========================================================================
E P I C A l e r t
========================================================================
Volume 14.20 October 6, 2007
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Published by the
Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC)
Washington, D.C.
http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_14.20.html
========================================================================
Table of Contents
========================================================================
[1] EPIC to Senate: Impose Privacy Standards in Proposed Google Deal
[2] Release of Privacy and Human Rights Report
[3] Challenge to Indiana Voter ID Requirement Reaches Supreme Court
[4] EPIC Spotlight: Secure Flight Should Remain Grounded
[5] Congress to Investigate Warrantless Surveillance
[6] News in Brief
[7] EPIC Bookstore: "The Presidency, Privacy, and Domestic Surveillance"
[8] Upcoming Conferences and Events
- Subscription Information
- Privacy Policy
- About EPIC
- Donate to EPIC
========================================================================
[1] EPIC to Senate: Impose Privacy Standards in Proposed Google Deal
========================================================================
In testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee on September 27 about
the pending Google-DoubleClick merger, EPIC Executive Director Marc
Rotenberg said that the Federal Trade Commission should establish
privacy safeguards as a condition of the merger. EPIC filed a complaint
before the Commission in April regarding the merger, similar to other
complaints filed by EPIC in the DoubleClick-Abacus merger, the Microsoft
Passport matter, and Choicepoint. Since the filing of the EPIC
complaint, competition authorities around the world have opened
investigations.
At the hearing, entitled, "An Examination of the Google-DoubleClick
Merger and the Online Advertising Industry: What Are the Risks for
Competition and Privacy?," Senator Herb Kohl agreed that privacy is an
integral part of the antitrust review. "Some commentators believe that
antitrust policymakers should not be concerned with these fundamental
issues of privacy, and merely be content to limit their review to
traditional questions of effects on advertising rates. We disagree,"
Sen. Kohl said. "The antitrust laws were written more than a century ago
out of a concern with the effects of undue concentrations of economic
power for our society as a whole, and not just merely their effects on
consumers' pocketbooks. No one concerned with antitrust policy should
stand idly by if industry consolidation jeopardizes the vital privacy
interests of our citizens so essential to our democracy."
Google's David Drummond stated that the company has strong privacy
safeguards, and reiterated its call for global privacy standards based
on the APEC framework, which has been called weak. Google is under
investigation for possible violations of the current global privacy
standards, based on the consumer-protective OECD guidelines. Agencies in
the US, Canada, Australia and Europe are investigating Google's
policies.
Other participants at the hearing were Brad Smith of Microsoft, Scott
Cleland of Precursor, and Thomas Lenard of the Progress & Freedom
Foundation. Smith and Cleland both detailed significant antitrust
problems in the proposed merger. Smith said, "This merger will
undoubtedly result in higher profits for the operator of the dominant
advertising pipeline, but it will be bad for everyone else." He
continued, stating, "It will be bad for publishers, bad for advertisers
and, most importantly, bad for consumers."
On September 26, in a letter to the European Commissioner for
Competition, the Data Protection Commissioner of the German federal
state of Schleswig-Holstein urged the rejection of the proposed
Google-DoubleClick merger. "At present we have to assume that in the
event of a takeover of DoubleClick the databases of that company will be
integrated into those of Google, with the result that fundamental
provisions of the European Data Protection Directive will be violated,"
said Thilo Weichert. The European Commission Directorate on Competition
is currently investigating the proposed merger.
Testimony of EPIC before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Proposed
Google-DoubleClick Merger (Sept. 27, 2007) (PDF):
http://www.epic.org/privacy/ftc/google/epic_test_092707.pdf
Letter from Thilo Weichert, Data Protection Commissioner of the German
federal state of Schleswig-Holstein, to the European Commissioner for
Competition (Sept. 26, 2007) (in German):
http://www.epic.org/redirect/german1007.html
EPIC's Page on the Proposed Google-DoubleClick Merger (containing the
original FTC complaint and supplements):
http://www.epic.org/privacy/ftc/google/
Senate Judiciary Committee, "An Examination of the Google-DoubleClick
Merger and the Online Advertising Industry: What Are the Risks for
Competition and Privacy?":
http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearing.cfm?id=2955
APEC Privacy Framework:
http://www.epic.org/redirect/apec_framework.html
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Privacy
Guidelines:
http://www.epic.org/redirect/oecd_guidelines.html
========================================================================
[2] Release of Privacy and Human Rights Report
========================================================================
The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) and Privacy
International released the 9th "Privacy and Human Rights" report last
week at the International Conference of Data Protection and Privacy
Commissioners in Montreal. "Privacy and Human Rights: an international
survey of privacy laws and developments" provides an overview of key
privacy topics and reviews the state of privacy in over 75 countries
around the world. It singles out a number of global trends, such as
expansion of identification technologies, new data retention schemes,
and intensified international data transfers, among others.
