EPIC Alert 16.17

EPIC Alert 16.02 (02/10/09)

EPIC logo

                              E P I C   A l e r t
Volume 16.17                                          Sepember 15, 2009

                                Published by the
                   Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC)
                                Washington, D.C.


			"Defend Privacy. Support EPIC."

Table of Contents
[1] EPIC's Privacy Report Card on the Administration Gives Mixed Grades
[2] EPIC Moves to Intervene in Google Book Settlement
[3] DHS Okays Suspicion-less Seizure of Laptops
[4] White House Announces New Transparency Policy for Visitor Logs
[5] Congress and Advocates Call for Safeguards in Online Advertising
[6] News in Brief
[7] EPIC Bookstore:
[8] Upcoming Conferences and Events
     - Join EPIC on Facebook http://facebook.com/epicprivacy
     - Privacy Policy
     - About EPIC
     - Donate to EPIC http://epic.org/donate
     - Subscription Information

[1] EPIC's Privacy Report Card on the Administration Gives Mixed Grades

EPIC released its Privacy Report Card for the Obama Administration at a
briefing held at the National Press Club. EPIC scored the Administration
with an "Incomplete" for Consumer Privacy, A- for Medical Privacy, C+
for Civil Liberties, and a B for Cyber Security.

EPIC's grades were based on a review of the Administration's privacy
initiatives. EPIC cited the vacancies on the Federal Trade Commission,
the continuation of the Bush Administration's policies on the use of the
"state's secrets privilege," the Department of Homeland Security's
support for PASS ID, and privacy exemptions for social networking
services as areas where the Administration has failed to protect

EPIC recognized the early work of the Administration to bring greater
transparency and openness to the work of the Federal government.  They
also sited the very strong privacy language for medical health records
that is included in the Economic Stimulus Law. However, a number of
programs began under the previous Administration have not been
challenged or cancelled by the Obama Administration. These programs
include the use of National Security Letters, expanding fusion centers,
and adoption of 0whole body imaging technology.

A panel of privacy experts offered their own perspective on how the
Administration is doing on several key issues including: No-Fly list,
border searches of digital devices, state preemption, and behavioral

The scores given by EPIC did not reflect the public's participation in
the online scorecard. The public's privacy report card for the
Administration was "F" in all categories.

Report Card:

Public Report Card:

EPIC Press Release:

[2] EPIC Moves to Intervene in Google Book Settlement

On September 4, 2009, EPIC filed papers in federal district court on the
proposed settlement between Google, authors, and publishers. The Google
Books Settlement would create a single digital library, operated by
Google, but currently fails to limit Google's use of the personal
information collected. EPIC stated that the settlement "mandates the
collection of the most intimate personal information, threatens
well-established standards that safeguard intellectual freedom, and
imperils longstanding Constitutional rights, including the right to read
anonymously." EPIC further warned that the Google Books deal "threatens
to eviscerate state library privacy laws that safeguard library patrons
in the United States." EPIC has previously participated as a "friend of
the court" in many cases involving privacy issues. The Court denied EPIC
Intervenor status, but invited EPIC to advocate for readers' privacy as
an Objector to the proposed agreement.

The Google Books project began in 2004 as an online research tool and
database that permitted access the full or partial text of millions of
books. Google entered into agreements with several libraries to digitize
books, including books protected by U.S. Copyright law, in those
libraries' collections. In 2005, the Authors Guild and several
publishers sued Google. The rightsholders alleged that the project's
digitization process infringed their copyrights. In response, Google
argued that its digitization of the books is permitted under U.S.
Copyright law. In 2008, the parties negotiated a proposed settlement.
The federal court for the Southern District of New York must analyze the
settlement's fairness, and approve or reject the terms. EPIC told the
Court that "the proposed settlement profoundly implicates the privacy
interests of millions of Internet users, ... yet none of the parties to
the agreement represents these interests."

Days before EPIC's filing, Federal Trade Commission Chairman John
Liebowitz issued a statement, calling attention to privacy concerns and
the vast amount of consumer information that could be collected. The
Chairman expressed the Commission's commitment to evaluating the privacy
issues presented by Google Books, a sentiment that was echoed by
Commissioner Pamela Jones Harbour in her statement. In a separate
letter, FTC Consumer Protection Director David C. Vladeck urged Google
to address consumer privacy concerns and to limit the secondary use of
user data.

