[CIMC-working] FW: EPIC Alert 10.04: including info o new domestic spy agency
Elizabeth Fraser
ehf at bookbeast.com
Mon, 24 Feb 2003 19:35:51 -0600
I'm forwarding this mostly for the info under number [3]:
Senator Proposes Domestic Spy Agency; Bush Launches Threat Center.
But there's more than just this proposed Homeland Information Agency
that folks might want info on in here ... so I'm sending the whole
kit and kaboodle--not just section [3]. -- Elizabeth
-----Original Message-----
=======================================================================
E P I C A l e r t
=======================================================================
Volume 10.04 February 24, 2003
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Published by the
Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC)
Washington, D.C.
http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_10.04.html
=======================================================================
Table of Contents
=======================================================================
[1] Data Sellers May Be Liable for Sale of Personal Information [2] EPIC
Files Comments at FTC Workshop on Cross-Border Fraud [3] Senator
Proposes Domestic Spy Agency; Bush Launches Threat Center [4] Congress
Passes "Do-Not-Call" Legislation [5] EPIC Comments on Proposed Airline
Passenger Database [6] Privacy International Seeks "Stupid Security"
Contest Submissions [7] EPIC Bookstore: Hong Kong Data Privacy Law [8]
Upcoming Conferences and Events
=======================================================================
[1] Data Sellers May Be Liable for Sale of Personal Information
=======================================================================
The New Hampshire Supreme Court issued an important decision on February
18 in Remsburg v. Docusearch, a civil lawsuit brought against
information brokers and private investigators for selling personal data
about Amy Boyer to a stalker who murdered her after using that
information to locate her. Boyer's killer obtained information about
her through Docusearch, a data brokerage firm run by private
investigators, who used pretexting to obtain Boyer's employment address
and other information. EPIC filed an amicus brief in the case, arguing
that that private investigators and information brokers should be liable
for wrongful privacy invasions of third parties about whom they are
collecting and disseminating information.
The court held that private investigators and information brokers have a
duty to exercise reasonable care when the sale of personal information
creates a risk to the individual being investigated. The court found
that stalking and identity theft are two foreseeable harms that give
rise to the duty to exercise care. In a significant expansion of
privacy protection, the court held that the investigators could be
liable for damages resulting from the sale of information obtained
through pretexting. This holding exceeds federal protections against
pretexting phone calls, which were enacted with the passage of the
Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. Finally, the court held that individuals may
have a tort cause of action against investigators who purchase their
Social Security Numbers (SSNs) from credit reporting agencies without
permission. The court noted, "While a SSN must be disclosed in certain
circumstances, a person may reasonably expect that the number will
remain private."
Now that the New Hampshire Supreme Court has ruled, the case will be
remanded to a federal district court where a trial will proceed to
determine whether Docusearch and the other defendants were actually
liable for Amy Boyer's death.
New Hampshire Supreme Court Decision in Remsburg v. Docusearch:
http://www.courts.state.nh.us/supreme/opinions/2003/remsb017.htm
EPIC's Amicus Brief:
http://www.epic.org/privacy/boyer/brief.html
EPIC's Amy Boyer Case Page:
http://www.epic.org/privacy/boyer/
Amy Boyer Memorial and Informational Web Site:
http://www.amyboyer.org/
=======================================================================
[2] EPIC Files Comments at FTC Workshop on Cross-Border Fraud
=======================================================================
On February 20, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) explored "Potential
Partnerships Among Consumer Protection Enforcement Agencies and Internet
Service Providers and Web Hosting Companies" and "Cooperation Between
Consumer Protection Enforcement Agencies and Domain Registration
Authorities" as two panels of a public workshop on partnerships against
cross-border fraud. EPIC submitted statements for inclusion in both of
these panels.
