From: Chris Chiu [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 06 June 2002 15:26
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: GILC Alert


GILC Alert
Volume 6, Issue 4
6 June 2002

Welcome to the Global Internet Liberty Campaign Newsletter.

Welcome to GILC Alert, the newsletter of the Global Internet Liberty
Campaign. We are an international organization of groups working for
cyber-liberties, who are determined to preserve civil liberties and human
rights on the Internet.
We hope you find this newsletter interesting, and we very much hope that you
will avail yourselves of the action items in future issues.
If you are a part of an organization that would be interested in joining
GILC, please contact us at <[log in to unmask]>.
If you are aware of threats to cyber-liberties that we may not know about,
please contact the GILC members in your country, or contact GILC as a whole.
Please feel free to redistribute this newsletter to appropriate forums.

===============================================
Free expression
[1] US courts issue key Net speech rulings
[2] Russian Net speech curbs debated
[3] New legal battles over deep weblinks
[4] Turkish Internet restrictions draw fire
[5] Jordan jails online dissenter
[6] Mystery surrounds end to Chinese blocking of news sites
[7] Court refuses to throw out charges in Russian E-Book case
[8] Study recommends education, not Net blockers
[9] US Congress considers new virtual images ban
[10] Egypt clamps down on Internet speech
[11] Daniel Pearl video back online
[12] Report: marker trick fools crippled CDs

Privacy
[13] Euro data retention decision provokes alarm
[14] New US gov't rules may allow massive Internet spying
[15] US gov't investigates Verichip tracking implants maker
[16] Euro regulators probe Microsoft privacy woes
[17] US Net privacy bill passes important hurdle
[18] Interactive TV privacy fears grow
[19] US cell phone tracking scheme still on hold

===================================================
[1] US courts issue key Net speech rulings
===================================================
The future of Internet free speech was the focus of several recent court
decisions in the United States.

One of these cases involved the so-called Child Online Protection Act
(COPA), which made it a crime to use the Internet to pass along "for
commercial purposes" information considered "harmful to minors." The statute
was enacted in response to the 1997 Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union
decision, in which the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the Communications
Decency Act and applied traditional free speech protections to the
Information Superhighway. COPA was soon challenged by the American Civil
Liberties Union (ACLU-a GILC member) on behalf of 17 groups and individuals,
including fellow GILC members the Electronic Privacy Information Center and
the Electronic Frontiers Foundation.

The U.S. Supreme Court's subsequent ruling reflected deep divisions among
the Justices regarding various aspects of the case. Justice Clarence Thomas,
who wrote the majority opinion, held that "COPA's reliance on community
standards to identify 'material that is harmful to minors' does not by
itself render the statute substantially overbroad" and therefore violate the
U.S. constitutional free speech protections. However, Thomas added that the
scope of this decision was "quite limited" and that the Court was not sure
whether COPA might be an unconstitutional restriction on free expression for
other reasons. Citing these reasons, the Court maintained a ban on COPA
enforcement and sent the case back to a lower appeals court for further
examination of these issues. The case could go on for several more years
before a final resolution.

Several weeks later, a U.S. trial court struck down the Children's Internet
Protection Act, which essentially required high schools and libraries to
include blocking software on their computers. Institutions that refused to
do so (or implement policies to that effect) would have lose federal
funding. In a court challenge launched by the ACLU and the American Library
Association, a Federal judicial panel held that the law violated the right
to free expression protected under the First Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution: "Any public library that adheres to CIPA's conditions will
necessarily restrict patrons' access to a substantial amount of protected
speech in violation of the First Amendment." The panel also called blocking
programs "blunt instruments that not only 'underblock,' i.e., fail to block
access to substantial amounts of content that the library boards wish to
exclude, but also, central to this litigation, 'overblock,' i.e., block
access to large quantities of material that library boards do not wish to
exclude and that is constitutionally protected."

