======================================================================= E P I C A l e r t=======================================================================Volume 16.18 September 25, 2009----------------------------------------------------------------------- Published by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) Washington, D.C. http://www.epic.org/alert/epic_alert_1618.html "Defend Privacy. Support EPIC." http://epic.org/donate=======================================================================Table of Contents=======================================================================[1] EPIC Renews Calls for Release of Bush Warrantless Wiretap Memos[2] MA Supreme Court Requires Warrant for GPS Tracking[3] EPIC Pursues Accountability at Homeland Security Office[4] EPIC Urges Appeals Court to Protect Prescription Data[5] Cloud Computing Initiative Lacks Privacy Umbrella[6] News in Brief[7] EPIC Bookstore: "The Test of Our Times"[8] Upcoming Conferences and Events - Join EPIC on Facebook http://facebook.com/epicprivacy - Privacy Policy - About EPIC - Donate to EPIC http://epic.org/donate - Subscription Information=======================================================================[1] EPIC Renews Calls for Release of Bush Warrantless Wiretap Memos=======================================================================On September 15, 2009, EPIC and the ACLU urged a federal court toorder the government to release records and memoranda regarding theNSA's warrantless wiretapping program, arguing that the existence ofthe memoranda and significant portions of their content have alreadybeen revealed in separate reports.EPIC and the ACLU originally sought disclosure of any recordsrelating to the program in 2005, pursuant to the Freedom ofInformation Act (FOIA). However, the Department of Justice (DOJ)argued that the records, including memoranda from the Office of LegalCounsel, were exempt from FOIA's disclosure requirements. As"national security information," "information exempted by otherstatutes," and "inter- and intra-agency memoranda." Nonetheless, theUnited States District Court for the District of Columbia wasunconvinced that the DOJ needed to withhold the documents completelyand commenced an in camera examination of ten memoranda on November17, 2008.Despite the DOJ's claimed need for secrecy, on July 10, 2009, thegovernment released an "Unclassified Report on the President'sSurveillance Program," prepared by the Offices ofInspectors General of the Department of Defense, Department ofJustice, Central Intelligence Agency, National Security Agency, andthe Office of the Director of National Intelligence. The IG Reportspecifically identifies, extensively quotes from, and publiclydescribes several of the OLC memoranda that the DOJ continued towithhold from the FOIA request. In light of the disclosures in the Inspector General's Report,EPIC and the ACLU filed a supplemental memorandum with the courtconducting the in camera review, arguing that the disclosure ofspecific portions of the requested documents in the IG Report fatallyundermines the DOJ's claim that the OLC memoranda at issue had to bewithheld completely. Thus, EPIC and the ACLU renewed their argumentthat the memoranda or segregable portions of the memoranda should bereleased to the public. The court has yet to reach a decision.EPIC v. DOJ Filing http://epic.org/privacy/nsa/foia/epic_supp_memo.pdfInspectors General Unclassified Report: http://epic.org/privacy/nsa/foia/nsa_ig_report.pdfNew York Times 2005 Report on the NSA Program: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/16/politics/16program.htmlEPIC "Freedom of Information Act Work on the NationalSecurity Agency's Warrantless Surveillance Program": http://epic.org/privacy/nsa/foia/=======================================================================[2] MA Supreme Court Requires Warrant for GPS Tracking=======================================================================On September 17, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court handeddown its decision in Commonwealth v. Connolly, ruling that using GPSdevices to monitor vehicles constitutes a seizure under theMassachusetts Constitution and therefore may only be done under avalid warrant. The court also required that these warrants expireafter fifteen days. EPIC had filed a "friend of the court" briefurging the justices to adopt this warrant requirement.The case originated when the Massachusetts State Police begantracking Everett H. Connolly, a Cape Cod resident who they suspectedof drug trafficking. After Connolly sold crack cocaine to anundercover office, State Police installed a GPS device in his minivanwithout his knowledge, but with a valid warrant. The device wasdesigned to report the location of the vehicle to the policedepartment at all times. Police computers stored this locationinformation. By observing the data, officers determined thatConnolly was on his way back to his home after a trip to New