In the "Potential Partnerships" panel, the discussion first focused on
trying to assess how Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and Web hosting
companies could more efficiently share their subscribers' personal
information with the FTC and foreign law enforcement authorities in the
context of cross-border fraud. EPIC's statement asserted that the FTC's
foremost role is to protect consumers' privacy, and that the debate
should be refocused to concentrate less on how privacy rules may
represent a hurdle for law enforcement and more on how the FTC could
articulate its law enforcement activities with the task of protecting
the privacy of defrauded consumers. To develop cooperation and
information-sharing partnerships between the public and private sectors
in the context of consumer fraud investigations, EPIC recommended to the
FTC that the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD) Privacy Guidelines be used as a trans-national legal framework to
protect the privacy of consumers in the context of the international
transfer of personal information. Because such guidelines have served
as a model for several national data protection laws, they should foster
consumer confidence by providing strong principles for the protection of
consumer privacy. EPIC's statement also addressed many of the privacy
implications of cross-border transfers of personal information in
consumer fraud investigations.
During the panel on "Cooperation Between Consumer Protection Enforcement
Agencies and Domain Registration Authorities," the FTC considered the
expanded use of information about Internet domain name registrants for
law enforcement purposes. In particular, the Commission explored how
domain registrars and registries could improve the accuracy of WHOIS
data in the generic top-level domains. WHOIS data consists of domain
name registrants' contact information, administrative contact
information, and technical contact information
-- all of which include mailing address, email address, telephone
number, and fax number -- as well as domain name, domain servers, and
other information. This data is globally, publicly accessible. EPIC
recommended that the FTC address the privacy, free speech, and consumer
fraud implications of requiring domain name registrants to provide
accurate personal information. EPIC also emphasized that the FTC plays
a critical role both in investigating consumer fraud and protecting
consumers from fraud. Specifically, the FTC advises consumers not to
disclose personal information, and if consumers choose to disclose
personal information, they should know who is collecting the
information, why the information is being collected, and how it is going
to be used. EPIC argued that the same criteria should be applied to
WHOIS data.
EPIC's statement on "Potential Partnerships Among Consumer Protection
Enforcement Agencies and Internet Service Providers and Web Hosting
Companies":
http://www.epic.org/privacy/internet/ftc/epic_submission_022003.pdf
EPIC's statement on "Cooperation Between Consumer Protection Enforcement
Agencies and Domain Registration Authorities":
http://www.epic.org/privacy/whois/ftc_submission_021903.pdf
FTC public workshop on "Public/Private Partnerships to Combat Cross-
Border Fraud":
http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/workshops/crossborder/
=======================================================================
[3] Senator Proposes Domestic Spy Agency; Bush Launches Threat Center
=======================================================================
On February 13, Senator John Edwards (D-NC) introduced a bill, S. 410,
that would authorize the creation of a "Homeland Intelligence Agency."
The bill, titled the "Foreign Intelligence Collection Improvement Act of
2003," would create a domestic intelligence agency modeled after
Britain's MI5 Security Service, but would incorporate what are
characterized as innovative civil liberties safeguards. Sen. Edwards
argues that the law enforcement and intelligence gathering functions of
the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) are fundamentally
inconsistent, and that the country needs an agency focused solely on
domestic intelligence. The proposed agency would take over the
intelligence functions of the FBI and would also obtain control over the
domestic intelligence functions of the Central Intelligence Agency
(CIA), National Security Agency (NSA), and other intelligence agencies.
To balance the unprecedented centralization of domestic surveillance
power, S. 410 proposes a system of rigorous internal auditing, enhanced
public reporting and congressional oversight. The Homeland Intelligence
Agency would have an Office of Privacy and Civil Liberties Protection,
along with an independent Citizens Advisory Board, to monitor the
operations of the agency. The bill proposes that the Privacy Act's Fair
Information Practices would apply to the collection of intelligence
information and that the agency would conduct privacy impact assessments
for its surveillance proposals. It also promises strong guidelines on
data mining activities.
The Foreign Intelligence Collection Improvement Act is predicated on two
assumptions: that a law enforcement agency cannot and should not have
intelligence capabilities, and that there is a need for greater domestic
intelligence gathering power. It is not clear, however, that either of
these assumptions holds true. While Congress is unlikely to act upon
the bill in the near term, it provides a concrete alternative solution
to the debate about how to conduct lawful domestic intelligence
gathering. Such proposals need to be analyzed carefully on their merits
for potential ideas and problems.
