EPIC logo

   
    ==============================================================
   
        @@@@  @@@@  @@@  @@@@      @    @     @@@@  @@@@  @@@@@
        @     @  @   @   @        @ @   @     @     @  @    @
        @@@@  @@@    @   @       @@@@@  @     @@@   @@@     @
        @     @      @   @       @   @  @     @     @  @    @
        @@@@  @     @@@  @@@@    @   @  @@@@  @@@@  @   @   @
   
    ==============================================================
    Volume 9.09                                       May 10, 2002
    --------------------------------------------------------------
   
                             Published by the
               Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC)
                             Washington, D.C.
   
              http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_9.09.html
   
=======================================================================
Table of Contents
=======================================================================

[1] DOJ Says Office of Homeland Security Not Subject to FOIA
[2] EPIC Files Objections to DoubleClick Class Action Settlement
[3] EPIC Urges Openness, Accountability for Infrastructure Protection
[4] Consumer Groups and State AGs Argue for Financial Privacy
[5] Coalition Proposes Alternatives to Weak Privacy Bill
[6] EPIC Bill-Track: New Bills in Congress
[7] EPIC Bookstore - The First Amendment and Civil Liability
[8] Upcoming Conferences and Events

=======================================================================
[1] DOJ Says Office of Homeland Security Not Subject to FOIA
=======================================================================

The Department of Justice (DOJ) is seeking the dismissal of EPIC's
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Office of
Homeland Security (OHS).  In a brief submitted to the U.S. District
Court in Washington, DOJ argues that OHS is not an "agency" and
therefore is not subject to the FOIA's open government requirements.
The brief argues that the OHS "functions solely to advise and assist
the President and, does not exercise substantial independent
authority."  It likens the OHS to the National Security Council, which
the D.C. Circuit Court in 1996 held was exempt from the FOIA.

EPIC plans to file a reply arguing that the OHS does in fact exercise
substantial independent authority.  The OHS has a limited track
record, but has extensive powers that are already in evidence.  The
administration appears to prefer downplaying the role of the OHS so
that there will be no "chilling effect on the advisory role" from the
"knowledge that FOIA can be invoked."  EPIC firmly believes that,
under well-established principles of open government, an agency like
the OHS -- especially with its important mandate -- should be open to
public oversight.  The FOIA, which, among other agencies, covers the
CIA, FBI, and NSA, makes adequate provision for protecting sensitive
information from disclosure.  Acknowledging the proper role of the OHS
will also serve to make the office more effective.

EPIC is seeking the disclosure of documents relating to OHS Director
Tom Ridge's efforts to create a "trusted-traveler" card and his plans
to standardize state driver's licenses so as to create a de facto
national identification system.

For more information, see EPIC's Homeland Security Page:

     http://www.epic.org/open_gov/homeland/

=======================================================================
[2] EPIC Files Objections to DoubleClick Class Action Settlement
=======================================================================

On Monday, May 6th, EPIC filed formal objections in the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of New York to a proposed settlement
reached by class action attorneys and DoubleClick.  A series of class
action lawsuits were brought against DoubleClick for violation of
privacy relating to the company's cookie tracking practices.  These
actions were consolidated by the court into a single case for
settlement discussions.  Because the case is a class action, the
proposed settlement must be approved by the court, and a hearing has
been scheduled for May 21 to determine whether the settlement is
"fair, reasonable, and adequate."

As part of class action procedure rules, the judge published the terms
of the settlement, which will bind all individuals who were impacted
by DoubleClick's profiling practices.  EPIC, on behalf of itself,
members of the public, and its individual employees, filed with the
court formal objections to the proposed settlement and concurrently
asked that its employees be exempted from the settlement if approved.

EPIC asserted that the proposed settlement is inappropriate because it
does not provide any significant benefit to class members that was not
previously agreed to by DoubleClick as part of its earlier agreement
with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) under the terms of the Network
Advertising Initiative (NAI).  DoubleClick has not made any
significant change to its practices or its policies, nor has it
provided the type of meaningful privacy protection sought by the
consumer and privacy organizations (including EPIC) that filed the
initial complaint with the FTC.  It appears that the only significant
new component in the proposed settlement is DoubleClick's agreement to
pay almost two million dollars to the plaintiffs' lawyers.

In its submission to the court, EPIC made side-by-side comparisons
between DoubleClick's obligations under the weak NAI terms and
DoubleClick's obligations under the proposed settlement, and concluded
that the proposed settlement fails to match those commitments to which
DoubleClick is already bound.  EPIC further argued that a broad range
of leading organizations representing the interests of consumers
across the U.S. believe that stronger obligations should be imposed on
a company, such as DoubleClick, that routinely monitors and profiles
Internet users without their consent.  EPIC concluded its objections
with specific recommendations for the provisions of a settlement
agreement that serves the public interest.

