EFFector Vol. 20, No. 32 August 13, 2007 email@example.com A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation ISSN 1062-9424 In the 436th Issue of EFFector:
- Appeals Court Battle Over NSA Surveillance on August 15
- How Ma Bell Fought for Your Privacy - 80 Years Ago
- First Sale: Why It Matters; Why We're Fighting for It
- Let 1,000 YouTube Presidential Debate Remixes Bloom!
- miniLinks (12): A Gateway for Hackers
For more information on EFF activities & alerts: http://www.eff.org/ Make a donation and become an EFF member today! http://eff.org/support/ Tell a friend about EFF: http://action.eff.org/site/Ecard?ecard_id=1061 effector: n, Computer Sci. A device for producing a desired change. : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : * Appeals Court Battle Over NSA Surveillance on August 15 Government Aims to Block Accountability for Illegal Spying on Americans San Francisco - In the wake of Congress approving a dramatic expansion of U.S. warrantless wiretapping powers, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will hear arguments on the future of two critical lawsuits over illegal surveillance of Americans. The hearing is set for August 15 at 2 p.m. in San Francisco. The government is fighting to get the cases thrown out of court, contending that the litigation jeopardizes state secrets. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is representing the plaintiffs in Hepting v. AT&T, which accuses the telecom giant of collaborating with the National Security Agency (NSA) in illegal electronic surveillance of millions of AT&T's customers. The court will also hear arguments on Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation v. Bush, a case alleging that the government illegally wiretapped calls between the charity and its lawyers. "At issue here is whether the courts have any meaningful role to play in protecting Americans' privacy from Executive branch abuses of its surveillance powers," said EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn. "If the claim of 'state secrets' is allowed to shut down litigation, then the courts will never be able to exercise their Constitutional duty to hold the White House accountable for illegal and even unconstitutional abuses of power." The court has scheduled one hour of arguments for Hepting v. AT&T and 40 minutes for Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation v. Bush. Because of the large number of attendees expected at Wednesday's hearing, the court will provide an overflow room with audio and video of the proceedings for spectators who cannot get a seat in the courtroom itself. WHAT: Hepting v. AT&T Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation v. Bush WHEN: 2 p.m. Wednesday, August 15 WHERE: 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Courtroom 1, 3rd Floor 95 Seventh Street San Francisco, CA 94103 For more on EFF's case against AT&T: http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/att See EFF's page on the NSA's Warrantless Domestic Surveillance: http://www.eff.org/Privacy/Surveillance/NSA/ For this release: http://www.eff.org/news/archives/2007_08.php#005398 : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : * How Ma Bell Fought for Your Privacy - 80 Years Ago Once upon a time, nearly 80 years ago, AT&T fought at the Supreme Court to stop the government's warrantless surveillance of Americans' private communications. How times have changed. Since its participation in the president's illegal wiretapping program came to light in late 2005, AT&T has desperately tried to avoid accountability and has sided with the government's claims that no one should be able to sue to stop the dragnet surveillance of millions of ordinary Americans. But when the Supreme Court first confronted warrantless wiretapping in Olmstead v. USA, AT&T co-authored an amicus brief that outspokenly defended its customers' privacy: "The telephone companies deplore the use of their facilities in furtherance of any criminal or wrongful enterprise. But it was not solicitude for lawbreakers that caused the people of the United States to ordain the Fourth and Fifth Amendments as part of the Constitution.... [I]t is better that a few criminals escape than that the privacies of life of all the people be exposed to the agents of the government, who will act at their own discretion, the honest and the dishonest, unauthorized and unrestrained by courts." Even in the 1920s, AT&T clearly recognized that surveillance of the modern telecommunications system could be far more invasive than the Colonial era privacy violations that inspired the Bill of Rights. "The telephone has become part and parcel of the social and business intercourse of the people of the United States, and this telephone system offers a means of espionage to which general warrants and writs of assistance were the puniest instruments of tyranny and oppression." "Writs of assistance" were used by Kings George II and III to carry out wide-ranging searches of anyone, anywhere, and anytime regardless of whether they were suspected of a crime. These "hated writs" spurred colonists toward revolution and directly motivated James Madison's crafting of the Fourth Amendment. Today, the president has essentially updated this page from the kings' playbook. EFF's lawsuit against AT&T presents uncontested evidence that, since at least 2001, the telco giant has given the National Security Agency unfettered backdoor access to its customers' Internet and phone communications, as well as realtime access to calling records. If AT&T in 1928 thought that wiretapping made the "hated writs" look puny, how can it now cooperate with the president's massive and illegal spying program? Both federal statutes and the Constitution plainly forbid the president's abuse of power as well as AT&T's participation, and EFF will continue to fight hard in court to restore your rights. This Wednesday, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals will hear oral arguments in our case. As AT&T's brief from 80 years ago makes clear, the most basic essence of our Constitution is at stake. AT&T isn't the only one in need of a history lesson; Congress needs one, too, and it's up to each and every one of us to set our representatives straight. By passing horrible legislation last week permitting the warrantless surveillance of Americans' international communications, Congress failed to do its job and check the Executive's abuse of power. Now we must do our democratic duty and help restore our Constitutional rights. Take action and write to Congress now. http://action.eff.org/fisa Read AT&T's amicus brief from Olmstead v. USA: http://eff.org/legal/cases/att/att_olmstead_amicus.pdf For this post: http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/005397.php : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : * First Sale: Why It Matters; Why We're Fighting for It The "first sale" doctrine expresses one of the most important limitations on the reach of copyright