York,where police believed Connolly purchased cocaine. At that point,officers stopped the van, conducted a search, and arrested Connollyon the basis of cocaine found hidden in the vehicle.Connolly appealed the validity of the search to the SupremeJudicial Court, the highest court in the state of Massachusetts.There, EPIC filed an amicus brief in favor of a warrant requirementfor such tracking. EPIC's brief provided the court with considerableinformation about the history and function of GPS devices, as well asabout the current use of GPS tracking technology for law enforcementand non-law enforcement purposes. EPIC's brief explained the risksinherent in allowing such tracking without court oversight by thegovernment. It also explained the risks in such surveillance withinthe private sector. Finally, it urged the court to insist on awarrant requirement before allowing such tracking, a provision theCommonwealth did not acknowledge as a prerequisite in its caseagainst Connolly.The court's decision, while not perfect, did follow EPIC'srecommendation. The primary opinion, signed by all seven justices ofthe court, found that the use of the device interfered with thedefendant's property rights and classified GPS tracking as a"seizure" of that property for constitutional purposes. On thisreasoning, the court held that a warrant was therefore a requirement.Three of the seven justices also participated in a concurringopinion, which argued for a result much closer to EPIC's position:that the invasion should also be characterized as a search, such thatconducting GPS tracking without a warrant would constitute aviolation of a defendant's reasonable expectation of privacy.By requiring warrants for GPS tracking, the Supreme JudicialCourt has placed Massachusetts firmly on one side of the state spliton this issue. A Wisconson appeals court has ruled that GPS trackingdoes not require a warrant, while earlier this year New York'shighest court ruled in favor of a warrant requirement.EPIC: Commonwealth v. Connolly: http://epic.org/privacy/connolly/Slip Opinion - Commonwealth v. Connolly http://epic.org/privacy/connolly/slip_opinion.pdfEPIC "People, Not Places, A Policy Framework for AnalyzingLocation Privacy Issues": http://epic.org/privacy/location/jwhitelocationprivacy.pdfMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court: http://www.mass.gov/courts/sjc/=======================================================================[3] EPIC Pursues Accountability at Homeland Security Office=======================================================================This week EPIC filed a Freedom of Information Act appeal with theDepartment of Homeland Security for the calendar of the Chief PrivacyOfficer, Mary Ellen Callahan. EPIC submitted the original request inJune 2009 to find out why the DHS Privacy Officer could not meet withprivacy groups in Washington, DC.In August, the agency turned over many pages from Ms. Callahan'scalendar, but most of the entries were blacked out as non responsive.Because EPIC possesses several documents also possessed by DHS, EPICknows that DHS failed to disclose several responsive meetings. EPICis challenging DHS failure to disclose, as well as its wrongfulassertion of several FOIA exemptions.In the appeal, EPIC said the agency has failed to comply withFOIA and also cited the President's commitment to governmenttransparency concerning the activities of public officials. EPICreminded Ms. Callahan's office that she is required to comply withthe law and disclose the records.In a related letter to the Chief Privacy Officer of theDepartment of Homeland Security, EPIC asked when the annual privacyreport will be made available. The Department is required by law toprovide an annual report "on activities of the Department that affectprivacy, including complaints of privacy violations, implementationof the Privacy Act of 1974, internal controls, and other matters."The last privacy report was published in July 2008. EPIC haspreviously sent similar letters to the Department, reminding theagency of its legal obligation to inform the public about itsactivities.EPIC's FOIA Appeal to the Department's Chief Privacy Officer: http://epic.org/foia/EPIC_DHS_FOIA_Appeal.pdfEPIC's Original FOIA Request to the Chief Privacy Officer: http://epic.org/foia/DHS%20FOIA%20Request.pdfEPIC "Open Government": http://epic.org/privacy/litigation/EPIC's letter to Ms. Callahan regarding the Annual Report: http://epic.org/redirect/092309_AnnRptLttr.htmlThe 2008 Privacy Office Annual Report: http://epic.org/redirect/092309_2008AnnRpt.htmlEPIC's Prior Request for Annual Reports: http://epic.org/privacy/oversight/default.html=======================================================================[4] EPIC Urges Appeals Court to Protect Prescription Data=======================================================================EPIC filed a friend of the court brief in the Court of Appealsfor the Second Circuit, urging the judges in IMS v. Sorrell to