The proposed settlement is available at:

     http://www.epic.org/privacy/cookies/dblclkproposedsettlement.pdf

EPIC's formal objection is available at:

     http://www.epic.org/privacy/cookies/doubleclickobjection.pdf

For background information on the DoubleClick settlement, see:

     http://www.epic.org/privacy/cookies/

=======================================================================
[3] EPIC Urges Openness, Accountability for Infrastructure Protection
=======================================================================

In testimony before the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee on May
8, EPIC General Counsel David Sobel criticized proposals to create a
new Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) exemption for "critical
infrastructure information."  He told the Committee that, "rather than
seeking ways to hide information, Congress should consider approaches
that would make as much information as possible available to the
public" concerning security flaws in critical systems.  Sen. Robert
Bennett (R-UT), a member of the Committee, has introduced the Critical
Infrastructure Information Security Act (S. 1456), which seeks to
encourage businesses to disclose to federal agencies any information
they possess about vulnerabilities in computer systems or networks. 
The bill would grant such companies exemptions from the FOIA, as well
as antitrust protections and immunity from lawsuits that might result
from voluntary disclosures of security flaws.

Sobel told the Committee that "Congress should consider appropriate
incentives" to encourage disclosures, but "secrecy and immunity, which
form the basis for many of the proposals put forward to date, remove
two of the most powerful incentives -- openness and liability."  He
noted that "many security experts believe that disclosure and
potential liability are essential components of any effort to
encourage remedial action."

Committee chairman Sen. Joseph Lieberman (D-CT), ranking member Sen.
Fred Thompson (R-TN) and several government and industry witnesses
acknowledged that many issues raised by the legislation, as currently
drafted, must be resolved.  John Malcolm, Deputy Assistant Attorney
General in the Justice Department's Criminal Division, said the bill
must clarify that the federal government could pursue criminal cases
against companies based on information they disclose.  He also
expressed concern that the bill could hamper the government's ability
to pursue civil cases against companies based on the voluntarily
submitted information.  As now written, he said, the legislation would
"tie the government's hands."

EPIC's testimony on critical infrastructure information:

     http://www.epic.org/security/infowar/sobel_testimony.html

EPIC's Critical Infrastructure Protection Page:

     http://www.epic.org/security/infowar/resources.html

=======================================================================
[4] Consumer Groups and State AGs Argue for Financial Privacy
=======================================================================

EPIC, the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, U.S. PIRG and the Consumers
Union submitted comments on May 1 for a U.S. Treasury Department study
on the effectiveness of Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) financial
privacy protections.  The comments criticize the GLBA for "fail[ing]
to provide the adequate protections for consumer privacy in modern
financial services."  The groups point to practices by some
institutions -- including the sale of personal data -- and lament the
loss of individual privacy due to a "lack of control over use of
sensitive data."

Congress enacted the GLBA, which requires companies to give notice to
consumers about their information-sharing practices, in response to
public concern about privacy loss.  However, the GLBA places the
burden on consumers to "opt-out," or affirmatively respond, if they
wish to restrict how their information is shared.  Because customers
are unlikely to read opt-out notices, any consent implied from their
silence is not truly informed.  The comments describe such a system as
inherently faulty: "Any system to protect the privacy of personal
information that relies upon silence as agreement has the built-in
elements for abuse and eventually public outcry."

Other inadequacies of the GLBA highlighted in the comments are the
fact that institutions have a financial incentive to create confusing
privacy notices and opt-out procedures that are difficult to follow.
When companies send the required notices to consumers, the notices
often are overlooked or viewed as junk mail and thrown away.  Second,
the GLBA assumes a company has the ability or desire to explain a
complex legal principle in a way that allows consumers to make an
informed choice, which is not necessarily the case.  Third, there are
no restrictions on the sharing of information about individuals who
are not customers.  In addition, the enforcement mechanisms are
inadequate to ensure that companies are complying with the existing
protections.

Attorneys General in 37 states filed similar comments on this matter,
which argue that "current law does not adequately protect consumers'
privacy" and poses a significant risk to consumers.