In July, the Department of Justice announced an investigation into
Google's proposed settlement with book publishers and authors. The
Department "determined that the issues raised by the settlement warrant
further inquiry," and noted that commentators have "expressed concern
that aspects of the settlement agreement may violate the Sherman
[anti-trust] Act." The announcement followed the European Commission's
notice of a similar investigation. The European Commission met on
September 7, 2009 to examine the proposed settlement.

EPIC has a long history of opposing actions that consolidate data
concerning users' online habits. On April 20, 2007, EPIC and other
privacy groups filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission,
requesting that the agency open an investigation into the proposed
Google/Doubleclick merger. EPIC identified specific privacy threats
arising from the heightened ability of the merged company to record,
analyze, track, and profile Internet users' activities. The Department
of Justice later scuttled Google's proposed deal with Yahoo based on
similar privacy concerns. The Department's probe focused on Google's
growing power in advertising.

EPIC's Motion to Intervene:

EPIC Google Books Settlement and Privacy:

Google Books Settlement:

FTC Chairman John Liebowitz's Statement Concerning the Google Books

FTC Commissioner Pamela Jones Harbour's Statement Concerning the Google
Books Settlement:

FTC Consumer Protection Director David C. Vladeck's Letter Concerning
the Google Books Settlement:

[3] DHS Okays Suspicion-less Seizure of Laptops

On August 25, 2009, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released a
Privacy Impact Assessment for searching electronic devices possessed by
travelers at U.S. borders, determining that it maintains the right to
search and seize all data on electronic devices carried across the
border. Currently the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and the
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) have broad powers to
search travelers, including United States citizens, who cross the U.S.
border. The 51-page study was designed to determine how searches of the
contents of electronic devices compared to physical searches of
travelers' belongings.

When it comes to searching physical possessions, CBP and ICE are
authorized to conduct warrantless searches and investigations of
travelers to determine whether they are carrying contraband or entering
the country illegally. These searches are authorized even in the absence
of any reasonable suspicion. The new Assessment clarifies the
government's belief that this authorization extends not just to physical
possessions, like briefcases and backpacks, but also to the data stored
on electronic devices. The Assessment acknowledges that the privacy
implications of searching electronic devices are broader than those of
searching physical possessions, in large part because of the large
amounts of data that may be stored on travelers laptops, PDAs, cell
phones, and other devices, as well as the potentially sensitive nature
of the information. The study goes on to discuss the various methods by
which the two agencies may look at travelers' data: examination with the
traveler present, "detention," of a device which may last for up to five
days, seizure of a device with probable cause, and retention of data

The Assessment identifies six privacy risks associated with these
activities: "(1) travelers may need additional information regarding
the authority to conduct border searches; (2) the traveler may be
unaware of the viewing or detention of his/her information by CBP and
ICE; (3) personally identifiable information may be detained where
it is not needed; (4) PII may be misused by CBP and ICE officers; (5)
CBP and ICE may disclose PII to other agencies that may misuse or
mishandle it; and (6) new privacy risks may arise as the technology
involved in this activity is ever-changing."

The study determines that the first risk is not a problem in the face of
"overwhelming precedent." But the agency came to this conclusion - that
there is no risk - because it is treating precedent referring to
physical searches as if it automatically applies to electronic searches.

According to the assessment, the only way for the agency to address the
last risk factor is for it to conduct ongoing scrutiny, and the study
calls for regular reassessment.

The rest of the Assessment attempts to identify possible ways to
mitigate the second through fifth. DHS identifies various ways to
improve transparency, individual participation, purpose specification
with accompanying use limitations, minimization procedures, data
integrity, security, and accountability, for both CBP and ICE. The
primary change now being implemented is to clarify signage at ICE and
CBP search points to inform travelers that their electronic devices are
subject to search and copy. However, the overall effect of the
Assessment is a reiteration of the DHS position that all electronic
border searches are legal even without reasonable suspicion.

While they purport to conform to the standards set in the Privacy Act of
1974, these policies fail to conform to the intent of the Act by
continuing to allow broad access to all of travelers' data without any
reasonable suspicion. The policies also allow the agencies to share
this information with third parties if they need those third parties'
assistance with accessing or translating the data, a practice which puts
travelers at increased risk of identity theft.