upholda Vermont law regulating companies that sell or useprescriber-identifiable data for marketing. The Vermont law is aimedat protecting public health, protecting the privacy of prescribers,and containing prescription drug costs. It prohibits access toprescriber-identifiable data unless physicians choose to opt in andallow the release of such information.Although several other states have also adopted statutes aimed atprotecting the privacy of prescribers and prescriber-identifiabledata, Vermont is the first to adopt a model that requires physiciansconsent before outside parties can access information. The FirstCircuit recently upheld as constitutional a New Hampshire statutethat blocks third parties' access to prescriber-identifiable data ifphysicians opt out of disclosure. EPIC also submitted a friend ofthe court brief in that case and supported the decision of the FirstCircuit.Several data-mining companies challenged the Vermont law indistrict court. After the law was upheld, the datamining companiesappealed the decision to the Second Circuit. The dataminingcompanies argue that the law violates their First Amendment rights tofree speech. The district court held that the commercial speech atissue could be limited, as the Vermont law's restrictions on datadisclosure were "in reasonable proportion to the State's interests."The court did not reach the merits of the State's privacy claim.EPIC's amicus brief supports the district court's conclusion thatthe law is valid. The EPIC brief argues that Vermont has asubstantial state interest in privacy protection and that the dataminers' de-identification practices do not protect patient privacy.The brief notes that in a method called "record linkage,"prescription data can be re-linked to an individual's identity.Because this information can easily be re-identified, EPIC argues,the de-identification of data is no longer an adequate safeguard toensuring patient and prescriber privacy.The Second Circuit is scheduled to hear oral arguments during theweek of October 12, 2009.EPIC's "friend of the court" brief: http://epic.org/privacy/ims_sorrell/epic_amicus.pdfVermont's Prescription Confidentiality Law: http://epic.org/redirect/092309_VtPres.htmlFirst Circuit Decision in IMS v. Ayotte: http://epic.org/privacy/imshealth/11_18_08_order.pdfEPIC's "friend of the court" brief in IMS v. Ayotte: http://epic.org/privacy/imshealth/epic_ims.pdfDistrict Court Opinion in IMS v. Sorrell: http://epic.org/privacy/ims_sorrell/sorrell_trial_opinion.pdfEPIC "IMS v. Sorrell": http://epic.org/privacy/ims_sorrell/EPIC "IMS v. Ayotte": http://epic.org/privacy/imshealth/=======================================================================[5] Cloud Computing Initiative Lacks Privacy Umbrella=======================================================================Chief Information Officer Vivek Kundra announced the launch of"Apps.gov", a website where federal agencies can obtain cloud-basedIT services. Cloud computing allows data and applications to behoused on centralized servers, so that they are accessible at anytime from anywhere, so long as the user has access to the internet.The initiative is aimed at "lowering the cost of governmentoperations while driving innovation." Kundra notes that in thecurrent economic climate, "the federal government must buy smarter,"and cloud computing is a response to the President's charge to ensure"we are lowering the cost of govt operations, that we are finding theinnovative path, and that we are deploying solutions that are goingto be greener and better for the environment itself."Currently, the administration's main goal is to increase the sizeand scale of cloud computing, but key concerns, such as security andprivacy, have received little attention. In a speech given at NASAAmes Research Center, Kundra "challenge[d] industry to step up andaddress . . . security concerns [to] make sure that information anddata [are protected and secured]. Still, Kundra recognizes thatfinding appropriate solutions to these concerns will not happenovernight, but will take months or even years.In March, EPIC filed a complaint with the Federal TradeCommission urging the agency to open an investigation into CloudComputing services, such as Google Docs, to determine "the adequacyof the privacy and security safeguards." Subsequently, thirty-eightcomputer security researchers and privacy academics sent a letter toGoogle's CEO, asking Google to uphold privacy promises made to usersof Google Cloud Computing services. The Commission's investigation isongoing; no response has been received from Google.Vivek Kundra's Blog Announcement regarding Apps.gov: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Streaming-at-100-In-the-Cloud/Vivek Kundra's Speech on Cloud Computing at NASA's Ames ResearchCenter: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eND7hT8JdwAEPIC's Federal Trade Commission Complaint Urging an Investigationinto Cloud Computing Services: http://epic.org/privacy/cloudcomputing/google/ftc031709.pdfLetter to Google's CEO regarding Google Cloud Computing Services: http://files.cloudprivacy.net/google-letter-final.pdfEPIC "Cloud Computing": http://epic.org/privacy/cloudcomputing/=======================================================================[6] News in Brief=======================================================================Indiana Court Strikes Down Voter ID LawThe Indiana Court of Appeals ruled that the Indiana Voter ID law,which requires certain individuals to present government-issued photoidentification before they could vote, violates the stateConstitution. The law is unconstitutional, the court held, because it"regulates voters in a manner that is not uniform and impartial." TheUnited States Supreme Court previously ruled that the law did notviolate the federal Constitution, but did not address the law'svalidity under the Indiana Constitution. EPIC and ten legal scholarsand technical experts filed a "friend-of-the-court" brief in thatcase, urging the Court to invalidate the law because of its disparateimpact and its reliance on REAL-ID, a "flawed federal identificationsystem."Indiana Court of Appeals Decision: http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/09170901par.pdfCrawford v. Marion County Election Board Supreme Court Decision: http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/07-21.pdfEPIC's friend of the court brief for Crawford v. Marion CountyElection Board: http://www.epic.org/privacy/voting/crawford/epic_sc_111307.pdfEPIC "National ID and REAL ID Act": http://epic.org/privacy/id-cards/California Moves to Strengthen Data Breach LawsThe California State Legislature passed Senate Bill 20, a billthat would improve California's current security breach notificationlaw. Senator Joe Simitian said Senate Bill 20 "is designed to make agood law better." Under current California law, a company that losesunencrypted personal information must notify affected consumers ofthe security breach. If signed by Governor Schwarzenegger, SenateBill 20 would require that notifications include information thathelps consumers safeguard their privacy. The bill is one more exampleof the many state efforts to address the growing problem of securitybreaches. In May, EPIC testified in Congress on the need to improvesecurity breach notification.California Senate Bill 20: http://epic.org/redirect/092309_CaBill.htmlCalifornia Senator Joe Simitian's Announcement: http://epic.org/redirect/092309_CaBillAnn.htmlFederal Trade Commission to Host Privacy Roundtables Last week, the Federal Trade Commission held a meeting withprivacy advocates to discuss their "omnibus project," which involvesheightened efforts to implement new privacy initiatives and explorethe challenges regarding consumer privacy. The FTC introduced theirplan to host three roundtables focused on consumer privacy andtechnology, the first to be held on December 7, 2009. The roundtablediscussions, which are open to the public, will focus on threeinitial questions: (1) what risks, concerns, and benefits arise fromthe collection, sharing, and use of consumer information; (2) arethere commonly understood or recognized consumer expectations abouthow information concerning consumers is collected and used; and (3)do the existing legal requirements and self-regulatory regimes in theUnited States today adequately protect consumer privacy interests?Parties interested in participating as a panelist at the next privacyroundtable must submit a request to the Commission.Federal Trade Commission's Exploring Privacy: A Roundtable Series: http://ftc.gov/bcp/workshops/privacyroundtables/index.shtmlFederal Trade Commission Press Release Announcing PrivacyRoundtables: http://ftc.gov/opa/2009/09/privacyrt.shtmFederal Trade Commission Privacy Initiatives Website: http://www.ftc.gov/privacy/Federal Trade Commission's Invitation to Comment: http://epic.org/redirect/092309_FTCComment.htmlEPIC's Page on the Federal Trade Commission: http://mail.privacy.org/privacy/internet/ftc/Office of Legal Counsel Releases Memos on Einstein 2.0On September 18, 2009, the Office of Legal Counsel released twoopinions regarding Einstein 2.0, the federal cyber-securityinitiative that monitors network activity. The Bush administrationopinion, signed January 9, 2009, concluded that Einstein 2.0 compliedwith the Constitution and applicable federal laws, provided thatusers are properly warned that it is operating. The Obamaadministration opinion, signed August 14, 2009, concurred with theearlier opinion, and also concluded that the system does not violate"state wiretapping or communications privacy laws," but EPIC hasargued that Einstein should be subject to the Privacy Act. Also,documents previously obtained by EPIC under the Freedom ofInformation Act revealed that network monitoring tools often exceedtheir legal authority.Wikipedia Page on the Einstein Program: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein_%28US-CERT_program%29Bush