======================================================================= E P I C A l e r t=======================================================================Volume 16.20 October 23, 2009----------------------------------------------------------------------- Published by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) Washington, D.C. http://www.epic.org/alert/epic_alert_1620.html "Defend Privacy. Support EPIC." http://epic.org/donate=======================================================================Table of Contents=======================================================================[1] EPIC Urges Court to Protect Speech of Privacy Advocate[2] Agency Seeks Comments on Definition of Personal Data[3] EPIC Recommends Safeguards for Voting Systems[4] Privacy Groups Say Homeland Security Privacy Office Failing[5] Privacy Groups Urge Google Books Judge to Protect User Privacy[6] News in Brief[7] EPIC Bookstore: "Delete"[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 Urges Court to Protect Speech of Privacy Advocate=======================================================================On October 20, 2009, EPIC filed a "friend of the court" brief with theFourth Circuit Court of Appeals, urging the court to hold that theFirst Amendment protects the speech of Betty Ostergren, a privacyadvocate.Ostergren runs a Website calling for improved privacy rights and theremoval of private information from public records. Virginia provides"secure remote access" to certain public records, including courtrecords that contain "several hundred million documents with SSNs."Ostergren obtained unredacted public documents through the secureremote access system and posted the documents, including SocialSecurity Numbers, on her Website. Ostergren argued that posting therecords informs the public about the online availability of personalinformation, and increases transparency and oversight.Under Virginia law, Ostergren could be prosecuted for publishing SSNs,even though Virginia makes the numbers widely available. The PersonalInformation Privacy Act provides that "a person shall not . . .[i]ntentionally communicate another individual's social security numberto the general public." The previous version of the statute provided anexception for "records required by law to be open to the public."Before the revised provision went into effect, Ostergren filed acomplaint in the United States District Court for the Eastern Districtof Virginia, alleging that the revised provision was unconstitutionalunder the First Amendment and applicable Supreme Court precedent.The District Court held that the provision was unconstitutional asapplied to her website. The court found that Ostergren's websiteaddressed a matter of public concern, and that Virginia did not appearto regard the protection of SSNs as an "interest of the highest order"because it made some records available online and did not fund theredaction of the records.The Virginia Attorney General appealed to the Court of Appeals for theFourth Circuit. EPIC's brief urges the appeals court to uphold thelower court's ruling, arguing that her activity is pure speech intendedto call attention to the precise problems of SSN availability bypublishing the SSNs of the relevant Virginia state officials who makethe SSNs available. The Supreme Court has consistently held that suchspeech may be punished only under extraordinary circumstances.Moreover, protecting Ms. Ostergren's constitutional right to freespeech will not unduly interfere with the Commonwealth's ability toprotect its citizens' privacy against data mining and disclosure bycommercial interests because commercial speech is governed by a lowerstandard.EPIC Brief: http://epic.org/privacy/ostergren/Ostergren_EPIC_Amicus_Brief.pdfVirginia Attorney General Brief: http://epic.org/privacy/ostergren/Appellant%27s%20opening%20brief.pdfOstergren's Website: http://www.thevirginiawatchdog.com/%20Lower%20CourtDecision: http://www.epic.org/redirect/102209ostergren.htmlEPIC: Social Security Numbers: http://epic.org/privacy/ssn/EPIC: Identity Theft: http://epic.org/privacy/idtheft/=======================================================================[2] Agency Seeks Comments on Definition of Personal Data=======================================================================The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) plans to modifysections of the federal Privacy Rule that was issued under HIPAA. TheDepartment issued an interim final rule that would ensure geneticinformation is not considered in determining health care eligibility,in hopes of encouraging more people to participate in genetic testingto better detect and prevent illnesses. HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebeliusstated, "protect[ing] Americans undergoing genetic testing