============================================================== @@@@ @@@@ @@@ @@@@ @ @ @@@@ @@@@ @@@@@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @@@@ @@@ @ @ @@@@@ @ @@@ @@@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @@@@ @ @@@ @@@@ @ @ @@@@ @@@@ @ @ @ ============================================================== Volume 9.04 February 27, 2002 -------------------------------------------------------------- Published by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) Washington, D.C. http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_9.04.html ======================================================================= Table of Contents ======================================================================= [1] Paying for Big Brother: Surveillance Funding in DOJ Budget [2] Supreme Court Hears Anonymity Case; Rejects "Peer Grading" Privacy [3] EPIC Seeks DC Surveillance Camera Records [4] ICANN Reconsiders At-Large Participation [5] Law Schools and EFF Form "Chilling Effects Clearinghouse" [6] EPIC Bill-Track: New Bills in Congress [7] EPIC Bookstore - Terrorism & the Constitution [8] Upcoming Conferences and Events ======================================================================= [1] Paying for Big Brother: Surveillance Funding in DOJ Budget ======================================================================= The President's FY 2003 Budget Proposal requests a $1.8 billion increase in funding for the Department of Justice, including substantial spending on surveillance, profiling and information sharing. To increase public understanding and foster debate on the proposed budget, EPIC has released a report entitled "Paying for Big Brother: A Review of the Proposed FY2003 Budget for the Department of Justice." The report, released today, draws attention to the levels of funding that DOJ seeks for surveillance, the nature of the mechanisms proposed, and the unanswered questions regarding the impact of DOJ's proposal on privacy and civil liberties. It analyzes the general programs under DOJ's jurisdiction, as well as programs implemented by the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), the proposed new National Security Coordination Council, the Detention Trustee, the Counterterrorism Fund, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Drug Enforcement Administration, the U.S. Marshals Service and the U.S. Attorneys. The report finds that for each organization under its authority, the Department of Justice has thus far released insufficient information about its programs to allow Congress or the public to evaluate them. EPIC recognizes that the current climate has prompted a shift towards more vigorous law enforcement and that intelligence and security mechanisms must maintain some level of confidentiality. However, it is equally important for government actions in these areas to be accountable, and for meaningful oversight to ensure protection of privacy and civil liberties. The EPIC report concludes that DOJ's budget proposal does not provide adequate information about the nature of its surveillance programs, the potential of the technology, the extent of information sharing, or safeguards implemented to prevent misuse or security lapses. As discussed in the report, Congress has several opportunities in the coming weeks to seek answers and explanations from the Department of Justice, its subsidiary organizations and Attorney General Ashcroft. EPIC urges lawmakers to make conscientious use of their oversight function in evaluating DOJ's new surveillance proposals. EPIC's report is available online at: http://www.epic.org/reports/paying_for_bb.pdf Testimony of Attorney General Ashcroft before the Senate Appropriations Committee, February 26, 2002: http://appropriations.senate.gov/releases/record.cfm?id=181386 Department of Justice Budget Information: http://www.usdoj.gov/02organizations/02_3.html ======================================================================= [2] Supreme Court Hears Anonymity Case; Rejects "Peer Grading" Privacy ======================================================================= On February 26, the Supreme Court heard arguments in Watchtower Bible v. City of Stratton, a case that considers whether a registration requirement for door-to-door canvassing to promote a cause violates the First Amendment. EPIC, the ACLU, and 14 legal scholars submitted an amicus brief arguing that the ordinance implicates privacy, as well as the First Amendment rights of anonymity, expression, and freedom of association. During the argument, the Justices asked the attorney for Watchtower Bible whether there was a real problem for the clients since the city of Stratton routinely grants the request for a permit. He responded that the ordinance was an effort to discourage the Jehovah's Witnesses and that the city should not restrict communications between willing parties. Justice Ginsburg asked whether the ordinance scheme in Stratton was permissible after the Supreme Court's earlier decision in Buckley v. ACLF. In that case, the Court said petition circulators could not be required to wear a name badge, but could be required to provide identifying information when the petition is submitted to the state secretary. The Watchtower attorney replied that this procedure was clearly necessary for the ensuring the integrity of the electoral process, but would not be justified for core First Amendment activity. The attorney for the City of Stratton came under repeated questioning from the Justices about the scope of the ordinance. Justice O'Connor asked whether trick-or-treaters needed to first obtain a permit before going door-to-door at Halloween. She asked also whether she would need permission from the mayor before asking a neighbor for a cup of sugar. Justice Scalia, following a lengthy series of questions about the "remarkable scope" of the ordinance said that the City was suggesting that ordinance was