Department of Homeland Security - Privacy Impact Assessment:

Customs and Border Patrol - Search Authority

EPIC - Air Travel Privacy:

EPIC - Privacy Act of 1974:

EPIC - Passenger Profiling:

EPIC - Identity Theft:

[4] White House Announces New Transparency Policy for Visitor Logs

On September 4, 2009, the White House announced a new policy to release
the records of White House visitors, an initiative that is intended to
promote open government. In a released statement, President Obama
described the initiative:

    "For the first time in history, records of White House visitors
    will be made available to the public on an ongoing basis.  We will
    achieve our goal of making this administration the most open and
    transparent administration in history not only by opening the doors
    of the White House to more Americans, but by shining a light on the
    business conducted inside it.  Americans have a right to know whose
    voices are being heard in the policymaking process."

Under the policy, the White House will release information on all
individuals who come to the White House for an appointment, a tour, or
to conduct official business, with certain exceptions for confidential
or particularly sensitive meetings. For example, the White House will
not release access records that implicate national security or records
from meetings with prospective Supreme Court nominees. It will also
withhold the records from purely personal guests of the first or second

The White House also promised not to release visitors' personal
information or information that implicates law enforcement concerns. The
personal information that the policy will protect includes such data as
dates of birth, social security numbers, and contact phone numbers. Law
enforcement concerns will prevent the White House from releasing records
that may implicate the personal safety of the staff of the Executive
Office of the President, such as their daily arrivals and departures.

EPIC has spoken with White House representatives and informed them of
the possible privacy risks of this new policy.  The policy would
disclose the names of tourists and other visitors who are not meeting
with government officials.  This information is not necessary to promote
the open government objectives set forth in this policy and could create
unnecessary privacy risks, which should be considered by the White

In a related matter, EPIC recently filed a request to the Department of
Homeland Security under the Freedom of Information Act, seeking
information regarding meetings between the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) Chief Privacy Officer, Mary Ellen Callahan, and third
parties. In the spirit of the new policy announced by the White House,
that information should be available to the public. However, DHS'
response to the request was heavily redacted, obscuring much of the
information that, by analogy, would be available under the White House
policy. EPIC is appealing the redactions and seeking more complete

White House Transparency Policy:

White House Press Release on Transparency Policy:

EPIC's Open Government Page:

[5] Congress and Advocates Call for Safeguards in Online Advertising

This week, Rep. Rick Boucher (D-Va.), chairman of the House
Communications, Technology and the Internet Subcommittee, announced that
he is drafting a bill that would impose strict rules on websites and
advertisers regarding the use of consumer information. This important
legislation comes at a time when online behavioral marketing techniques
are being scrutinized for the unauthorized use of consumer data. One of
these techniques involves deep-packet inspection, which enables Internet
Service Providers to intercept virtually all of their customers'
Internet activity, including web surfing data, email, and peer-to-peer

Boucher's goal in drafting the web-privacy bill is "to ensure that
consumers know what information is being collected about them on the Web
and how it is being used, and to give them control over that
information." Boucher, who is working with Reps. Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.)
and Bobby Rush (D-Ill.) on the bill, attempts to strike a balance
between the interests of privacy watchdogs and of websites and
advertisers in assessing the default standard for websites to monitor
and gather consumer data. The bill would impose different standards on
websites for different types of consumer data. Websites that collect
information for targeted advertising should allow consumers the
opportunity to opt out of having their online activity tracked.
Further, websites would be obligated to offer a detailed description of
how the information is collected, disclosed, and used. On the other
hand, websites collecting sensitive personal information, including
medical or financial data or other personally-identifiable information,
would be required to have users opt in before tracking their interests.

This bill follows several pieces of significant online privacy
legislation, such as the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act, but
is the first to regulate online advertising. While many privacy
watchdogs welcome the bill, others, such as Adonis Hoffman, Senior Vice
President and Counsel of the American Association of Advertising
Agencies, do not believe that legislation is necessary because the
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) already calls for self-regulation in the
area of online advertising, which Hoffman says "the industry is taking
quite seriously." FTC Commissioner Jon Leibowitz, however, warns that
the "[i]ndustry needs to do a better job of meaningful, rigorous
self-regulation, or it will certainly invite legislation by Congress and
a more regulatory approach by our commission."