from havingthe results of that testing used against them by their insurancecompanies is one of the 'first major new civil rights' of the newcentury." This rule will increase "[c]onsumer confidence in genetictesting[, which] can now grow and help researchers get a better handleon the genetic basis of diseases."The proposed changes would clarify the scope of privacy andconfidentiality of genetic information. According to Labor DepartmentSecretary Hilda L. Solis, "Today's genetic technologies yield data thatare vital to helping Americans make personal, medical decisions. It isessential that we protect such information and ensure it is not misusedby health plans or insurers. The rules issued today protect individualsagainst the unwarranted use of information related to their personalhealth, because no one should have to fear that disclosure of theirmedical data will put their job or health coverage at risk."Specifically, HHS proposes to modify the Privacy Rule, pursuant to theGenetic Information Nondiscrimination Act Title I, to prohibitgroup health plans from using or disclosing personally identifiablehealth information. This would explicitly include genetic information,for underwriting purposes. Thus, group health plans and issuers cannotincrease premiums, deny enrollment, or impose pre-existing conditionexclusions based on the results of an enrollee's genetic information.These prohibitions already apply to the individual health insurancemarket, as regulated by the Act.Public comments on the proposed rule are due December 7, 2009. EPIC isrecommending that HHS pay particular attention to the problem of datareidentification.Department of Health and Human Services: http://www.hhs.govPrivacy Rule: http://www.epic.org/redirect/102209privrule.htmlGenetic Information Nondiscrimination Act: http://www.epic.org/redirect/102209geninfoact.htmlHHS Press Release: New Rules Protect Patients' Genetic information: http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2009pres/10/20091001b.htmlHHS Proposed Rule Modifying HIPAA: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/pdf/E9-22492.pdfEPIC: Reidentification: http://www.epic.org/privacy/reidentification=======================================================================[3] EPIC Recommends Safeguards for Voting Systems=======================================================================The Election Assistance Commission (EAC) recently closed its latestrequest for public input into the process of developing new federalguidelines on voting system technology to be used federal elections.The standards, when final, would replace the 2005 version and be thefirst major rewrite of voting systems standards in more than fiveyears.The most recent comment period marked the second 120-day commentperiod for the Commission's work to redraft standards for federalvoting system testing and certification. The "Draft Standards" documentreleased for the most recent comment period had significant,unexplained changes from the document released for the first 120-daycomment period held in 2008. The document released by the EAC in 2008for that comment period included provisions for "software independence"and an "innovation class" for voting systems. Both of these proposalsare missing from the 2009 opportunity to comment on the ElectionAssistance Commission's efforts to update standards for voting systems.EPIC's comments to the agency raised questions about transparency inthe drafting process for the next iteration of the Voluntary VotingSystem Guidelines. EPIC questioned why the Technical GuidelinesDevelopment Committee currently lacks a role in the drafting. TheTechnical Guidelines Development Committee was established to informthe agency on the drafting of voting system standards, but has not metsince August 2007 and was officially disbanded in 2009. Additionally,EPIC's comment noted that past public comments submitted on earlieriterations of the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines are not availableon the agency's Web site and that differences between versions of thedocument are not explained. In its comments, EPIC stressed theimportance of protection of the secret ballot cast in public elections.EPIC urged the Commission to include in its guidelines strong supportof open government procedures that allow public access to the electionadministration process. EPIC also urged the Commission to includeguidance that addresses the need to minimize and, when possible,eliminate the threat to voters' privacy. Finally, EPIC reiterated itssupport for "software independence" and the "innovation class asrecommended by the Technical Guidelines Development Committee.EPIC 2009 Comments to the EAC: http://epic.org/privacy/voting/EPIC_VVSG_v.1.1-9_28_2009.pdfVoluntary Voting System Guidelines 2009 120-Day