EPIC Alert 25.17

EPIC Alert logo

1. EPIC v. IRS: D.C. Circuit Hears Arguments in FOIA Case for Trump's Tax Returns

The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments last week in EPIC v. IRS, EPIC's Freedom of Information Act case to obtain public release of President Trump's tax returns. EPIC Counsel John Davisson argued that the IRS has the authority, under a provision known as "(k)(3)," to disclose the President's returns to correct misstatements of fact relating to his taxes and financial dealings with Russia.

EPIC filed suit in 2017 after the IRS refused to process EPIC's FOIA request for President Trump's tax records. Though a lower court dismissed the case, EPIC brought an appeal before the D.C. Circuit arguing that (k)(3) gives EPIC a right to seek the President's tax records without his consent.

At argument, EPIC's Davisson told the Court that "if ever there were a situation that justified the use of (k)(3), this is it." Davisson highlighted a January 2017 tweet in which President Trump claimed that "Russia has never tried to use leverage over me. I HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH RUSSIA - NO DEALS, NO LOANS, NO NOTHING." The President has also accused the IRS of targeting him for audits on the basis of his political activities and religious faith.

Judge Patricia Millett questioned the IRS's claim that it could only process EPIC's FOIA request with the President's consent. "It would be ludicrous to require consent of the taxpayer under (k)(3)," Millett said. Judge Millett also noted that it is "pretty settled FOIA law" that the IRS has the burden of demonstrating a legal basis if it withholds any records requested by EPIC.

EPIC v. IRS is one of several FOIA cases EPIC has pursued concerning Russian interference in the 2016 Presidential election, including EPIC v. FBI (response to Russian cyberattack) and EPIC v. DHS (election cybersecurity). In a related case, EPIC v. IRS II, EPIC is seeking the release of tax settlement information concerning President Trump's businesses. These "offers in compromise" are "an agreement between a taxpayer and the Internal Revenue Service that settles a taxpayer's tax liabilities for less than the full amount owed."

2. EPIC Asks Senate Committee for Delay on Kavanaugh Vote, Seeks Records Release

In a September 12 statement, EPIC urged the Senate Judiciary Committee to postpone a vote on the nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh pending the release of documents concerning surveillance programs when Kavanaugh served in the White House. The vote, which was originally scheduled for September 13, has since been delayed.

During Kavanaugh's time in the White House, the Bush administration developed several surveillance programs directed toward the American public, including warrantless wiretapping and the secret expansion of the Patriot Act. When these programs were made public, they were revised or scrapped. Judge Kavanaugh testified during a 2006 D.C. Circuit nomination hearing that he was not involved these post-9/11 surveillance programs, but recently released documents appear to contradict those statements.

Less than 7% of Kavanaugh's records from his time in the White House have been released to the public, a sharp departure from prior hearings. For example, approximately 99% of the records of Justice Kagan's work in the Clinton White House were made available. "The release of these documents is necessary to resolve questions that continue to surround Judge Kavanaugh regarding his role in the post-9/11 surveillance programs, and how his view of the Fourth Amendment and the Constitutional rights of Americans may impact his future opinions," EPIC wrote in its statement.

In an earlier statement to the Senate Committee, EPIC asked the Senators to determine Kavanaugh's role in warrantless wiretapping and the expansion of the Patriot Act. Traditionally, the records of Supreme Court nominees who served in the White House are made available prior to committee hearings.

Last month, EPIC submitted two urgent Freedom of Information Act requests for Judge Kavanaugh's White House records. EPIC regularly advises the Senate concerning nominees to the Supreme Court and the possible consequences for the future of privacy in America. EPIC has submitted statements for the record for the nominations of Justice Gorsuch, Justice Kagan, Justice Sotomayor, Justice Alito, and Chief Justice Roberts.

3. European Court of Human Rights Rules UK Surveillance Violated Human Rights

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has ruled that the United Kingdom's surveillance regime, revealed by Edward Snowden, violates human rights set out in the European Convention. In the consolidated cases Big Brother Watch v. UK, Bureau of Investigative Journalism v. UK, and 10 Human Rights Organizations v. UK, the Court ruled that the UK surveillance system violated both Article 8, which protects the right to privacy, and Article 10, which protects freedom of expression and information. EPIC served as amicus in the case.

