EFF in the News
The Electronic Frontier Foundation is taking on Credible's and Higgins' cases. The San Francisco–based organization strives to protect privacy as it relates to computer and Internet technology and does a lot of work with computer searches and seizures. Civil liberties director Jennifer Granick says she's concerned about the recent laptop grabs because they've apparently been done without arrests being made. She explains that police can seize the property of someone who is being arrested, and if, say, alcohol is being sold illegally or people have weapons in their possession, cops can confiscate those items. "You can't just go to a party and say, 'You can't have a party because it's after hours and you don't have a permit,' and just take people's property," she adds. She points out that taking laptops away is "a real interference with people's livelihood, whether they are professional DJs or they work somewhere else."
Jones’ appellate lawyer, Stephen Leckar of Washington’s Shainis & Peltzman, argued that the circumstance in the Jones case is different from the scenario the Supreme Court ruled on in Knotts. In the Jones case, police used GPS to supplant traditional surveillance, not to augment it, Leckar said. (Both the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation supported Jones as an amicus in the case.)
Tatel noted what he called the “big caveat” in Knotts. The late Justice William Rehnquist said in Knotts that if 24-hour surveillance were ever implemented, “[t]here will be time enough then to determine whether different constitutional principles may be applicable. The Jones case, [Judge] Tatel said, presents that scenario.
In order to get the fixes to customers, Kafasis took out all of the offending images and replaced them with the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) logo. If you tap on the logo, you will be taken to a page explaining why the images have been removed.
Psystar has a ray of hope left in this case, but the ruling's language indicates that the clone maker's success on the remaining claims is unlikely. Psystar did not respond to our request for comment, but the Electronic Frontier Foundation's Fred von Lohmann doesn't think this is necessarily a death blow to the hackintosh industry as a whole.
"While the ruling is a serious setback for Psystar, I don't see it having much impact beyond the facts of that case," von Lohmann told Ars. "On a number of important points, the outcome was driven by Psystar-specific factors, such as Psystar forfeiting one of their strongest defenses by failing to plead it in time. Moreover, my understanding is that the commercial 'hackintosh' industry has moved on to selling software that enables the user to bring their own PC and OS X DVD, rather than selling a pre-installed solution like the one at issue in the ruling."
Cindy Cohn of the Electronic Frontier Foundation wrote, "Unfortunately, the parties did not add any reader privacy protections. The only nominal change was that they formally confirmed a position they had long taken privately that information will not be freely shared between Google and the Registry."
"You could make it bloody sing the national anthem, for crying out loud," says Chris Roberts, a managing director for Denver-based electronic forensics firm Cyposis and part-time calculator hobbyist. "There's no logical reason as to why you should do this besides it's there." ...
The Electronic Frontier Foundation, a San Francisco-based nonprofit that advocates for the free exchange of information online, is representing three other calculator enthusiasts who were sent cease-and-desist emails from Texas Instruments after they repeated or linked to details of Mr. Moody's breakthrough.
Much information about ACTA has come from leaked documents posted to such sites as http://wikileaks.org; other details have been pried out through Freedom of Information Act requests by such groups as the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Knowledge Ecology International.
The new Copyright Watch site is slated to serve as a reference base for users on copyright laws around the world. Among the groups participating in the effort are the US-based Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and Electronic Information for Libraries.
Kevin Bankston, senior staff attorney for the EFF, who originally harangued Google over Latitude, was not happy about the feature, noting that Location History for Latitude creates a whole new set of privacy risks because that history may be vulnerable to demands by the government or civil litigants.
“He who controls the past, controls the future,” said a bulletin on the case issued Thursday by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, an online civil liberties group. Jennifer Granick, a lawyer for the group, said the case “really is about editing history.”