From: Chris Chiu [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 17 November 2003 16:25
To: Gilc-Announce (E-mail)
Subject: [Gilc-announce] GILC Alert


GILC Alert
Volume 7, Issue 8
17 November 2003

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] New wave of Chinese Net dissident arrests
[2] Upcoming EuroDMCA may stifle Net free speech
[3] Flap over voting machine documents on the Web
[4] Hollywood sues more Net users
[5] Spyware maker launches legal attacks against critics
[6] US gov't orders crippling of digital TV systems
[7] College music-sharing system shutdown amidst copyright threats
[8] US gov't unveils limited copyright law exemptions
[9] US Supreme Court again reviews Net speech law
[10] Crippled DVDs prove unpopular
[11] US plan would restrict flow of mere facts
[12] New report on multiple digital divides released

Privacy
[13] New law allows Singapore gov't cyber-attacks
[14] Information sought on MATRIX spy program
[15] New computer bug does not require opening of attachment
[16] AOL invades private computers, alters settings
[17] Lingerie retailer fined over e-privacy breach
[18] Finnish geographic kid Net tracking plan draws concern
[19] Big Brother Awards ceremonies held recently in 4 countries

=========================================================
[1] New wave of Chinese Net dissident arrests
=========================================================
The mainland Chinese government has renewed efforts to stifle criticism by
detaining a slew of individuals who expressed themselves online.

As part of these efforts, government agents recently arrested at least 3
individuals for their Internet activities. Du Daobin, a civil servant who
had posted many essays on the Information Superhighway regarding democracy
and various human rights issues, was taken into custody on 29 October and
accused of subversion after calling for protests in support of jailed
dissident Liu Di. Fellow Internet activist Yan Jun was charged with
subversion and reportedly beaten so severely in prison that he had to be
hospitalized. Luo Yongzhong, who supposedly published online articles
"attacking the socialist system," was ordered to spend the next 3 years in
jail.

In addition, several other Chinese cyber-dissidents are undergoing
protracted legal battles over their online writings. It has been revealed
that Jiang Lijun, who was arrested over a year ago for alleged "incitement
to subvert state power" and whose whereabouts were unknown for some time,
will soon be tried behind closed doors in a Beijing tribunal. Furthermore, a
court has rejected appeals on behalf of 4 other people (Xu Wei, Yang Zili,
Jin Haike and Zhang Hongkai) who were each given multi-year prison sentences
for expressing themselves in cyberspace. Still another online protestor, He
Depu, was sentenced to 8 years in prison for his activities in connection
with the banned Chinese Democracy Party and for posting supposedly
subversive writings on the Internet. As for Liu Di, prosecutors reportedly
have sent her case back to the police due to lack of evidence, which has
fueled hope that she might be freed within the near future.

This harsh treatment of online dissidents has once again prompted sharp
rebukes from human rights groups. Robert Menard, the secretary general of
Reporters Sans Frontieres (RSF-a GILC member), expressed "regret that the
Chinese authorities have turned a deaf ear to the growing number of voices
speaking out in China and abroad against their policy of cracking down on
cyber-dissidents. In particular, Menard paid "homage to Du Daobin's courage
and the impact of his symbolic protest in support of Liu Di. The simulated
detention campaign was a model of peaceful protest and the arrest of its
instigator is quite simply disgraceful." Similarly, Liu Qing, the president
of Human Rights in China, called the Yan Jun case "yet another classic
example of the Chinese government's suppression of free expression on the
Internet."

Meanwhile, authorities in the Land of the Dragon are apparently seeking
tighter control over cybercafes. According to the state-run Xinhua news
agency, Chinese leaders will move to ensure that government firms will
takeover and consolidate ownership of the nation's Internet cafi chains,
which number in the hundreds of thousands. Such establishments will also
have to have to install spyware in order to monitor customers. Robert Menard
explained: "By putting Internet cafis under the control of a few, partly
state-owned companies and by standardising the surveillance equipment
installed by the chain stores, the Chinese authorities are making it easier
to censor the Internet. Centralising the management of points of Internet
access will make it easier for the authorities to control users. This is a
worrying precedent, which could serve as a model for other repressive
governments to follow."

For the latest details in the Liu Di case, see "China web dissident 'soon
free'," BBC News Online, 17 November 2003 at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/3276227.stm

Read Hamish McDonald, "Internet mouse is trapped," Sydney Morning Herald, 7
November 2003 at
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/11/06/1068013326676.html

See also Robert Marquand, "The 'mouse' that caused an uproar in China,"
Christian Science Monitor, 6 November 2003 edition at
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/1106/p01s04-woap.html

Additional details regarding He Depu as well as the recent appeals court
hearing are available from the RSF website at
http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=8509

Read "Internet dissidents lose appeal over sentence," ABC News Online (AU),
10 November 2003 at
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s985891.htm

For more on the arrest of Du Daobin, visit the RSF website under
http://www.rsf.fr/article.php3?id_article=8406

Further information regarding the case of Yan Jun is available from the
Human Rights in China website at
http://iso.hrichina.org/iso/news_item.adp?news_id=1565

For further information in German (Deutsch) about the case of Yan Jun, read
"Erneut Internet-Aktivist in China vor Gericht gestellt," Heise Online, 29
October 2003 at
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/jk-29.10.03-000/