EPIC's Page on Deep Packet Inspection and Privacy:

EPIC's Page on Children's Online Privacy Protection Act:

FTC's Self-Regulatory Principles for Online Behavioral Advertising:

FTC Staff Revises Online Behavioral Advertising Principles (Comments of
Chairman Liebowitz):

Comments of Congressmen and Privacy Advocates:

[6] News in Brief

Trade Commission Prohibits Robocalls

As of September 1, 2009, The Federal Trade Commission has prohibited
commercial telemarketing calls to consumers. The agency amended the
Telemarketing Sales Rule, which was authorized under is the
Telemarketing and Consumer Fraud and Abuse Prevention Act. The Rule,
which imposes a penalty of $16,000 per call, has been expanded to cover
sellers and telemarketers who transmit prerecorded messages to consumers
who have not agreed in writing to accept such messages. The new rule
does not prohibit informational messages or calls by politicians, banks,
telephone carriers, and charities. EPIC has urged the Federal
Communications Commission to require strong privacy safeguards for
telephone customers' personal information, and protect wireless
subscribers from telemarketing. For more information, see EPIC
Telemarketing and Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

FTC Press Release Regarding Rule Prohibiting Unwanted Robocalls:

Telemarketing and Consumer Fraud and Abuse Prevention Act:

EPIC Page on Telemarketing and Telephone Consumer Protection Act:

Following Canadian Investigation, Facebook Upgrades Privacy

The Canadian Privacy Commissioner issued a report last month raising
concerns over Facebook business practices. The Office asked the social
networking firm to cease the sharing of user information with
application developers, clarify the policy on deactivation and deletion
of accounts, protect the personal information of non-users, and
"memorialize" the account of deceased users. In complying with the
Commissioner's report, Facebook will include new notifications, update
its Privacy Policy, and implement technical changes to enable more user
control over information accessed by third-party applications. Facebook
also faces a lawsuit by five users filed in California's Orange County
Superior Court, alleging that Facebook violated several California
privacy laws. EPIC had previously raised similar concerns about the use
of Facebook data by application developers.

Canadian Privacy Commissioner Report:

News Release: Facebook Agrees to Comply:

Facebook's Proposed Privacy Upgrades:

EPIC's Facebook Page:

EPIC's Social Network Privacy Page:

Government Explores New Techniques for Authentication

At the Gov 2.0 Conference in Washington, D.C. this week, the Obama
Administration announced that the public websites for certain government
agencies would begin participating in a pilot program using the OpenID
and Information Card joint authentication systems. The agencies include
the Center for Information Technology, National Institutes of
Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and
related agencies." The system should allow for citizens to use services
on those websites by logging in with accounts that they may already have
from other OpenID participating web sites, including Yahoo, PayPal,
Google, and America Online, among several others. According to the
press release, the system will allow users to choose a qualifying
identity provider that will supply authentication credentials on their
behalf. Depending on settings and requirements, theoretically this will
allow for users to participate with varying levels of anonymity or


Information Card:

OpenID and Government:

Open ID Press Release:

Congress Explores Reliability of Forensic Techniques

On September 9, 2009, the Senate Judiciary Committee conducted a hearing
regarding the reliability of forensic techniques. According to a
congressionally-mandated report by the National Research Council, there
are "serious deficiencies in the nation's forensic science system," and
"major reforms and new research" are needed. In 2008, EPIC submitted an
amicus brief to the Supreme Court in Herring v. United States in which
EPIC explained how government databases are becoming increasingly
unreliable and urged the Court to "ensure an accuracy obligation on law
enforcement agents who rely on criminal justice information systems."
EPIC's brief was cited by Justice Ginsburg, writing for four Justices in

Senate Judiciary Hearing Information:

National Research Council News Release:

EPIC's Page on Herring v. United States:

EPIC's Page on Genetic Privacy:

E-Verify Screening is now Mandatory for Federal Government Contracts

Starting Tuesday, September 8, 2009, all federal government contractors
must verify their employees' eligibility to work in the United States
using E-Verify, an electronic security system implemented by the
Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration.
Employers will continue collecting employee information from an I-9
form, including two forms of identification, but are now required to run
this information against the E-Verify system, which is linked to the DHS
and Social Security Administration databases. If there is an
inconsistency between the employee's information and the E-Verify
system, the employee has eight working days to challenge it. The program
has been challenged several times, including once by the US Chamber of
Commerce, and come under scrutiny because of the likelihood of
inaccuracies in the databases and the system's failure to identify those
employees who are illegally using others' valid names and numbers.