Responding to criticisms about inadequate cooperation between the
various intelligence agencies, the White House announced the creation of
the Terrorist Threat Information Center (TTIC) on January 28. According
to the press release, the TTIC will be implemented in three phases. In
its initial stage, TTIC will primarily focus on the production of
integrated terrorist threat analysis for senior policymakers. In the
second phase of implementation, TTIC will be the principal gateway for
policymaker requests for analysis of potential terrorist threats to U.S.
interests, and will maintain a database of known and suspected
terrorists. In its final stage, TTIC will serve as the hub for all
terrorist threat-related analytic work. TTIC will be located in a
facility separate from CIA and FBI Headquarters, but will be under the
Director of Central Intelligence. The FBI, meanwhile, is establishing
an intelligence program to ensure that the collection and dissemination
of intelligence is given the same institutional priority as the
collection of evidence for prosecution. A new Executive Assistant
Director for Intelligence will be given direct authority and
responsibility for the FBI's national intelligence program.
S. 410, Foreign Intelligence Collection Improvement Act of 2003:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:s.00410:
Fact Sheet, Strengthening Intelligence to Better Protect America:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030128-12.html
=======================================================================
[4] Congress Passes "Do-Not-Call" Legislation
=======================================================================
Congress has passed legislation to implement the Federal Trade
Commission's Do-Not-Call (DNC) list. The legislation, H.R. 395, the
Do-Not-Call Implementation Act, passed by unanimous consent in the
Senate, and by a 418-7 vote in the House. The measure was sponsored by
House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Billy Tauzin (R-LA).
The FTC will now move forward with implementation of its DNC list. It
is expected to be operational by Fall 2003. However, to prevent its
operation, the telemarketing industry has filed suit challenging the
list. That case, US Security v. FTC, was filed on January 29, 2003, in
federal court in Oklahoma.
The legislation now goes to the White House, where it is predicted that
President Bush will sign the bill.
H.R. 395 is available at:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:h.r.00395:
EPIC's Telemarketing Page:
http://www.epic.org/privacy/telemarketing/
=======================================================================
[5] EPIC Comments on Proposed Airline Passenger Database
=======================================================================
EPIC has submitted comments on a Transportation Security Administration
(TSA) proposal to create a new database of Aviation Security Screening
Records on all airline passengers. This proposed database was disclosed
for the first time in a Privacy Act notice published in the Federal
Register on January 15, 2003. EPIC argued that the notice did not
provide sufficient information for the public to contribute meaningfully
to this rule-making procedure. In fact, the TSA has resisted requests
EPIC brought under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to provide
public access to relevant information in the agency's possession about
the TSA proposal.
According to the Federal Register notice, the TSA proposes to collect
passenger manifest information on all airline travelers and store it in
a large centralized database. The manifest information includes
"Passenger Name Records (PNR) and associated data." This includes date
and time of flights, flight number, destination, reservation
information, and payment information. According to the notice, the TSA
would store the records until the "completion of the individual's air
travel to which the record relates." The TSA also proposes to collect
and store data on "individuals who are deemed to pose a possible risk to
transportation or national security." If a person is determined to be a
"risk" under this opaque (and possibly arbitrary and/or discriminatory)
procedure, the data will be stored for 50 years. The TSA, to date, has
provided absolutely no information about how a passenger is determined
to be a "possible risk to transportation or national security." They
also give no information about how such a person might become aware of
his or her categorization, and how that categorization might be legally
challenged. Indeed, one could argue that simply purchasing a ticket
makes an individual a "possible" risk to transportation. The TSA
proposes that if a person is determined to be a risk, the database will
also be populated by detailed data about that person, including "risk
assessment reports; financial and transactional data; public source
information; proprietary data; and information from law enforcement and
intelligence sources."
EPIC has requested that the TSA answer the following questions to enable
better informed public comments on the merits of their
proposal:
(a) What is the aim of the Passenger Database? Is it the
foundation of CAPPS-II (the TSA's data mining initiative
similar Total Information Awareness) or is it an
integrated watch list?
