Thomas J. Downey and Adam M. Eisgrau Will Work to Block Amnesty for Telecoms

San Francisco - As Congress debates letting the telecom industry off the hook for its compliance with illegal government surveillance of millions of ordinary Americans, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has enlisted two veteran lobbyists to try to block amnesty for companies collaborating with the warrantless spying.

EFF is lead counsel for the plaintiffs in Hepting v. AT&T, one of many lawsuits aimed at holding telecommunications companies accountable for violating their customers' rights by illegally assisting the National Security Agency in domestic surveillance. The opportunity for this critical case to be decided by a judge is under serious threat as the White House calls for Congress to provide these companies with immunity for their role in the illegal program.

In an effort to preserve the courts' crucial role in protecting the privacy of all Americans, EFF will now take its fight against warrantless spying to Capitol Hill. Thomas J. Downey and Adam M. Eisgrau, both with decades of experience in Washington, have been retained by EFF to work to block amnesty for companies who break the law.

"While EFF generally does not engage in Washington-style lobbying, we need to make Congress understand the importance of letting our case against AT&T go forward," said EFF Executive Director Shari Steele. "By releasing the telecoms from liability, Congress would be permitting the widespread flouting of our laws by private companies entrusted with our most personal communications."

To help with EFF's "Stop the Spying" campaign:
http://www.stopthespying.org

Contact:

Rebecca Jeschke
Media Coordinator
Electronic Frontier Foundation
press@eff.org

EFF Lawsuit Demands Information About Telecom Industry Lobbying

Washington, D.C. - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) filed suit against the Department of Justice (DOJ) today, demanding any records of a telecom industry lobbying campaign to block lawsuits over their compliance with illegal electronic surveillance. EFF's lawsuit comes as Congress debates letting telecommunications companies off scot-free as part of the hotly disputed "modernization" of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).

EFF represents the plaintiffs in Hepting v. AT&T, a class-action lawsuit brought by AT&T customers accusing the telecommunications company of violating their rights by illegally assisting the National Security Agency in domestic surveillance. The Hepting case is just one of many suits aimed at holding telecoms responsible for knowingly violating federal privacy laws with warrantless wiretapping and the illegal transfer of vast amounts of personal data to the government.

The government has intervened and moved for dismissal of many of these lawsuits. The DOJ has also pushed for changes to federal law that would ensure the telecoms are not held responsible for their role in the warrantless surveillance. Meanwhile, the DOJ has not responded to EFF's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to disclose records concerning any lobbying activities regarding potential immunity for the telecom industry.

"The White House is publicly calling for immunity for the telecoms, while a recent Newsweek article detailed a 'secretive lobbying campaign' to block the lawsuits," said EFF Staff Attorney Marcia Hofmann. "If there are backroom deals going on at the Department of Justice, then Americans need to know about them now, before Congress passes any law that gets the telecom companies off the hook."

The Department of Justice has already agreed that the records should be disclosed quickly because of the urgent need to inform the public about these issues. However, despite this recognition, DOJ has neither processed the FOIA requests nor told EFF when the documents might be released. EFF's suit asks for the immediate disclosure of the telecom lobbying records, including any documents concerning briefings, discussions, or other contacts DOJ officials have had with representatives of telecommunications companies. The suit also asks for records of contact between the DOJ and members of Congress about telecom immunity.

"Our lawsuit and others allege serious privacy law violations that impact millions of ordinary Americans," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Kurt Opsahl. "If the telecoms are seeking amnesty for their illegal activity, Americans deserve to know why and how lobbyists pressured the DOJ."

For the full complaint:
http://www.eff.org/flag/fisa_lobbying/092707_complaint.pdf

For more on our FOIA work:
http://www.eff.org/flag

Contacts:

Marcia Hofmann
Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
marcia@eff.org

Kurt Opsahl
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
kurt@eff.org

David Sobel
Senior Counsel
Electronic Frontier Foundation
sobel@eff.org

Free Culture Leader John Buckman and Privacy and Security Expert Lorrie Faith Cranor Sign on to Distinguished Team

San Francisco - The Board of Directors of the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has elected two leading technologists to join its executive board: free culture leader John Buckman and privacy and security expert Lorrie Faith Cranor.

