Skip to main content

EFF Press Release Archives

Press Releases: March 2010

March 31, 2010

Federal Appeals Court Should Reexamine Ruling Threatening Email Privacy

Atlanta - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and attorney Bryan Vroon asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit today to reexamine a panel ruling that violated a whistleblower's Fourth Amendment right to privacy in his email communications.

The whistleblower, Charles Rehberg, uncovered systematic mismanagement of funds at a Georgia public hospital. He alerted local politicians and others to the issue through a series of faxes. A local prosecutor in Dougherty County, Ken Hodges, conspired with the hospital and used a sham grand jury subpoena to obtain Mr. Rehberg's personal email communications. The prosecutor then provided that information to private investigators for the hospital and indicted Mr. Rehberg for a burglary and assault that never actually occurred. All the criminal charges against Mr. Rehberg were eventually dismissed. Hodges is currently running for Attorney General of Georgia in the Democratic primary.

Mr. Rehberg filed a civil suit against the prosecutors and their investigator for their misconduct, but the appeals court erroneously ruled that he did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in his private email.

"Mr. Rehberg did the right thing and blew the whistle on financial mismanagement," said EFF Civil Liberties Director Jennifer Granick. "In response, he was persecuted by local authorities and his constitutional rights were violated. It's well established that individuals have a right to privacy in the content of their communications, electronic or otherwise. We're asking the court to look at this again and follow the law."

Also at issue in EFF's request for rehearing is the panel's decision to give immunity to county prosecutors and their investigators for manipulating and fabricating "evidence" and defaming Mr. Rehberg as a felon in comments to the press.

"The Supreme Court has ruled that prosecutors are not entitled to immunity when they fabricate evidence during the course of an investigation, knowingly defame an innocent man as a felon to the press, or collude with private parties to retaliate against a critic, as they did here," said Mr. Vroon, who has represented Mr. Rehberg since the beginning of his lawsuit. "This case involves a gross misuse of power which damaged an innocent man who never committed a burglary or assault on anyone."

For the full brief:
http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/rehberg_v_hodges/rehbergmotion.pdf

For more on this case:
http://www.eff.org/cases/rehberg-v-hodges

Contacts:

Jennifer Granick
Civil Liberties Director
Electronic Frontier Foundation
jennifer@eff.org

Bryan A. Vroon
Attorney
Law Offices of Bryan A. Vroon, LLC
bvroon@vclawfirm.com

Related Issues:
March 30, 2010

Coalition Urges Updates to Electronic Privacy Statute to Reflect Web 2.0 World

San Francisco - As part of a broad coalition of privacy groups, think tanks, technology companies, and academics, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) today issued recommendations for strengthening the federal privacy law that regulates government access to private phone and Internet communications and records, including cell phone location data.

The "Digital Due Process" coalition includes major Internet and telecommunications companies like Google, Microsoft, and AT&T as well as advocacy groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT). The coalition has joined together to preserve traditional privacy rights and clarify legal protections in the face of a rapidly changing technological landscape.

"The federal law protecting Internet and telephone users' privacy was written nearly 25 years ago, which is eons ago in 'Internet time,'" said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Kevin Bankston. "When it comes to privacy, EFF has had its disagreements with fellow Digital Due Process members such as Google and AT&T. But this diverse coalition of privacy advocates and Internet companies agree on at least one thing: the current electronic privacy laws are woefully outdated and must be updated to provide clear privacy protections that reflect the always-on, location-enabled, Web 2.0 world of the 21st century."

The group's four recommendations focus on how to update the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), a law originally passed in 1986 before the World Wide Web was invented and when the number of American cell phone users numbered in the tens of thousands rather than the hundreds of millions. The group recommends that the legal standards under which the government can obtain private communications and records be clarified and strengthened in order to:

* Better protect the privacy of communications and documents you store in the cloud

* Better protect you against secret tracking of your location through your cell phone or any other mobile device

* Better protect you against secret monitoring of when and with whom you communicate over the telephone or the Internet

* Better protect innocent Americans against government fishing expeditions through masses of communications data unrelated to a criminal suspect

"The recommendations of the Digital Due Process coalition are not an exclusive list of the reforms to ECPA that EFF would support, and in some cases EFF would urge even stronger protections than those urged by the group," said Bankston. "However, EFF strongly agrees with its fellow Digital Due Process members that each of the coalition's recommended changes would significantly strengthen the law and better protect privacy."