In 2013, following the Snowden disclosures, ten human rights organizations filed suit before the UK Investigatory Powers Tribunal challenging UK surveillance and the intelligence transfer deal between the U.S. and UK. The groups took their challenge to the ECHR to claim that the surveillance violated fundamental rights guaranteed by the Convention. The case was consolidated with two similar challenges by organizations and individuals that had been brought directly to the ECHR.

The Court of Human Rights found that the UK's bulk interception of communications violates the Article 8 right to privacy due to a "lack of oversight" and an "absence of any real safeguards" for selecting data subject to surveillance. "All interception regimes . . . have the potential to be abused," the Court said, so bulk surveillance must include safeguards "to be sufficiently foreseeable to minimise the risk of abuses of power." The Court also ruled that UK surveillance violated the Article 10 right of free expression and information because the law did not sufficiently protect confidential journalistic material.

EPIC filed a brief in the case explaining that the U.S., which transfers intelligence data to the UK, has "technological capacities" enabling "wide scale surveillance" and that U.S. law does not restrict surveillance of non-U.S. persons abroad. EPIC's casebook Privacy Law and Society explores a wide range of privacy issues, including recent decisions of the European Court of Human Rights.

4. In Privacy Victory, ICE Backs Down from Voter Data Demand

Following efforts by EPIC and other civil rights organizations, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement backed down from an immediate demand for over 18 million North Carolina voter records.

ICE and the Department of Justice issued a subpoena in August, requiring state and country boards of elections to turn over millions of voter records by September 25 for use by a grand jury. The data demand appeared to contradict prior statements by DHS Secretary Kristjen Nielsen, who told Congress this year that DHS's role in elections is limited to voluntary requests for assistance from the states. Nielsen also wrote, in records obtained through an EPIC FOIA request, that associating the DHS with voter data collection "could disrupt critical efforts" to work with state officials on election cybersecurity.

EPIC and other groups strongly opposed the subpoena, noting that the sweeping demand for documents covered over 18 million records covering eight years of voter information. Troublingly, the requested records would also include over two million absentee ballots that could directly link voters to their choices. Releasing these documents would endanger fundamental principles of secrecy and privacy, which underpin the American voter system.

North Carolina officials responded to ICE by questioning the timing and scope of the request. Following pushback, ICE agreed to limit the amount of documents requested and to allow North Carolina to respond in January 2019, after the midterm elections.

EPIC has long fought to ensure voter privacy and recently forced the defunct Presidential Election Commission to delete millions of state voter records unlawfully obtained. Recently in that case, EPIC asked the Supreme Court to review a lower court decision that wrongly denied EPIC access to a privacy impact assessment concerning the collection of voter data.

5. EPIC FOIA: EPIC Obtains Facebook Privacy Documents

In response to an EPIC Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, the Federal Trade Commission has released supplemental materials from the biennial Facebook audits (production 1, production 2, production 3, production 4). The documents include letters from the FTC to Facebook inquiring about the company's relationship with Instagram and telling Facebook that it must notify the Commission "whenever a corporate change such as an acquisition may affect the design and/or implementation of the Company's privacy program[.]"

In March, following the Cambridge Analytica breach, EPIC filed an urgent FOIA request for the complete 2013, 2015, and 2017 Facebook audits. The audits are required by the FTC's 2011 Consent Order with Facebook, which resulted from complaints by EPIC and other consumer privacy organizations demonstrating that Facebook changed privacy settings without users' knowledge. When the FTC failed to release the audits in unredacted form, EPIC filed suit.

The supplementary documents indicate that Facebook was required to notify the Commission about its data sharing practices on WhatsApp, as Facebook's acquisition of WhatsApp "affect[ed] the design and/or implementation of the Company's privacy program." EPIC opposed the acquisition of WhatsApp and submitted comments for the FTC's review of the merger remedy process.

The FTC announced in March that it would reopen the Facebook investigation, but the agency has not updated the public on the progress of the investigation. Congress and the European Parliament have both conducted extensive hearings on the Cambridge Analytica matter. The UK Information Commissioner's Office conducted an investigation, published a substantial report, and issued a significant fine in July.

