EFF in the News
“Data breaches are very common. If biometric information is stored on a mass scale it can be hacked into and stolen and we may lose control of it,” warns Jennifer Lynch, a senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital rights group.
Lynch is particularly concerned about the rise in use of facial recognition in shops – which use it to identify thieves and high rollers – and other public spaces. “Depending on what that data is linked to, it could be very threatening to privacy,” she adds.
“Social-media companies shouldn’t take on the job of censoring speech on behalf of any government, and they certainly shouldn’t do so voluntarily,” said Danny O'Brien, international director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation in San Francisco.
Attempting to set speech restrictions online is a slippery slope, he said.
“Who defines 'terrorism'? Does Facebook, for example, intend to enforce its policies only against those that the United States government describes as terrorists, or will it also respond if Russia says someone is a terrorist? Israel? Saudi Arabia? Syria? The same questions apply to the speech that might be targeted," he said.
“In Internet years, this rhetoric is ancient at this point,” Nate Cardozo, a staff lawyer at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told Yahoo News. “We’ve been hearing it since the mid-’90s.”
Sophia Cope is a staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation. She focuses on the application of free speech and privacy rights to the Internet and other technologies.
“When it comes to terrorist content, it’s certainly a tricky position for companies, and one that I don’t envy,” said Jillian York, the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s director of international freedom of expression, in an email. “Still, I worry that giving more power to companies—which are undemocratic by nature—to regulate speech is dangerous.”
Facebook explicitly bans content being shared by "dangerous organizations" engaged in terrorist activity or organized crime. But even that requires a judgment call, because not everyone around the world defines terrorism in the same way, said David Greene, civil liberties director for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital rights group.
"Most of these areas are more gray than black or white, and that can put these companies in a very difficult position," Greene said.
“From a technical perspective, it seems likely that Twitter is keeping a record of which way users vote in polls.” Parker Higgins, Director of Copyright Activism at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told the Daily Dot. “It's a little funny to wedge into the existing [privacy] policy, because your votes on a poll seem to fall somewhere on the privacy scale between, say, your direct messages (which Twitter does not sell information about) and the people you follow (which is public, and which Twitter has reserved the right to aggregate and share and disclose).”
Journalists and civil libertarians both here and in Europe have criticized the EU court decision as an infringement of free speech. Search engines "must censor their own references to publicly available information in the name of privacy with little guidance or obligation to balance the nees of free expression," said Danny O'Brien, international director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a San Francisco-based nonprofit defending digital civil liberty.
Airing on Thursday, December 3, 2015: On today's show, we'll talk about whether or not we can trust tech philanthropy; Google education and how companies should handle children's privacy; and we have a story from our Codebreaker podcast about a software update...in space.
Because we really needed help sifting through this f–kery, MTV News spoke to Eva Galperin, Global Policy Analyst at the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF). Galperin noted that while Çiftçi did not create the meme, “criticizing the president of Turkey is against the law — defamation of the president can get you sent to jail for up to four years.”