A full description of the coalition and its recommendations is available at www.digitaldueprocess.org.

Contact:

Kevin Bankston
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
bankston@eff.org

March 25, 2010

Senior Staff Attorney Kevin Bankston to Testify In Response to School Webcam Scandal

Philadelphia - On Monday, March 29, at 10 a.m., the Subcommittee on Crime and Drugs of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee will hold a public hearing in the Philadelphia federal courthouse on whether the federal electronic privacy laws need to be updated to better regulate secret video surveillance. Senior Staff Attorney Kevin Bankston of the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) will testify.

Subcommittee Chairman Arlen Specter called the hearing in response to recent allegations that public schools in the Lower Merion School District in Pennsylvania have secretly used webcams on school-issued laptops to visually monitor students while they were in their homes. At Monday's hearing, Bankston will urge Congress to update the federal wiretapping statute to protect against secret video surveillance in the same way it protects against secret eavesdropping on private conversations. Such a change to the law would clearly require the government to obtain a search warrant before engaging in secret video surveillance of private places and would protect against similar spying by non-government actors, such as stalkers, computer criminals, private schools, private employers and others.

"It doesn't make sense that federal law regulates secret eavesdropping but doesn't equally protect us from secret video surveillance, which can be even more invasive," said Bankston. "Just as the federal wiretapping statute protects against electronic eavesdropping, it should also protect against secret video recording, whether in the home or in any other place where people have a reasonable expectation that they are not going to be photographed."

WHO:
Kevin Bankston
Senior Staff Attorney, Electronic Frontier Foundation

WHAT:
"Video Laptop Surveillance: Does Title III Need to Be Updated?"
U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Crime and Drugs

WHEN:
10 a.m.
Monday, March 29

WHERE:
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Courtroom 3B
601 Market Street
Philadelphia, PA 19106

For more on the hearing:
http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearings/hearing.cfm?id=4492

Contact:

Rebecca Jeschke
Media Relations Director
Electronic Frontier Foundation
press@eff.org

Related Issues:
March 23, 2010

Public Employees Have Reasonable Expectation of Privacy in Workplace Electronic Communications

Washington, D.C. - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) urged the United States Supreme Court today to ensure that modern communications methods such as text messages retain the constitutional privacy protections applied to earlier technologies.

In an amicus brief in City of Ontario v. Quon, EFF sided with a public employee who was allowed personal use of his work pager but then discovered that his employer had secretly obtained his communication records from his wireless provider. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled that the city violated the Fourth Amendment, and the Supreme Court granted the city's request to review that ruling.

"The Constitution fully safeguards the privacy of electronic communications sent over employer-provided equipment," said EFF Civil Liberties Director Jennifer Granick. "Text messages, like phone calls or letters, are protected from warrantless law enforcement surveillance, even if sent from the workplace or through an outside service provider."

This case comes to the Supreme Court as Americans are adopting smart phones in record numbers, making texting and on-the-fly emailing a part of everyday life for millions of people. Most employers allow and encourage some use of workplace equipment for personal communications, instead of forcing employees to carry around multiple devices. In its amicus brief, EFF urged the court not to disturb longstanding Fourth Amendment protections against warrantless law enforcement access to these electronic communications.

"The privacy questions in this case turn on the application of settled legal principles in new technological contexts," said Andrew Pincus of Mayer Brown LLP and the Yale Supreme Court Clinic, who worked with EFF on the amicus brief. "The court should proceed cautiously, in order to preserve constitutional protections for Americans' most private communications."

"People are moving away from postal mail and landline phones to electronic and mobile communications, both at home and at the workplace," added EFF's Granick. "We should not be forced to leave our privacy behind."

EFF was joined on this brief by the America Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT), and Public Citizen.