For more about the sentencing of Luo Yongzhong, visit the RSF website under
http://www.rsf.fr/article.php3?id_article=8331

For more concerning the Jiang Lijun case, click
http://iso.hrichina.org/iso/news_item.adp?news_id=1590

See also "China stellt erneut Internet-Aktivisten vor Gericht," Heise
Online, 4 November 2003 at
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/jk-04.11.03-003/

Further details regarding new Chinese cybercafe restrictions are posted at
http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=8377

See "China to consolidate Net cafes," CNETAsia, 27 October 2003 at
http://news.com.com/2102-1028_3-5097379.html

For coverage in German (Deutsch), read "China will Internet-Cafes unter
Kontrolle Bringen," Heise Online, 27 October 2003 at
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/anw-27.10.03-008/

=========================================================
[2] Upcoming EuroDMCA may stifle Net free speech
=========================================================
Controversy continues to swirl over a European proposal that would expand
the powers of intellectual property holders.

The draft European Intellectual Property Enforcement Directive supposedly
will simplify the enforcement of copyrights, patents, and trademarks
throughout the continent. Among other things, the Directive would ban the
use, manufacture, importation and distribution of "illegal technical
devices" that could circumvent technologies designed to protect any
industrial property right. The proposal also includes provisions that
essentially would give intellectual property holders broad subpoena powers
to collect personal information. The proposal's general outlines have drawn
comparisons to the much-maligned United States Digital Millennium Copyright
Act (DMCA), which contains broadly similar language. Indeed, a recent
analysis commissioned by the Foundation for Information Policy Research
(FIPR-a GILC member) dubbed the Directive a "EuroDMCA" that could serious
harm to individual users.

After heavy criticism from a number of groups, nearly 200 amendments to the
Directive were proposed, and voting on the entire proposal was delayed.
However, not all of the amendments would water down the bill; one of them,
proposed by European Parliament Member (MEP) Janelly Fourtou, would make it
a crime to engage in noncommercial use of otherwise protected works without
prior authorization, including Internet peer-to-peer (P2P) file sharing.
Besides alarming defenders of free speech, Fourtou's actions have also drawn
serious conflict-of-interest accusations, since she is also the wife of
entertainment magnate Jean-Rene Fourtou, whose company, Vivendi Universal,
would ostensibly be one of the primary beneficiaries of the proposal if it
is approved.

Meanwhile, another notorious copyright law has taken effect in Britain. The
new law was approved several years ago supposedly to bring United Kingdom
into compliance with a European Union Copyright Directive (which has still
yet to be implemented in 9 of the 15 European Union member nations). FIPR's
Ian Brown warned: "The main problem with the directive is that it goes
further with copyright than copyright has ever gone before. Copyright had
always focused on people infringing rights and making copies. This goes
further and says that any kind of technology that can help you do that is
now illegal. The record companies are trying all sorts of ways to try to
prevent copying - such as releasing CDs that you can listen to on a hi-fi
but can't on a PC because it won't read it. The EUCD says it is illegal to
break those copyright mechanisms even if you do it for a perfectly valid
reason. So, if you buy a CD and want to listen to it on your PC at work,
which is quite legitimate, you can't."

For further information, visit the website of IP Justice (a GILC member)
under
http://ipjustice.org/code/update102403.htm

Read Barry Fox, "Loophole claimed in new European copyright laws," New
Scientist, 14 November 2003 at
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994384

See Mark Ward, "Why that mix CD might be illegal," BBC News Online, 10
November 2003 at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3256945.stm

The FIPR-commissioned analysis of the EuroDMCA is posted under
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/draftdir.html

Read "How the web turned into a minefield," The Guardian (UK), 27 October
2003 at
http://www.guardian.co.uk/online/news/0,12597,1071541,00.html

See also "U.K. copyright law goes into effect," Reuters, 31 October 2003 at
http://news.com.com/2102-1028_3-5100441.html

=========================================================
[3] Flap over voting machine documents on the Web
=========================================================
An embattled voting machine company has lashed out at its critics with legal
threats.

For some time now, elections experts have questioned the security of
machines manufactured by Diebold Election Systems. These concerns have been
fueled by several documents recently posted online that contained
information regarding vulnerabilities in Diebold voting software, including
email warnings from Diebold technicians about various security flaws.
Diebold then threatened lawsuits against various groups and individuals who
either hosted or provided weblinks to those documents, claiming their
actions constituted copyright infringement. The list of targeted groups
included Online Policy Group (OPG-a GILC member), which hosted an
Independent Media Group site that had weblinks to the Diebold papers in
question.

In response, OPG, along with two college students who also received legal
threats from Diebold, have filed a lawsuit, hoping to stop the election
machine company from issuing further legal threats against Internet service
providers (ISPs). OPG spokesperson David Weekly explained: "As an ISP
committed to free speech, we are affirming our users' right to link to
information that's critical to the debate on the reliability of electronic
voting machines. The court now has the opportunity to defend free speech by
helping protect small publishers and ISPs from frivolous legal threats by
large corporations." Cindy Cohn from the Electronic Frontier Foundation
(EFF-a GILC member), which is representing OPG in this case, argued:
"Instead of paying lawyers to threaten its critics, Diebold should invest in
creating electronic voting machines that include voter-verified paper
ballots and other security protections."