According to EPIC's Executive Director, Marc Rotenberg, "the report
makes clear that what is needed today is the enforcement of privacy
rights as fundamental human rights and not ever-weaker policy frameworks
that allow governments and businesses to do whatever they wish with the
personal information of individuals."
The leading privacy resource for policymakers, experts, government
officials, and activists alike, "Privacy and Human Rights" is the most
comprehensive report on privacy and data protection ever published. By
publishing this report annually, EPIC and Privacy International seek to
make readers aware of recent developments and emerging issues. A few
examples of emerging issues include: the biometric identification of
individuals in Iraq, the proliferation of surveillance systems in China,
and global investigations into the proposed Google-DoubleClick merger.
"Privacy and Human Rights," which was written with the collaboration of
more than 300 privacy experts, and identifies continuing public
opposition to video surveillance, workplace monitoring and
privacy-infringing corporate practices. The current edition tracks the
adoption of new data protection and open government laws, and includes
new country reports for the Dominican Republic, Iraq, the United Arab
Emirates, Zimbabwe and the virtual world Second Life.
The Washington DC launch of "Privacy and Human Rights" will take place
on Friday, October 5, at the National Press Club. Speakers include EPIC
Chair Deborah Hurley, EPIC Executive Director Marc Rotenberg, UCLA Law
Professor Jerry Kang, and Sophie In't Veld, a member of the European
Parliament and a leading champion of privacy rights in the European
Union.
Privacy and Human Rights is available for sale at:
http:/www.epic.org/phr06/
========================================================================
[3] Challenge to Indiana Voter ID Requirement Reaches Supreme Court
========================================================================
The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a challenge to the Indiana voter
identification requirement. The issue in this case is whether
voter-identification laws unfairly keep poor people and members of
minority groups from going to the polls. Experts have argued
successfully that voting practices that violate substantial privacy
interests (e.g. publication of the SSN in the state voting rolls) are an
impermissible burden on the right to vote.
An Indiana federal district judge and a panel of the United States Court
of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit upheld the state law which requires,
with certain exceptions, that someone wanting to vote in person in a
primary or general election present a government-issued photo
identification. Prior to the enactment of this law, voters were required
only to sign a book at the polling place, where a photocopy of the
voter's signature was kept on file.
Judge Posner, writing for the majority of the appeals panel,
acknowledged that the Indiana law favors one party, and said, "No doubt
most people who don't have photo ID are low on the economic ladder and
thus, if they do vote, are more likely to vote for Democratic than
Republican candidates." Despite this finding, the majority concluded
that the dilution of the right of legitimate voters to vote as a result
of voter fraud makes the law valid. The law was purportedly passed to
help stamp out voter fraud; however, no one in Indiana has even been
prosecuted for voter fraud. Further, the panel wrote that there was no
evidence to show that there are fewer cases of fraud than there are
eligible voters whom the new law will prevent from voting.
In dissent, Judge Evans wrote that "[t]he Indiana voter photo ID law is
a not-too-thinly-veiled attempt to discourage election-day turnout by
certain folks believed to skew Democratic." As a result, Judge Evans
concluded that the law "imposes an undue burden on a recognizable
segment of potential eligible voters and that it therefore violates
those voters' rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the
Constitution."
National Committee for Voting Integrity:
http://www.ncvi.org
EPIC's page on Voting Privacy:
http://www.epic.org/privacy/voting/
========================================================================
[4] EPIC Spotlight: Secure Flight Should Remain Grounded
========================================================================
EPIC's Spotlight on Surveillance project is scrutinizing the Secure
Flight traveler prescreening program run by the Department of Homeland
Security's Transportation Security Administration. Spotlight details the
problems in the system; these issues are also discussed in recent
comments EPIC submitted to DHS about Secure Flight's proposed
rulemaking.
The Department of Homeland Security's Fiscal Year 2008 budget request is
an 8 percent increase over last year's request. Included in the $46.4
billion proposed budget for the agency is $38 million designated for
Secure Flight, on top of the $144 million that has been spent on the
program. Introduced in 2004, the Secure Flight has been roundly
criticized.