For the full amicus brief:
http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/ontario_v_quon/EFFamicus.pdf

For more on this case:
http://www.eff.org/cases/city-ontario-v-quon

Contact:

Jennifer Stisa Granick
Civil Liberties Director
Electronic Frontier Foundation
jennifer@eff.org

Related Issues:
March 15, 2010

Senior Counsel David Sobel to Testify on the Freedom of Information Act and the Obama Administration

Washington, D.C. - On Thursday, March 18, at 2 p.m., members of the U.S. House of Representatives Oversight and Government Reform Committee will hold a public hearing on the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and the Obama administration compliance with transparency law. The hearing comes as transparency advocates celebrate Sunshine Week, the annual celebration of our nation's open government laws that features numerous events measuring the progress made in combating official secrecy.

Senior Counsel David Sobel of the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) will testify at Thursday's hearing, urging the White House to fulfill its promises for open government. Despite President Obama's order to government agencies last year to renew their commitment to FOIA, EFF and other organizations still see delays in releasing relevant documents, excuses for not releasing other records, and excessive redactions, among other needless secrecy.

In one case, for example, EFF has compared heavily redacted documents from the FBI released to us under FOIA with documents leaked from a whistleblower containing no redactions. We found that much of the blacked-out content concerns the FBI's attempts to avoid court oversight of its inappropriate surveillance tactics through the use of generic and legally questionable "umbrella" authorizations. However, these umbrella authorizations had already been revealed to the public in a previous report by the Department of Justice's Inspector General. You can see a revealing side-by-side comparison at http://www.eff.org/pages/sunshine2010.

WHO:
David Sobel
Senior Counsel, Electronic Frontier Foundation

WHAT:
"Administration of the Freedom of Information Act: Current Trends"
U.S. House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Subcommittee on Information Policy, Census, and National Archives

WHEN:
2 p.m.
Thursday, March 18

WHERE:
Rayburn House Office Building
Room 2154
Washington, D.C. 20515

For more on the hearing:
http://oversight.house.gov/index.php?option=com_jcalpro&Itemid=2&extmode=view&extid=134

For a side-by-side comparison of the FBI redactions:
http://www.eff.org/pages/sunshine2010

Contact:

Rebecca Jeschke
Media Relations Director
Electronic Frontier Foundation
press@eff.org

Related Issues:
March 15, 2010

Battle Over Message Board Flame War Must Not Circumvent the First Amendment

Chicago - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the Media Freedom and Information Access Practicum (MFIA) at Yale Law School filed a friend-of-the-court brief today urging the Illinois Court of Appeals to block the unmasking of an anonymous online critic of a local political candidate.

The critic, commenting on a story on the website of a suburban Chicago newspaper called the Daily Herald, engaged in a heated debate with other commenters. One turned out to be the son of the village trustee candidate in Buffalo Grove, Illinois, who was discussed in the article. The candidate, Lisa Stone, who eventually won her race, asked a state court to order the newspaper to release the critic's name and address without appropriately showing that the statements directed towards her son were defamatory or otherwise illegal. Stone indicated that she may choose to subsequently file a lawsuit once she determines the critic's identity through the pre-complaint procedure.

"Because of the enormous potential for abuse, the First Amendment requires litigants to demonstrate that they have a legitimate case before they can use the courts to unmask anonymous online critics," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Matt Zimmerman. "Insults are not enough, especially when the conversation takes place in the context of a political campaign."

In November, a lower court granted Stone's pre-lawsuit request for her critic's identity, incorrectly arguing that a narrow disclosure to Stone would adequately protect the speaker's First Amendment rights. The court stayed the disclosure requirement in light of the speaker's appeal. In its amicus brief filed today, EFF and MFIA argue that this low standard for unmasking an anonymous speaker has a chilling effect on all manner of anonymous speech, political or otherwise.

"Lisa Stone is now a person of political power in the community. She does not have a blank check to pry into someone's life just because he said something she didn't like," said Margot Kaminski, Yale Law student and co-founder of MFIA. "We hope the Court of Appeals will recognize the importance that anonymous speech plays in the free and robust political debate generated by newspapers online."