(b) What procedure will determine if a person is a "risk"?
(c) How does a person become aware of being tagged as a "risk"?
(d) How can that determination be legally challenged? and
(e) what specifically are the policy and security safeguards to
protect the Passenger Database?
The comments also discussed the privacy and security risks of the
CAPPS-II initiative and the need for greater transparency for the other
projects that are currently being pursued by the TSA.
EPIC's Comments:
http://www.epic.org/privacy/airtravel/tsacomments2.24.2003.html
DOT Electronic Docket:
http://www.epic.org/redirect/dot_docket.html
=======================================================================
[6] Privacy International Seeks "Stupid Security" Contest Submissions
=======================================================================
Privacy International, a privacy watchdog group based in London, is on a
quest to find the world's most "stupid" security measure. In order for
a particular security measure to be considered "stupid," it should be
one or more of the following: pointless, intrusive, annoying, or
self-serving.
The "Stupid Security" award aims to highlight the absurdities of the
security industry. Privacy International director Simon Davies said the
group had launched the contest as a result of numerous security
initiatives around the world that had absolutely no genuine security
benefit.
The competition is open to everyone, and will be judged by a panel of
well-known security experts, public policy specialists, privacy
advocates, and journalists. Nominations will be accepted until March
15, 2003. Winners will be announced at the 13th Annual Computers,
Freedom & Privacy conference in New York on April 3, 2003.
For more information, see:
http://www.privacyinternational.org/activities/stupidsecurity/
Nominations can be sent to:
<stupidsecurity@privacy.org>
=======================================================================
[7] EPIC Bookstore: Hong Kong Data Privacy Law
=======================================================================
Mark Berthold and Raymond Wacks, "Hong Kong Data Privacy Law:
Territorial Regulation in a Borderless World" (Thomson, Sweet & Maxwell
Asia 2002)
http://www.smlawpub.com.hk/products/prod_spec.asp?ProdId=406
It may surprise some in the West to learn that Hong Kong has one of the
most advanced privacy laws in the world. But to those in the data
protection field, the Hong Kong Data Privacy Law is a well known model
for the protection of information privacy in the modern era. The
Ordinance, as it is called, is derived from both the European Union Data
Directive and international norms for privacy protection, including
Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 19
of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
This is also a privacy law with teeth. As Raymond Tang (the current
Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data) notes, the Ordinance has been
the subject of over 98,000 inquiries, 3,400 investigations, and 55
appeals before the statutory Administrative Appeals Board. This is a
privacy law that requires careful study, and this new text from Thomson
delivers.
Mark Berthold and Raymond Wacks have set out an extraordinarily useful
overview of privacy law in Hong Kong and also the larger issues of
privacy protection in the online world. The book details the operation
of the Hong Kong Data Privacy Ordinance. It provides useful
interpretation of key provisions, as well as reports and analysis of
various cases decided under the law. Researchers, practitioners, and
consumer advocates will find the text invaluable.
Berthold and Wacks have also made a significant contribution to the
larger study of privacy protection in a borderless world. The text
explores the impact of the Internet as well as the various technologies
that both enhance and undermine privacy. In the final chapter the
authors consider a range of important matters for policy makers around
the world -- drafting privacy law, developing codes of practice,
understanding the role of the privacy commissioner -- drawing often on
the experience of Hong Kong and its own law. Their conclusion has
universal application: "A well drafted, properly enforced and socially
accepted data privacy regime provides a construct and valuable means by
which to check the relentless, but far from inevitable, assault on our
personal data and privacy."
- Marc Rotenberg
Office of the Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data, Hong Kong:
http://www.pco.org.hk/
EPIC / Privacy International, "Privacy and Human Rights: An
International Survey of Privacy Law and Developments" 196-205 (EPIC
2002) (Discussion of Hong Kong)
http://www.epic.org/bookstore/phr2002/
================================
EPIC Publications:
"The Privacy Law Sourcebook 2002: United States Law, International Law,
and Recent Developments," Marc Rotenberg, editor (EPIC 2002).