To read an EFF press release regarding the case, click
http://www.eff.org/Legal/ISP_liability/OPG_v_Diebold/20031104_eff_pr.php

For video and audio coverage of this story, go to "ISP Defies Electronic
Voting Machine Maker's Copyright Claims," Democracy Now, 30 October 2003 at
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=03/10/30/1626213

See Declan McCullagh, "Students buck DMCA threat," CNET News, 3 November
2003 at
http://news.com.com/2100-1028_3-5101623.html

See also Kim Zetter, "E-Vote Protests Gains Momentum," Wired News, 29
October 2003 at
http://wired.com/news/print/0,1294,61002,00.html

=========================================================
[4] Hollywood sues more Net users
=========================================================
Hollywood has gone after more people over their online file-sharing
activities in a second wave of lawsuits.

The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) has now sued 80
Internet users who they claim have engaged in copyright infringement by
sharing music files online. The RIAA had already filed lawsuits against 261
other alleged file-sharers earlier this year, although it is not clear
whether all of these people were actual infringers. Indeed, one of the
lawsuits had to be dropped when it was discovered that the intended target
was a 65-year-old grandmother, Sarah Ward, who never had downloaded music
through the Information Superhighway and did not have any other family
members living at home who might have done so. In this second wave, the
Association contacted the individuals in question beforehand, urging them to
enter a settlement or otherwise face litigation; 124 people settled under
this arrangement. In addition, such lawsuit blitzes may soon reach overseas.
The RIAA's Korean counterpart, the Recording Industry Association of Korea,
is considering whether to sue users of Soribada, Korea's leading
peer-to-peer music sharing service.

A number of groups (including cyberliberties organizations and Internet
service providers) have criticized these moves. Fred von Lohmann from the
Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF-a GILC member) charged: "Suing your
customers one at a time is not a business model. And in the meantime, the
RIAA is trampling on privacy and proposing legislation that's dangerous to
the Internet generally. We still don't think this is a solution. It may not
be paying any dividends other than ruining the lives of those who are
arbitrarily singled out."

These concerns were bolstered by a new study by the NPD Group indicating
that the RIAA's actions have led to ill will among Internet users against
the entertainment industry. The author of the study, Russ Crupnick, noted
that while the lawsuit blitz has led some 2 million households to delete all
music files from their computers, consumers are "resenting it. ... [T]he
real work of winning back the hearts and minds of consumers must begin."

See Benny Evangelista, "Millions deleted downloads," San Francisco
Chronicle, 5 November 2003, page B1 at
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/11/05/BUGVM2Q3RG19.DTL

Read Katie Dean, "RIAA Sues 80 More Swappers," Wired News, 30 October 2003
at
http://wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,61028,00.html

For coverage in German (Deutsch), see "US-Musikindustrie klagt weiter,"
Heise Online, 31 October 2003 at
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/wst-31.10.03-001/

For more details concerning the legal disputes surrounding Soribada, read
Kim Sung-jin, "Online Music Exchange Battle Heads for Second Round," Korea
Times, 29 October 2003 at
http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/tech/200310/kt2003102920305811800.htm

=========================================================
[5] Spyware maker launches legal attacks against critics
=========================================================
The maker of computer program that secretly spies on its users is now using
lawsuits in an apparent attempt to silence its opponents.

The controversial Gator advertising utility is often surreptitiously bundled
with other downloaded computer programs and can be installed with little
notice to the user, particularly if the given machine's web browser uses low
security settings. Once in place, Gator tracks a user's Internet usage and
displays advertisements based on this information. For example, as explained
in a recent study, the program watches the terms people enter into the
Google search engine and serves up ads pursuant to those terms. Gator also
targets specific host names and even federal government websites for
advertising opportunities.

The emergence of Gator and other spyware programs has spawned a cottage
industry for developing software to remove such programs from people's
computers as well as sparking heated discussion over the impact of
Gator-type routines on individual privacy. However, the manufacturer of
Gator (which recently changed its name to Claria sued one of these firms, PC
Pitstop, claiming that the company had engaged in defamation, among other
things. PC Pitstop eventually settled the lawsuit; while the terms of the
settlement were not publicly revealed, the company did remove several
articles from its website that had titles such as the "Gator Boycott List"
and the "Gator Quiz."

These latest developments have prompted concern from various cyber-rights
experts as well as industry figures. A spokesperson at one anti-spyware firm
(which declined to be named) explained: "There is this feeling out there
that [Claria] won the lawsuit, and people are starting to get scared. We
haven't been sued, but we've heard that other companies are being sued for
saying this and that, so we've changed our language."

Read Paul Festa, "See you later, anti-Gators?" CNET News, 22 October 2003 at
http://news.com.com/2102-1032_3-5095051.html

For coverage in German (Deutsch), see "Gator will sich nicht
Spyware-Hersteller nennen lassen," Heise Online, 23 October 2003 at
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/hps-23.10.03-000/

To read the aforementioned study, click
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/edelman/ads/gator/

See Stefanie Olsen, "Gator sheds skin, renames itself," CNET News, 29
October 2003 at
http://news.com.com/2102-1024_3-5099212.html

See also "Spyware-Hersteller Gator will nicht mehr Gator heissen," Heise
Online, 30 October 2003 at
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/hps-30.10.03-000/

=========================================================
[6] US gov't orders crippling of digital TV systems
=========================================================
United States government regulators have issued an order that critics say
will needlessly restrict the ability of consumers to enjoy digital
television broadcasts as well as the Internet.