Administration Opinion: http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/2009/e2-issues.pdfObama Administration Opinion: http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/2009/legality-of-e2.pdf EPIC's PriorObjections on Einstein: http://epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_15.11.htmlEPIC "Carnivore": http://epic.org/privacy/dpi/Proposed Settlement in California Facebook CaseFacebook has entered into a proposed agreement to end Beacon, thecontroversial advertising technique that broadcast user purchases intheir public profile. Previously, EPIC and other privacy advocatesobjected to Beacon's privacy implications and successfully persuadedFacebook to adopt opt-in for the service. Now, under the terms of aclass-action lawsuit in California, Facebook proposes to terminateBeacon and contribute $9.5 million towards the creation of afoundation dedicated to protecting online privacy. A class-actionlawsuit concerning Beacon is also pending in Texas.Proposed Agreement: http://spamnotes.com/files/31236-29497/BeaconSettlement.pdfPrior Objections to Beacon: http://blog.facebook.com/blog.php?post=7584397130 EPIC's Page onTexas Lawsuit: "Harris v. Blockbuster": http://epic.org/amicus/blockbuster/default.htmlEPIC "Facebook Privacy": http://epic.org/privacy/facebook/ EPICEPIC Testimony on the "Impact and Policy Implications ofSpyware on Consumers and Businesses." (June 2008): http://epic.org/privacy/dv/Spyware_Test061108.pdfInternet Governance Forum - United StatesThe first Internet Governance Forum-USA will take place onOctober 2, 2009 at the Center for Strategic and InternationalStudies. The forum is intended to raise awareness about Internetgovernance issues and to contribute to awareness about the InternetGovernance Forum. The one-day forum will engage civil society,government, technologists/researchers, industry and academia indiscussions about topics including management of critical Internetresources, privacy, cyber security, access, openness/freedom ofexpression, child online safety, capacity building and development.By identifying and discussing issues, participants help to broadenunderstanding and identify possible best practices that can informglobal decisions that affect the Internet.Internet Governance Forum-USA Website: http://www.igf-usa.usAgenda for Internet Governance Forum - USA, Oct. 2, 2009,Washington DC: http://thepublicvoice.org/IGF%20USA%20agenda%209-22-09.pdfInternet Governance Forum Website: http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/=======================================================================[7] EPIC Bookstore: "The Test of Our Times"=======================================================================The Test of Our Times: America Under Siege . . . And How We CanBe Safe Again" By Tom Ridge with Lary Bloom "Do you remember the scene in the Batman movie The Dark Knight, where Morgan Freeman voices strong objection to eavesdropping on all of Gotham City in order to find and capture the Joker? He agrees to oversee the effort and vows to resign when he's finished. In Gotham, the end justifies the means. Not in the United States. The price is too high." (p.111)Former Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge remembers thatscene from the 2008 summer blockbuster, and when he evokes it halfwaythrough his new memoir, it is to convey why he felt some responses toPresident Bush's warrantless wiretap program from those who did notobject to the government listening because they were doing no wrongthemselves "troublesome." Yet much of Ridge's book suggeststhat he saw himself in that scene, a Morgan Freeman to thePresident's Bruce Wayne.Secretary Ridge paints himself as a sympathetic figure, aprincipled public servant who did the best he could at anear-impossible task. As he tells the story of the origins of theDepartment of Homeland Security, he occasionally criticizes hisformer colleagues, but more often paints them with a similar brush.For instance, even while he clearly disapproved of the warrantlessprogram, he is sure to object only to the fact that theAdministration's decision to keep its legal analysis a secret"presented an appearance of employing unauthorized power."In a much-reported chapter entitled "The Politics of Terrorism,Part 2," Ridge discusses two episodes in the run-up to the 2004election. The first was when the team in charge of the scale agreedto temporarily raise the threat level from yellow to orange for NewYork City, Newark, and Washington, D.C. On August 1, just beforeRidge was to announce the increased level, the White House called andasked him to add a few sentences, crediting the intelligenceinformation to "the president's leadership in the war on terror."Ridge reports that agreeing to add the words is one of his fewregrets. The second episode was when a new video of Osama Bin Ladenappeared only days before the 2004 election. According to Ridge,Attorney General John Ashcroft and Secretary of Defense DonaldRumsfeld pushed hard to raise the level, while he and FBI DirectorRobert Mueller were strongly opposed. Eventually, the level was notraised. He never goes so far as to say the drive to raise the levelwas definitely political, but Ridge acknowledges the possibility.This was too much for the Bush Administration's Morgan Freeman, andhe resigned soon after.While much has been made of these passages, the rest of the booktracks a similar theme. Ridge shows the post-9/11 world inside DHSand the broader Administration as one in which the potentialconsequences of failure were so great that its leaders were drivennot by power, or politics, but by fear.