Price: $40. http://www.epic.org/bookstore/pls2002/
The "Physicians Desk Reference of the privacy world." An invaluable
resource for students, attorneys, researchers and journalists who need
an up-to-date collection of U.S. and International privacy law, as well
as a comprehensive listing of privacy resources.
================================
"FOIA 2002: Litigation Under the Federal Open Government Laws," Harry
Hammitt, David Sobel and Mark Zaid, editors (EPIC 2002). Price: $40.
http://www.epic.org/bookstore/foia2002/
This is the standard reference work covering all aspects of the Freedom
of Information Act, the Privacy Act, the Government in the Sunshine Act,
and the Federal Advisory Committee Act. The 21st edition fully updates
the manual that lawyers, journalists and researchers have relied on for
more than 25 years. For those who litigate open government cases (or
need to learn how to litigate them), this is an essential reference
manual.
================================
"Privacy & Human Rights 2002: An International Survey of Privacy Laws
and Developments" (EPIC 2002). Price: $25.
http://www.epic.org/bookstore/phr2002/
This survey, by EPIC and Privacy International, reviews the state of
privacy in over fifty countries around the world. The survey examines a
wide range of privacy issues including data protection, telephone
tapping, genetic databases, video surveillance, location tracking, ID
systems and freedom of information laws.
================================
"Filters and Freedom 2.0: Free Speech Perspectives on Internet Content
Controls" (EPIC 2001). Price: $20.
http://www.epic.org/bookstore/filters2.0/
A collection of essays, studies, and critiques of Internet content
filtering. These papers are instrumental in explaining why filtering
threatens free expression.
================================
"The Consumer Law Sourcebook 2000: Electronic Commerce and the Global
Economy," Sarah Andrews, editor (EPIC 2000). Price: $40.
http://www.epic.org/cls/
The Consumer Law Sourcebook provides a basic set of materials for
consumers, policy makers, practitioners and researchers who are
interested in the emerging field of electronic commerce. The focus is
on framework legislation that articulates basic rights for consumers and
the basic responsibilities for businesses in the online economy.
================================
"Cryptography and Liberty 2000: An International Survey of Encryption
Policy," Wayne Madsen and David Banisar, authors (EPIC 2000). Price:
$20. http://www.epic.org/crypto&/
EPIC's third survey of encryption policies around the world. The
results indicate that the efforts to reduce export controls on strong
encryption products have largely succeeded, although several governments
are gaining new powers to combat the perceived threats of encryption to
law enforcement.
================================
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 Bookshelf" at Powell's Books
http://www.powells.com/features/epic/epic.html
=======================================================================
[8] Upcoming Conferences and Events
=======================================================================
** Uniting Privacy and the First Amendment in the 21st Century **
May 9-10, 2003
Oakland, CA
EPIC, the First Amendment Project, and the California Office of Privacy
Protection are sponsoring this activist symposium designed to explore
the interplay between privacy and First Amendment rights, with the goal
of developing strategies for optimizing both.
If you are interested in making a presentation or leading a Working
Group, please submit a letter outlining your proposed presentation and
including a brief explanation of the issue to be addressed, a list of
possible presenters, and the desired outcome of the session to:
<dgreene@thefirstamendment.org>
For more information: http://www.epic.org/events/unitingsymposium/
=======================================================================
Third Annual Privacy & Data Security Summit: Implementing & Managing
Privacy in a Complex Environment. International Association of Privacy
Professionals. February 26-28, 2003. Washington, DC. For more
information: http://www.privacyassociation.org/html/conferences.html
Quality Labels for Web Sites: Alternative Approaches to Content Rating.
Programme in Comparative Media Law and Policy (PCMLP), Oxford
University. February 27, 2003. Kirchberg, Luxembourg. For more
information:
http://www.saferinternet.org/news/Quality-label-workshop.asp
The Law and Technology of DRM: What will DRM technologies mean for the
future of information? University of California, Berkeley, School of
Information Management and Systems and Boalt Hall School of Law.
February 27 - March 1, 2003. Berkeley, CA. For more information:
http://www.law.berkeley.edu/institutes/bclt/drm/
Legal and Pedagogical Aspects of a Safer Internet. Safer Internet For
Knowing and Living (SIFKaL). February 28, 2003. Kirchberg, Luxembourg.