For the full amicus brief:
http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/stone_v_paddock/Scanned%20Brief.pdf

Contact:

Matt Zimmerman
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
mattz@eff.org

Related Issues:
March 15, 2010

Wednesday Panels are Open to the Public at the FTC Conference Center

Washington, D.C. - On Wednesday, March 17, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is hosting its final public roundtable on technology privacy challenges in Washington, D.C. Two experts from the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) are taking part.

EFF Senior Staff Technologist Peter Eckersley and EFF Boardmember Edward W. Felten will discuss "Internet Architecture and Privacy" at the first panel of the day. Later panels will cover health information privacy and issues around other sensitive information, as well as lessons learned so far and future plans for privacy protection.

For more information on attending the roundtable including a full agenda, visit http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/workshops/privacyroundtables/index.shtml

WHAT:
FTC Roundtable "Internet Architecture and Privacy"

WHEN:
Wednesday, March 17
9:15 a.m.

WHERE:
FTC Conference Center
601 New Jersey Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001

For more information on the roundtable:
http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/workshops/privacyroundtables/index.shtml

Contact:

Rebecca Jeschke
Media Relations Director
Electronic Frontier Foundation
press@eff.org

Related Issues:
March 10, 2010

Groups Urge California PUC to Adopt Rules to Protect Consumer Privacy

San Francisco - Privacy advocates are warning that "smart meters" intended to precisely measure and control home electrical consumption could erode the privacy of daily life unless regulators limit data collection and disclosure. In a joint filing yesterday, the Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT) and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) urged the California Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to adopt rules to protect the privacy and security of consumers' energy-usage information. The Samuelson Law, Technology & Public Policy Clinic at UC Berkeley School of Law drafted the comments for CDT.

Smart meters being installed now in California will collect 750 to 3,000 data points a month per household. This detailed energy usage data can indicate whether someone is at home or out, entertaining guests, or using particular appliances. Marketers and others may seek such data. To head off misuse of the information, CDT and EFF urged the California PUC to adopt comprehensive privacy standards for the collection, retention, use and disclosure of consumers' household energy data.

"In the absence of clear rules, this potentially beneficial smart grid technology could mean yet another intrusion on private life," said Jim Dempsey, San Francisco-based Vice President of CDT. "The PUC should act now, before our privacy is eroded."

CDT and EFF argue that utilities collecting detailed information about energy use in the home must specify in advance how they are going to use that data and must confine their collection to legitimate purposes. Disclosure to marketers or government agencies should be restricted. In addition, utility companies should ensure that consumers have access to their own data, so they can take advantage of innovative energy efficiency services.

"The Smart Grid offers great promise for fighting climate change and improving energy policy, but it can also amass vast amounts of data that reveals intimate details of consumers' lives," said Jennifer Lynch, an attorney with the Samuelson Clinic. "Building privacy protections into the Grid from the beginning protects both the environment and consumers from harm."

The California PUC is conducting a rulemaking proceeding to consider setting policies, standards, and protocols to guide the development of the smart grid system. The stimulus law signed by President Obama in February 2009 included $4.5 billion to modernize the electric grid. The electric utilities' ongoing smart meter projects are one aspect of this initiative. However, increases in efficiency and economy promised by the Smart Grid need to be measured against the potential privacy risks.

"The data points gathered by advanced energy metering projects will allow the reconstruction of your life: when you wake up, when get home, when you go on vacation. It's not hard to imagine a divorce lawyer subpoenaing this information, or an insurance company interpreting the data in a way that allows it to penalize customers, or criminals intercepting the information to plan a burglary," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Lee Tien. "We must have meaningful rules to protect this extremely sensitive information."