law. The idea, set out in Section 109 of the Copyright Act, is simple: once you've acquired a lawfully-made CD or book or DVD, you can lend, sell, or give it away without having to get permission from the copyright owner. In simpler terms, "you bought it, you own it" (and because first sale also applies to gifts, "they gave it to you, you own it" is also true). Seems obvious, right? After all, without the "first sale" doctrine, libraries would be illegal, as would used bookstores, used record stores, and video rental shops (and their modern variants, like LaLa and other CD-swapping communities). But that hasn't stopped Universal Music Group. In May, UMG sued Roast Beast Music for auctioning "promo CDs" on eBay, CDs which Roast Beast Music had itself purchased from used record stores around Los Angeles. Apparently, UMG has been harassing a number of eBay sellers, sending bogus DMCA takedown notices to eBay, getting auctions suspended and accounts terminated. Last week, EFF filed papers in court on behalf of Roast Beast Music answering UMG's allegations and counter-suing them for the bogus DMCA takedowns. The critical question is whether UMG can trump first sale by printing "promotional use only, not for resale" notices on the CDs that they routinely give away to radio stations, journalists, and tastemakers of all kinds. If UMG is right, then copyright owners of all kinds can strip away our first sale rights by putting these kinds of "label licenses" on their wares. Next thing you know, CDs, books, DVDs, and video games could be festooned with "notices" that erode a customer's first sale, fair use, and other rights. Read Section 109 of the U.S. Copyright Act: http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#109 See EFF's case page on UMG v. Augusto: http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/umg_v_augusto/ For the entire post and related links: http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/005400.php : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : * Let 1,000 YouTube Presidential Debate Remixes Bloom! It's amazing how fast things can change. In April, a transpartisan coalition spearheaded by Stanford Law Professor and EFF Board Member Lawrence Lessig called for the release of presidential debate footage into the public domain. The coalition of Internet luminaries, free speech advocates, conservative and progressive activists and others asked the broadcasters behind the debates to make all footage available to the public for remixing, blogging, commentary, analysis, and parody. Starting in May, three out of the five major networks granted the public access to their debate footage and acknowledged the ever-growing number of citizens that are already making use of new forums like YouTube to engage in political debate. Of course, even without the networks' permission, people are free to engage in non-infringing re-uses -- commentary, news reporting, and parody are classic examples of fair use. But uncertainty in the law and threat of litigation can nevertheless have a significant chilling effect on free speech. Find out which major networks have granted access in our complete post: http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/005401.php Read Lawrence Lessig's April blog post, " A Call on the RNC & DNC to Eliminate Unnecessary Regulation of Political Speech": http://lessig.org/blog/2007/04/a_call_on_the_rnc_dnc_to_elimi.html : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : * miniLinks The week's noteworthy news, compressed. ~ A Gateway for Hackers Susan Landau says wiretapping may create a security nightmare by tempting hackers. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/08/AR2007080801961.html ~ China Enacting a High-Tech Plan to Track People The Chinese government plans to use new ID cards to track all 12.4 million people in Shenzhen. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/12/business/worldbusiness/12security.html?ex=1344571200&en=7afecf6fde098a90&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss ~ Feds Consider Lowering Passenger Data Requirements Under a new plan, airlines would provide less data on travelers to the TSA. http://news.com.com/2100-1029_3-6201946.html ~ Delete This! Companies may begin retaining more data in response to the recent TorrentSpy case. http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/450 ~ Meltdown at the E-voting Machine The story behind why California's secretary of state decided to decertify E-voting machines. http://www.lacitybeat.com/article.php?id=5959&IssueNum=218 ~ Voice ID Snares Drug Kingpin in Brazil Police identified Ramirez Abadia using voice recognition software, with help from the U.S. DEA. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/08/10/international/i132148D24.DTL&tsp=1 ~ Perfect 10 Returns for More Abuse Having lost once, Perfect 10 returns to claim copyright infringement from search engine thumbnails. http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070809-perfect-10-shows-steep-learning-curve-sues-microsoft-over-thumbnails.html ~ Microsoft Games Open for Non-Commercial Re-Use You can create derivative works -- but don't even think about reverse engineering! http://www.developmag.com/news/28301/Microsoft-opens-game-IP-for-non-commercial-projects ~ Mod Chip Raid Fallout: A Roundup Should cops target small time pirates or focus on the big game? http://kotaku.com/gaming/piracy/mod-chip-raid-fallout-a-roundup-286137.php ~ DRM-free Tunes to be Watermarked Universal's plan to sell music without DRM doesn't mean it won't track user data. http://blog.wired.com/music/2007/08/universals-open.html ~ "Cyber-Punk" No More The man who supposedly coined the term "cyberspace" says the "cyber" prefix is fading from popular usage. http://news.com.com/8301-10784_3-9756972-7.html?tag=nefd.only ~ Habeas Corpus for Avatars! Will avatars in Second Life end up having more rights than their human creators? http://www.wonderlandblog.com/wonderland/2007/08/avatar-rights.html : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : * Administrivia EFFector is published by: The Electronic Frontier Foundation 454 Shotwell Street San Francisco CA 94110-1914 USA +1 415 436 9333 (voice) +1 415 436 9993 (fax) http://www.eff.org/ Editor: Julie Lindner, Education Outreach Coordinator firstname.lastname@example.org Membership & donation queries: email@example.com General EFF, legal, policy, or online resources queries: firstname.lastname@example.org Reproduction of this publication in electronic media is encouraged. Signed articles do not necessarily represent the views of EFF. To reproduce signed articles individually, please contact the authors for their express permission. Press releases and EFF announcements & articles may be reproduced individually at will. Current and back issues of EFFector are available via the Web at: http://www.eff.org/effector/ Click here to change your email address: http://action.eff.org/addresschange This newsletter is printed on 100% recycled electrons.