The U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has issued new rules
requiring makers of digital television equipment to accept broadcasts with a
special copy-protection signal, known as a broadcast flag. Under this
scheme, such equipment would detect flagged digital TV shows and prevent
consumers from disseminating such material, including through the
Information Superhighway. The rule applies to such items as digital video
cassette recorders, DVD players and personal computers. The FCC order did
not mandate a specific broadcast flag technology and instead laid out a
certification process for such systems; the deadline for compliance is 1
July 2005.

Many observers, including free speech advocates and consumer electronics
manufacturers, have disparaged the FCC's decision. Mike Godwin from Public
Knowledge pointed out: "It's clear the scheme is fundamentally flawed as we
are aiming to protecting content by re-architecting devices. It's a costly
approach to protect copyrighted works in the digital world. You can't write
to a DVD that plays in a legacy player. We buy electronics with the idea of
connecting them to each other." Godwin cautioned that the FCC decision
indicates "we're going in the opposite direction."

A special archive of information regarding the broadcast flag issue is
available from the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF-a GILC member) under
http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/HDTV/20031104_eff_pr.php

To read an FCC press release regarding this decision (in PDF format), click
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-240759A1.pdf

More of Commissioner Copps' comments are posted (in PDF format) at
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-240759A4.pdf

Read Rita Chang, "FCC Endorses Built-In Copy Controls," Medill News Service,
4 November 2003 at
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,113285,00.asp

==================================================================
[7] College music-sharing system shutdown amidst copyright threats
==================================================================
A prominent university has halted use of an innovative music-sharing system
for fear of copyright lawsuits.

The Library Access to Music Project service, which was developed two
students at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), allowed music
broadcasts throughout the school's campus via MIT's internal analog cable
television network. Such files, which were to be licensed through a company
called Loudeye, could then be downloaded onto users' computers or burned
onto CDs. However, just hours after the system was unveiled, several record
industry conglomerates voiced objections to it, claiming it violated their
copyrights. Universal Music Group, for example, rather than lauding the
students for their technical prowess, moaned that it was "unfortunate that
MIT launched a service in an attempt to avoid paying recording artists,
union musicians, and record labels." Loudeye later claimed that it had not
actually provided MIT with licenses for music from various music labels,
including Universal. MIT subsequently suspended the LAMP service; in a
statement, the university said the suspension was temporary and that it was
pursuing "clarifying discussions with Loudeye, the record labels, and music
publishers. MIT continues to be committed to developing a fully licensed
service."

Many experts see the decision as yet another symbol of the way copyright
laws are being used to thwart new methods of digital expression. Professor
Jonathan Zittrain of Harvard Law School questioned whether current legal
standards provide sufficient protection for scientists: "It doesn't seem
that MIT was trying to steal anything, but rather to simply hew to the
letter of the law in an incredibly Byzantine area."

The LAMP website is located at
http://lamp.mit.edu/

Read John Schwartz, "MIT shutters its music-serving site," New York Times, 3
November 2003 at
http://news.com.com/2102-1027_3-5101181.html

For coverage in German (Deutsch), read Claus Jahnel, "Pirat wider Willen,"
Heise Telepolis, 5 November 2003 at
http://www.heise.de/tp/deutsch/special/copy/16012/1.html

=========================================================
[8] US gov't unveils limited copyright law exemptions
=========================================================
The United States government has rolled out exemptions to a heavily
criticized copyright law, but critics charge that more relief is needed.

The U.S. Library of Congress (LoC) has issued regulations that essentially
limit the reach of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which, among
other things, prohibits circumvention of copy-protection schemes. The DMCA
includes a provision allowing the LoC to exempt any "particular class of
works" from this anticircumvention ban to allow noninfringing uses that
would otherwise be "adversely affected." Last week, the LoC announced that 4
categories of information would be exempted, including (1) "Compilations
consisting of lists of Internet locations blocked by commercially marketed
filtering software applications that are intended to prevent access to
domains, websites or portions of websites," (2) "Computer programs protected
by dongles that prevent access due to malfunction or damage and which are
obsolete," (3) "Computer programs and video games distributed in formats
that have become obsolete and which require the original media or hardware
as a condition of access," and (4) "Literary works distributed in ebook
format when all existing ebook editions of the work ... contain access
controls that prevent the enabling of the ebook's read-aloud function and
that prevent the enabling of screen readers to render the text into a
'specialized format.'"

Many cyberliberties experts feel that the Library of Congress did not go far
enough with its exemptions, and should have included such activities as
making full use of public domain movies on DVDs, playing foreign DVDs on
U.S. machines and playing copy-protected audio CDs that malfunction to stop
playback. Gwen Hinze from the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF-a GILC
member) complained: "Consumers are the real losers in today's ruling,
because the Librarian of Congress is ignoring the rights of nearly everyone
who has purchased CDs and DVDs. We're disappointed that the Copyright Office
and the Librarian of Congress did not recognize the significant impact that
the DMCA is having on millions of consumers' ability to make reasonable uses
of digital media they've purchased."