EPIC's Page on Spotlight on Surveillance:

US Chamber of Commerce Testimony Challenging E-Verify:

USCIS E-Verify Page:

Secretary Napolitano's Announcement of Mandatory E-Verify Screenings for
Federal Contractors:

New Report on Government Secrecy Released

The  2009 Secrecy Report Card, from Openthegovernment.org, chronicles
slight decreases in government secrecy during the last year of the
Bush-Cheney Administration. The report, released by a coalition of more
than 70 open government  advocates, also provides an overview of the
Obama Administration's proposed transparency policies. Among the issues
discussed are the Open Government Directive, Classified Information, the
Freedom of Information Act memo, signing statements, and the
state secrets, doctrine.

Openthegovernment.org's 2009 Secrecy Report Card:


EPIC's Page on Open Government and Transparency:

[7] EPIC Bookstore: Cass Sunstein's "The Second Bill of Rights"

    Cass Sunstein's book explores one of the little known or discussed
    bold proposals of President Franklin D. Roosevelt: a second bill of
    rights. In policy and politics few ideas are new, but often take
    time to find fertile ground for growth.

    The notion that Americans needed a second bill of rights grew from
    the deprivation caused by the Great Depression and the resulting
    existential struggle of democracy against fascism. It is easy to
    forget how close this world came to losing democracy.  It would have
    died under the heel of fascism if the United States had not the
    capacity or will to fight. People - not only in Europe, but also in
    the United States - desperately wanted leaders who would bring an
    end to their suffering caused by the global depression. As a result,
    Churchill, Roosevelt, Stalin, Hitler, and Mussolini emerged as
    leaders. Hitler and Mussolini, as fascists, appeared to be bringing
    an end to high unemployment and want, which made many in the United
    States desire that same system of government for themselves: to be
    free from fear of starvation, want, and a lack of basic needs was an
    irresistible force. What was not understood very well in the
    beginning was how Fascism was able to accomplish so much in such a
    very short period of time.  By abolishing the judicial and
    legislative branches of government the executive branches in those
    nations became all powerful. Their goal was not about providing for
    the needs of all, but to motivating their people through fear. The
    government's use of aggression in the form of political, social, and
    economic sanctions against citizens who were deemed undesirable,
    seemed rationale the majority of people living in those nations.
    Once basic liberties and freedoms had been suppressed the fascist
    regimes turned their aggression outward.

    The Second World War became the ultimate test of democracy. If
    democracy was to survive, it not only had to win a global war, but
    it also had to secure itself and future generations from the
    temptation to pursue forms of government or policies that would
    corrupt its foundational principles of life, liberty, and the
    pursuit of happiness. In the depths of the depression and the rise
    of the Fascist state, in June and July of 1940, President Roosevelt
    proposed a declaration of human rights for the US. He proposed the
    protection of the government should extend to "certain freedoms:"
    freedom of information, freedom of religious liberty, freedom of
    expression, freedom from fear, and freedom from want.  His
    definition of what it required is still part of today's dialogue on
    human rights. These principles are included in the constitutions of
    major governments that emerged following World War II, and the
    Universal Declaration of Human Rights ratified by most of the
    nations of the earth including the United States, and is agreed to
    by most members of the United Nations.

    The relevance Roosevelt's proposed new Bill of Rights, as reiterated
    in the book by Cass Sunstein, are the enumeration of basic
    necessities of American political and economic life: equal
    opportunity, employment, security, end of special privilege, civil
    liberties, and scientific progress toward higher standards of
    living. These have been the over arching issues in our post 9/11
    world.  We have seen a single definition of security that allowed
    special privilege for some (those who could afford a Registered
    Travel ID), the undermined of civil liberties (warrantless wiretap
    surveillance of telephone calls, national ID, and secret government
    watchlist programs), that suppressed freedom of information (secrecy
    in all actions of government, no bid contracting, rules of secrecy
    expanded to include legal memorandum that purportedly rationalized
    government action) and that hindered scientific progress (increased
    travel restrictions making it difficult for scientific conferences
    to be held in the US, coupled with arrest and prosecution of
    researchers attending conferences in the US under the Digital
    Millennium Copyright Act meant that many of the important
    discussions in a wide range scientific and engineering innovation
    did not happen in this country).

    As the nation contends with one of the issues that Roosevelt
    promoted as an important freedom under his proposed new bill of
    rights, that is, access to adequate and affordable health care, it
    is important to note that 60 years after his proposal this nation
    still has not exhausted the wealth of wisdom shown by one of the
    world's greatest leaders. The look back offered by this book is of
    value especially for the reminder that desperate people may be
    tempted to do desperate things, but it takes leadership to stay the
    course and serve as the morale compass for our nation.