The text of the COPA decision is available under
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=000&invol=00-1
293

The text of the CIPA decision is available under
http://www.paed.uscourts.gov/documents/opinions/02D0415P.HTM

An ACLU press release about the COPA decision is posted at
http://www.aclu.org/news/2002/n051302a.html

For more on the COPA ruling, see "US child porn law 'not enforceable'," BBC
News Online, May 14, 2002 at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1987000/1987099.stm

See also Charles Lane, "Justices Partially Back Cyber Pornography Law,"
Washington Post, May 14, 2002, page A3 at
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A11465-2002May13.html

Further coverage of the CIPA ruling is available from "Judges Overturn Porn
Law," CBSNews.com, May 31, 2002 at
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/05/31/national/printable510688.shtml

See also Lisa M. Bowman, "Court overturns library filtering law," CNet News,
May 31, 2002 at
http://news.com.com/2100-1023-929577.html

=================================================
[2] Russian Net speech curbs debated
=================================================
A new Russian government proposal to target "extremist" messages is being
greeted with dismay from free speech advocates.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has issued a draft law (No. 203307-3) that
supposedly targets extremist activities. However, the proposal contains a
broad definition of include attempts to impede lawful activities of state
powers and organizers of mass disorder-which, in turn, may cover many forms
of public protest. The plan goes on to say that
"information-telecommunication networks" may not be used for any extremist
activity; the proposal specifically mentions websites. The draft law also
bans the posting of any extremist slogans online. Internet service providers
(ISPs) or moderators are required to remove such materials immediately. This
requirement would be enforced through a somewhat complicated procedure by
which government prosecutors and judges can successively order relevant
third parties (such as ISPs) to take down offending material, or risk losing
their licenses.

Experts suggest that the draft law is part of a disturbing trend against
freedom of expression over the Information Superhighway. These observers
have cited to legislation currently being discussed by the Russian
legislature (Duma) that, among other things, would ban materials that merely
contain quotations from alleged terrorists and specifically mentions
computer networks.

To read the text of the draft law, click
http://www.hro.org/docs/rlex/duma/41/ex1.htm

For comments on the draft law from Sergei Smirnov of the Russian Human
Rights Network (a GILC member), see
http://www.hro.org/ngo/discuss/ex5.htm

For additional expert analysis from Alexander Verkhovsky, visit
http://www.obshestvo.ru/expert/art437608.html

===================================================
[3] New legal battles over deep weblinks
===================================================
Should the law require people to provide weblinks to only the front pages of
websites?

That's essentially the question being posed by several recent cases. In such
incident, the Danish Newspaper Publishers' Association is suing Newsbooster,
an online news service. Specifically, the trade group is asking a court to
bar the service from providing so-called deep links to individual Danish
newspaper articles. Experts have criticized this action, claiming that it
will chill free speech and severely curb the effectiveness of the
Information Superhighway. A spokesperson for the Lycos Denmark portal
accused the Association of essentially trying to "turn time back and remove
the Internet. Deep-linking is the nature of the Internet. It is without
question the killer application for the World Wide Web."

Meanwhile, two broadly similar disputes have arisen in the United States.
Recently, the publisher of the Dallas Morning News threatening a webpage
author with a lawsuit over his Internet links to individual DMN articles.
Since then, the publisher of Runner's World magazine made similar demands
against the proprietors of the LetsRun.com site, telling them to remove
links to a printer-friendly version of a Runner's World item.

See Declan McCullagh, "Another Run to a Deep-Link Suit," Wired News, May 14,
2002 at
http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,52514,00.html

Read Michelle Delio, "Deep Links Return to Surface," Wired News, April 18,
2002 at
http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,51887,00.html

=======================================================
[4] Turkish Internet restrictions may limit Net speech
=======================================================
Turkey has passed legislation that some experts fear will curb free speech
online.

Among other things, the new rules bar defamation along the Information
Superhighway as well as distribution of "false news." Violators could be
forced to pay steep fines. In addition, the proposal could enable the state
radio and television board, RTUK, to begin vetting websites. The RTUK
already has the power to impose penalties for a variety of content-related
activities, including airing Kurdish-language broadcasts and publishing what
it deems to be separatist propaganda.

While the precise impact of these directives is still being determined, a
number of observers worry that the legislation's provisions will be used
against journalists, online discussion groups and other types of Internet
expression. These concerns have been highlighted by several recent cases
where government regulators have fined or shutdown websites on such charges
as "mocking and insulting state institutions" or slighting the military.
Reporters Sans Frontieres secretary-general Robert Menard charged that the
new "measures fly in the face of the commitments to freedom of expression
that Turkey has made to the European Union. We deplore this seriously
repressive turn by the Turkish regime in this domain."

For more information, visit the RSF website under
http://www.rsf.fr/article.php3?id_article=2214

===================================================
[5] Jordan jails online dissenter
===================================================
A Jordanian politician who expressed concern over apparent government
corruption has been thrown in prison.