John Buckman is a programmer, an entrepreneur, and the founder of Magnatune.com -- an online record label that strives to be fair to both recording artists and consumers alike. The Magnatune site provides web-based distribution to over 250 recording artists and features an innovative tool for online music licensing for film, television, and new media. This Creative Commons-backed business model has helped establish Buckman as a leader in the free culture movement. Buckman is also the founder Bookmooch.com, an online community for the exchanging of used books. His past accomplishments include having founded email software company Lyris in 1994, which he sold to JL Halsey in 2005. He also created Tile.net, an early web site directory that was sold in 2001.

"EFF fights to protect the rights of artists and fans who use technology to make and enjoy creative works," said Buckman. "I'm happy to join them in taking on these cutting-edge issues."

Lorrie Faith Cranor is an Associate Research Professor in the School of Computer Science and the department of Engineering and Public Policy at Carnegie Mellon University. She has played a key role in building the usable privacy and security research community, having co-edited the seminal book "Security and Usability" and founded the Symposium On Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS). Cranor has authored over 80 research papers on online privacy, phishing and semantic attacks, spam, electronic voting, anonymous publishing, usable access control, and other topics. She has also testified as an expert in lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of Internet "harmful to minors" laws. In 2003, Cranor was named one of the top 100 innovators 35 or younger by Technology Review magazine. She was previously a researcher at AT&T Labs Research and taught in the Stern School of Business at New York University.

"The privacy and security policy decisions made now will have far-reaching implications in the years to come," said Cranor. "I'm pleased to work with EFF as they champion the public interest in these important debates."

Other members of EFF's executive board include John Perry Barlow, David Farber, Edward W. Felten, John Gilmore, Brewster Kahle, Joe Kraus, Lawrence Lessig, Pamela Samuelson, Shari Steele, and Brad Templeton.

"EFF is so fortunate to have such a distinguished Board of Directors, comprised of leaders in technology, policy, and law," said EFF Executive Director Shari Steele. "John and Lorrie bring a wonderful wealth of experience to EFF and will help us continue to think about our role in relation to emerging technologies."

Contact:

Rebecca Jeschke
Media Coordinator
Electronic Frontier Foundation
press@eff.org

Court Blocks DirecTV's Heavy-Handed Legal Tactics

San Francisco - In an important ruling today, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals blocked satellite television provider DirecTV's heavy-handed legal tactics and protected security and computer science research into satellite and smart card technology after hearing argument from the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF).

The cases, DirecTV v. Huynh and DirecTV v. Oliver, involved a provision of federal law prohibiting the "assembly" or "modification" of equipment designed to intercept satellite signals. DirecTV maintained that the provision should cover anyone who works with equipment designed for interception of their signals, regardless of their motivation or whether any interception occurs. But in a hearing earlier this year, EFF argued that the provision should apply only to entities that facilitate illegal interception by other people and not to those who simply tinker or use the equipment, such as researchers and others working to further scientific knowledge of the devices at issue.

"Congress never meant this law to be used as a hammer on those who use or tinker with new technologies," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Jason Schultz. "We're pleased the court recognized that researchers need to be protected."

These cases were part of DirecTV's nationwide legal campaign against hundreds of thousands of individuals, claiming that they were illegally intercepting its satellite TV signal simply because they had purchased smart card technology. Because DirecTV made little effort to distinguish legal uses of smart card technology from illegal ones, EFF has worked to limit the lawsuits to only those cases where DirecTV has proof that their signals were illegally received.

"DirecTV always had legal recourse against those who pirate their signal. The ruling today prevents satellite and cable TV companies from piling on excessive damages that would punish and chill legitimate encryption research," said EFF Civil Liberties Director Jennifer Granick.

David Price and Trevor Dryer at Stanford Law School's Cyberlaw Clinic also assisted in this case.

For the full opinion from the 9th Circuit:
http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/directv_v_huynh/directv_ruling.pdf

For more on this case:
http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/directv_v_huynh

Contacts:

Jason Schultz
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
jason@eff.org

Jennifer Stisa Granick
Civil Liberties Director
Electronic Frontier Foundation
jennifer@eff.org

Jennifer Stisa Granick Named Civil Liberties Director

San Francisco - Noted computer crime attorney Jennifer Stisa Granick has joined the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) as its new Civil Liberties Director, working on government surveillance, Fourth Amendment, computer security, and computer crime law.