News in Brief

EPIC Sues for Release of Kavanaugh White House Records on Warrantless Surveillance, Patriot Act

EPIC has filed a lawsuit to compel the National Archives and Records Administration to release Brett Kavanaugh's White House records about warrantless surveillance and the Patriot Act. EPIC's lawsuit follows the agency's failure to respond to EPIC's two urgent Freedom of Information Act requests. In the complaint, EPIC explains that timely release of these records is now essential to assess Kavanaugh's role in the White House surveillance programs. In Senate testimony, Kavanaugh claimed that he knew nothing about these programs, but documents indicate that he drafted President Bush's speech on the Patriot Act, communicated with John Yoo, the architect of the warrantless surveillance program, and defended suspicionless surveillance of the American public. Last week, EPIC sent a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee urging postponement of the the committee vote on Kavanaugh until the documents EPIC requested are released. EPIC highlighted concerns about Kavanaugh's White House years in an earlier letter to the Committee.

EPIC FOIA Docs Show FBI and CBP Accessed 'Hemisphere' Records

The Drug Enforcement Agency has released to EPIC a new FOIA production about the AT&T "Hemisphere" program. Hemisphere is a massive call records database made available to government agents by the nation's largest telecommunication company. AT&T discloses to the government billions of detailed customer phone records, including location data, without judicial review. The new release to EPIC reveals that both the FBI and CBP obtained access to these call details records. EPIC filed suit against the DEA in 2013 after the agency failed to respond to EPIC's FOIA request for information about the Hemisphere program. EPIC previously argued that the names of other agencies with access to Hemisphere records should be released. In June, the Supreme Court held in Carpenter v US that government access to location data is a search subject to Fourth Amendment review. EPIC filed an amicus brief in the Carpenter case.

EPIC to Congress: Urge Social Media Platforms to Be Transparent About Russia Hacking

In advance of a hearing on "Foreign Influence Operations' Use of Social Media Platforms," EPIC sent a statement to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. EPIC said that the American public must be given more information about the extent of Russian interference in the 2016 election. EPIC asked the Senate Committee to press the social media companies to be more transparent about the manipulation of news and information. EPIC sent similar requests this year to both the Senate and House Intelligence Committees. EPIC also pursued an important FOIA case, EPIC v. ODNI, to make public the Intelligence Committee Assessment on Russian interference.

EPIC Urges Senate Committee to Explore Kavanaugh's Views on Privacy, Klayman Opinion

In a letter and memo to the Senate Judiciary Committee sent earlier this month, EPIC urged Senators to question Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh on critical privacy, open government, and government surveillance issues. EPIC expressed concerns about the Kavanaugh's views on privacy and Constitutional rights, stating "In Klayman v. Obama, Judge Kavanaugh went out of his way to set out theories to defend the suspicionless surveillance of the American public that surprised even conservative legal scholars." EPIC said that Kavanaugh's views are out of step with recent Supreme Court opinions that carry forward Fourth Amendment protections to the digital age for GPS tracking, cell phone searches, and cell site location data. EPIC also asked the Senate to determine Judge Kavanuagh's role, while in the Bush White House, in the unlawful warrantless wiretapping program and the secret expansion of the Patriot Act. EPIC regularly shares its views with the Senate concerning nominees to the Supreme Court, including Justice Gorsuch, Justice Kagan, Justice Sotomayor, Justice Alito, and Chief Justice Roberts.

EPIC: Congress Should Require Algorithmic Transparency for Twitter, Dominant Internet Firms

In advance of a recent hearing on "Twitter: Transparency and Accountability," EPIC sent a statement to the House Energy and Commerce Committee. EPIC said that "algorithmic transparency" could help establish fairness, transparency, and accountability for much of what users see online. In a 2011 statement to the FTC during the investigation of Google, EPIC said that Google's acquisition of YouTube led to a skewing of search results after Google substituted its secret "relevance" ranking for the original objective ranking, based on hits and ratings. EPIC pointed out that it was then competing with the search giant for the rankings of "privacy" videos and that Google's algorithm preferences Google's web pages over EPIC's. The FTC took no action on EPIC's complaint. But last year the European Commission found that Google in fact rigged search results to give preference to its own shopping service. The Commission required Google to change its algorithm to rank its own shopping comparison the same way it ranks its competitors.

New Federal Law Makes Credit Freezes Free for All Consumers

Starting this week, consumers will be able to "freeze" their credit reports at no cost. A credit freeze restricts public access to a consumer's credit report, making it much more difficult for identity thieves to open fraudulent accounts. Previously, state laws allowed credit bureaus to charge consumers $2 to $10 to place or lift credit freezes. Amendments to the Fair Credit Reporting Act also extend the time period for a fraud alert in a consumer's file and create new safeguards for the protection of credit records of minors. Following the Equifax data breach in 2017, EPIC President Marc Rotenberg testified before the Senate Banking Committee and recommended free credit freezes and other consumer safeguards to mitigate the risk of identity theft.