Secure Flight was intended to compare passenger information from
Passenger Name Records, which contain data given by passengers when they
book their flights, against watch lists maintained by the federal
government. However, Secure Flight morphed from a simple system of
comparing names on watchlists to a complex system where profiles are
created on passengers in order to assess the threat that they pose. TSA
sought to identify "suspicious indicators associated with travel
behavior" in passengers' itinerary PNR data.
The system was suspended in 2006, because it contained massive security
and privacy vulnerabilities. According to the Government Accountability
Office, "TSA may not have proper controls in place to protect sensitive
information." In addition to criticizing Secure Flight's lack of privacy
and security safeguards, GAO noted that the documents underlying the
program "contained contradictory and missing information."
In August, TSA detailed a revised Secure Flight program in which TSA
said Secure Flight would return to its original purpose and be used to
conduct watch-list matching. Although Secure Flight has been revamped,
it remains fundamentally flawed. The core of the program rests on
watchlists so full of errors that the Department of Justice's Inspector
General has suggested that there is "a deficiency in the integrity of
watchlist information."
In a review, the Inspector General was highly critical of the watch
lists and said the data collection and dissemination structure helped
cause "inaccurate and incomplete watchlist records." In fact, problems
at the Terrorist Screening Center, which controls the watch lists, meant
that "several known or suspected terrorists" were not on the lists,
although they should be. The Inspector General explained that this
oversight significantly affects travelers because "inaccurate,
incomplete, and obsolete watchlist information increases the chances of
innocent persons being stopped or detained during an encounter because
of being misidentified as a watchlist identity."
Accuracy and reliability problems need to be resolved before they are
used in yet another passenger profiling system to restrict the movement
of U.S. citizens. Full application of the Privacy Act requirements to
government record systems is the only way to ensure that data is
accurate and complete, which is especially important in the context of
watch lists and Secure Flight, where mistakes and misidentifications are
costly. Secure Flight should remain suspended until these problems are
resolved.
EPIC, Spotlight on Surveillance, "Secure Flight Should Remain Grounded
Until Security and Privacy Problems Are Resolved":
http://www.epic.org/privacy/surveillance/spotlight/0807/
Department of Justice, Office of Inspector General "Follow-Up Audit of
the Terrorist Screening Center, Audit Report 07-41 (Redacted for Public
Release)" (Sept. 2007) (pdf):
http://www.usdoj.gov/oig/reports/FBI/a0741/final.pdf
Department of Homeland Security, "Secure Flight Plan; Proposed Rule"
(Aug. 23, 2007):
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2007/E7-15960.htm
EPIC's page on Secure Flight:
http://www.epic.org/privacy/airtravel/secureflight.html
========================================================================
[5] Congress to Investigate Warrantless Surveillance
========================================================================
The US House Energy and Commerce committee announced that it would
investigate the current administration's domestic spying activities.
EPIC and other organizations have pressed the committee to investigate
the National Security Agency domestic spying program when it focused on
the Hewlett-Packard pretexting scandal. The committee is concerned
whether the spying program violated the Constitution and consumer
protection and privacy laws. The committee is also interested in the
position of the telephone companies and their exposure to liability for
participating in the wiretapping program in violation of the law.
The committee sent letters to AT&T, Verizon and QWEST questioning the
companies' participation in surveillance activities. It had been
reported earlier in the media that QWEST had refused participation the
program. The questions concern surveillance under the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act and National Security Letter procedures;
the use of subscriber information outside of legal authorization; and
the installation of equipment to intercept communications without legal
authorization.
The committee also asked civil liberties and privacy groups, including
EPIC, about government databases. The committee is concerned about the
effect that increasing numbers of government databases have,
particularly when the security of those databases is breached. Further,
the committee asked about the likelihood that the government would use
information for purposes other than that for which it was collected.
In inquiring about National Security Letters, the Committee references
abuses of the PATRIOT Act National Security Letters powers. EPIC's
Freedom of Information Act requests as well as a March 2007 Inspector
General's report have shown evidence of FBI abuses of these powers, and
EPIC has urged Congress to repeal the PATRIOT Act expansion of the
National Security Letter authority.