Granick previously was Executive Director at Stanford Law School's Center for Internet and Society as well as Director of the Cyberlaw Clinic. Before Stanford, Granick spent almost a decade practicing criminal defense law, focusing on hacker defense and the interaction of free speech, privacy, law, and technology.

"EFF plays a critical role in the battle to protect freedom and privacy as new technologies transform our lives, and I'm thrilled to be a part of this important work," Granick said. "I'm especially looking forward to protecting privacy rights in digital communications technologies, creating standards for how new technologies are used in national security and law enforcement investigations and promoting network privacy by working with security researchers."

Granick was selected by Information Security magazine in 2003 as one of 20 "Women of Vision" in the computer security field. She has spoken to the American Bar Association, National Security Agency, Naval Postgraduate School, International Security Forum, Computer Security Institute, Black Hat security conference, and the international Workshop on the Economics of Information Security, among others.

"EFF has long wanted to expand into criminal defense work, and Jennifer is the best there is," said EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn. "It's time to take a deeper look at how technologies are being used in criminal and national security prosecutions. We're all very excited about adding this new depth to our work."

Granick received her J.D. degree from the University of California Hastings College of the Law and her undergraduate degree from the New College of the University of South Florida.

Contact:

Jennifer Stisa Granick
Civil Liberties Director
Electronic Frontier Foundation
jennifer@eff.org

EFF Releases Comprehensive Report on Recording Industry's Litigation Campaign

San Francisco - As college students across the country head back to class this fall, they need to worry about more than keeping up on their schoolwork. The Recording Industry of America (RIAA) continues to target college campuses for hundreds of new lawsuits each month. Meanwhile, under pressure from the recording industry, universities are instituting draconian punishments for students suspected of sharing music files. At the same time, the RIAA continues to sue file sharers off campus, with a total tally now exceeding 20,000.

In a report released today, "RIAA v. The People: Four Years Later," the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) provides the only comprehensive look at the four-year litigation campaign waged by the RIAA against music fans. The report traces the RIAA campaign from its beginnings in 2003 against a handful of students at Princeton, Rensselaer Polytechnic, and Michigan Tech to the current spate of "pre-litigation settlement" letters being sent to universities nationwide.

"Despite the RIAA's legal campaign, file-sharing is more popular than ever," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Fred von Lohmann. "History will treat this as a shameful chapter in the history of the music industry, when record companies singled out random music fans for disproportionate penalties. Artists must be compensated, but these lawsuits aren't putting money in any creator's pocket."

The crackdown on Internet file-sharing has already driven music fans to technologies that are harder to monitor -- for example, burning and exchanging CDs among friends and sharing on members-only "darknets." EFF calls on universities to help artists get paid for their creative work while protecting their students from costly legal problems. Universities should insist on a blanket license for their students, collecting a reasonable regular payment -- for example, $5 a month -- in exchange for the right to keep sharing music with their classmates.

"This is about money, not morality," said von Lohmann. "With a blanket licensing solution, the RIAA can call off the lawyers and the lobbyists, and universities can get back to education instead of copyright enforcement."

For the full report "RIAA v. The People: Four Years Later":
http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/riaa_at_four.pdf

For more on the litigation campaign:
http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/?f=riaa-v-thepeople.html

FAQ for students faced with "pre-litigation letters":
http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/RIAA_v_ThePeople/college_faq.php

Contact:

Fred von Lohmann
Senior Intellectual Property Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
fred@eff.org

Illegitimate Patent Used to Threaten Website Hosting Companies

San Francisco - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is challenging a bogus patent on Internet subdomains that has been used to threaten small businesses and innovators.

Ideaflood, a self-proclaimed "intellectual property holding company," used this illegitimate patent to demand payment from website hosting companies that offer virtual, personalized subdomains -- like "action.eff.org" for the parent domain "eff.org." But in a reexamination request filed with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) today, EFF and Rick Mc Leod of Klarquist Sparkman, LLP show that the method Ideaflood claims to have invented was well known before the patent was issued. In fact, website developers were having public discussions about how to create these virtual subdomains on an Apache developer mailing list for more than a year before Ideaflood made its patent claim.