Toujan el-Faisal was Jordan's first-ever female parliament member. This past
March, she wrote an open letter that was published on the Arab Times
website, which is hosted in the United States. In the letter, she railed
against government corruption, saying that it could damage relations with
the Jordanian public. She also claimed that the country's prime minister had
made money off a government decree that doubled car insurance rates
throughout the Middle Eastern kingdom. Soon afterwards, Jordanian
authorities charged her with damaging the state's reputation and sentenced
her to 18 months in prison-a sentence that cannot be appealed.

Free speech advocates have objected strongly to these moves. Robert Menard
from Reporters Sans Frontieres said his group was "outraged" by the court's
decision and could not accept "the imprisonment of someone for simply
expressing an opinion on the Internet."

An RSF press release on this subject is posted under
http://www.rsf.fr/article.php3?id_article=2213

Read Julia Scheeres, "Jordan Punishes Net Critic," Wired News, May 17, 2002
at
http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,52631,00.html

===========================================================
[6] Mystery surrounds end to Chinese blocking of news sites
===========================================================
Chinese citizens are now able to access several foreign news sites that had
been blocked by the government. But the reason why the restrictions have
been partially lifted, and how long this new state of affairs will continue,
remains an open question.

For years, Chinese users were prevented to visiting the Internet sites of
CNN, the Washington Post and many others. However, earlier this month, these
constraints were lifted for various selected webpages. Thus, while
cybernauts in the Land of the Dragon are now able to read the Washington
Post, the Los Angeles Times and the Boston Globe online, they are still not
able to view CNN, the BBC or Time Magazine via the World Wide Web. This
development came with virtually no fanfare from Beijing; so far, the Chinese
government has refused to comment on these changes.

It is unclear whether this limited respite from web censorship will last. In
October 2001, there was a somewhat similar easing of Internet restrictions
that coincided with an Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) meeting
being held in Shanghai. The restrictions were put back into place shortly
after the meeting ended.

Meanwhile, the fate of several Chinese citizens who were jailed for their
Internet activities remains in doubt. Huang Qi, for example, was arrested
after he created a website to help the families and friends of Tiananmen
massacre victims. Huang was tried in secret last summer, and the verdict has
still yet to be revealed. Similarly, Wang Jinbo, who protested against
government repression of Tiananmen pro-democracy activists, remains in
prison, where he has been for the past two years.

For further details and analysis, visit the Digital Freedom Network (DFN-a
GILC member) website under
http://dfn.org/news/china/ban-lifted.htm

Read "News Web site blocks lifted," South China Morning Post, May 17, 2002
at
http://www.asiamedia.ucla.edu/Weekly2002/05.14.2002/China8.htm

See also "China lifts blocks on Net wall," Reuters, May 16, 2002 at
http://news.com.com/2100-1023-915329.html

For more information in Spanish (Espanol), see "China desbloqueo el acceso a
medios extranjeros," Clarin.com, May 17, 2002 at
http://www.clarin.com/tecnologia/notas/2002/05/17/t-388181.htm

For additional details on the Huang Qi and Wang Jinbo cases, read Vivien
Pik-Kwan Chan, "Amnesty says 200 still in prison over June 4," South China
Morning Post, May 31, 2002 at
http://www.asiamedia.ucla.edu/Weekly2002/05.28.2002/China2.htm

=============================================================
[7] Court refuses to throw out charges in Russian E-Book case
=============================================================
A Russian software company will continue to face criminal charges based on a
controversial United States copyright law.

Elcomsoft is accused of violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act
(DMCA), which restricts the right of computer users to circumvent any
program that "effectively controls access" to copyrighted works. Last year,
Elcomsoft employee Dmitry Sklyarov had developed a program that circumvents
the copy protection scheme contained on Adobe Systems electronic books. He
had created the program as part of a project to allow E-Book readers to view
such products on whatever computers they like.

Presiding judge Ronald Whyte has refused to throw out the charges agaist
Elcomsoft, claiming that although computer programs should be treated as
speech, the DMCA did not violate free expression protections because it did
not intend to regulate content, but merely the functioning of a program.
Cindy Cohn from the Electronic Frontiers Foundation (EFF-a GILC member)
criticized Whyte's reasoning: "It's as if the judge ruled that Congress can
ban the sale of printing presses, because the First Amendment right to
publish speech was not attacked directly and quills and ink are still
available. What good are the public's rights if the tools needed to make
fair use or access works in the public domain are illegal?"