For the full comments to the California PUC:
http://www.eff.org/files/CDTEFFJointComment030910.pdf

For more on California's smart grid initiative:
http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUC/energy/smartgrid.htm

Contacts:

Rebecca Jeschke
Media Relations Director
Electronic Frontier Foundation
press@eff.org

Brock Meeks
Director of Communications
Center for Democracy and Technology
brock@cdt.org

Jennifer Lynch
Attorney
Samuelson Law, Technology, and Public Policy Clinic
jlynch@law.berkeley.edu

Related Issues:
March 5, 2010

EFF Supports Challenge to Overbroad Statute That Chills Online Expression

San Francisco - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) filed a friend-of-the-court brief today urging a federal court judge to block two criminal statutes that unconstitutionally limit the free expression of millions of adults who use the Internet and other electronic forms of communication, bringing the threat of criminal sanctions for private, lawful speech.

At issue are provisions of federal law that require anyone who produces a visual depiction of sexually explicit expression to maintain extensive records -- including copies of drivers' licenses, the dates and times images were taken, and all URLs where images were posted -- and often force public disclosure of a creator's home address. Even more troubling, the regulations allow law enforcement warrantless entry into homes or offices in order to inspect the records that are supposed to be kept. While these statutes regulate the commercial pornography industry, they also likely apply to a staggering number of Americans who create and share images of themselves over social networks, online dating services, personal erotic websites, and text messaging.

"The plain language of the statute subjects ordinary Americans, who are using emerging communications technologies at an ever-increasing rate, to onerous record-keeping and inspection requirements for lawful speech. They could face up to five years in prison if they don't follow the statutory requirements to the letter," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Matt Zimmerman. "Speakers who engage in private, expressive activity protected by the First Amendment should not be at risk of criminal sanctions for violating an overbroad statute that they likely know nothing about."

A coalition of artists, producers, distributors, and educators filed suit against the provisions last year, arguing that the law censored their artistic and educational work. In its amicus brief in support of the coalition filed today, EFF asked the judge to throw out the record-keeping regulations as an unconstitutional chill on adult free expression in the digital age.

"Digital cameras, camcorders, and the Internet make it easy to create and share lawful adult material in a wide variety of ways. Thousands of ordinary Americans are doing just that, only to find themselves subject to these record-keeping and inspection requirements," said EFF Civil Liberties Director Jennifer Granick. "This just doesn't square with the Constitution."

For the full amicus brief:
http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/fsc_v_holder/EFF%20Amicus%20Brief.pdf

For more on Free Speech Coalition v. Holder:
http://www.eff.org/cases/free-speech-coalition-v-holder

Contacts:

Matt Zimmerman
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
mattz@eff.org

Jennifer Stisa Granick
Civil Liberties Director
Electronic Frontier Foundation
jennifer@eff.org

Related Issues:
March 4, 2010

Lawful Speech Should Not Be Collateral Damage in Copyright Battles

San Francisco - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) submitted a petition signed by more than 7000 people to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) today demanding that the agency close a loophole for copyright enforcement in its proposed regulations for network neutrality.

The petition is part of EFF's reply comments in the FCC's net neutrality rulemaking. The FCC's proposed rules generally prohibit ISPs from discriminating or blocking lawful content, but include a loophole for 'reasonable network management' by ISPs. The proposed rules then define 'reasonable network management" to include measures taken by ISPs to block unlawful content or transmissions. This exception would effectively permit ISPs to violate net neutrality rules and block lawful activities in the name of copyright enforcement.

"We can't afford to let lawful speech become collateral damage in Hollywood's war on copyright infringement," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Fred von Lohmann. "Net neutrality regulations should not excuse ISPs that interfere with lawful content just because they claim they were acting as copyright cops."

EFF's original comments to the FCC, submitted in January, also question whether the FCC has the legal authority or political independence necessary to properly regulate the Internet. Additionally, EFF has called on the FCC to protect the interests of individuals who offer open WiFi Internet access to their neighbors or local communities.

"Before the ink is dry on net neutrality regulations, we already see corporate lobbyists and 'public decency' advocates pushing for loopholes," said EFF Civil Liberties Director Jennifer Granick. "A loophole like this could swallow network neutrality, with ISPs claiming copyright enforcement as a pretext for all sorts of discriminatory behavior."