"This illustrates how an open-source project can establish a public record of technology development and thwart invalid patents," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Jason Schultz. "The public discussions on the Apache and other mailing lists have shown that Ideaflood's patent claims were without merit and that the patent should be revoked before it causes any more damage to innovation on the Internet."

The companies that Ideaflood threatened include Freehomepage.com, T35 Hosting, and LiveJournal, a social networking site where each of its three million users have their own subdomain. The patent has since been reassigned to a company called Hoshiko, LLC.

"Our patent system is intended to encourage innovation, not damage it by encroaching on the public domain," said Rick Mc Leod, who drafted EFF's petition. "Unfortunately, in recent years the PTO has been deluged with applications, making it difficult to determine whether many patents should be issued or rejected. When a 'bad' patent targets something as ephemeral as the Internet, it can be even more difficult to get that patent invalidated. Fortunately, a diligent, prior art searcher sent us a key reference."

The challenge to the Ideaflood patent is part of EFF's Patent Busting Project, which combats the chilling effects that bad patents have on public and consumer interests. So far, the project has killed one bogus patent and requested the reexamination of two others.

For the full reexamination request:
http://www.eff.org/patent/wanted/ideaflood/reexam/ReqReexam_746.pdf

For more on EFF's Patent Busting Project:
http://www.eff.org/patent

Contacts:

Jason Schultz
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
jason@eff.org

Rick Mc Leod
Klarquist Sparkman, LLP
rick.mcleod@klarquist.com

NSA Surveillance Comes Under Fire Today in Appeals Court Battle

San Francisco - In a packed San Francisco courtroom today, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) urged the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to allow AT&T customers to continue to fight against illegal spying on their telephone and Internet communications.

EFF is representing the plaintiffs in Hepting v. AT&T, a class-action lawsuit brought by AT&T customers accusing the giant telco of violating their rights by illegally assisting the National Security Agency in domestic surveillance. The U.S. government is fighting to get the class-action lawsuit thrown out of court, contending that the litigation jeopardizes state secrets.

"The courts cannot permit the government to evade responsibility for unconstitutional activities with thin claims of 'state secrets.' Without judicial review, there is no way to stop abuses of power," said EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn. "The courts are well equipped to protect state secrets while determining whether the spying is illegal and if so, to put a stop to it."

"In trying to shut down this case, the government is hoping to avoid accountability for spying on millions of AT&T customers," said EFF Staff Attorney Kevin Bankston. "Our system of checks and balances is supposed to thwart abuses of power. The White House is trying to wiggle out of those checks by taking the courts out of the picture."

Also Wednesday, the court heard arguments on the future of Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation v. Bush, a case alleging that the federal agents illegally wiretapped calls between the charity and its lawyers. The government also wants this case dismissed on state secrets grounds.

"The President is trying to hide behind a veil of false secrecy to evade a judicial determination that he broke the law. We're asking the court to see through that ploy," said Jon B. Eisenberg of Eisenberg and Hancock, LLP, attorney for the Al-Haramain plaintiffs.

C-SPAN television recorded today's hearing and said it would air later in the day.

The appeals court did not make a ruling Wednesday. The decision will be released at a later date.

Contacts:

Rebecca Jeschke
Media Coordinator
Electronic Frontier Foundation
press@eff.org

Jon B. Eisenberg
Attorney for the Al-Haramain plaintiffs
Eisenberg and Hancock, LLP
jon@eandhlaw.com

Ashlee Albies
Attorney for the Al-Haramain plaintiffs
ashlee@albieslaw.com

Government Aims to Block Accountability for Illegal Spying on Americans

San Francisco - In the wake of Congress approving a dramatic expansion of U.S. warrantless wiretapping powers, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will hear arguments on the future of two critical lawsuits over illegal surveillance of Americans. The hearing is set for August 15, at 2 p.m. in San Francisco.

The government is fighting to get the cases thrown out of court, contending that the litigation jeopardizes state secrets. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is representing the plaintiffs in Hepting v. AT&T, which accuses the telecom giant of collaborating with the National Security Agency (NSA) in illegal electronic surveillance of millions of AT&T's customers. The court will also hear the arguments on the future of Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation v. Bush, a case alleging that the government illegally wiretapped calls between the charity and its lawyers.