The Elcomsoft trial is expected to begin on August 26, 2002.

An EFF press release on this subject is posted under
http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/US_v_Elcomsoft/20020508_eff_elcom_pr.html

Read Steven Bonisteel, "August 26 Trial Date Set For E-book Cracking Case,"
Newsbytes, May 21, 2002 at
http://www.newsbytes.com/news/02/176704.html

==================================================
[8] Study recommends education, not Net blockers
==================================================
A new report suggests education rather than Internet blocking software as a
better way to protect children online.

The study, entitled "Youth, Pornography and the Internet," was commissioned
by a subunit of the United States National Research Council. The authors of
the paper note that it has been very difficult to formulate definitions for
inappropriate online content without adversely affecting free speech rights.
Furthermore, computer blocking packages tended to exacerbate this problem:
"An approach based on machine-executable rules abstracted from human
judgments inevitably misses nuances in those human judgments, which reduces
the accuracy of this approach compared to that of humans, while the
presumption-based approach necessarily identifies a large volume of
appropriate material as inappropriate."

In end, the researchers recommended that there should be more education of
minors "about reasons not to access inappropriate material. ... An analogy
is the relationship between swimming pools and children. Swimming pools can
be dangerous for children. To protect them, one can install locks, put up
fences and deploy pool alarms ... but by far the most important thing one
can do for one's children is to teach them to swim."

The study is available online under
http://www.nap.edu/books/0309082749/html/

Read "Protecting Kids From Internet Porn," CBSNews.com, May 2, 2002 at
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/05/02/national/printable507863.shtml

=================================================
[9] US Congress considers new virtual images ban
=================================================
Politicians in the United States are looking to pass legislation in response
to a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision regarding virtual computer images.

The Court had struck down the so-called Child Pornography Protection Act
(CPPA), which included a strict ban on any image that "appears to be" or
"conveys the impression" of someone under 18 engaged in sexually explicit
conduct. This ban applied even in instances where no model was used and the
given picture was completely fictitious. The high Court held that the Act
violated the right to freedom of expression guaranteed under First Amendment
to the U.S. Constitution, and that the statute "prohibits speech despite its
serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. The statute
proscribes the visual depiction of an idea-that of teenagers engaging in
sexual activity-that is a fact of modern society and has been a theme in art
and literature throughout the ages."

In response, several U.S. politicians have introduced measures that have
apparently strong similarities with the CPPA. One such measure, which was
unveiled by U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft and a number of U.S.
Congressmen, includes a ban on images that are "virtually indistinguishable
from that of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct." The U.S. House
of Representatives may hold a markup session for a version of this bill as
early as this week.

The text of the Ashcroft proposal is posted under
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:H.R.4623:
http://www.politechbot.com/docs/doj.childporn.bill.050102.html

Read Declan McCullagh, "Round Two on 'Morphed' Child Porn," Wired News, May
3, 2002 at
http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,52285,00.html

See David McGuire, "Lawmakers Take Another Shot At 'Morphed' Kid Porn,"
Washtech.com, May 1, 2002 at
http://www.newsbytes.com/news/02/176276.html

=================================================
[10] Egypt clamps down on Internet speech
=================================================
The Egyptian government has arrested several individuals after they each
posted materials online regarding various controversial subjects.

In one case, Shohdi Surur published a poem written by his father that
critiqued the country's way of life. Egyptian officials then arrested and
prosecuted Surur, who could be sentenced to 2 years in prison pending the
outcome of his trial. "I'm not scared of the case as such," explained Surur,
"I'm scared of living under a horrendous violent regime. All of us are being
watched all the time. Where is this leading to?"

Surur's comments were an apparent reference to government surveillance
efforts against people who wish to express themselves online. Law
enforcement agents have admitted to conducting such operations for several
years. One topic that is sure to attract attention from Egyptian authorities
is homosexuality, which is essentially banned in the Middle Eastern country
through a patchwork of laws, although not explicitly mentioned. To wit, a
website that deals with homosexual topics has posted the following advisory:
"Guess who's watching? Egyptian State Security!"