okay because "it only addresses communication." He objected to the characterization of in-person communication in the Stratton permit application as a "privilege desired." Scalia also noted that "one of the costs of liberty is the higher risk of unlawful activity." An interesting line of questions was pursued by Justice Ginsburg, who asked if the city had the ability to allow homeowners to designate that they did not want Jehovah's Witnesses to knock on their doors, and whether they also had the ability to request that only Caucasians knock on their doors. "How different," she asked, "is that from saying 'No Jehovah's Witnesses?'" The Court is expected to issue an opinion in the case sometime before June. On February 20, the Supreme Court announced an opinion in Owasso Independent School District v. Falvo. In that case, the Court upheld the practice of allowing one student to grade another's work, ruling that the activity did not violate the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. The Supreme Court rejected Kristja Falvo's argument that forcing children to have their grades read aloud in the classroom is a violation of a 1974 federal law that guarantees the privacy of student records. The Court also announced that next year it will consider two more cases of interest to the Internet community: the legality of posting sex offenders' names online (Otte v. Doe) and whether Congress can extend copyrights, a move that could result in thousands of classic works becoming freely available via the Internet (Eldred v. Ashcroft). Supreme Court - Watchtower Bible: http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-1737.htm EPIC, ACLU, 14 Legal Scholars Amicus Brief: http://www.epic.org/anonymity/watchtower.pdf Owasso Independent School District v. Falvo: http://www.epic.org/redirect/falvo_redirect.html ======================================================================= [3] EPIC Seeks DC Surveillance Camera Records ======================================================================= In response to news reports that the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) had constructed an extensive surveillance camera network in Washington, D.C., EPIC has filed a series of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to learn more about the system. The system allows police to monitor surveillance cameras from around the city in a central office called the "Synchronized Operations Command Center" (SOCC). The system was assembled and activated with no public dialogue or debate. Since its activation, the camera network has been used to monitor individuals engaged in legitimate First Amendment activities, including the participants in the World Bank and International Monetary Fund protests in April 2000. Basic questions regarding the system -- such as the cost of the system and issues of access to data, data retention, and data sharing -- remain unknown. EPIC's request seeks information about the cameras, the policies on their use, and future plans for expansion of the network. The request was directed to the MPD and federal agencies that have access to the SOCC for monitoring. The MPD has plans to link even more cameras to the system, including cameras from private stores in Washington's Georgetown neighborhood. Rep. Connie Morella (R-MD) has expressed objections to the monitoring network as well. Rep. Morella chairs a House Government Reform subcommittee that has oversight on DC policy, and has called for hearings on the issue. On February 26, the MPD announced that it had turned off twelve cameras that monitored buildings in and around the National Mall. The cameras were deactivated with the close of the Olympic Games in Salt Lake City, Utah and the end of the terror alert announced last month by Attorney General John Ashcroft; however, the cameras could be reactivated at any time. EPIC Press Release on DC Surveillance Cameras: http://www.epic.org/open_gov/FOIA/dccameraspr.html EPIC Face Recognition Page: http://www.epic.org/privacy/facerecognition/ Privacy International Video Surveillance Page: http://www.privacyinternational.org/issues/cctv/index.html ======================================================================= [4] ICANN Reconsiders At-Large Participation ======================================================================= On February 24, Stuart Lynn, President and CEO of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), proposed a major reorganization of the body's current governing structure following a private retreat of board directors in Washington over the weekend. Among other things, his proposed changes would substitute a 15-member Board of Trustees for the current 19-member Board of Directors. Five of these seats would be given to national governments, five more would be appointed by a "Nominating Committee," and the remaining five would be made up of the chairs of three new Policy Committees, the chair of a Technical Advisory Committee, and the CEO. The plan would abolish public (or "At-Large") elections of Board members, thereby eliminating any role for the Internet user community in ICANN's decision making processes. As originally designed, the Board of Directors was supposed to comprise nine elected At-Large members, nine representatives of the internal Supporting Organizations (SOs), and the Chairperson. Currently, however, only five of the nine At-Large seats are filled by elected individuals with the remaining four occupied by interim, unelected individuals. In July 2000, a study committee (ALSC) was set up to re-examine the entire At-Large issue. In November 2001, the ALSC issued a report calling for the reduction in the number of At-Large Board seats from nine to six and payment of a membership fee as a prerequisite to voting. Both the ALSC report and Mr. Lynn's more radical proposal for restructuring will be discussed by the Board in an open forum with the public at the upcoming ICANN