"At issue here is whether the courts have any meaningful role to play in protecting Americans' privacy from Executive branch abuses of its surveillance powers," said EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn. "If the claim of 'state secrets' is allowed to shut down litigation, then the courts will never be able to exercise their Constitutional duty to hold the White House accountable for illegal and even unconstitutional abuses of power."

The court has scheduled one hour of arguments for Hepting v. AT&T, and 40 minutes for Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation v. Bush. Because of the large number of attendees expected at Wednesday's hearing, the court will provide an overflow room with audio and video of the proceedings for spectators who cannot get a seat in the courtroom itself.

For more information about attending the hearing, contact press@eff.org.

WHAT:
Hepting v. AT&T
Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation v. Bush

WHEN:
2 p.m.
Wednesday, August 15

WHERE:
9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
Courtroom 1, 3rd Floor
95 Seventh Street
San Francisco, CA 94103

For more on EFF's case against AT&T:
http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/att

Contacts:

Rebecca Jeschke
Media Coordinator
Electronic Frontier Foundation
press@eff.org

Cindy Cohn
Legal Director
Electronic Frontier Foundation
cindy@eff.org

Lisa Jaskol
Attorney for the Al-Haramain plaintiffs
ljaskol@earthlink.net

Record Industry Takes Aim at Right of 'First Sale'

San Francisco - An eBay seller is taking on Universal Music Group (UMG) in court after the record industry giant targeted his online music sales with false claims of copyright infringement.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the San Francisco law firm of Keker & Van Nest LLP are representing Troy Augusto, whose online auctions included sales of promotional CDs distributed by Universal. Augusto does business on eBay under the name Roast Beast Music and specializes in sales of rare and collectible music.

Copyright law's "first sale" doctrine makes it clear that the owner of a CD is entitled to resell it without the permission of the copyright holder. Nevertheless, Universal demanded that eBay take down Augusto's auctions, claiming that CDs marked as "promotional use only" remain the property of Universal and thus can never be resold.

"When a consumer buys a CD, he gets certain rights, including the right to resell it. Universal is mistaken if it thinks that it can trump these rights simply by putting a label on a CD," said Fred von Lohmann, EFF Senior Intellectual Property Attorney. "Universal is trying to unilaterally rewrite copyright law to the detriment of Augusto's legitimate business and the public. Unless this effort is blocked, it could jeopardize not only sales of used CDs, but also libraries, used bookstores, and businesses that rent movies and video games."

In May, Universal filed a copyright infringement lawsuit against Augusto. Today, EFF filed papers with the federal court in Los Angeles answering Universal's claims and counter-suing the company for sending bogus "takedown notices" to eBay that resulted in the unwarranted suspension of Augusto's auctions.

This is not the first instance of Universal and its affiliated companies abusing copyright law. Last month, EFF filed suit against Universal Music Publishing Group on behalf of a mom who had a home video yanked from YouTube because a snippet of a Prince song could be heard in the background. In May, UMG made baseless copyright complaints about a video podcast by political blogger Michelle Malkin.

EFF has also fought other efforts to override the first sale doctrine, arguing in 2004 that Lexmark should not be permitted to use a "label license" to prohibit the resale of laser printer toner cartridges.

For the answer and counterclaim:
http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/umg_v_augusto/20070806_augusto_answer.pdf

For more on this case:
http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/umg_v_augusto

Contacts:

Fred von Lohmann
Senior Intellectual Property Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
fred@eff.org

Corynne McSherry
Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
corynne@eff.org

Home Video of Dancing Toddler Yanked From YouTube After Bogus Claim

San Francisco - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) filed suit today against Universal Music Publishing Group (UMPG), asking a federal court to protect the fair use and free speech rights of a mother who posted a short video of her toddler son dancing to a Prince song on the Internet.

Stephanie Lenz's 29-second recording shows her son bouncing along to the Prince song "Let's Go Crazy," which is heard playing in the background. Lenz uploaded the home video to YouTube in February to share it with her family and friends.

But last month, YouTube informed Lenz that it had removed the video from its website after Universal claimed that the recording infringed a copyright controlled by the music company. Under federal copyright law, a mere allegation of copyright infringement can result in the removal of content from the Internet.