The Library of Congress order is available via
http://www.copyright.gov/1201/

To read an EFF press release on this subject, click
http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/20031028_1201_pr.php

Read Katie Dean, "New Ways to Skirt DMCA ... Legally!" Wired News, 29
October 2003 at
http://wired.com/news/print/0,1294,60996,00.html

See John Borland, "Feds grant DMCA exceptions," CNET News, 28 October 2003
at
http://news.com.com/2102-1028_3-5098639.html

For coverage in German (Deutsch), read "Copyright Office formuliert
Ausnahmen vom Urheberrecht," Heise Online, 29 October 2003 at
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/anw-29.10.03-000/

=========================================================
[9] US Supreme Court again reviews Net speech law
=========================================================
The United States Supreme Court will once again consider whether a
controversial Internet censorship law is unconstitutional.

The case revolves around the 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." COPA was 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 Frontier Foundation. When the case
reached the Supreme Court, the majority held (in an opinion written by
Justice Clarence Thomas) 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 U.S. constitutional
free speech protections. However, the Court maintained a ban on COPA
enforcement and sent the case back to a lower appeals court for further
examination of whether COPA might be an unconstitutional restriction on free
expression for other reasons.

Earlier this year, a Federal appeals court once again struck down COPA as
unconstitutional. Among other things, the 3-judge panel held that "while
COPA penalizes publishers for making available improper material for minors,
at the same time it impermissibly burdens a wide range of speech and
exhibits otherwise protected for adults." The panel also found fault with
the statute's vague standards with regard to what was suitable for minors,
saying that the law did not take into account the concept that "materials
that have 'serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value' for a
sixteen-year-old" may not "have the same value for a minor who is three
years old. ... Web publishers who seek to determine whether their Web sites
will run afoul of COPA cannot tell which of these 'minors' should be
considered in deciding the particular content of their Internet postings."

The U.S. Justice Department has since appealed the panel's latest ruling,
and the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments from both sides in early
2004. However, a number of experts are skeptical about this latest attempt
to revive COPA will succeed. A final decision is expected by next June.

To read the latest appeals court ruling (in PDF format), click
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/3rd/991324p.pdf

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

See "US court revisits net porn law," BBC News Online, 14 October 2003 at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3191676.stm

=========================================================
[10] Crippled DVDs prove unpopular
=========================================================
One of Hollywood's latest ideas to thwart pirates has not only proven
unpopular among consumers, but also managed to irritate environmentalists.

EZ-Ds are special DVDs that expire after 48 hours. After their packaging is
opened, a resin on the discs reacts with the air and slowly deteriorates,
rendering it unplayable after two days. Flexplay Technologies, the company
that manufactures EZ-Ds, is marketing the discs for "no return, no late fee
movie rental" services. EZ-Ds have received the blessing of Buena Vista
Entertainment, a subsidiary of media giant Disney, which has launched a test
program to sell the discs in stores across the United States.

However, EZ-Ds have so far proven to be a marketing bust for a variety of
reasons. Retailers have found it hard to convince consumers to pay about USD
6 for a disc that will last only 2 days. One store manager said he had only
sold one-eighth of the discs in stock, explaining that many customers don't
"like the idea that it self-destructs in 48 hours. I think a lot of them are
worried about the quality of the DVD for that price. Seeing as how it
self-destructs, can it really be that good?" In addition, several
environmentalist groups have launched street protests outside various
establishments that sell EZ-Ds (as well as phone and postcard campaigns),
saying that the discs needlessly create more waste. Moreover, questions
remain over the effect that these and other so-called "crippleware"
technologies will have on free speech and fair use.

See Katie Dean, "Two-Day DVDs a Slow Sale," Wired News, 28 October 2003 at
http://wired.com/news/print/0,1294,60983,00.html

=========================================================
[11] US plan would restrict flow of mere facts
=========================================================
Lawmakers in the United States are considering a proposal that would extend
copyright-style restrictions on mere facts.

The "Database and Collections of Information Misappropriation Act" would
essentially bar people from knowingly making available "a quantitatively
substantial part of the information in a database" created or maintained by
another person without that other person's permission. The proposal is
broadly worded and would apply databases stored in digital form, including
such information as Internet search engine results. Violators could be sued
in civil court. A subcommittee of the U.S. House of Representatives has
given its blessing to the bill; a committee vote on the legislation may come
within the next few months.

The proposal has generated serious anxiety among free speech and fair use
advocates, who believe it will deter information transfers, including
discussions online, for fear of legal liability. Public Knowledge issued a
statement calling the plan "deeply flawed" and said it "further strikes at
the very heart of the public interest in an informed democracy." The bill
has also rankled several prominent politicians, who believe it is
unnecessary. U.S. Representative Rick Boucher labeled the measure "the
classic solution in search of a problem."