Comment PeriodDocument: http://epic.org/privacy/voting/VVSG_1-1_Volume_1.pdfVoluntary Voting System Guidelines 2008 120-Day Comment PeriodDocument: http://epic.org/privacy/voting/final_tgdc2007.pdfEPIC 2008 Comments to the EAC: http://www.epic.org/privacy/voting/2007vvsg_5508.pdfEPIC Voting Privacy Page: http://epic.org/privacy/voting/=======================================================================[4] Privacy Groups Say Homeland Security Privacy Office Failing=======================================================================EPIC and a number of other privacy and civil liberties groups have senta letter to the House Committee on Homeland Security, in response tothe Annual Report recently issued by the Chief Privacy Officer of theDepartment of Homeland Security. The annual report discusses all of theactivities of the Privacy Office from July 2008 to June 2009. Notablyabsent from the report were ways in which the Office had performed itsstatutory obligation to assure "that the use of technologies sustain,and do not erode, privacy protections."To help the Officer achieve these goals, Congress granted considerableinvestigative authority, including access to nearly all documentationrelating to Department programs, the power to conduct investigationsinto any program or operation, the power to take sworn affidavits, andthe power to issue subpoenas with the approval of the Secretary. Yetthe section of the annual report entitled "Compliance" only brieflydiscusses ways in which the Office has affected Department policy.Instead, it focuses almost entirely on the conducting of assessments.The letter from EPIC and the other organizations focused on four majorprograms within the Department and highlighted the Privacy Office'slack of action on each one:-Fusion Centers and the Information Sharing Environment-Whole Body Imaging-Closed-Circuit Television Surveillance-Suspicionless Electronic Border SearchesAs the letter states, in each of the above cases, the Privacy Office"has written Privacy Impact Assessments, but these Assessments have noforce, no meaningful effect on the Department’s activities." Also, ineach case, the Office has focused on justifying the legality ofDepartment behavior, made recommendations with no force, or used theAssessment process as an outreach tool in an attempt to explain awayviolations of privacy. The letter states that the job of the ChiefPrivacy Officer, "as defined in the statute is to protect the privacyof American citizens, through investigation and oversight. If thiscannot be achieved by an internal office, then the situation calls foran independent office that can truly evaluate these programs and makerecommendations in the best interests of the American public."The letter ends by urging the Committee to open an investigation intothe Privacy Office and to consider replacing it with an independentoffice.EPIC and Other Groups' Letter: http://epic.org/security/DHS_CPO_Priv_Coal_Letter.pdfDHS Privacy Office 2009 Annual Report: http://www.epic.org/redirect/102209privrpt.htmlDHS Privacy Office: http://www.dhs.gov/privacyStatutory Obligations of CHS Chief Privacy Officer: http://www.epic.org/redirect/102209statob.html=======================================================================[5] Privacy Groups Urge Google Books Judge to Protect User Privacy=======================================================================In hopes of influencing the revision of the Google Books Settlementseveral organizations and experts issued an October 9, 2009 letter toGoogle regarding the Settlement. The writers included EPIC, libraryassociations, nonprofit organization, and privacy authors andpublishers (represented by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, theAmerican Civil Liberties Union Foundation, and the Samuelson Law,Technology & Public Policy Clinic). The letter was written to urgeGoogle to include enforceable privacy protections along with theamended settlement agreement that the company is currently negotiating.The letter cited the failure of the settlement to ensure that readersusing the Google Book Search services will have their privacy protectedas much as readers using physical books. This failure, the letter said,is not only the basis for some objections to the settlement, but hasalso been raised as a concern by those who support the settlement."Providing real, enforceable privacy protections may help reduce thenumber of objections that the court must consider as the case movesforward," the letter writers argued.The letter writers also stated that current Google Books Privacy Policydoes not go far enough, saying "We believe that it is vital that Googlecommit to additional privacy protections and that such commitments beenforceable by the court presiding over the settlement."EPIC has been