"I was really surprised and angry when I learned my video was removed," said Lenz. "Universal should not be using legal threats to try to prevent people from sharing home videos of their kids with family and friends."

"Universal's takedown notice doesn't even pass the laugh test," said EFF Staff Attorney Corynne McSherry. "Copyright holders should be held accountable when they undermine non-infringing, fair uses like this video."

Last May, UMPG's parent company, Universal Music Group, sent a baseless copyright takedown demand to YouTube for a video podcast by political blogger Michelle Malkin. That video was quickly reposted after Malkin fought back.

"Copyright abuse can shut down online artists, political analysts, or -- as in this case -- ordinary families who simply want to share snippets of their day-to-day lives," said EFF Staff Attorney Marcia Hofmann. "Universal must stop making groundless infringement claims that trample on fair use and free speech."

The lawsuit asks for a declaratory judgment that Lenz's home video does not infringe any Universal copyright, as well as damages and injunctive relief restraining Universal from bringing further copyright claims in connection with the video.

This lawsuit is part of EFF's ongoing work to protect online free speech in the face of bogus copyright claims. EFF is currently working with Stanford's Fair Use Project to develop a set of "best practices" for proper takedowns under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

For the video (since reposted):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1KfJHFWlhQ

For the full complaint:
http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/lenz_v_universal/lenz_complaint_final.pdf

For more on DMCA abuse and free speech:
http://www.eff.org/IP/freespeech/

Contacts:

Corynne McSherry
Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
corynne@eff.org

Marcia Hofmann
Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
marcia@eff.org

Jason Schultz
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
jason@eff.org

Justice Department Withholds Records on Electronic Surveillance

Washington, D.C. - On Thursday, July 26, at 11 a.m., the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) will argue for the release of court orders that supposedly authorize the government's highly controversial electronic domestic surveillance program that intercepts and analyzes millions of Americans' communications.

The White House first acknowledged the surveillance program's existence in 2005, claiming that it could be conducted without warrants or judicial authorization of any kind. But in January of this year, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales announced that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) had authorized collection of some communications and that the surveillance program would now operate under its approval. EFF filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with Department of Justice (DOJ) for the FISC orders and other records concerning the purported changes in the program, but when the DOJ did not comply, EFF filed suit in federal court.

Thursday's hearing, before Chief Judge Thomas F. Hogan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, will include oral arguments from both EFF and the DOJ.

WHAT:
EFF v. Department of Justice

WHEN:
11 a.m.
Thursday, July 26

WHERE:
United States District Court for the District of Columbia
Courtroom 25A
333 Constitution Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20001

For more on EFF's lawsuit:
http://www.eff.org/flag/07403TFH

Contact:

David Sobel
Senior Counsel
Electronic Frontier Foundation
sobel@eff.org

EFF Urges Appeals Court to Protect Innovation

San Francisco - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has filed a brief urging the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider a recent ruling that endangers features like search customization and user feedback on interactive web services.

The ruling came in a housing discrimination lawsuit against Roommate.com, which runs Internet forum where users can search for potential roommates. A three-judge panel held that Roommate.com could be held liable for the activity of its users because it "suggested, encouraged, or solicited" and then sorted and categorized content that may have violated fair housing law. But this reasoning threatens both current and future Internet innovators with potentially insurmountable liability problems -- impacting everything from search engine functionality to the ability to tag content on media sharing sites such as YouTube and Flickr -- and is directly contrary to federal law. As EFF argued Friday in its amicus brief in support of appeal, Roommate.com is immune to liability for its users' activities under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which specifically protects hosts of interactive computer services.

"Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act was passed specifically to help the Internet continue to grow without being tied down by regulation," said EFF Staff Attorney Matt Zimmerman. "If service providers have to worry about potentially crushing liability, it will strongly discourage the development of new tools for online users. In fact, many of the tools we use already would be impacted by this ruling, potentially crippling innovations in search and customization."

Search engines, for example, are designed to categorize and sort content, features potentially at risk under the Ninth Circuit's ruling. Sites that solicit user feedback and opinions and allow searching by user ranking could also run afoul of the new ruling.