meetings in Accra, Ghana, March 10-14, 2002. Mr. Lynn's announcement is available at: http://www.icann.org/general/lynn-reform-proposal-24feb02.htm The ALSC report is available at: http://www.icann.org/at-large/final-report-05nov01.htm The schedule for the Accra meetings is available at: http://www.icann.org/accra/#MeetingScheduleandAgenda For commentary on these and other recent ICANN developments, also visit the Internet Democracy Project at: http://www.internetdemocracyproject.org/ ======================================================================= [5] Law Schools and EFF Form "Chilling Effects Clearinghouse" ======================================================================= On February 25, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and four law school clinics announced the launch of a website and project that has been established to educate Internet users about their rights online. The Chilling Effects Clearinghouse provides detailed information about the legal rights of Internet users regarding "cease-and-desist" letters (letters sent from entities claiming violation of copyright or trademark and other grievances and threatening legal action if the violating party does not cease and desist). The project currently provides basic legal information on issues like copyright and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, trademark and domain names, anonymous speech, and defamation. The Chilling Effects website includes a forum for Internet users to post their cease-and-desist letters to an online clearinghouse. Students at the participating law clinics will review the letters and annotate them with links to explain applicable legal rules. The four Internet law clinics currently involved are Harvard, Stanford, the University of California at Berkeley, and the University of San Francisco, and the project is expected to grow to include additional law schools. Posted letters will remain online in a searchable database that interested parties can consult to find information that relates to their particular situation. "The Internet makes it easier for individuals to speak to a wide audience, but it also makes it easier for other people and corporations to silence that speech," said Wendy Seltzer, Fellow at Harvard's Berkman Center for Internet and Society, who created the project and website. "Chilling Effects aims to level the field by helping online speakers to understand their rights in the face of legal threats." Chilling Effects website: http://www.chillingeffects.org/ EPIC's Free Speech Page: http://www.epic.org/free_speech/ ======================================================================= [6] EPIC Bill-Track: New Bills in Congress ======================================================================= *House* H.R.3716 Online Criminal Liability Standardization Act of 2002. To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a defense against certain criminal prosecutions for interactive computer service providers. Sponsor: Rep Goodlatte, Bob (R-VA). Latest Major Action: 2/12/2002 Referred to House committee: House Judiciary. H.R.3726 Video Voyeurism Act of 2002. To amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit video voyeurism in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States. Sponsor: Rep Oxley, Michael G (R-OH). Latest Major Action: 2/12/2002 Referred to House committee: House Judiciary. *Senate* S.1928 To amend section 222 of the Communications Act of 1934 to require affirmative written consent by a customer to the release of customer proprietary network information. A bill to amend section 222 of the Communications Act of 1934 to require affirmative written consent by a customer to the release of customer proprietary network information. Sponsor: Sen Wellstone, Paul D. (D-MN). Latest Major Action: 2/11/2002 Referred to Senate committee: Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation. EPIC Bill Track: Tracking Privacy, Speech, and Cyber-Liberties Bills in the 107th Congress, is available at: http://www.epic.org/privacy/bill_track.html ======================================================================= [7] EPIC Bookstore - Terrorism & the Constitution ======================================================================= Terrorism & the Constitution: Sacrificing Civil Liberties in the Name of National Security, by James X. Dempsey and David Cole. 2nd ed. http://www.epic.org/bookstore/powells/redirect/alert904.html In Terrorism & the Constitution, authors Jim Dempsey (Deputy Director, Center for Democracy and Technology) and David Cole (Law Professor, Georgetown University) trace the history of abuse of civil liberties in the name of national security, concentrating on the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the 1996 and 2001 Antiterrorism Acts. Full of endnotes valuable to activists and lawyers, yet written for a general audience, Terrorism & the Constitution is a well-balanced examination of the intersection between civil liberties and the level of security necessary to protect our nation against terrorism. Terrorism & the Constitution has been praised highly by Rep. John Conyers, Jr., Gore Vidal, ACLU President Nadine Strossen, Arab American Institute President Dr. James Zogby, and many more. The new edition is fully revised and updated for 2002, and includes a new chapter on the response to September 11. ================================ EPIC Publications: "Privacy & Human Rights 2001: An International Survey of Privacy Laws and Developments," (EPIC 2001). Price: $20. http://www.epic.org/bookstore/phr2001/ This survey, by EPIC and Privacy International, reviews the state of privacy in over fifty countries around the world. The survey examines a wide range of privacy issues including, data protection, telephone tapping, genetic databases, ID systems and freedom of information laws. ================================ "The Privacy Law Sourcebook 2001: United