See "Busted! Cyberspace-Scouring Cops Accused of Suppressing Online
Expression," Associated Press, May 21, 2002 at
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/scitech/DailyNews/egypt_web020521.html

=================================================
[11] Daniel Pearl video back online
=================================================
An Internet service provider has restored an online video file that had been
taken down at the behest of the United States government.

The file was an unedited video showing the murder of Daniel Pearl, a Wall
Street Journal reporter who had been abducted while working in Pakistan. It
had been posted on ogrish.com, a private website hosted by a company in the
United States. Several weeks ago, the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigations
(FBI) sent a letter to several Internet companies, including Pro Hosting,
claiming that the file was obscene and that it could lead to prosecution on
criminal obscenity grounds. Pro Hosting initially talked with ogrish.com's
proprietor and removed the video from public view; however, after consulting
with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU-a GILC member), it decided to
make the controversial file available again. The webhost's owner, Ted
Hickman, commented that his organization had "decided to take the hot seat
in this position, mainly because we and ogrish.com believe strongly in
freedom of speech and freedom of press." He added that the video was
"definitely something that I think people should be able to view if they
choose to."

The decision came as the FBI signaled that, in the words of one ACLU
spokesperson, "they did not intend to put pressure on websites to not show
the video, nor do they intend legal action." Indeed, experts had questioned
whether the file was actually illegal, since Federal obscenity laws target
materials of a sexual nature, rather than the violence depicted in the
video. Moreover, attempts to stifle the distribution of the file already had
been frustrated, as it had become widely available from many other places
along the Information Superhighway.

Read Declan McCullagh, "Besieged ISP Restores Pearl Vid," Wired News, May
28, 2002 at
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,52818,00.html

=================================================
[12] Marker trick fools crippled CDs
=================================================
Think it's tough to break through the copy-protection contained on compact
discs? You might want to think again.

Researchers have discovered that the copy protection schemes of Sony Music
CDs can be bypassed with a few swabs from an ink marker. These discs are
designed to trick computer CD-ROM drives into reading an extra track of
meaningless information, usually at the outer edge, rather than scanning the
music files. It has been reported that this feature has even caused some
computers (especially Macintosh machines) to malfunction. However, if the
meaningless data track is covered over with ink or even a carefully placed
post-it note, the CDs can be played in computer without a hitch. Some
experts claim that this technique can applied successfully to other
so-called "crippleware" CDs, including non-Sony discs.

These developments come as the United States Congress considers a bill that
would require the installation of copy protection routines within new
consumer electronic products. The bill has heightened public concern that
such schemes will stifle the ability of individuals to make fair use of
copyrighted works. One user quipped, "I wonder what type of copy protection
will come next? Maybe they'll ban markers."

See "Cheap pen cracks 'copy-proof' CD," Reuters, May 20, 2002 at
http://zdnet.com.com/2102-1105-917908.html

For the text of the United States Congress mandatory copy protection bill,
click
http://www.politechbot.com/docs/cbdtpa/hollings.s2048.032102.html

=================================================
[13] Euro data retention decision provokes alarm
=================================================
Critics have savaged the European Parliament's adoption of a law that
permits data retention for police purposes.

A recently approved European Union Directive will allow national governments
to introduce legislation that will (a) require telecommunications companies
to retain traffic and localization data about their customers and (b) give
law enforcement agents access to this data. The type of information to be
collected under this scheme could include such items as web surfing
histories, email trails, fax logs, credit card numbers with holders' names,
callers' and recipients' names, connection times, chatroom user IDs, and the
geographic locations of individual mobile phones. In the past, such
information could only be retained for billing purposes, then discarded;
under the new rules, the data could be kept for an indeterminate period.
Although the Directive does contain references to several human rights
agreements, it does not require specific measures be taken to protect those
rights.

The decision came despite heavy opposition from various quarters. The Global
Internet Liberty Campaign issued a letter urging the EP "to vote against
general and exploratory data retention of individuals' electronic
communications by law enforcement authorities. ... Wide data retention
powers for law enforcement authorities, especially if they were used on a
routine basis and on a large part of the population, could have disastrous
consequences for the most sensitive and confidential types of personal
data." Thousands of individual Internet users from around the world signed
on to this letter, while similar objections were aired by a number of EP
members, including Ilka Schroeder and Marco Cappato. The battle will now
shift to the legislatures of the constituent national governments.
Implementation of the Directive could take two to five years.