EPIC's comments are available at:

     http://www.epic.org/privacy/financial/glb_comments.pdf

Comments of 37 State Attorneys General:

     http://www.epic.org/privacy/financial/ag_glb_comments.html

Treasury Department request for comments:

     http://www.epic.org/redirect/glb_study_redirect.html

=======================================================================
[5] Coalition Proposes Alternatives to Weak Privacy Bill
=======================================================================

Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-FL), Chair of the House Commerce Subcommittee on
Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection, has introduced H.R. 4678,
the Consumer Privacy Protection Act of 2002.  The bill, which is
cosponsored by the Chair of the House Commerce Committee and 18 other
Democrats and Republicans, would be the weakest federal information
privacy law on the books if passed.  In response, a coalition of
privacy organizations has set out the framework for alternative, more
effective privacy legislation.

There are several inadequate provisions in Stearns' bill.  For
example, the bill would regulate both online and offline data
collection, but individuals would have almost no protections against
secondary use of their data.  Individuals would receive notice and
opportunity to opt-out for a five-year period, but data collectors are
free to share data with an unlimited number of "information sharing
partners."  Additionally, individuals would have to rely on Federal
Trade Commission (FTC) enforcement, as the bill specifically bars
private lawsuits.

The bill also preempts all conflicting state privacy law, including
common law and regulatory protections.  This would result in a serious
diminution of privacy for all Americans.

Stearns' bill would harm not only American privacy, but also
international privacy law and voluntary programs such as the US-EU
Safe Harbor.  It requires the Secretary of Commerce to "harmonize," or
water down, international privacy laws so that they match the weak
protections embodied in the Stearns bill.  Additionally, the bill
could block the FTC from enforcing voluntary agreements made under the
Safe Harbor.

Other provisions include a requirement that data collectors develop a
security plan that is approved by company management, the ability of
data collectors to renege on information sharing guarantees that
exceed the notice and opt-out framework, as long as 30 days notice is
given to customers, and total immunity from monetary damages if the
data collector joins a self-regulatory seal program absent willful
non-compliance.

A coalition of privacy organizations and consumer groups sent a letter
to members of Stearns' committee outlining a framework of Fair
Information Practices (FIPs) for effective privacy legislation.
Stearns' legislation fails to satisfy any of these FIPs.

H.R. 4678, the Consumer Privacy Protection Act of 2002:

     http://www.epic.org/privacy/107hr4678ih.pdf

The coalition privacy letter is available at:

     http://www.epic.org/privacy/fipsltr5.8.02.html
	 
=======================================================================
[6] EPIC Bill-Track: New Bills in Congress
=======================================================================

*House*

H.R.4187 Presidential Records Act Amendments of 2002. To amend chapter
22 of title 44, United States Code, popularly known as the
Presidential Records Act, to establish procedures for the
consideration of claims of constitutionally based privilege against
disclosure of Presidential records. Sponsor: Rep Horn, Stephen (R-CA).
Latest Major Action: 4/11/2002 referred to House committee. Latest
Status: Referred to the House Committee on Government Reform.
Committees: House Government Reform.

H.R.4513 Social Security Number Protection Act of 2002. To strengthen
the authority of the Federal Government to protect individuals from
certain acts and practices in the sale and purchase of Social Security
numbers and Social Security account numbers, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Markey, Edward J. (D-MA) Latest Major Action: 5/6/2002
Referred to House subcommittee. Latest Status: Referred to the
Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection. Committees:
House Energy and Commerce; House Ways and Means.

H.R.4561 Federal Agency Protection of Privacy Act. To amend title 5,
United States Code, to require that agencies, in promulgating rules,
take into consideration the impact of such rules on the privacy of
individuals, and for other purposes. Sponsor: Rep Barr, Bob (R-GA).
Latest Major Action: 5/1/2002 House committee/subcommittee actions.
Latest Status: Subcommittee Hearings Held. Committees: House
Judiciary.

H.R.4598 Homeland Security Information Sharing Act. To provide for the
sharing of homeland security information by Federal intelligence and
law enforcement agencies with State and local entities. Sponsor: Rep
Chambliss, Saxby (R-GA) Latest Major Action: 4/25/2002 Referred to
House committee. Latest Status: Referred to the Committee on
Intelligence (Permanent Select), and in addition to the Committee on
the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the
Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall
within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. Committees: House
Select Committee on Intelligence; House Judiciary.

H.R.4628 Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003. To
authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2003 for intelligence and
intelligence-related activities of the United States Government, the
Community Management Account, and the Central Intelligence Agency
Retirement and Disability System, and for other purposes. Sponsor: Rep
Goss, Porter J.(R-FL). Latest Major Action: 5/1/2002 Referred to House
committee. Latest Status: Referred to the House Committee on
Intelligence (Permanent Select). Committees: House Select Committee on
Intelligence.

