need neither &quot;confirm nor deny&quot; the existence of any records about the agency&apos;s relationship with Google, even after such a collaboration was widely reported in the national media....</summary>
   <author>
      <name>EPIC</name>
      
   </author>
   
      <category term="Top News" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   <category term="982" label="EPIC v. NSA" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="134" label="Google" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="138" label="NSA" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="478" label="privacy" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://epic.org/">
      <![CDATA[The DC Circuit Court of Appeals <a href="/foia/nsa/EPIC-v-NSA-DCCir-2012.pdf">ruled</a> today the National Security Agency need neither "confirm nor deny" the existence of any records about the agency's relationship with Google, even after such a collaboration was widely reported in the national media. EPIC filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) <a href="/privacy/nsa/foia/NSA-Google_FOIA_Request.pdf">request</a> with the NSA following a cyber attack in January 2010 that led Google to contact the NSA. The NSA refused to either confirm or deny the existence of responsive records, claiming that such information is exempt from disclosure under the NSA Act. EPIC challenged this "Glomar" response and argued that the agency had a responsibility to locate records that could be disclosed, but a lower court ruled in favor of the NSA and the appellate court affirmed. EPIC has several other pending FOIA matters concerning the NSA, including "Perfect Citizen," Internet wiretapping, and even the NSA's own legal authority which the agency has refused to release to the public. For more information, see <a href="/foia/epic_v_nsa_google.html">EPIC v. NSA: Google / NSA Relationship</a>.]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>EPIC Stresses Need For Privacy Evaluation in Drone Testing </title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://epic.org/2012/05/epic-stresses-need-for-privacy.html" />
   <id>tag:epic.org,2012://10.4696</id>
   
   <published>2012-05-09T16:13:06Z</published>
   <updated>2012-05-09T16:16:47Z</updated>
   
   <summary>In comments to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), EPIC emphasized the need for transparency and accountability in drone operations, and recommended the development of privacy protections before drones are more widely deployed in the US. The FAA Notice of Proposed...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>EPIC</name>
      
   </author>
   
      <category term="Top News" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   <category term="1022" label="Drone" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="478" label="privacy" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://epic.org/">
      <![CDATA[In <a href="/privacy/drones/EPIC-FAA-2012-0252.pdf">comments</a> to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), EPIC emphasized the need for transparency and accountability in drone operations, and recommended the development of privacy protections before drones are more widely deployed in the US. The FAA <a href="http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2012-0252-0001" target="_new">Notice of Proposed Rulemaking</a> set out proposed criteria for drone testing. Congress has <a href="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.R.658:" target="_new">tasked</a> the FAA with facilitating the use of drones in the domestic airspace. February, EPIC, joined by a coalition of more than 100 organizations, experts, and members of the public, <a href="/privacy/drones/FAA-553e-Petition-03-08-12.pdf">petitioned</a> the FAA to conduct a rulemaking on the privacy implications of domestic drone use. For more information, see <a href="/privacy/drones/">EPIC: Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) and Drones</a>.]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>Myspace Settles With FTC Over Deceptive Practices Complaint</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://epic.org/2012/05/myspace-settles-with-ftc-over-.html" />
   <id>tag:epic.org,2012://10.4694</id>
   
   <published>2012-05-08T19:57:50Z</published>
   <updated>2012-05-08T20:00:14Z</updated>
   
   <summary>The Federal Trade Commission has reached a settlement with the social networking service Myspace over charges that Myspace allowed advertisers to access personally-identifying information after promising to keep such information private. Advertisers were able to access the unique &quot;Friend ID&quot;...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>EPIC</name>
      
   </author>
   
      <category term="Top News" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   <category term="130" label="Federal Trade Commission" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="128" label="FTC" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="478" label="privacy" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="325" label="Social Network Privacy" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="208" label="Social Networking" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://epic.org/">
      <![CDATA[The Federal Trade Commission has reached a <a href="http://ftc.gov/opa/2012/05/myspace.shtm" target="_new">settlement</a> with the social networking service Myspace over charges that Myspace allowed advertisers to access personally-identifying information after promising to keep such information private. Advertisers were able to access the unique "Friend ID" of users and link this identifier to other personal information. The settlement requires Myspace to implement a comprehensive privacy program, submit to independent audits, and refrain from privacy misrepresentations. For more information, see <a href="/privacy/internet/ftc/">EPIC: Federal Trade Commission</a> and <a href="/privacy/socialnet/">EPIC: Social Networking Privacy</a>.]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

</feed>