For more information, visit the Electronic Privacy Information Center
(EPIC-a GILC member) website under
http://www.epic.org/privacy/intl/data_retention.html

To read a European Commission press release on the EP vote, visit
http://europa.eu.int/rapid/start/cgi/guesten.ksh?p_action.gettxt=gt&doc=IP/0
2/783|0|RAPID&lg=EN&display=

The aforementioned GILC letter is posted under
http://www.gilc.org/cox_en.html

If you wish to sign the GILC letter, click
http://www.stop1984.com/index2.php?lang=en&text=letter.txt

Read Stuart Millar, "Europe votes to end data privacy," The Guardian, May
31, 2002 at
http://www.guardian.co.uk/internetnews/story/0,7369,725204,00.html

See "European 'spying' laws savaged," BBC News Online, May 30, 2002 at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_2016000/2016848.stm

Read "EU vote relaxes e-privacy rules," Reuters, May 31, 2002 at
http://zdnet.com.com/2102-1105-929605.html

Further analysis is available from the Statewatch website under
http://www.statewatch.org/news/2002/may/15epvote.htm

==========================================================
[14] New US gov't rules may allow massive Internet spying
==========================================================
Despite past mistakes, the United States government officials have decided
to expand their law enforcement powers along the Information Superhighway.

On May 30, 2002, U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft issued guidelines
(effective immediately) on how the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI)
and the Justice Department conduct investigations. Among other things, these
revised standards will allow government agents to monitor Internet postings
when there is no evidence that the authors of the postings are involved in
crime. The measures will also permit FBI and Justice Department officials to
buy information from data mining firms, thereby allowing the government to
gather a myriad of personal information on private individuals. The plan
will loosen time restrictions, thereby allowing the FBI to conduct full
investigations for up to one year even when there is no evidence of a crime.

Many groups have criticized these moves, pointing out that the now-discarded
rules had been created to protect the privacy of ordinary Americans. The
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU-a GILC member) noted that "any time you
write a check, use a credit card, buy something on credit, make department
store purchases, surf the web, use an e-z pass to buy gasoline or pay a
toll, the FBI may be permitted, under the new guidelines, to purchase this
information to build a profile on you. ... This is an invitation for a
fishing operation."

Ironically, the changes came not long after several documents appeared
revealing that the FBI has already abused its powers by collecting
information on ordinary law-abiding individuals. These papers were disclosed
to the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC-a GILC member), which had
filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for materials in
connection with the FBI's much-derided Internet spytool known by its old
name, Carnivore. The documents included the text of an internal FBI email
message that revealed how, in one case, Carnivore managed to gather so much
information on innocent parties that a distraught FBI technician deleted
nearly all of the collected data, including what was relevant to the given
investigation. EPIC General Counsel David Sobel said that the documents
"confirm what many of us have believed for two years-Carnivore is a powerful
but clumsy tool that endangers the privacy of innocent American citizens.
Our FOIA lawsuit shows that there's a great deal about Carnivore that we
still don't know."

To read the new Attorney General guidelines, click
http://www.usdoj.gov/olp/

For an ACLU analysis of these guidelines, click
http://www.aclu.org/congress/l053002a.html

Read Julian Borger, "Shamed FBI's snooping powers increased," The Guardian,
May 31, 2002 at
http://www.guardian.co.uk/internetnews/story/0,7369,725155,00.html

See "New FBI Rules Not Welcomed By All," CBS News, May 31, 2002 at
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/05/23/national/main510040.shtml

Read Bill Miller, "Ashcroft: Old Rules Aided Terrorists," Washington Post,
May 31, 2002, page A13 at
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A34880-2002May30.html

The latest documents regarding Carnivore spyware problems are available from
the EPIC website under
http://www.epic.org/privacy/carnivore/

Read Stefanie Olsen, "Documents reveal Carnivore deficiencies," CNet News,
May 28, 2002 at
http://news.com.com/2100-1023-927252.html

See also D. Ian Hopper, "Memo Reveals FBI E-Mail Snafu," Associated Press,
May 29, 2002 at
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/05/29/attack/main510393.shtml

============================================================
[15] US gov't investigates Verichip tracking implants maker
============================================================
The manufacturers of a controversial tracking device designed to be
implanted under a person's skin are now under heightened scrutiny from
United States government regulators.