H.R.4629 To amend the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act to
establish a program to encourage and support carrying out innovative
proposals to enhance homeland security, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Davis, Tom (R-VA) Latest Major Action: 5/1/2002 Referred
to House committee. Latest Status: Referred to the House Committee on
Government Reform. Committees: House Government Reform.

H.R.4633 Driver's License Modernization Act of 2002. To amend title
23, United States Code, to establish standards for State programs for
the issuance of drivers' licenses and identification cards, and for
other purposes. Sponsor: Rep Moran, James P. (D-VA). Latest Major
Action: 5/1/2002 Referred to House committee. Latest Status: Referred
to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition
to the Committees on the Judiciary, and Science, for a period to be
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration
of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee
concerned. Committees: House Transportation and Infrastructure; House
Judiciary; House Science.

H.R.4640 To provide criminal penalties for providing false information
in registering a domain name on the Internet. Sponsor: Rep Coble,
Howard (R-NC). Latest Major Action: 5/2/2002 Referred to House
committee. Latest Status: Referred to the House Committee on the
Judiciary. Committees: House Judiciary.

H.R.4650 Aviation Biometric Badge Act. To amend title 49, United
States Code, to improve airport security by using biometric security
badges, and for other purposes. Sponsor: Rep Hefley, Joel (R-CO).
Latest Major Action: 5/2/2002 Referred to House committee. Latest
Status: Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure. Committees: House Transportation and Infrastructure.

H.R.4678 Consumer Privacy Protection Act of 2002. To protect and
enhance consumer privacy, and for other purposes. Sponsor: Rep
Stearns, Cliff (R-FL). Latest Major Action: 5/8/2002 Referred to House
committee. Latest Status: Referred to the Committee on Energy and
Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on International Relations,
for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each
case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the
jurisdiction of the committee concerned. Committees: House Energy and
Commerce; House International Relations.

*Senate*

S.2137 Family Privacy and Security Act of 2002. A bill to facilitate
the protection of minors using the Internet from material that is
harmful to minors, and for other purposes. Sponsor: Sen Landrieu, Mary
L. (D-LA). Latest Major Action: 4/16/2002 Referred to Senate
committee. Latest Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Committees: Senate Commerce,
Science, and Transportation.

S.2201 Online Privacy Protection Act. A bill to protect the online
privacy of individuals who use the Internet. Sponsor: Sen Hollings,
Ernest F. (D-SC). Latest Major Action: 4/25/2002 Senate committee/
subcommittee actions. Latest Status: Committee on Commerce, Science,
and Transportation. Hearings held. Committees: Senate Commerce,
Science, and Transportation.

S.2238 Private Security Officer Employment Standards Act of 2002. A
bill to permit reviews of criminal records of applicants for private
security officer employment. Sponsor: Sen Levin, Carl (D-MI). Latest
Major Action: 4/24/2002 Referred to Senate committee. Latest Status:
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text of
measure as introduced: CR S3307-3308) Committees: Senate Judiciary.

S.2395 Anticounterfeiting Amendments of 2002. A bill to prevent and
punish counterfeiting and copyright piracy, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Biden Jr., Joseph R. (D-DE). Latest Major Action:
4/30/2002 Referred to Senate committee. Latest Status: Read twice and
referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text of measure as
introduced: CR S3562-3563) Committees: Senate Judiciary.

S.2452 National Homeland Security and Combating Terrorism Act of 2002.
A bill to establish the Department of National Homeland Security and
the National Office for Combating Terrorism. Sponsor: Sen Lieberman,
Joseph I. (D-CT). Latest Major Action: 5/2/2002 Referred to Senate
committee. Latest Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on
Governmental Affairs. (text of measure as introduced: CR S3875-3880)
Committees: Senate Governmental Affairs.

S.2459 To provide for a terrorist identification classification
system, and for other purposes. A bill to provide for a terrorist
identification classification system, and for other purposes. Sponsor:
Sen Wyden, Ron (D-OR). Latest Major Action: 5/6/2002 Referred to
Senate committee. Latest Status: Read twice and referred to the
Committee on Intelligence. Committees: Senate Intelligence.


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 - The First Amendment and Civil Liability
=======================================================================

The First Amendment and Civil Liability, by Robert M. O'Neil.

     http://www.epic.org/bookstore/powells/redirect/alert909.html

With increasing frequency, publishers (including owners of Web sites)
are being hailed into court to answer for the content of their
publications.  Plaintiffs' lawyers are meeting with more success in
asserting creative tort theories that, until just a few years ago,
seemed unfathomable.  First Amendment scholar Robert O'Neil shows how
these civil liability theories are fundamentally contrary to tort
theory and free speech principles.  In doing so, however, O'Neil does
not simply repeat First Amendment mantras; he maintains an academic
perspective and sympathetic posture to plaintiffs' claims, which
brings this eminently readable book even greater credibility.