Court: California Donor Disclosure Requirement Doesn't Violate First Amendment

A federal appeals court has ruled that a California law requiring nonprofit organizations to provide the state with an annual list of donors and donations does not violate the First Amendment. The Ninth Circuit concluded that the law does not significantly burden the free speech of nonprofits "because the information is collected solely for nonpublic use, and the risk of inadvertent public disclosure is slight." EPIC filed an amicus brief in the case, arguing that the reporting requirement "infringes on several First Amendment interests, including the free exercise of religion, the freedom to express views without attribution, and the freedom to join in association with others without government monitoring." EPIC also explained that California had "failed to implement basic data protection standards" for donor information. EPIC has argued for donor privacy and similar constitutional privacy rights in Packingham v. North Carolina, Doe v. Reed, and Watchtower Bible v. Stratton.

FTC Explores Competition and Consumer Protection Issues at Hearings

The FTC held a hearing last week to examine the regulation of consumer data, the consumer welfare standard in antitrust law, and vertical mergers. It was the first in a series of hearings on "Competition and Consumer Protection in the 21st Century" that will examine how changes in the economy affect the FTC's enforcement priorities. EPIC and a coalition of consumer groups submitted extensive comments for the hearings. EPIC and the groups said that privacy protection is critical for competition and innovation. EPIC and the groups told the FTC that it should: 1) unwind the Facebook-WhatsApp deal; 2) require Facebook and Google to spin off their advertising units; 3) block future acquisitions by Facebook and Google that would extend monopoly control over consumer data; 4) impose privacy safeguards for all mergers that implicate data privacy; and 5) perform audits of algorithmic tools to promote accountability and to limit anticompetitive conduct. The FTC reopened the investigation of Facebook in March after EPIC and consumer groups filed a formal complaint, but has still taken no action. The UK Information Commissioner completed its initial investigation, published a report, and issued a substantial fine in July.

Senator Leahy Pursues Questions About Privacy with Judge Kavanaugh

During the Senate Judiciary Committee's recent Supreme Court nomination hearings, Senator Patrick Leahy asked Judge Kavanaugh about privacy and government surveillance (6:20). Senator Leahy stated "In your concurrence in Klayman v. Obama you went out of your way to say that not only is the dragnet collection of American's telephone records by the NSA okay because it's 'not a search,' you also said that 'even if it is a search, it is justified in order to prevent terrorism.'" Senator Leahy pointed out that the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board found that the legal authorities in the Klayman case had not prevented a single terrorist act. Leahy asked, "Why did you go out of your way to write an opinion stating that the program met a critical national security need when it had already been found by our national security people it made no concrete difference in fighting terrorism?" Judge Kavanaugh said that the recent Supreme Court decision in Carpenter was a "game-changer" and that had it been law at the time, he could not have written the concurrence in Klayman. Senator Leahy also questioned Judge Kavanaugh on U.S. v. Jones, asking "do you believe that there becomes a point where the collection of data about a person becomes so pervasive that a warrant would be required even if the collection of one bit of the same data would not?" Judge Kavanaugh did not answer this question directly. Senator Flake commended Senator Leahy's questions, noting that future of privacy was a critical issue for the Committee to consider.

Government Report on One-Year Anniversary of Equifax Breach Finds No Action by Federal Agencies

The Government Accountability Office recently released a report on "Actions Taken by Equifax and Federal Agencies in Response to the 2017 Breach." The GAO report details the Equifax data breach in 2017 that compromised the authenticating details (SSN, Data of Birth) of over one hundred million Americans. The response also summarizes the response of Equifax and federal agencies. To date no federal agency has taken action against Equifax, following one of the largest data breaches in U.S. history. Rep. Luetkemeyer (R-MO) has introduced a bill that would codify basic data breach notification standards for the financial services industry but would preempt stronger state laws. In testimony before the House Financial Services Committee in February, EPIC called on Congress to ensure that the CFPB takes action against Equifax and to pass comprehensive data protection regulation that would not preempt state laws.