For EFF's full reply comments to the FCC:
http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/nn/EFF%20NN%20reply%20comments2b.pdf

For more on net neutrality:
http://www.eff.org/issues/net-neutrality

Contacts:

Jennifer Stisa Granick
Civil Liberties Director
Electronic Frontier Foundation
jennifer@eff.org

Fred von Lohmann
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
fred@eff.org

Related Issues:
March 3, 2010

Board Members to Discuss Societal Impact of Technology Design

Pittsburgh - On Monday, March 8, at 4 p.m., board members of the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) will discuss the societal impact of technology design in a panel at Carnegie Mellon University.

Technology design can maximize or decimate our basic rights to free speech, privacy, property ownership, and creative thought. The panel will discuss some good and bad design decisions through the years and the ramifications of those decisions.

Monday's panel is free and open to the public.

WHAT:
Architecture Is Policy: The Legal and Social Impact of Technical Design Decisions

WHEN:
4 p.m.
Monday, March 8

WHERE:
Newell-Simon Hall, Room 3305
Carnegie Mellon University
Pittsburgh, PA 15213

WHO:
Ed Felten (Professor of Computer Science and Public Affairs and Director of the Center for Information Technology Policy, Princeton University)
Dave Farber (Distinguished Career Professor of Computer Science and Public Policy in the School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University)
Lorrie Cranor (Associate Professor of Computer Science and of Engineering and Public Policy, Director of the CyLab Usable Privacy and Security Laboratory [CUPS], Carnegie Mellon University)
John Buckman (EFF Board Chair, Serial Entrepreneur)
Cindy Cohn (EFF Legal Director, Moderator)

Contact:

Rebecca Jeschke
Media Relations Director
Electronic Frontier Foundation
press@eff.org

March 3, 2010

EFF Documents Continuing Legacy of Harm to Fair Use, Free Speech

San Francisco - Twelve years after the passage of the controversial Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), the law continues to stymie fair use, free speech, scientific research, and legitimate competition. A new report from the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) collects reported examples of abuses of the DMCA and the ongoing harm the law continues to inflict on consumers, scientists, and small businesses.

The U.S. Copyright Office is currently mulling proposed exemptions to the DMCA's ban on "circumventing" digital rights management (DRM) and "other technical protection measures" used to restrict access to copyrighted works. The Copyright Office is empowered to grant exemptions to the law every three years to mitigate the harms that DRM otherwise would impose on legitimate, non-infringing uses of copyrighted materials.

The triennial Copyright Office rulemaking, however, has not been enough to prevent abuses of the DMCA. EFF's report details the numerous harms stemming from the DMCA's ban on circumventing DRM, including Apple's attempts to lock down the iPhone and force users into its App Store. Also new in this year's report is the account of hobbyists threatened by Texas Instruments for blogging about potential modifications to the company's programmable graphing calculators as well as the story behind the legal attacks on Real DVD and other products that create innovative new ways for consumers to enjoy DVD content they have legitimately purchased.

"The DMCA's ban on tampering with digital locks on content is a dangerous anachronism, a holdover from a time when people thought DRM could solve all of Hollywood's problems," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Fred von Lohmann. "The DMCA's ban on bypassing DRM has failed to stem digital copyright infringement, but it has unfortunately been repurposed as a cudgel to threaten legitimate research and competitors."

Among the DMCA exemption requests currently before the Copyright Office are three from EFF. One asks for an exemption for amateur creators who use excerpts from DVDs in order to create new, noncommercial remix videos. Another would explicitly exempt cell phone "jailbreaking," allowing iPhones and other handsets to run applications from any source. EFF's third proposal asks for a renewal of an exemption previously granted for unlocking cells phones so they can be used with any mobile carrier. A final decision on these and other requests is expected from the Copyright Office within the next few weeks.

For "Unintended Consequences: Twelve Years Under the DMCA":
http://www.eff.org/wp/unintended-consequences-under-dmca

For more on EFF's exemption requests:
http://www.eff.org/cases/2009-dmca-rulemaking

Contact:

Fred von Lohmann
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
fred@eff.org

Related Issues:
JavaScript license information