O'Neil focuses on certain troubling portents for continued free
expression in the U.S., lending his perspective on court cases
invoking civil liability for publications like Natural Born Killers,
the Hit Man manual, and the Nuremberg Files Web site.  O'Neil looks at
seven areas where free expression is now at risk for incurring civil
liability: general libel, libel on the Internet, privacy, defective or
dangerous products, incitement, advertising, news-gathering, and
threats/incitement on the Internet.  Exploring recent cases, O'Neil
looks backward for the origin of these liability theories, evaluates
the reception that such theories are currently receiving, and looks
ahead to hypothetical scenarios that might result in even more serious
risks to free speech.  Without a crystal ball, O'Neil cannot predict
the future, but his analysis helps one understand the possibilities.
   
                   ================================
   
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
=======================================================================

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

O'Reilly Emerging Technology Conference. O'Reilly and Associates. May
13-16, 2002. Santa Clara, CA. For more information:
http://conferences.oreilly.com/etcon/

Information Integrity World Summit. The Hands-On Summit to Protect
Your Organization: Overcoming Cyber-security and E-Privacy Threats.
Information Integrity. May 15-16, 2002. Washington, DC. For more
information: http://www.411integrity.com/live/80/events/80II102

Personal Privacy in the Digital Age: The Challenge for State and Local
Governments. Joint Center for eGovernance. May 19-21, 2002. Arlington,
VA. For more information: http://www.conted.vt.edu/privacy/agenda.htm

Call For Papers - June 1, 2002 (special recognition for outstanding
student papers). 18th Annual Computer Security Applications Conference
(ACSAC): Practical Solutions to Real Security Problems. Applied
Computer Security Associates. December 9-13, 2002. Las Vegas, Nevada.
For more information: http://www.acsac.org/

Third Annual Institute on Privacy Law. Practising Law Institute. June
3-4, 2002, San Francisco, CA; June 24-25, New York, NY. For more
information: http://www.pli.edu/

Big Brother Is Watching: The Independent Policy Forum. The Independent
Institute. June 6, 2002. Oakland, CA. For more information:
http://www.independent.org/tii/forums/020606ipf.html

Privacy Paradox: The Gain of Security vs. Privacy's Loss. Strategic
Research Institute. June 17-18, 2002. Chicago, IL. For more
information: http://www.srinstitute.com/ci234/

INET 2002. Internet Crossroads: Where Technology and Policy Intersect.
Internet Society. June 18-21, 2002. Washington, DC. For more
information: http://www.inet2002.org/

The Public Voice in Internet Policy Making. June 22, 2002. Washington,
DC. The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) will host a
one-day public symposium to discuss the future of our rights and
freedoms in the information age. The event is being hosted in
conjunction with INET 2002 and is free and open to the public. For
more information: http://www.thepublicvoice.org/events/dc02/

IViR International Copyright Law Summer Course. Royal Netherlands
Academy of Arts and Sciences. July 8-12, 2002. Amsterdam, Netherlands.
For more information: http://www.ivir.nl/

O'Reilly Open Source Convention. O'Reilly and Associates. July 22-26,
2002. San Diego, CA. For more information:
http://conferences.oreilly.com/oscon/

Cyberwar, Netwar and the Revolution in Military Affairs: Real Threats
and Virtual Myths. International School on Disarmament and Research on
Conflicts (ISODARCO). August 3-13, 2002. Trento, Italy. For more
information: http://www.isodarco.it/html/trento02.html

ILPF Conference 2002: Security v. Privacy. Internet Law & Policy
Forum. September 17-19, 2002. Seattle, WA. For more information:
http://www.ilpf.org/conference2002/

Privacy2002. Technology Policy Group. September 24-26, 2002.
Cleveland, OH. For more information:
http://www.privacy2000.org/privacy02/index.shtml

=======================================================================
Subscription Information
=======================================================================
   
Subscribe/unsubscribe via Web interface:
   
     http://mailman.epic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/epic_news

Subscribe/unsubscribe via email:
   
     To: [email protected]
     Subject line: "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" (no quotes)
     
Help with subscribing/unsubscribing:

     To: [email protected]
     Subject: "help" (no quotes)
   
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 [email protected] if you would
like to change your subscription email address, if you are
experiencing subscription/unsubscription problems, 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 [email protected], 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 9.09 -----------------------
   
   
.