Committee Opens Investigation on Warrantless Surveillance:
http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_110/110nr98.shtml
Joint Statement of EPIC and Other Groups To House Energy and Commerce
Committee (pdf):
http://www.privacycoalition.org/coalition-ltr092806.pdf
EPIC Resources on Domestic Surveillance:
http://epic.org/features/surveillance.html
========================================================================
[6] News in Brief
========================================================================
DHS Satellite Surveillance Program May Be Put On Hold
Democratic members of the Homeland Security Committee asked the House
Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security to withhold funding for
domestic satellite surveillance programs. The National Applications
Office, a new DHS component, plans to share intelligence satellite
imagery inside the United States with non-intelligence state, local and
federal agencies. Democrats urged that funding be withheld until written
legal procedures for protecting privacy and civil liberties were
prepared.
EPIC's Resources on Domestic Surveillance:
http://epic.org/features/surveillance.html
Congress Proposes Extension of Do Not Call Initiative
The Do Not Call Improvement Act aims to prevent numbers from being
removed from the Do Not Call list. Currently, numbers that are placed on
the list remain on the list for five years, and the first numbers are
set to expire in 2008. No notice is given that the enrollment has
expired. The proposed Act would allow numbers to remain permanently once
a consumer has enrolled. More than 100 million numbers are on the list.
Do Not Call Improvement Act (H.R. 3451):
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:h.r.03541:
EPIC's page on Telemarketing:
http://www.epic.org/privacy/telemarketing/preemptiveattack.html
U.S. Sues Illinois over Law about Employment Eligibility System
On September 24, the federal government filed suit in a federal district
court seeking to block a new Illinois law, claiming it preempts federal
law. However, the state law does not place an outright ban on employer
use of the voluntary employment eligibility verification system called
E-Verify. Instead, the Illinois law prohibits employers from using the
system until the federal databases used can be certified as 99 percent
accurate. At a House Subcommittee on Social Security hearing on June 7,
EPIC urged the strengthening of privacy safeguards associated with
employment eligibility verification systems and said existing agency
database problems should be corrected before a nationwide expansion is
considered. Federal reviews have deemed the system "seriously flawed in
content and accuracy." For example, the Social Security Administration
database is estimated to include 18 million incorrect records.
U.S. v. Illinois, U.S. District Court for the Central District of
Illinois, Springfield Division (Sept. 24, 2007) (pdf):
http://www.epic.org/privacy/ssn/usvill_gov_092407.pdf
Illinois's Right to Privacy in the Workplace Act (2007):
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/publicacts/fulltext.asp?Name=095-0138
EPIC's Testimony on Employment Verification Systems before the House
Committee on Ways and Means (June 6, 2007) (pdf):
http://www.epic.org/privacy/ssn/eevs_test_060707.pdf
Department of Homeland Security Tracks Travelers' Reading Habits
The Department of Homeland Security's files on travelers include data on
their race, religion, personal items they carry (including their books),
and with whom they stay or travel, according to documents disclosed to
the Identity Project pursuant to a Freedom of Information Act request.
These detailed files are created under the Automated Targeting System,
which creates secret, terrorist "risk assessments" on tens of millions
of U.S. citizens and foreign visitors and keeps the data for 15 years.
Last month, in comments to DHS, EPIC detailed significant security and
privacy problems in ATS, and urged the agency to either suspend the
system or to fully apply all Privacy Act safeguards to any individual
subject to ATS.
The Identity Project:
http://www.papersplease.org/
EPIC's Page on the Automated Targeting System:
http://www.epic.org/privacy/travel/ats/
Federal Agent Uses Government Database to Stalk Girlfriend
A federal agent accessed the Treasury Enforcement Communications System
(TECS) in order to stalk his former girlfriend. The agent has been
indicted on charges of making a false statement to a government agency
and unlawfully obtaining information from a protected computer. The TECS
system is designed to track individuals suspected of involvement in
violations of federal law. It links with the FBI's National Criminal
Information Center and state motor vehicle records. The Agent accessed
TECS 163 times between May of 2003 and March of 2004. He tracked the
whereabouts of his ex and her family.
EPIC's page on Domestic Violence and Privacy:
http://www.epic.org/privacy/dv/
========================================================================
[7] EPIC Bookstore: "The Presidency, Privacy, and Domestic Surveillance"
========================================================================
"Takeover: The Return of the Imperial Presidency and the Subversion of
American Democracy" by Charlie Savage, (Little Brown & Co. 2007)
http://www.powells.com/biblio/1-9780316118040-1
In 2002 Congress passed legislation that established the Department of
Homeland Security. Congress also provided the funding that made Homeland
Security the third largest agency in the federal Government. As a modest
check on the powers given to this new federal agency, Congress created a
privacy office and required that it publish regular reports about
privacy violations and compliance with federal privacy laws.