--Jared Kaprove================================EPIC Publications:"Litigation Under the Federal Open Government Laws 2008," edited byHarry A. Hammitt, Marc Rotenberg, John A. Verdi, and Mark S. Zaid (EPIC2008). Price: $60.http://epic.org/bookstore/foia2008/Litigation Under the Federal Open Government Laws is the mostcomprehensive, authoritative discussion of the federal open access laws.This updated version includes new material regarding the substantialFOIA amendments enacted on December 31, 2007. Many of the recentamendments are effective as of December 31, 2008. The standard referencework includes in-depth analysis of litigation under Freedom ofInformation Act, Privacy Act, Federal Advisory Committee Act, Governmentin the Sunshine Act. The fully updated 2008 volume is the 24th editionof the manual that lawyers, journalists and researchers have relied onfor 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.htmlThis clear, comprehensive introduction to the field of informationprivacy law allows instructors to enliven their teaching of fundamentalconcepts by addressing both enduring and emerging controversies. TheSecond Edition addresses numerous rapidly developing areas of privacylaw, including: identity theft, government data mining and electronicsurveillance law, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act,intelligence sharing, RFID tags, GPS, spyware, web bugs, and more.Information Privacy Law, Second Edition, builds a cohesive foundationfor an exciting course in this rapidly evolving area of law.================================"Privacy & Human Rights 2006: An International Survey of Privacy Lawsand Developments" (EPIC 2007). Price: $75. http://www.epic.org/phr06/This annual report by EPIC and Privacy International provides anoverview of key privacy topics and reviews the state of privacy in over75 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 privacyand data protection ever published.================================"The Public Voice WSIS Sourcebook: Perspectives on the World Summit onthe Information Society" (EPIC 2004). Price: $40.http://www.epic.org/bookstore/pvsourcebookThis resource promotes a dialogue on the issues, the outcomes, and theprocess of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS). Thisreference guide provides the official UN documents, regional andissue-oriented perspectives, and recommendations and proposals forfuture action, as well as a useful list of resources and contacts forindividuals and organizations that wish to become more involved in theWSIS 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 DeskReference" of the privacy world, is the leading resource for students,attorneys, researchers, and journalists interested in pursuing privacylaw in the United States and around the world. It includes the fulltexts of major privacy laws and directives such as the Fair CreditReporting Act, the Privacy Act, and the OECD Privacy Guidelines, as wellas an up-to-date section on recent developments. New materials includethe APEC Privacy Framework, the Video Voyeurism Prevention Act, and theCAN-SPAM Act.================================"Filters and Freedom 2.0: Free Speech Perspectives on Internet ContentControls" (EPIC 2001). Price: $20.http://www.epic.org/bookstore/filters2.0A collection of essays, studies, and critiques of Internet contentfiltering. These papers are instrumental in explaining why filteringthreatens free expression.================================EPIC publications and other books on privacy, open government, freeexpression, crypto and governance can be ordered at:EPIC Bookstore http://www.epic.org/bookstore================================EPIC also publishes EPIC FOIA Notes, which provides brief summaries ofinteresting documents obtained from government agencies under theFreedom of Information Act.Subscribe to EPIC FOIA Notes at:https:/mailman.epic.org/mailman/listinfo/foia_notes=======================================================================[8] Upcoming Conferences and Events======================================================================="The Net will not forget," European conference on ICT and Privacy,Copenhagen, Denmark, September 23-24, 2009. For more information:http://www.ict-privacy.dk/"Secure Telework and Remote Access", Ari Schwartz, Telework ExchangeTown Hall Meeting, Washington, DC, September 