"Courts across the country have recognized the critical role that Section 230 plays in Internet innovation," said Zimmerman. "The 9th Circuit should take this appeal and clarify that its strong protections remain in full force."

For the full amicus brief:
http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/roomate.com/EFFroommateamicus.pdf

For more on this case:
http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/roommate.com

Contact:

Matt Zimmerman
Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
mattz@eff.org

Friday Hearing to Finalize Sanctions, Revote in Contested Election

Oakland, Calif. - On Friday, July 13, at 9:30 a.m., a California judge will rule on sanctions against Alameda County for botching its response to a contested race conducted on Diebold electronic voting machines. In a tentative ruling issued Thursday, Judge Winifred Y. Smith said that the election results in the race were "nullified" and ordered a revote.

Americans for Safe Access and voters in the city of Berkeley brought a legal challenge seeking a recount after Measure R, an initiative addressing the operation of medical marijuana dispensaries, lost by fewer than 200 votes in the 2004 election. While the lawsuit was ongoing, election officials returned the voting machines to supplier Diebold Election Systems, and 96% of the election data was destroyed. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) helped analyze the remaining data, but too many questions remained.

"Without examining the redundant data, audit logs, and chain-of-custody records, no one can confirm whether any of the reported malfunctions were ever resolved or whether vote data was manipulated or lost," said EFF Staff Attorney Matt Zimmerman. "As a result, no one can ever confirm whether the vote result announced by the county was correct."

Smith's tentative ruling orders the county to place Measure R on the ballot in the next general election, as well as to pay the costs for the incomplete recount. That ruling is likely to be finalized after Friday's hearing.

What:
Americans for Safe Access vs. County of Alameda

When:
9:30 a.m.
Friday, July 13, 2007

Where:
Wiley Manuel Courthouse
Department 114
661 Washington Street
Oakland, CA

Contacts:

Matt Zimmerman
Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
mattz@eff.org

Gregory G. Luke
Attorney
Strumwasser & Woocher LLP
gluke@strumwooch.com

Rebecca Saltzman
Chief of Staff
Americans for Safe Access
rebecca@safeaccessnow.org

Caleb Dardick
CDA Strategies
caleb@cdastrategies.com

EFF Lawsuit Uncovers History of Surveillance Mistakes

Washington, D.C. - Documents obtained by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) show years of chronic problems with the Federal Bureau of Investigation's use of National Security Letters (NSLs) to collect Americans' personal information and that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has long been aware of these problems.

The documents were disclosed after EFF sued the government under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) earlier this year for records related to a scathing Justice Department critique of FBI NSL activity. The records detail more than 40 instances of improper, unauthorized collection of information about individuals, including unlawful access to phone records and email. The records show that Gonzales himself was sent several of these problem reports, including one less than a week before he told a congressional committee that no civil liberties abuses have resulted from the USA PATRIOT Act. He also voiced surprise when the Justice Department report on NSL misuse was made public earlier this year.

"These chronic privacy problems have long been known within the Justice Department but still were kept secret from those who really needed to know -- members of the American public, including those who were surveilled," said EFF Staff Attorney Marcia Hofmann. "The FBI can't be trusted to police its own agents. It's time for Congress to provide oversight to protect American citizens."

The FBI's use of NSLs was expanded under the USA PATRIOT Act in 2001, allowing federal agents to gather private records about anyone's domestic phone calls, emails, and financial transactions without any court approval -- as long as an FBI agent claims that the information could be related to a terrorism or espionage investigation. EFF submitted a FOIA request about the reported misuse of NSLs in March, and when no documents were forthcoming, EFF sued the FBI for their immediate release. Last month, a judge held that the FBI was required to release records related to the inspector general's report beginning on July 5, with more documents to be disclosed every 30 days. In all, 1138 pages of NSL records were released to EFF late last week in the first batch of documents complying with the court's order.

"This is by no means the whole story on NSL abuse," said EFF Senior Counsel David Sobel. "We're looking forward to receiving the rest of the documents. Americans deserve the whole story on the FBI's deeply flawed program to issue NSLs."