Top European Court Hears Key 'Right to Be Forgotten' Case

Last week the Court of Justice for the European Union heard arguments in Google v. Commission nationale de l'informatique et des liberté concerning the "Right to Be Forgotten." Google v. CNIL follows a ruling in Google v. Spain that Europeans have a right, in some circumstances, to remove links to their personal data posted online by Google. Google has fought the judgement of the European high court and now is fighting the French agency, continuing to post links to personal data worldwide even after it is found to violate privacy rights in democratic countries. EPIC has supported the CNIL's approach, explaining that "the right to privacy is global." EPIC published "The Right to be Forgotten on the Internet: Google v. Spain" an account of the case by former Spanish Privacy Commissioner Artemi Rallo, an EPIC Champion of Freedom.

Pew Research Surveys: Americans Have Complicated Relationship With Facebook

Two recent surveys reveal that many Facebook users don't understand how the site's news feed works and that Americans are changing their relationship with Facebook. 54% of adult Facebook users have adjusted their privacy settings in the past year and 42% say they have not used the platform for at least several weeks. 53% of U.S. adults who use Facebook said that they do not understand why certain posts but not others are included in their news feed. Only 14% of Facebook users think they have "a lot" of control over the content that appears in their newsfeed, while 57% think they have "a little" control and 28% think they have no control. Public opinion polls consistently find strong support among Americans for privacy rights in law to protect their personal information from government and commercial entities.

National Academies Releases Report on Voting Security and American Democracy

The National Academies of Sciences have released a report titled "Securing the Vote: Protecting American Democracy," which highlights vulnerabilities in current voting technology. EPIC Advisory Board member Ronald Rivest served on the expert committee. The Academies report includes many recommendations "designed to harden our election infrastructure and safeguard its integrity and credibility," concerning voter registration, ballot design, voting technology, system certification, cybersecurity, online voting, and auditing. The Academies report recommends end-to-end verifiable systems to ensure that votes have been counted as intended. These systems use cryptographic methods developed by EPIC Advisory Board member David Chaum. In 2016, EPIC published "The Secret Ballot at Risk: Recommendations for Protecting Democracy," highlighting the importance of the secret ballot for American democracy. The Academies report noted that new strategies for election security "must still preserve the secret ballot."

U.S. Defends Privacy Shield, But Fails to Comply with Privacy Commitments

The Department of Commerce has told the President of the European Parliament that the U.S. is in compliance with the Privacy Shield, a pact that permits U.S. companies to obtain the personal data of Europeans. The statement follows a resolution of Parliament to suspend the international arrangement if the U.S. did not comply in full by September 1. The Parliament cited the Cambridge Analytica data breach, the reauthorization of FISA Section 702 without reform, the failure to stand up the PCLOB, the passage of the CLOUD Act, and the absence of a Privacy Shield ombudsman. The Commerce Department disputed the Parliament's findings but failed to show progress on the issues identified. EPIC highlighted similar problems with data protection in the United States in recent comments to the European Commission. Almost six months have passed since the FTC reopened the investigation of Facebook's compliance with the 2011 consent order, which followed a complaint from EPIC and other consumer privacy organizations.

EPIC in the News

More EPIC in the News »

EPIC Bookstore

EPIC publications and books by members of the EPIC Advisory Board, distinguished experts in law, technology and public policy are available at the EPIC Bookstore.

Recent EPIC Publications

The Privacy Law Sourcebook 2016, edited by Marc Rotenberg (2016)

The Privacy Law Sourcebook is the leading resource for students, attorneys, researchers, and journalists interested in privacy law in the United States and around the world. It includes major US privacy laws such as the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Communications Act, the Privacy Act, the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, the Video Privacy Protection Act, and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The Sourcebook also includes key international privacy frameworks including the OECD Privacy Guidelines, the OECD Cryptography Guidelines, and European Union Directives for both Data Protection and Privacy and Electronic Communications. The Privacy Law Sourcebook 2016 (Kindle Edition) has been updated and expanded to include recent developments such as the United Nations Resolution on Right to Privacy, the European Union General Data Protection Regulation, the USA Freedom Act, and the US Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act. The Sourcebook also includes an extensive resources section with useful websites and contact information for privacy agencies, organizations, and publications.

Communications Law and Policy: Cases and Materials, 5th Edition, by Jerry Kang and Alan Butler. Direct Injection Press (2016).

This teachable casebook provides an introduction to the law and policy of modern communications. The book is organized by analytic concepts instead of current industry lines, which are constantly made out-of-date by technological convergence. The basic ideas—power, entry, pricing, access, classification, bad content, and intermediary liability—equip students with a durable and yet flexible intellectual structure that can help parse a complex and ever-changing field.