    --Lillie Coney

EPIC Publications:

"Litigation Under the Federal Open Government Laws 2008," edited by
Harry A. Hammitt, Marc Rotenberg, John A. Verdi, and Mark S. Zaid (EPIC
2008). Price: $60.


Litigation Under the Federal Open Government Laws is the most
comprehensive, authoritative discussion of the federal open access laws.
This updated version includes new material regarding the substantial
FOIA amendments enacted on December 31, 2007. Many of the recent
amendments are effective as of December 31, 2008. The standard reference
work includes in-depth analysis of litigation under Freedom of
Information Act, Privacy Act, Federal Advisory Committee Act, Government
in the Sunshine Act. The fully updated 2008 volume is the 24th edition
of the manual that lawyers, journalists and researchers have relied on
for more than 25 years.


"Information Privacy Law: Cases and Materials, Second Edition" Daniel J.
Solove, Marc Rotenberg, and Paul Schwartz. (Aspen 2005). Price: $98.


This clear, comprehensive introduction to the field of information
privacy law allows instructors to enliven their teaching of fundamental
concepts by addressing both enduring and emerging controversies. The
Second Edition addresses numerous rapidly developing areas of privacy
law, including: identity theft, government data mining and electronic
surveillance law, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act,
intelligence sharing, RFID tags, GPS, spyware, web bugs, and more.
Information Privacy Law, Second Edition, builds a cohesive foundation
for an exciting course in this rapidly evolving area of law.


"Privacy & Human Rights 2006: An International Survey of Privacy Laws
and Developments" (EPIC 2007). Price: $75. http://www.epic.org/phr06/

This annual report by EPIC and Privacy International provides an
overview of key privacy topics and reviews the state of privacy in over
75 countries around the world. The report outlines legal protections,
new challenges, and important issues and events relating to privacy.
Privacy & Human Rights 2006 is the most comprehensive report on privacy
and data protection ever published.


"The Public Voice WSIS Sourcebook: Perspectives on the World Summit on
the Information Society" (EPIC 2004). Price: $40.


This resource promotes a dialogue on the issues, the outcomes, and the
process of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS). This
reference guide provides the official UN documents, regional and
issue-oriented perspectives, and recommendations and proposals for
future action, as well as a useful list of resources and contacts for
individuals and organizations that wish to become more involved in the
WSIS process.


"The Privacy Law Sourcebook 2004: United States Law, International Law,
and Recent Developments," Marc Rotenberg, editor (EPIC 2005). Price:


The Privacy Law Sourcebook, which has been called the "Physician's Desk
Reference" of the privacy world, is the leading resource for students,
attorneys, researchers, and journalists interested in pursuing privacy
law in the United States and around the world. It includes the full
texts of major privacy laws and directives such as the Fair Credit
Reporting Act, the Privacy Act, and the OECD Privacy Guidelines, as well
as an up-to-date section on recent developments. New materials include
the APEC Privacy Framework, the Video Voyeurism Prevention Act, and the


"Filters and Freedom 2.0: Free Speech Perspectives on Internet Content
Controls" (EPIC 2001). Price: $20.


A collection of essays, studies, and critiques of Internet content
filtering. These papers are instrumental in explaining why filtering
threatens free expression.


EPIC publications and other books on privacy, open government, free
expression, crypto and governance can be ordered at:

EPIC Bookstore http://www.epic.org/bookstore


EPIC also publishes EPIC FOIA Notes, which provides brief summaries of
interesting documents obtained from government agencies under the
Freedom of Information Act.

Subscribe to EPIC FOIA Notes at:

[8] Upcoming Conferences and Events
2nd International Action Day "Freedom not Fear - Stop the Surveillance
Mania" Demonstrations, Events, Privacy Parties, etc., in many countries.
Worldwide, September 12, 2009. For more information:

Pan-European Dialogue on Internet Governance (EuroDIG), Geneva,
Switzerland, September 14-15, 2009. For more information:
http://www.eurodig.org/ "Practical Approaches to Privacy in Health
Reform," Deven McGraw of the Center for Democracy and Technology,
Seventeenth National HIPAA Summit in Washington, DC, September 16, 2009.
For more information: http://www.cdt.org