consistently involved in the Google Books settlement. OnSeptember 4, 2009, EPIC filed papers in federal district court on theproposed settlement between Google, authors, and publishers. The GoogleBooks Settlement would create a single digital library, operated byGoogle, but currently fails to limit Google's use of the personalinformation collected. EPIC stated that the settlement "mandates thecollection of the most intimate personal information, threatenswell-established standards that safeguard intellectual freedom, andimperils longstanding Constitutional rights, including the right toread anonymously." EPIC further warned that the Google Books deal"threatens to eviscerate state library privacy laws that safeguardlibrary patrons in the United States."EPIC has also conducted an in-depth analysis of the Google Booksprivacy policy and found it to be lacking in satisfactory privacysafeguards. EPIC cited several provisions in the policy that allow forthe collection, storage, and sharing of massive amounts of personallyidentifiable user information. EPIC advocated for the inclusion ofprivacy provisions in the Google Books Settlement and urged Google tofix the privacy policy and improve privacy protection.October 9, 2009 Letter Issued to Google Regarding Settlement: http://www.epic.org/redirect/102209gbletter.htmlEPIC: Google Books Settlement and Privacy: http://epic.org/privacy/googlebooks/default.htmlEPIC: Google Books Litigation: http://epic.org/privacy/googlebooks/litigation.htmlEPIC: Google Books: Policy Without Privacy: http://epic.org/privacy/googlebooks/policy.html#policyGoogle Books Privacy Policy: http://books.google.com/googlebooks/privacy.html=======================================================================[6] News in Brief=======================================================================TSA Expands Passenger Electronic Strip Search ProgramThe Transportation Security Administration has plans to greatlyexpand its use of whole body imaging machines at airports around thecountry. The x-ray machines, which each cost over $100,000, capturedetailed, graphic images of passengers' naked bodies. In June, theHouse of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a measure that wouldrestrict Administrations's use of these machines. The measure is pending in theSenate. The Privacy Coalition has urged the Department of HomelandSecurity to suspend the program until privacy and security risks can befully evaluated. EPIC has also filed Freedom of Information Actrequests for the contracts with the vendor Rapiscan.EPIC: Whole Body Imaging: http://epic.org/privacy/airtravel/backscatter/EPIC: Spotlight on Surveillance: http://mail.privacy.org/privacy/surveillance/spotlight/0605/House Bill HR 2027: http://www.epic.org/redirect/102209hb.htmlTSA's Website on Whole Body Imaging: http://www.tsa.gov/approach/tech/imaging_technology.shtmCalifornia Governor Vetoes Consumer Privacy Bill, but Signs Bill toStrengthen Celebrity PrivacyGovernor Schwarzenegger has terminated S.B. 20, a bill that would havestrengthened California's data breach laws by requiring that consumersbe notified every time their privacy was compromised. But just dayslater, the Governor signed A.B. 524, an amendment to California'scurrent anti-paparazzi law that will protect the privacy of celebritiesby making it easier to sue photographers and media outlets for takingor purchasing unauthorized pictures. For more information about privacyin California, see the California Office of Information Security andPrivacy Protection.Data Breach Bill: S.B. 20: http://www.epic.org/redirect/102209databrbill.htmlAnti-Paparazzi Amendment: A.B. 524: http://www.epic.org/redirect/102209antipap.htmlCalifornia's Current Anti-paparazzi Law: http://www.epic.org/redirect/102209currentantipap.htmlCalifornia Office of Information Security and Privacy Protection: http://www.oispp.ca.gov/default.aspEPIC Meets with Spanish Delegation on Freedom of Information LawsLast week, EPIC met with a delegation from Spain, which includedprofessors, journalists, and lawyers, to offer advice on drafting aSpanish freedom of information law. Currently, Spain is the only majorcountry in the European Union that does not have such a law Delegatesfrom Spain traveled to the U.S. to meet with several FOIA experts anddiscuss the details of FOIA law, in hopes that this would inform thecreation of their own open government law. EPIC assisted the delegationby discussing important advantages and disadvantages of United Statesopen government laws.EPIC: Open Government: http://epic.org/open_gov/US Freedom of Information Act: http://www.epic.org/redirect/102209FOIA.htmlEPIC FOIA Litigation Manual 2008: http://epic.org/bookstore/foia2008/European Commissioner Calls for Privacy Safeguards for InternetCommissioner Viviane Reding, Member