24, 2009. For moreinformation: http://www.cdt.org3rd International Conference "Keeping Children and Young People SafeOnline," Warsaw, Poland, September 29-30, 2009. For more information:http://tinyurl.com/KCYPSO"6th Communia Workshop: Memory Institutions and Public Domain"Barcelona, Spain, October 1-2, 2009. For more information:http://www.communia-project.eu/ws06Engaging Data Forum, MIT, October 12-13, 2009. For more information:http://senseable.mit.edu/engagingdata/registration.html10th German Big Brother Awards, Bielefeld, Germany, October 16, 2009.For more information: http://www.bigbrotherawards.deeChallenges 2009, Istanbul, Turkey, October 21-23, 2009. For moreinformation: http://www.echallenges.org/e2009/default.aspBig Brother Awards Switzerland, Zurich, Switzerland, October 24, 2009.For more information:http://www.bigbrotherawards.ch/2009/3rd European Privacy Open Space, Vienna, Austria, October 24-25, 2009.For more information: http://www.privacyos.euAustrian Big Brother Awards Vienna, Austria, October 25, 2009. Deadlinefor nominations: 21 September 2009. For more information:http://www.bigbrotherawards.atFree Culture Forum: Organization and Action, Barcelona, Spain, October29 - November 1, 2009. For more information: http://fcforum.netFree Society Conference and Nordic Summit, Gothenburg, Sweden, November13-15, 2009. For more information: http://www.fscons.org3rd European Privacy Open Space, Vienna, Austria, October 24-25, 2009.For more information: http://www.privacyos.euGlobal Privacy Standards in a Global World, The Public Voice, Madrid,Spain, November 3, 2009. For more information:http://thepublicvoice.org/events/madrid09/31st International Conference of Data Protection and PrivacyCommissioners, Madrid, Spain, November 4-6, 2009. For more information,http://epic.org/redirect/072009_31Conf_IntlDPA.htmlUN Internet Governance Forum, Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt, November 15-18,2009. For more information: http://www.intgovforum.org/Privacy 2010, Stanford, March 23 - 25, 2010. For more information:http://codex.stanford.edu/privacy2010=======================================================================Join EPIC on Facebook=======================================================================Join the Electronic Privacy Information Center on Facebookhttp//facebook.com/epicprivacyhttp://epic.org/facebookStart a discussion on privacy. Let us know your thoughts. Stay up todate with EPIC's events. Support EPIC.=======================================================================Privacy Policy=======================================================================The EPIC Alert mailing list is used only to mail the EPIC Alert and tosend notices about EPIC activities. We do not sell, rent or share ourmailing list. We also intend to challenge any subpoena or other legalprocess seeking access to our mailing list. We do not enhance (link toother databases) our mailing list or require your actual name.In the event you wish to subscribe or unsubscribe your e-mail addressfrom this list, please follow the above instructions under "subscriptioninformation."=======================================================================About EPIC=======================================================================The Electronic Privacy Information Center is a public interest researchcenter in Washington, DC. It was established in 1994 to focus publicattention on emerging privacy issues such as the Clipper Chip, theDigital Telephony proposal, national ID cards, medical record privacy,and the collection and sale of personal information. EPIC publishes theEPIC Alert, pursues Freedom of Information Act litigation, and conductspolicy research. For more information, see http://www.epic.org or writeEPIC, 1718 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 200, Washington, DC 20009. +1 202483 1140 (tel), +1 202 483 1248 (fax).=======================================================================Donate to EPIC=======================================================================If you'd like to support the work of the Electronic Privacy InformationCenter, contributions are welcome and fully tax-deductible. Checksshould 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/donateYour contributions will help support Freedom of Information Act andFirst Amendment litigation, strong and effective advocacy for the rightof privacy and efforts to oppose government regulation of encryption andexpanding wiretapping powers.Thank you for your support.=======================================================================Subscription Information=======================================================================Subscribe/unsubscribe via web interface:http://mailman.epic.org/mailman/listinfo/epic_newsBack issues are available at: http://www.epic.org/alertThe EPIC Alert displays best in a fixed-width font, such as Courier.------------------------- END EPIC Alert 16.18 ------------------------.