To read the text of the bill, click
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:h.r.3261:

The Public Knowledge statement is posted under
http://www.publicknowledge.org/issues/hr3261.html

Read "Database protection bill advances in Congress," CNET News, 16 October
2003 at
http://news.com.com/2102-7341_3-5092685.html

=========================================================
[12] New report on multiple digital divides released
=========================================================
A new report ominously warns that not only is the digital divide "here for
some time to come," but the divide "is large, multifaceted, and, in some
ways, is not shrinking."

Entitled "Charting and Bridging Digital Divides," the report investigates
levels of Internet access and usage in eight countries, including China,
Korea, Mexico, Germany and United States. The authors of the study
discovered that while "the Internet has grown rapidly and hugely in the last
decade," this growth was very "uneven. ... Rather than shrinking with
expanding Internet use, the global digital divide between developed
countries and developing nations continues to be huge." Thus, "only 10
percent of the world's population was on the Internet in 2002, and 88
percent of these Internet users resided in industrialized countries." The
document also highlights how this digital divide extends beyond the question
of whether someone in a given country can access the Internet, but also to
questions concerning technological access (such as broadband access rather
than dialup), technological literacy, social access (meaning such factors as
income, gender and language barriers) and social use (including censorship
and high access costs). The report notes how the largest digital divide "is
between better-educated, affluent, younger, English-speaking men in
developed countries and less-educated, poor, older, non-English-speaking
women in underdeveloped rural areas."

The study concludes that there is a "Need for Nuanced Understanding and
Action" to solve these problems: "A simple commitment to 'close the digital
divide' will not do. This is not simple, but simplistic. There is no one
digital divide. ... [B]ridging the digital divide is more complicated than
merely providing computers and Internet connections. ... The question is how
disadvantaged individuals and groups could be enabled to obtain the
necessary resources and afford the leapfrog into a digital future. It is
clear that without intervention, the global digital divide will take many
years to close within developing countries and between the developing and
the developed world. ... To turn the global digital divide into digital
dividends for most people in less-developed countries will be a long way
with many bumps in the road."

The report is available (in PDF format) under
http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/content_type/DownloadableAssets/FINAL_REPORT
_CHARTING_DIGI_DIVIDES.pdf

================================================================
[13] New law allows Singapore gov't cyber-attacks
================================================================
Criticism is mounting over new legal standards that will allow Singaporean
government agents to attack and disrupt individuals' computers.

Those standards came in the form of an amendment to the country's Computer
Misuse Act. The measure will empower the government to conduct heavier
surveillance of electronic networks and to engage in "pre-emptive" action,
as well as arrest people who it deems suspicious. Individuals who run afoul
of the new law may face three years in prison as well as heavy fines. One
member of parliament, Ho Geok Choo, explained that the now-amended Computer
Misuse Act is "very much like the cyber-space equivalent of the internal
security act", a much-maligned statute that allows criminal suspects to be
held for indefinite periods without a trial.

Many observers believe the amendment will have deleterious impact on civil
liberties in cyberspace, and will be used by the ruling People's Action
Party (PAP) to silence its opponents. Chee Soon Juan, the Secretary-General
of the Singapore Democratic Party warned that the new measure "sends a
chilling message to the people that the Government can on any pretext arrest
and imprison anyone whom it suspects to be a hacker. Given the appalling
record of the PAP and its use of the Internal Security Act to detain without
trial its political opponents and civil society leaders, the introduction of
the new cyber-law will curtail the development of democracy and freedom of
speech in Singapore even more. ... This new law must be exposed for what it
is - another disguised attempt by the ruling party to control the use of the
Internet by Singaporeans and to curtail the spread of discussion and dissent
in Singapore's cyberspace."

For more remarks from Chee Soon Juan, click
http://www.singaporedemocrat.org/media_releases_display.php?id=108

Further analysis is available from Reporters Sans Frontieres (RSF-a GILC
member) under
http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=8514

See John Burton, "Singapore tightens control over internet," Financial
Times, 12 November 2003 at
http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c
=StoryFT&cid=1066565807358

Read "Singapore tackles 'cyber-terror'," BBC News Online, 11 November 2003
at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/3259601.stm

========================================================
[14] Information sought on MATRIX spy program
========================================================
Efforts are underway to reveal more details regarding a controversial United
States government-sponsored data-trawling project.

The Multistate Anti-Terrorism Information Exchange (called the MATRIX for
short) is a computer network reportedly designed to allow government agents
to scan and analyze massive amounts of personal data, in order to predict
and prevent terrorist acts. The precise list of information sources for this
system has yet to be released, but reportedly includes data from police
files and commercial data merchants, and can pick out tidbits such as a
person's name, address, hair color and current geographic location. The
system is currently being developed by several states with financial support
from various U.S. Federal agencies. Officials familiar with the project have
admitted that the system has a number of flaws; Phil Ramer, a special agent
in charge of intelligence in the state of Florida, said the MATRIX is
"scary" and could be abused.

Privacy advocates have expressed serious concern over the MATRIX, which has
drawn comparisons to the infamous Federal Terrorism Information Awareness
project (previously named Total Information Awareness). The American Civil
Liberties Union (ACLU-a GILC member), in conjunction with several of its
state affiliates, has filed public records requests (at both the Federal and
state levels) to find out more information about the MATRIX. Among other
things, these requests call for the government to turn over records
regarding the system's specifications, what personal data is accessed and/or
used by the MATRIX, how the MATRIX has been used and what legal analyses of
the MATRIX have been performed.