Verichip--a device that can carry individualized data (such as a person's
name, current condition, medical records and unique identification number)
and is designed to be imbedded under a person's skin. When a special
external scanner is pointed at a Verichip, "a number is displayed by the
scanner" and the stored information is transmitted "via telephone or
Internet." Verichip's maker, Applied Digital Systems (ADS), is marketing its
product for such purposes as "identification, various law enforcement and
defense uses and search and rescue." Company officials are looking to expand
the program to include Global Positioning System (GPS) technology to allow
Verichip recipients to be tracked via the Internet.

Privacy advocates had already expressed serious concerns about the device.
As David Sobel from the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC-a GILC
member) pointed out: "The problem here is that you have something here that
is going to be permanently implanted in people, and once that happens, I
think there is going to be a real challenge to make sure that only that
original intended use is made of that technology."

The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has now launched a
probe into whether ADS' activities and claims violated Federal law.
Previously, the FDA had said it would not to regulate Verichips, so long as
the devices were used for identification purposes. However, ADS then claimed
it had received formal FDA approval, and encoded the first implanted
Verichips with medical information (such as the recipients' allergies to
various medications), which provoked the FDA inquiry.

For the latest details, see Jim Goldman, "FDA Launches Investigation Into
Verichip," Tech TV, May 17, 2002 at
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/business/TechTV/techtv_verichip_020517.html

For more on ADS' financial problems, see Joanna Glasner, "Stock Woes for
Chip Implanter," Wired News, May 16, 2002 at
http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,52499,00.html

First Verichip under-skin tracking implants performed
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/scitech/TechTV/techtv_chipfamily020510.html

See "Fla. Family Takes Computer Chip Trip," CBS News, May 10, 2002 at
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/05/10/tech/main508641.shtml

==================================================
[16] Euro regulators probe Microsoft privacy woes
==================================================
European government officials have launched a probe into how the world's
leading manufacturer of computer operating systems handles user information.

The European Commission probe will focus on Microsoft's .Net Passport user
authentication service, which the company intends to be a central repository
for such personal information as birthdates and credit card numbers.
According to one EC official, "The Commission is...looking into this as a
matter of priority, in concentration with national data protection
authorities, as regards the system's compatibility (or not) with EU data
protection law." The investigation was revealed in a response to Erik
Meijer, a European Parliament member, who had expressed concern over how
difficult it is for individuals to unsubscribe from Passport and how many
websites refused to deal with non-Passport users.

The decision was applauded by many privacy and consumer advocates. Simon
Davies from Privacy International (a GILC member) pointed out that there are
"profound implications about the flow of information across the world and
the privacy stakes are too high to allow Microsoft to control the standard."
Indeed, several organizations, including GILC members the Electronic Privacy
Information Center, Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility, the
Electronic Frontier Foundation and Net Action, had filed formal papers with
the United States government regulators regarding the potential detrimental
impact that Microsoft Windows XP could have on individual privacy. More
recently, Microsoft has admitted to a series of security flaws in its
Exchange email and Internet Explorer programs, further heightening fears
that the software giant is not doing enough to protect its users' personal
data.

Read "Microsoft under privacy investigation," BBC News Online, May 27, 2002
at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_2010000/2010839.stm

See also "MS privacy policies under EU probe," Reuters, May 26, 2002 at
http://zdnet.com.com/2102-1105-923035.html

For more background information on Microsoft privacy concerns, visit the
EPIC website under
http://www.epic.org/privacy/consumer/microsoft/

See David Becker, "Microsoft Exchange hole 'critical'," CNet News, May 29,
2002 at
http://news.com.com/2100-1001-928055.html

See also Robert Vamosi, "Will IE patch open new holes?" ZDNet News, May 22,
2002 at
http://zdnet.com.com/2102-1107-920114.html

=================================================
[17] US Net privacy bill passes important hurdle
=================================================
A United States comprehensive online privacy standards proposal has passed
an important test.

A U.S. Senate committee has approved the Online Personal Privacy Act, which,
among other things, would require Internet companies to get prior consent
from customers before collecting or disseminating sensitive personal
information about them. This category of data would include details such as
political affiliations, religious beliefs, ethnicity and medical histories.
The legislation would also require companies to provide "clear and
conspicuous notice" to consumers about their personal data will be handled,
and allow users to sue violators in civil court.