All of this would seem fairly straightforward, but for the fact that the
current occupants of the White House resent Congressional authority. So
the President essentially rejected the reporting requirement, and the
agency that was putting cameras on city streets across America,
mandating national identity cards, and funding Orwellian “fusion
centers” ignored the privacy implications of its programs. One annual
report was delayed and later the President asserted in a signing
statement that he would construe the requirement for a privacy report,
“in a manner consistent with the President's constitutional authority to
supervise the unitary executive branch."
How did it get to the point that the President could choose which parts
of a law to follow and which parts of a law to ignore? That is the
question that Charlie Savage explores in this carefully argued and
thoroughly researched text on the reemergence of the imperial
presidency. Savage observes that Presidents of both parties have sought
expanded powers particularly during wartime. But President Bush's
campaign was backed by a small cadre of determined “presidentialists”
who used their knowledge of Washington and their high positions within
the administration to advance the goal of expanding Presidential powers.
Inherent powers of the President became exclusive powers of the
President. Signing statements that could provide interpretative material
for a court became definitive statements of the President's views of
constitutional authority. The “unitary executive” approached the powers
of a monarch, particularly during the six years that the President's
party controlled also the legislative and judicial branches of
government.
It may be tempting for the President's defenders to argue that much of
what the White House did was in direct response to 9-11, but Charlie
Savage's careful narrative destroys this myth. The aim to extend
Presidential powers long pre-dated the terrorist attacks. The use of
secrecy to reduce accountability was on the table with the Cheney energy
task force in the early days of the administration and continues with
current disputes about public access to information to evaluate the
effectives of the administration's education programs. And those who
remember Dick Cheney's contributions as chief of staff in the Ford
Administration know that he opposed open government laws almost thirty
years before he advised President Bush to limit public access to
information about government after 9-11. In other words, Cheney did not
respond to events of 9-11 with new rules on secrecy, but took the
occasion of 9-11 to establish long-sought secrecy rules.
What are consequences of the reemergence of the imperial presidency? The
answer may be found in the book's title. “American democracy,” Savage
suggests, is based on an effective means of checks and balances, not
simply the ability to vote a leader out of office. Without this
Constitutional system of accountability, American democracy is
diminished.
- Marc Rotenberg
================================
EPIC Publications:
"Information Privacy Law: Cases and Materials, Second Edition" Daniel J.
Solove, Marc Rotenberg, and Paul Schwartz. (Aspen 2005). Price: $98.
http://www.epic.org/redirect/aspen_ipl_casebook.html
This clear, comprehensive introduction to the field of information
privacy law allows instructors to enliven their teaching of fundamental
concepts by addressing both enduring and emerging controversies. The
Second Edition addresses numerous rapidly developing areas of privacy
law, including: identity theft, government data mining and electronic
surveillance law, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act,
intelligence sharing, RFID tags, GPS, spyware, web bugs, and more.
Information Privacy Law, Second Edition, builds a cohesive foundation
for an exciting course in this rapidly evolving area of law.
================================
"Privacy & Human Rights 2005: An International Survey of Privacy Laws
and Developments" (EPIC 2006). Price: $60.
http://www.epic.org/bookstore/phr2005/phr2005.html
This annual report by EPIC and Privacy International provides an
overview of key privacy topics and reviews the state of privacy in over
70 countries around the world. The report outlines legal protections,
new challenges, and important issues and events relating to privacy.
Privacy & Human Rights 2005 is the most comprehensive report on privacy
and data protection ever published.
================================
"FOIA 2004: Litigation Under the Federal Open Government Laws," Harry
Hammitt, David Sobel and Tiffany Stedman, editors (EPIC 2004). Price:
$40.
http://www.epic.org/bookstore/foia2004
This is the standard reference work covering all aspects of the Freedom
of Information Act, the Privacy Act, the Government in the Sunshine Act,
and the Federal Advisory Committee Act. The 22nd edition fully updates
the manual that lawyers, journalists and researchers have relied on for
more than 25 years. For those who litigate open government cases (or
need to learn how to litigate them), this is an essential reference
manual.
================================
"The Public Voice WSIS Sourcebook: Perspectives on the World Summit on
the Information Society" (EPIC 2004). Price: $40.
http://www.epic.org/bookstore/pvsourcebook
This resource promotes a dialogue on the issues, the outcomes, and the
process of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS). This
reference guide provides the official UN documents, regional and
issue-oriented perspectives, and recommendations and proposals for
future action, as well as a useful list of resources and contacts for
individuals and organizations that wish to become more involved in the
WSIS process.