For more information regarding the MATRIX public records requests, click
http://www.aclu.org/Privacy/Privacy.cfm?ID=14240&c=130

Read Anita Ramasatry, "Why We Should Fear the Matrix," Findlaw, 5 November
2003 at
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/ramasastry/20031105.html

==============================================================
[15] New computer bug does not require opening of attachment
==============================================================
A new computer bug that more easily activated than other digital pests is
raising eyebrows among Internet security experts.

The Flea (also known as Fortnight) worm is often disguised as a signature
file in HTML-formatted email messages, unlike so many other computer bugs
that are embedded in files attached to such messages. Flea, which uses
Visual Basic Script, can thus infect a computer when the user reads the
message, rather than requiring users to affirmatively open the attachment
for an infection to occur. When a Flea-laced message is opened, the relevant
user is sent to a webpage and is forced to download a malicious program that
can reset the Internet browser and email settings on the target computer.
Certain email programs, notably Microsoft's Outlook Express, are
particularly vulnerable.

Flea is just one of several new computer bugs that have once again raised
concerns over whether Microsoft is doing enough to protect the privacy of
computer users. The Sober worm, which comes in the form of an email
attachment, affects several versions of Microsoft's Windows operating system
and uses different subject lines (in German and English) to disguise itself.
Sober includes a faulty error message to give victims a false sense of
security as well as a message lauding the creator of still another computer
bug: the Sobig worm.

For more on the Flea computer bug, read "Flea bugs Windows users," The
Register (UK), 24 October 2003 at
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/56/33569.html

See also
http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/js.fortnight.d.html

For coverage in Spanish (Espanol), see "Nuevo virus que infecta sin
necesidad de ejecutar nada," DelitosInformaticos.com, 26 October 2003 at
http://www.delitosinformaticos.com/seguridad/noticias/106719508576313.shtml

For more on the Sober worm, see "New Windows virus hits computers," BBC News
Online, 28 October 2003 at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3220887.stm

========================================================
[16] AOL invades private computers, alters settings
========================================================
A major Internet service provider (ISP) has entered many of its users'
computers and changed the settings on their machines without their
knowledge, drawing concern from various online security experts.

Specifically, AOL deactivated a messaging program that is present on many
Windows operating system-based machines. The program has been used by
computer technicians and certain applications to notify users of events
(such as the fact that print job is finished) or problems (network
shutdowns). AOL disabled the messaging mechanism (through a proprietary
auto-update program) by closing various Internet ports, claiming the
targeted mechanism helps spammers. However, AOL's actions may also have a
negative impact on other programs that use those ports, and affected users
(an estimated 15 million people) weren't notified of the change.

The seemingly heavy-handed manner with which AOL entered its users' machines
has left many observers feeling uneasy. Bruce Schneier of Counterpane
Internet Security Inc. warned that AOL had set "a very dangerous precedent
in having companies go into your computer and turn things on and off. From
there it's easy to turn off competitors' services."

Read "AOL's Covert War on Pop-Up Spam," Associated Press, 23 October 2003 at
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/10/23/tech/main579736.shtml

========================================================
[17] Lingerie retailer fined over e-privacy breach
========================================================
A major retailer of intimate apparel has been fined after personal details
regarding several of its customers were exposed online.

The case involved a special feature of the Victoria's Secret website that
allowed customers to check the status of their respective orders. One of
these individuals discovered that, because of a flaw in the program, it was
possible to see information regarding other people's orders. The types of
information that were revealed in this manner included clothing sizes and
prices as well as customer names and addresses.

Victoria's Secret subsequently settled an investigation into the matter by
the New York State Attorney General. As part of the settlement, the company
agreed to pay a fine of USD 50 000, and will provide refunds or store
credits to New York customers who were affected by the breach. Additionally,
the retailer will initiate a new security program to prevent future privacy
glitches and take on an external auditor who will perform annual reviews.

See "Victoria's Secret Reveals Too Much," Associated Press, 22 October 2003
at
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/10/22/tech/main579547.shtml

============================================================
[18] Finnish geographic kid Net tracking plan draws concern
============================================================
The government of Finland is considering a proposal that will allow tracking
of children using a combined mobile phone and Internet system.

Under this scheme, children would carry cellular phonesets whose geographic
locations could be determined by triangulating their signals. This
geolocational data would then be disseminated through the Information
Superhighway. A number of details regarding the proposal remain vague,
including how access to such data will be restricted and what uses may be
made of child geolocational information once received. Nevertheless, the
plan has drawn widespread support among policy makers in the Scandinavian
country, even if it has yet to be voted upon by the Finnish legislature.

Besides the apparent privacy implications of the legislation, there are
concerns that, if implemented, the scheme may have a damaging psychological
impact on youth. One expert, Frank Furedi, warned that such tracking schemes
teach children "to be scared of life, to distrust everyone. And that has to
have a negative impact in the long run."