A number of cyberlibertarians hope that the Act will encourage firms to
their privacy procedures. Lee Tien from the Electronic Frontier Foundation
(EFF-a GILC member) noted the importance of forcing companies to be held
accountable for their online personal data practices: "One of the basic
elements of any kind of privacy protection is the ability for people to sue
or for serious government agencies to sue and therefore cause the company to
really do something about privacy. Otherwise, it's just words."

See "Bitter battle over online privacy bill," Reuters, May 17, 2002 at
http://news.com.com/2100-1023-916662.html

For background information, see "Hollings puts together Net privacy bill,"
CNet News, April 18, 2002 at
http://news.com.com/2100-1023-886679.html

=================================================
[18] Interactive TV privacy fears grow
=================================================
Several recent incidents have privacy concerns among users of interactive
television systems.

One of these incidents involves SonicBlue's ReplayTV, which allows consumers
to record television programs on a hard drive, send them to friends through
the Internet, and fast-forward past commercials. SonicBlue is fighting a
court order that would require the company to turn over information about
the viewing habits of ReplayTV users. The order came as part of a lawsuit
launched by several major media companies, including AOL Time Warner,
Disney, NBC, and CBS, who claim that the device's adherents are violating
copyright laws.

The ruling drew fierce criticism from privacy groups. The Electronic Privacy
Information Center (EPIC) attorney Megan Gray warned that "whether
unpopular, controversial or sexually explicit, if they knew that an
electronic record would be created, in perpetuity, about their viewing
choices. A person's home is one of the most sacred of private places. The
studios have no right to intrude there to collect data for their own
purposes without the individual's consent." Subsequently, a Federal judge in
the United States overturned the order.

An EPIC friend-of-the-court brief on this subject is available in PDF format
under
http://www.epic.org/privacy/replaytv/amici_brief_eick_order.pdf

To read a SonicBlue press release about the latest ruling, click
http://www.sonicblue.com/company/press.asp?ID=554

Read Tiffany Kary, "Viewing secrets are safe with Sonicblue," CNet News,
June 3, 2002 at
http://news.com.com/2100-1040-930548.html

=================================================
[19] US cell phone tracking scheme still on hold
=================================================
A plan to track people using their cellular telephones continues to meet
with delays and frustration.

For several years, the United States government has pushed a scheme known as
"Enhanced 911." Under this scheme, mobile phone companies are required to
install technology allowing government agents to locate cellular users
within 100 meters. The tracking is done by triangulating the emissions given
off by a particular phone between different signal towers. Service providers
who fail to comply with these rules may face heavy fines.

A number of experts have expressed fears that this new tracking scheme will
seriously erode individual privacy. Meanwhile, numerous technical headaches
and high costs have severely hampered E911 implementation. Several cellular
phone carriers have said that they will not able to comply with upcoming
U.S. Federal Communications Commission deadlines, and at least one firm has
suggested that it may be forced to abandon their E911 network altogether.

Read Ben Charny, "Last chance for E911 technology," CNet News, May 29, 2002
at
http://news.com.com/2100-1033-928153.html

=========================================================
        ABOUT THE GILC NEWS ALERT:
=========================================================
The GILC News Alert is the newsletter of the Global Internet Liberty
Campaign, an international coalition of organizations working to protect and
enhance online civil liberties and human rights.  Organizations are invited
to join GILC by contacting us at
[log in to unmask]

To alert members about threats to cyber liberties, please contact members
from your country or send a message to the general GILC address.

To submit information about upcoming events, new activist tools and news
stories, contact:

Christopher Chiu
GILC Coordinator
American Civil Liberties Union
125 Broad Street, 17th Floor
New York, New York 10004
USA

Or email:
[log in to unmask]

More information about GILC members and news is available at
http://www.gilc.org

You may re-print or redistribute the GILC NEWS ALERT freely.

To subscribe to the alert, please send e-mail to
[log in to unmask]

with the following message in the body:
subscribe gilc-announce

========================================================
PUBLICATION OF THIS NEWSLETTER IS MADE POSSIBLE BY A
GRANT FROM THE OPEN SOCIETY INSTITUTE (OSI)
========================================================

************************************************************************************
Distributed through Cyber-Society-Live [CSL]: CSL is a moderated discussion
list made up of people who are interested in the interdisciplinary academic
study of Cyber Society in all its manifestations.To join the list please visit:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/cyber-society-live.html
*************************************************************************************