of the European Commission incharge of Information Society and Media, reaffirmed support for an openInternet and called for new initiatives for "the protection of privacyand personal data in the online environment." Reding cited threecommercial developments that require close attention: socialnetworking, behavioral advertising and RFID "smart chips." EPIC will behosting an international conference on privacy protection in Madrid (inconjunction with the annual meeting of the Data ProtectionCommissioners) that will explore these topics and other related issues.Commissioner Reding's Biography: http://ec.europa.eu/commission_barroso/reding/index_en.htmCommissioner's Press Release: http://www.epic.org/redirect/102209commpr.htmlEPIC: International Privacy Protection Conference: http://thepublicvoice.org/events/madrid09Annual Meeting of Data Protection Commissioners: http://www.epic.org/redirect/102209procomm.htmlEPIC Speaks on Google Books, Privacy at "D is for Digitize" ConferenceOn October 9, 2009, EPIC spoke at New York Law School's "D is forDigitize" conference, highlighting the privacy threats posed by theGoogle Books settlement. EPIC discussed its September motion tointervene in the lawsuit, and explained why it has asked a New Yorkfederal court to reject the proposed deal unless the parties addmeaningful privacy safeguards. The settlement would resolve a complaintfiled by rightsholders against Google, and arose from Google'slarge-scale digitization of books. On September 23, 2009, the partieswithdrew the proposed settlement and announced plans to renegotiateterms. The new settlement must be submitted for court review byNovember 9, 2009. In July, the Department of Justice announced aninvestigation of the proposed agreement. EPIC and other experts havecriticized the settlement on privacy and antitrust grounds.EPIC Google Books Settlement and Privacy: http://epic.org/privacy/googlebooks/default.htmlEPIC Google Books Litigation Page: http://epic.org/privacy/googlebooks/litigation.htmlEPIC Google Books: Policy Without Privacy: http://epic.org/privacy/googlebooks/policy.html"D is for Digitize" Conference: http://www.epic.org/redirect/102209digitize.html=======================================================================[7] EPIC Bookstore: "Delete"======================================================================="Delete: the virtue of forgetting in the digital age" By ViktorMayer-SchönbergerTo purchase: http://www.epic.org/redirect/102209book.html "For millennia, the relationship between remembering and forgetting remained clear. Remembering was hard and costly, and humans had to choose deliberately what to remember. The default was to forget. In the digital age, in what is perhaps the most fundamental change for humans since our humble beginnings, that balance of remembering and forgetting has become inverted."In "Delete," Viktor Mayer-Schönberger examines the role of rememberingand forgetting throughout human history. From early cave paintings tothe evolution of the written word, the act of remembering was alaborious task, so by default most information was forgotten. However,the advent of digital technology has stripped our natural ability toforget, depriving us of important societal benefits.Mayer-Schönberger, who is the director of the Information andInnovation Policy Research Centre at the National University ofSingapore's Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, deconstructs thetechnological factors that facilitate our inability to forget, fromdigitization to cheap storage. Although several other scholars andexperts have proposed solutions that would restore our ability toforget, Mayer-Schönberger explains why those fixes are insufficient andproposes an alternative - imposing expiration dates on information."Delete" begins by retracing the role of remembering and forgetting inhuman history. For thousands of years, humans have tried to invent waysto remember more and forget less. Beginning with language and simpleoral communication, humans soon developed the ability to store externalmemory and pass memories on to others through paintings. By the fourthmillennium BCE, humans had developed script, and more economical meansof printing words would eventually follow. However, until recently,forgetting has always been at least a little bit easier and cheaperthan remembering. Therefore, humans always had to decide what wasimportant enough to remember.In the digital age, however, remembering has become the norm: "Moderntechnology has fundamentally altered what information can beremembered, how it is remembered, and at what cost." Mayer-Schönbergeridentifies four "main technological drivers" that have catalyzed thechange: digitization, cheap storage, easy retrieval, and global reach.Digitization has allowed the "lossless, cheap, and easy copying ofdigital information," which enables "a new generation of informationprocessing, storage, retrieval, and sharing that is vastly superior toits analog counterparts." Cheap storage allows for vast amounts ofinformation to be stored indefinitely, and it is likely that "storagecapacity will continue to double and storage costs to halve about everyeighteen to twenty-four months, leaving us with an abundance of cheapdigital storage." Digital tools streamlining the easy retrieval ofinformation "strip[s] away original context," and even withre-contextualization efforts, much of the original context of theinformation is lost. Finally, as a result of global reach and sharingover the Internet, "our capacity as individuals to control informationis vastly reduced."Mayer-Schönberger then argues that the immortality of digital memoryadversely affects the "power" and "time" of our information.Information is power, but the accessibility, durability, andcomprehensiveness of the available digital information alter thebalance of power in a way that harms individuals and influences howhumans behave. Moreover, he argues, "digital remembering negates time,and thereby threatens our ability to decide rationally." Afterexplaining why forgetting is important in the digital age,Mayer-Schönberger examines "six possible responses aimed at preventingor mitigating the challenges of power and time posed by digitalmemory." He considers three responses - digital abstinence, privacyrights, and privacy digital rights management - which "[focus] on theability of individuals to control the sharing of information withothers." He also considers three others - cognitive adjustment,information ecology, and full contextualization - which focus on "thehuman process of using information for decision-making." However,none, he argues, "offered a silver bullet" because none addressed bothcomponents. Mayer-Schönberger then suggests another solution:"associating information we store in digital memory with expirationdates that user set." By setting expiration dates, people will be ableto both control the sharing of information with others, as well as bemore aware of the "finiteness of information." He considers thenumerous methods and variations of expiration that would be possible,and explains why the concept improves upon the six alternativesolutions. Mayer-Schönberger's book raises serious questions about therole of forgetting in our society, and his solution is an elegant onethat addresses many of the problems associated with digital remembering.--Matthew Phillips================================EPIC Publications:"Litigation Under the Federal Open Government Laws 2008," edited byHarry A. Hammitt, Marc Rotenberg, John A. Verdi, and Mark S. Zaid(EPIC 2008). Price: $60.http://epic.org/bookstore/foia2008/ Litigation Under the Federal Open Government Laws is the mostcomprehensive, authoritative discussion of the federal open accesslaws. This updated version includes new material regarding thesubstantial FOIA amendments enacted on December 31, 2007. Many of therecent amendments are effective as of December 31, 2008. The standardreference work includes in-depth analysis of litigation under Freedomof Information Act, Privacy Act, Federal Advisory Committee Act,Government in the Sunshine Act. The fully updated 2008 volume is the24th edition of the manual that lawyers, journalists and researchershave relied on for more than 25 years.================================"Information Privacy Law: Cases and Materials, Second Edition" DanielJ. 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, aswell as an up-to-date section on recent developments. New materialsinclude the APEC Privacy Framework, the Video Voyeurism Prevention Act,and the CAN-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 Bookstorehttp://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=======================================================================eChallenges 2009, Istanbul, Turkey, October 21-23, 2009.For more information: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.For more information:http://www.bigbrotherawards.atFree Culture Forum: Organization and Action, Barcelona, Spain, October29 - November 1, 2009.For more information:http://fcforum.netEmployee surveillance in Europe: Balancing privacy rights and managementcontrol, Madrid, Spain, 3 November, 2009.For more information:http://www.privacylaws.com/templates/EventPage.aspx?id=1437Global 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.htmlFree Society Conference and Nordic Summit, Gothenburg, Sweden, November13-15, 2009.For more information:http://www.fscons.orgUN 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 to date 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 16.20 ------------------------.