Read Clare Murphy, "Tracking down your child," BBC News Online, 28 October
2003 at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3218473.stm

================================================================
[19] Big Brother Awards ceremonies held recently in 4 countries
================================================================
Big Brother Awards ceremonies were held recently in Germany, Spain,
Switzerland and Austria. These awards, which are under the auspices of
Privacy International (a GILC member), are meant to publicize some of the
most significant threats to personal privacy.

In Germany, winners included a subsidiary of Deutsche Post that required
employees to see a doctor if they reported sick for longer than two weeks
and to waive their right to medical confidentiality. A special Politics
prize was given to the German states, Bavaria, Lower Saxony,
Rhineland-Palatinate and Thuringia "for their efforts, riding on the issue
of fighting terrorism, to tighten their states' police laws, allowing for
drastic restrictions of elementary basic rights and liberties affecting a
large number of unsuspicious people." In the category of Consumer
Protection, Metro AG's Future Store Initiative received an award for
"propagating the use of transponders or so-called RFIDs ('Radio Frequency
Identification' devices) in super markets." Other winners included GEZ (for
their surveillance efforts in order to collect public radio and TV license
fees), Berlin's Senator of the Interior ("for his more than dubious
justification for the use of the so-called 'silent SMS' by Berlin police"),
T-Mobile ("for storing the IP [Internet protocol] addresses of customers
with flat rate contracts") and the United States government (for coercing
"European and especially German airlines into granting various US
authorities access to the vast amount of data related to the bookings of all
passengers travelling to or via the United States").

Meanwhile, the Spanish Chapter of Computer Professionals for Social
Responsibility (CPSR-a GILC member) organized the second ever Big Brother
Awards Spain ceremony in Pamplona. One of the winners was the Spanish
Ministry of
Science and  Technology  (MCYT) for the controversial LSSI (short for La Ley
de Servicios de la Sociedad de la Informacion y de Comercio electronico),
which included the first mandatory data retention provision in Europe and
imposed potentially heavy fines for various types of Internet activity. A
Private Sector Prize and People's Choice Award went to Xabier Ribas, a
PriceWaterhouseCoopers lawyer who threatened to sue ninety-five thousand
Spanish users of peer-to-peer software in a fashion similar to that of the
Recording Industry Association of America (see item [4] above). An Intrusive
Technologies Prize was awarded to Microsoft for Palladium (now known as
Next-Generation Secure Computing Base or NGSCB), which many experts fear
will be used to control everything that users can do on their machines. On
the flipside, a Mariana Pineda Prize was given to Proinnova, a group that
battled fiercely against the latest European Union Directive on software
patents.

In Switzerland, one of the big winners was the Swiss Ministry of Defence,
which asked recruits highly intrusive questions about such subjects as their
sexual preferences. Examining magistrate Treccani from Lausanne, who ordered
mobile phone providers to hand over all traffic data from various specified
base stations, also garnered a Big Brother Award. On the positive side,
Rebekka Salome was honored (for revealing the existence of a secret database
containing information about customers of the Winterthur insurance company)
along with activist Daniel Costantino (who brought the aforementioned Swiss
Defence Ministry recruit questioning system to light) and Anina Ruest (for
her "SuPerVillainizer" program, which disrupts email surveillance routines
through disinformation).

At the Austrian Big Brother Awards, the European Commission and Janelly
Fourtou had the dubious distinction of being joint winners (in the Politics
category) for their efforts regarding the controversial draft Intellectual
Property Enforcement Directive (see item [2] above). Other awardees included
the European Patent Bureau (for awarding patents to ideas and methods in
information technology) and the Austrian postal service (for taking
addresses provided by people who had requested mail forwarding after having
recently moved and selling those addresses to direct marketing firms). On a
happier note, for the first time in five years, a positive prize was given
out; the so-called "defensor libertatis" award was presented to historian
and well known television journalist Peter Huemer for his defense of civil
rights in the information age and the freedom of communication.

The official German Big Brother Awards site is located at
http://www.bigbrotherawards.de/

See "Datenkraken-Oscars: Gebuehren fuer Big Brother," Heise Online, 24
October 2003 at
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/jk-24.10.03-006/

To visit the official Spanish Big Brother Awards site, click
http://www.bigbrotherawards-es.org

The Swiss Big Brother Awards website is located at
http://www.bigbrotherawards.ch/

For more on the Austrian Big Brother Awards, see
http://www.bigbrotherawards.at/

Read Brigitte Zarzer, "Schweinische 'Big Brother Awards'-Verleihung in
Oesterreich," Heise Telepolis, 27 October 2003 at
http://www.heise.de/tp/deutsch/inhalt/te/15951/1.html

See also
http://www.edri.org/cgi-bin/index?funktion=view&id=000100000117

=========================================================
     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.

This edition of the GILC Alert will be found on the World Wide Web under
http://www.gilc.org/alert/alert78.html

To subscribe to the Alert, or to change your subscription options
(including unsubscribing), please visit
http://www.2rad.net/mailman/listinfo/gilc-announce

========================================================
PUBLICATION OF THIS NEWSLETTER IS MADE POSSIBLE BY A
GRANT FROM THE OPEN SOCIETY INSTITUTE (OSI)
========================================================
_______________________________________________
Gilc-announce mailing list
[log in to unmask]
http://www.2rad.net/mailman/listinfo/gilc-announce

************************************************************************************
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
*************************************************************************************