World Summit on the Knowledge Society WSKS 2009, Crete, Greece,
September 16-18, 2009. For more information:

Gikii, A Workshop on Law, Technology and Popular Culture, Institute for
Information Law (IViR), University of Amsterdam, September 17-18, 2009.
For more information: http://www.law.ed.ac.uk/ahrc/gikii/2009.asp

"The Net will not forget," European conference on ICT and Privacy,
Copenhagen, Denmark, September 23-24, 2009. For more information:

"Secure Telework and Remote Access", Ari Schwartz, Telework Exchange
Town Hall Meeting, Washington, DC, September 24, 2009. For more
information: http://www.cdt.org

3rd International Conference "Keeping Children and Young People Safe
Online," Warsaw, Poland, September 29-30, 2009. For more information:

"6th Communia Workshop: Memory Institutions and Public Domain"
Barcelona, Spain, October 1-2, 2009. For more information:

Engaging Data Forum, MIT, October 12-13, 2009. For more information:

10th German Big Brother Awards, Bielefeld, Germany, October 16, 2009.
For more information: http://www.bigbrotherawards.de

eChallenges 2009, Istanbul, Turkey, October 21-23, 2009. For more
information: http://www.echallenges.org/e2009/default.asp

Big Brother Awards Switzerland, Zurich, Switzerland, October 24, 2009.
Deadline for nominations: August 31, 2009. For more information:

3rd European Privacy Open Space, Vienna, Austria, October 24-25, 2009.
For more information: http://www.privacyos.eu

Austrian Big Brother Awards Vienna, Austria, October 25, 2009. Deadline
for nominations: 21 September 2009. For more information:

Free Culture Forum: Organization and Action, Barcelona, Spain, October
29 - November 1, 2009. For more information: http://fcforum.net

Free Society Conference and Nordic Summit, Gothenburg, Sweden, November
13-15, 2009. For more information: http://www.fscons.org

3rd European Privacy Open Space, Vienna, Austria, October 24-25, 2009.
For more information: http://www.privacyos.eu

Global Privacy Standards in a Global World, The Public Voice, Madrid,
Spain, November 3, 2009. For more information:

31st International Conference of Data Protection and Privacy
Commissioners, Madrid, Spain, November 4-6, 2009. For more information,

UN Internet Governance Forum, Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt, November 15-18,
2009. For more information: http://www.intgovforum.org/

Privacy 2010, Stanford, March 23 - 25, 2010. For more information:

Join EPIC on Facebook

Join the Electronic Privacy Information Center on Facebook



Start a discussion on privacy. Let us know your thoughts. Stay up to
date with EPIC's events. Support EPIC.

Privacy Policy

The EPIC Alert mailing list is used only to mail the EPIC Alert and to
send notices about EPIC activities. We do not sell, rent or share our
mailing list. We also intend to challenge any subpoena or other legal
process seeking access to our mailing list. We do not enhance (link to
other databases) our mailing list or require your actual name.

In the event you wish to subscribe or unsubscribe your e-mail address
from this list, please follow the above instructions under "subscription

About EPIC

The Electronic Privacy Information Center is a public interest research
center in Washington, DC. It was established in 1994 to focus public
attention on emerging privacy issues such as the Clipper Chip, the
Digital Telephony proposal, national ID cards, medical record privacy,
and the collection and sale of personal information. EPIC publishes the
EPIC Alert, pursues Freedom of Information Act litigation, and conducts
policy research. For more information, see http://www.epic.org or write
EPIC, 1718 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 200, Washington, DC 20009. +1 202
483 1140 (tel), +1 202 483 1248 (fax).

Donate to EPIC

If you'd like to support the work of the Electronic Privacy Information
Center, contributions are welcome and fully tax-deductible. Checks
should be made out to "EPIC" and sent to 1718 Connecticut Ave., NW,
Suite 200, Washington, DC 20009. Or you can contribute online at:


Your contributions will help support Freedom of Information Act and
First Amendment litigation, strong and effective advocacy for the right
of privacy and efforts to oppose government regulation of encryption and
expanding wiretapping powers.

Thank you for your support.

Subscription Information

Subscribe/unsubscribe via web interface:

Back issues are available at: http://www.epic.org/alert

The EPIC Alert displays best in a fixed-width font, such as Courier.

------------------------- END EPIC Alert 16.17 ------------------------


Share this page:

Defend Privacy. Support EPIC.
US Needs a Data Protection Agency
2020 Election Security