For more information: http://rechtsinformatik.jura.uni-sb.de/sifkal/
Spectrum Policy: Property or Commons? Stanford Law School Center for
Internet and Society. March 1, 2003. For more information:
http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/spectrum/
Improving Identification: Enhancing Security, Guarding Privacy. The
Communitarian Network. March 6, 2003. Washington, DC. For more
information: <mdunkelman@communitariannetwork.org>
Identity Theft: Current Enforcement and Prevention Efforts. New York
City Bar Association, Committee on Consumer Affairs. March 12, 2003. New
York, NY. For more information: <jgreenbaum@fkkslaw.com>
P&AB's Privacy Practitioners' Workshop and Ninth Annual National
Conference. Privacy & American Business. March 12-14, 2003. Washington,
DC. For more information: http://www.pandab.org/postcard.pdf
Big Brother Technologies. A Choices and Challenges Forum. Center for
Interdisciplinary Studies, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State
University. March 27, 2003. Blacksburg, VA. For more information:
http://www.cddc.vt.edu/choices/2003/
CFP2003: 13th Annual Conference on Computers, Freedom, and Privacy.
Association for Computing Machinery (ACM). April 1-4, 2003. New York,
NY. For more information: http://www.cfp2003.org/
28th Annual AAAS Colloquium on Science and Technology Policy. American
Association for the Advancement of Science. April 10-11, 2003.
Washington, DC. For more information:
http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/colloqu.htm
Integrating Government With New Technologies '03: E-Government, Change
and Information Democracy. Riley Information Services. April 11, 2003.
Ottawa, Canada. For more information: http://www.rileyis.com/seminars/
RSA Conference 2003. RSA Security. April 13-17, 2003. San Francisco, CA.
For more information: http://www.rsaconference.com/
Building the Information Commonwealth: Information Technologies and
Prospects for Development of Civil Society Institutions in the Countries
of the Commonwealth of Independent States. Interparliamentary Assembly
of the Member States of the Commonwealth of Independent States (IPA).
April 22-24, 2003. St. Petersburg, Russia. For more information:
http://www.communities.org.ru/conference/
O'Reilly Emerging Technology Conference. April 22-25, 2003. Santa Clara,
CA. For more information: http://conferences.oreilly.com/etcon/
Mid Canada Information Security Conference. Information Protection
Association of Manitoba. April 30, 2003. Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada. For
more information: http://www.ipam.mb.ca/mcisc/
Technologies for Protecting Personal Information. Federal Trade
Commission. Workshop 1: The Consumer Experience. May 14, 2003. Workshop
2: The Business Experience. June 4, 2003. Washington, DC. For more
information: http://www.ftc.gov/techworkshop/
O'Reilly Open Source Convention. July 7-11, 2003. Portland, OR. For more
information: http://conferences.oreilly.com/oscon/
Privacy2003. Technology Policy Group. September 30 - October 2, 2003.
Columbus, OH. For more information:
http://www.privacy2000.org/privacy2003/
=======================================================================
Subscription Information
=======================================================================
Subscribe/unsubscribe via Web interface:
http://mailman.epic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/epic_news
Subscribe/unsubscribe via e-mail:
To: epic_news-request@mailman.epic.org
Subject line: "subscribe" or &"unsubscribe" (no quotes)
Help with subscribing/unsubscribing:
To: epic_news-request@mailman.epic.org
Subject: "help" (no quotes)
Back issues are available at:
http://www.epic.org/alert/
The EPIC Alert displays best in a fixed-width font, such as Courier.
=======================================================================
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
information." Please contact info@epic.org if you would like to change
your subscription e-mail address, if you are experiencing
subscription/unsubscription problems, or if you have any other
questions.
=======================================================================
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, e-mail info@epic.org,
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).
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:
http://www.epic.org/donate/
** Receive a free Observing Surveillance conference poster with donation
of $75 or more! **
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.
---------------------- END EPIC Alert 10.04 ----------------------
.