Privacy Law and Society, 3rd Edition, by Anita Allen, JD, PhD and Marc Rotenberg, JD, LLM. West Academic (2015).

The Third Edition of "Privacy Law and Society" is the most comprehensive casebook on privacy law ever produced. It traces the development of modern privacy law, from the early tort cases to present day disputes over drone surveillance and facial recognition. The text examines the philosophical roots of privacy claims and the significant court cases and statues that have emerged. The text provides detailed commentary on leading cases and insight into emerging issues. The text includes new material on developments in the European Union, decisions grounded in fundamental rights jurisprudence, and exposes readers to current debates over cloud computing, online profiling, and the role of the Federal Trade Commission. Privacy Law and Society is the leading and most current text in the privacy field.

Privacy in the Modern Age: The Search for Solutions, edited by Marc Rotenberg, Julia Horwitz and Jeramie Scott. The New Press (2015). Price: $25.95.

The threats to privacy are well known: The National Security Agency tracks our phone calls; Google records where we go online and how we set our thermostats; Facebook changes our privacy settings when it wishes; Target gets hacked and loses control of our credit card information; our medical records are available for sale to strangers; our children are fingerprinted and their every test score saved for posterity; and small robots patrol our schoolyards while drones may soon fill our skies.

The contributors to this anthology don't simply describe these problems or warn about the loss of privacy—they propose solutions.

Contributors include: Steven Aftergood, Ross Anderson, Christine L. Borgman (coauthored with Kent Wada and James F. Davis), Ryan Calo, Danielle Citron, Simon Davies, A. Michael Froomkin, Deborah Hurley, Kristina Irion, Jeff Jonas, Harry Lewis, Anna Lysyanskaya, Gary T. Marx, Aleecia M. McDonald, Dr. Pablo G. Molina, Peter G. Neumann, Helen Nissenbaum, Frank Pasquale, Dr. Deborah Peel, MD, Stephanie E. Perrin, Marc Rotenberg, Pamela Samuelson, Bruce Schneier, and Christopher Wolf.

Upcoming Conferences and Events

AI-Government and Treaty on AI Ethics and Practice. Sep. 20, 2018. Artificial Intelligence World Society (AIWS), Michael Dukakis Institute. Harvard Faculty Club, Cambridge, MA. Marc Rotenberg, EPIC President.

'Who Will Pass their Midterms? Business Opportunities and Election Outcomes.' Sep. 24, 2018. Yale Washington CEO Caucus, Yale School of Management. Washington, DC. Marc Rotenberg, EPIC President.

Big Debate on the Right to Be Forgotten. Sep 26, 2018. 5th Global Congress on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest. American University Washington College of Law, Washington, DC. Marc Rotenberg, EPIC President.

Privacy, News, and the Future of Freedom of the Press. Sep. 27-28, 2018. Tulane Law School, New Orleans, LA. Marc Rotenberg, EPIC President.

MFIA Access and Accountability Conference, Oct. 12–13, 2018. Yale Law School. Jeramie Scott, EPIC National Security Counsel.

'Arena Civil Dialogues: Digital Well-Being.' Oct. 14, 2018. Institute for Communitarian Policy Studies. Arena Stage, Washington, DC. Marc Rotenberg, EPIC President.

AI, Ethics, and Fundamental Rights: A Public Voice Event. Oct. 23, 2018. Brussels, Belgium. Eleni Kyriakides, EPIC International Counsel

'Debating Ethics: Dignity and Respect in Data Driven Life.' Oct. 24, 2018. 40th International Conference of Data Protection and Privacy Commissioners, Brussels, Belgium. Marc Rotenberg, EPIC President.

'Going Digital.' Nov. 12-13, 2018. Working Party on Security and Privacy in the Digital Economy, OECD, Paris. Marc Rotenberg. EPIC President.

Internet Governance Forum 2018. Nov. 14, 2018. UNESCO, Paris. Marc Rotenberg, EPIC President.

Centrum Wiskunde & Informatica Privacy and Security Lecture. Nov. 17, 2018. CWI, Amsterdam. Marc Rotenberg, EPIC President.

CPDP2019: Data Protection and Democracy. Jan. 30–Feb. 1, 2019. Les Halles de Schaerbeek, Brussels, Belgium.

'Going Digital.' Mar. 11-12, 2019. OECD, Paris. Marc Rotenberg, EPIC President.

Share this page:

Defend Privacy. Support EPIC.
US Needs a Data Protection Agency
2020 Election Security