================================
"The Privacy Law Sourcebook 2004: United States Law, International Law,
and Recent Developments," Marc Rotenberg, editor (EPIC 2005). Price:
$40.
http://www.epic.org/bookstore/pls2004/
The Privacy Law Sourcebook, which has been called the "Physician's Desk
Reference" of the privacy world, is the leading resource for students,
attorneys, researchers, and journalists interested in pursuing privacy
law in the United States and around the world. It includes the full
texts of major privacy laws and directives such as the Fair Credit
Reporting Act, the Privacy Act, and the OECD Privacy Guidelines, as well
as an up-to-date section on recent developments. New materials include
the APEC Privacy Framework, the Video Voyeurism Prevention Act, and the
CAN-SPAM Act.
================================
"Filters and Freedom 2.0: Free Speech Perspectives on Internet Content
Controls" (EPIC 2001). Price: $20.
http://www.epic.org/bookstore/filters2.0
A collection of essays, studies, and critiques of Internet content
filtering. These papers are instrumental in explaining why filtering
threatens free expression.
================================
EPIC publications and other books on privacy, open government, free
expression, crypto and governance can be ordered at:
EPIC Bookstore http://www.epic.org/bookstore
"EPIC Bookshelf" at Powell's Books
http://www.powells.com/features/epic/epic.html
================================
EPIC also publishes EPIC FOIA Notes, which provides brief summaries of
interesting documents obtained from government agencies under the
Freedom of Information Act.
Subscribe to EPIC FOIA Notes at:
https://mailman.epic.org/cgi-bin/control/foia_notes
========================================================================
[8] Upcoming Conferences and Events
========================================================================
University of Ottawa Faculty of Law: The Revealed "I". October 25-27,
2007. Ottawa, Canada. For more information:
http://www.idtrail.org/content/section/11/95/
ACI's 7th National Symposium on Privacy & Security of Consumer and
Employee Information. January 23-24, 2008. Philadelphia, PA. For more
information: http://www.americanconference.com/privacy
Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility: Technology in Wartime
Conference. AJanuary 26, 2008. Stanford University. For more
information: http://cpsr.org/news/compiler/2007/Compiler200707#twc
Future of the Internet Economy - OECD Ministerial Meeting. June 14-18,
2008. Seoul, Korea. For more information:
http://www.oecd.org/document/19/0,2340,en_2649_37441_38051667_1_1_1_37441,00.html
======================================================================
Subscription Information
======================================================================
Subscribe/unsubscribe via web interface:
https://mailman.epic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/epic_news
Back issues are available at:
http://www.epic.org/alert
The EPIC Alert displays best in a fixed-width font, such as Courier.
========================================================================
Privacy Policy
========================================================================
The EPIC Alert mailing list is used only to mail the EPIC Alert and to
send notices about EPIC activities. We do not sell, rent or share our
mailing list. We also intend to challenge any subpoena or other legal
process seeking access to our mailing list. We do not enhance (link to
other databases) our mailing list or require your actual name.
In the event you wish to subscribe or unsubscribe your e-mail address
from this list, please follow the above instructions under "subscription
information."
========================================================================
About EPIC
========================================================================
The Electronic Privacy Information Center is a public interest research
center in Washington, DC. It was established in 1994 to focus public
attention on emerging privacy issues such as the Clipper Chip, the
Digital Telephony proposal, national ID cards, medical record privacy,
and the collection and sale of personal information. EPIC publishes the
EPIC Alert, pursues Freedom of Information Act litigation, and conducts
policy research. For more information, see http://www.epic.org or write
EPIC, 1718 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 200, Washington, DC 20009. +1 202
483 1140 (tel), +1 202 483 1248 (fax).
========================================================================
Donate to EPIC
========================================================================
If you'd like to support the work of the Electronic Privacy Information
Center, contributions are welcome and fully tax-deductible. Checks
should be made out to "EPIC" and sent to 1718 Connecticut Ave., NW,
Suite 200, Washington, DC 20009. Or you can contribute online at:
http://www.epic.org/donate
Your contributions will help support Freedom of Information Act and
First Amendment litigation, strong and effective advocacy for the right
of privacy and efforts to oppose government regulation of encryption and
expanding wiretapping powers.
Thank you for your support.
------------------------- END EPIC Alert 14.20 -------------------------
.