EFF in the News
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.
As we've discussed, the ACTA took all of this country's worst copyright ideas --many of them enshrined in the controversial DMCA -- made them considerably worse, then foisted them upon much of the globe with little to no real public discussion. The EFF notes that a new global trade agreement, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), is trying to take things even further -- exporting usually-draconian U.S. intellectual property beliefs onto a list of partner countries, including New Zealand, Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Chile, Malaysia, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam.
Because of the Facebook action -- takedowns without justification --
Electronic Frontier Foundation got involved and snapped back their own
strongly-worded letter to the Dervaes family. Electronic Frontier
Foundation calls themselves the "first line of defense" when our
freedoms in the networked world come under attack.