States Law, International Law, and Recent Developments," Marc Rotenberg, editor (EPIC 2001). Price: $40. http://www.epic.org/bookstore/pls2001/ The "Physicians Desk Reference of the privacy world." An invaluable resource for students, attorneys, researchers and journalists who need an up-to-date collection of U.S. and International privacy law, as well as a comprehensive listing of privacy resources. ================================ "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. ================================ "The Consumer Law Sourcebook 2000: Electronic Commerce and the Global Economy," Sarah Andrews, editor (EPIC 2000). Price: $40. http://www.epic.org/cls/ The Consumer Law Sourcebook provides a basic set of materials for consumers, policy makers, practitioners and researchers who are interested in the emerging field of electronic commerce. The focus is on framework legislation that articulates basic rights for consumers and the basic responsibilities for businesses in the online economy. ================================ "Cryptography and Liberty 2000: An International Survey of Encryption Policy," Wayne Madsen and David Banisar, authors (EPIC 2000). Price: $20. http://www.epic.org/crypto&/ EPIC's third survey of encryption policies around the world. The results indicate that the efforts to reduce export controls on strong encryption products have largely succeeded, although several governments are gaining new powers to combat the perceived threats of encryption to law enforcement. ================================ 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 ======================================================================= [8] Upcoming Conferences and Events ======================================================================= 2nd Annual BNA Summit: Combatting Cyber Attacks on your Corporate Data. Bureau of National Affairs. February 27-28, 2002. Washington, DC. For more information: http://cybersecurity.pf.com/ Rethinking Law & Marketing in the Age of Privacy & Security. Wiley Rein & Fielding LLP. February 28, 2002. Redwood Shore, CA. For more information: http://www.wrf.com/event/home.asp Understanding Privacy: New Laws, New Challenges. BC Freedom of Information and Privacy Association (FIPA). March 11-12, 2002. Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. For more information: http://ellisriley.on.ca/fipa/ HIPAA Summit West II: The Leading Forum on Healthcare Privacy, Confidentiality, Data Security, and HIPAA Compliance. March 13-15, 2002. San Francisco, CA. For more information: http://www.hipaasummit.com/ Eighth Annual National Conference, "Managing the NEW Privacy Revolution," and First Annual Privacy Expo 2002. Privacy & American Business and Privacy Council. March 20-22, 2002. Washington, DC. For more information: http://www.ManagingThePrivacyRevolution.com/ Fourth Annual e-ProtectIT Infrastructure Security Conference. Norwich University. March 20-22, 2002. Northfield, Vermont. For more information: http://www.e-protectIT.org/ International Symposium on Freedom of Information and Privacy. Office of the New Zealand Privacy Commissioner. March 28, 2002. Auckland, New Zealand. For more information: Blair.Stewart@privacy.org.nz Consumer Protection Issues in 2002 and Beyond. Association of the Bar of the City of New York, Committee on Consumer Affairs. April 11, 2002. New York, NY. For more information: avernick@fgkks.com The 27th Annual AAAS Colloquium on Science and Technology Policy: Science and Technology in a Vulnerable World: Rethinking Our Roles. American Association for the Advancement of Science. April 11-12, 2002. Washington, DC. For more information: http://www.aaas.org/spp/dspp/rd/colloqu.htm Workshop on Privacy Enhancing Technologies. April 14-15, 2002. San Francisco, CA. For more information: http://www.pet2002.org/ CFP 2002: The Twelfth Conference on Computers, Freedom & Privacy. April 16-19, 2002. San Francisco, CA. For more information: http://www.cfp2002.org/ 4th Annual MIT Sloan eBusiness Awards. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Sloan School of Management. April 17, 2002. Cambridge, MA. For more information: http://www.mitawards.org/home.asp 2002 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy. IEEE and the International Association for Cryptologic Research. May 12-15, 2002. Oakland, CA. For more information: http://www.ieee-security.org/TC/SP02/sp02index.html INET 2002. Internet Society. June 18-21, 2002. Washington, DC. For more information: http://www.isoc.org/inet2002/ ======================================================================= Subscription Information ======================================================================= Subscribe/unsubscribe via Web interface: http://mailman.epic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/epic_news Subscribe/unsubscribe via email: To: epic_news-request@mailman.epic.org Subject line: "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" 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 email address from this list, please follow the above instructions under "subscription information". Please contact info@epic.org if you would like to change your subscription email address, or if you have any other questions. ======================================================================= 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, e-mail info@epic.org, 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). 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/ ======================================================================= Drink coffee, support civil liberties, get a tax deduction, and learn Latin at the same time! Receive a free epic.org "sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" coffee mug with donation of $75 or more. ======================================================================= 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 9.04 ----------------------- .