EFF in the News
The three users, American computer security researcher Jacob Appelbaum; Birgitta Jonsdottir, a member of the Icelandic parliament; and Rop Gonggrijp, a Dutch computer programmer, were supported by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).
These are just some of the findings of an Electronic Frontier Foundation study of nearly 2,500 pages of FBI documents from 2001 to 2008. The documents report violations of the rules governing FBI investigations to the Intelligence Oversight Board -- a commission charged with overseeing the Intelligence Community's compliance with the Constitution and other applicable laws.
The three individuals -- @ioerror, or Jacob Appelbaum, an American computer security researcher and programmer; @birgittaj or Birgitta Jonsdottir, a member of the Icelandic parliament; and @rop_g or Rop Gonggrijp, a Dutch activist and computer programmer -- were supported by attorneys, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which challenged the order on the grounds that it was overly broad and violated its clients' civil rights. The ACLU and EFF plan to appeal Judge Buchanan's ruling, the organizations said.
The judge rejected arguments by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), and private attorneys representing the account holders, dismissing claims that there were First Amendment issues involved because the activists "have already made their Twitter posts and associations publicly available."
According to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, "The federal government is trying to force states to turn your drivers license into a national ID. Unless you tell your state legislator to push back, the Real ID Act will create grave dangers to privacy and impose massive financial burdens without improving national security in the least."
Following the breaches, privacy advocates such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the American Civil Liberties Union and the Electronic Privacy Information Center, raised a ruckus. Facebook rolled back the privacy changes and Google Buzz stopped sharing. But this wasn’t the first time Internet users had their privacy yanked with little to no say in the matter. So last year, technology and privacy constituencies met at the 21st Century at the Computers, Freedom and Privacy Conference in San Jose, Calif., and emerged with a draft you’re now invited to vote on. Here it is, the "Social Media Users Bill of Rights":
The Electronic Frontier Foundation and the American Civil Liberties Union said they would appeal Friday's ruling, which also found thegovernment may prevent Twitter users and the public from seeing some documents prosecutors submitted to the court to support their claim for obtaining records.
The ruling stems from a December14 court filing that required Twitter to disclose private information about the users' accounts. The government initially wanted to keep theproceedings private, but documents were unsealed at the request oflawyers from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EEF), which tried unsuccessfully to get a judge to bar access to the Twitter accounts.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Theresa Buchanan rejected arguments raised by the
ACLU, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and a host of private
attorneys representing the Twitter account holders, who had asserted
that their privacy was protected by federal law, the First Amendment,
and the Fourth Amendment.
Considering the sheer lack of clear information about Net Neutralityoutside of the tech community, it isn't a surprise that most people either have no information, or worse bad information about Net Neutrality. I suggest actually reading up on what the EFF has to say, as Net Neutrality is among their key issues.