For the complete FBI documents and more analysis:
http://www.eff.org/flag/07656JDB/

Contacts:

Marcia Hofmann
Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
marcia@eff.org

David Sobel
Senior Counsel
Electronic Frontier Foundation
sobel@eff.org

Rebecca Jeschke
Media Coordinator
Electronic Frontier Foundation
press@eff.org

Innocent Target of File-Sharing Lawsuit Racked Up Legal Fees Fighting Baseless Charges

Seattle - The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) should pay for a single mom's two-year legal ordeal fighting a baseless file-sharing lawsuit, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) told Washington state court in an amicus brief filed Thursday.

The nightmare began for Dawnell Leadbetter in January of 2005, when she received a letter from the RIAA that accused her of illegally downloading copyrighted music and claiming she owed hundreds of thousands of dollars. Leadbetter contacted the RIAA to deny the baseless claims, and refused to pay any settlement monies. In response, the RIAA sued Leadbetter, and Leadbetter hired an attorney to fight the charges. After months of legal wrangling, the RIAA finally dropped the case in December of 2006. But in the meantime, Leadbetter had incurred significant attorney's fees.

"Ms. Leadbetter isn't the only innocent Internet user that has been ensnared by the RIAA's litigation dragnet. But she is one of the few who have fought back, resisting RIAA pressure to pay settlement monies for something she did not do," said EFF Staff Attorney Jason Schultz. "The RIAA's settlement offers are usually less that what it would cost to defend yourself, so it's a big commitment to hire a lawyer to clear your name. Reimbursing Ms. Leadbetter's attorney's fees could encourage other innocent lawsuit targets to stand up for themselves."

Since 2003, the RIAA has sued over 20,000 people for allegedly sharing music over the Internet. The industry uses questionable investigative methods tactics to find its targets, and then often employs erroneous legal theories in its quest for settlement monies. In Ms. Leadbetter's case, the suit against her included accusations of "secondary liability" -- putting her on the hook for anything that happened on her Internet account, whether she knew about it or not.

"The RIAA knows that this legal theory is wrong. But if innocent victims are too scared to hire an attorney and fight back, the public could suffer under the misconception that these bogus theories are legitimate," Schultz said. "Awarding attorney's fees to Ms. Leadbetter helps protect everyone's rights under copyright law."

The amicus brief was filed in U.S. District Court in Seattle in conjunction with attorney Derek Newman of Newman & Newman LLP.

For the full amicus brief:
http://eff.org/legal/cases/interscope_v_leadbetter

For more on the RIAA lawsuit campaign:
http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/?f=riaa-v-thepeople.html

Contact:

Jason Schultz
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
jason@eff.org

Public Interest Groups Urge Court to Block Radical Expansion of Discovery Rules

San Francisco - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) urged a California court Friday to overturn a dangerous ruling that would require an Internet search engine to create and store logs of its users' activities as part of electronic discovery obligations in a civil lawsuit.

The ruling came in a copyright infringement lawsuit filed by motion picture studios against TorrentSpy, a popular search engine that indexes materials made publicly available via the Bit Torrent file sharing protocol. TorrentSpy has never logged its visitors' Internet Protocol (IP) addresses. Notwithstanding this explicit privacy policy, a federal magistrate judge has now ordered TorrentSpy to activate logging and turn the logged data over to the studios.

"This unprecedented ruling has implications well beyond the file sharing context," said EFF Staff Attorney Corynne McSherry. "Giving litigants the power to rewrite their opponent's privacy policies poses a risk to all Internet users."

The magistrate judge incorrectly reasoned that, because the IP addresses exist in the Random Access Memory (RAM) of TorrentSpy's webservers, they are "electronically stored information" that must be collected and turned over to the studios under the rules of federal discovery.

This decision could reach every function carried out by a digital device. Every keystroke at a computer keyboard, for example, is temporarily held in RAM, even if it is immediately deleted and never saved. Similarly, digital telephone systems make recordings of every conversation, moment by moment, in RAM.

"In the analog world, a court would never think to force a company to record telephone calls, transcribe employee conversations, or log other ephemeral information," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Fred von Lohmann. "There is no reason why the rules should be different simply because a company uses digital technologies."

The decision also threatens to radically increase the burdens that companies face in federal lawsuits, potentially forcing them to create and store an avalanche of data, including computer server logs, digital telephone conversations, and drafts of documents never saved or sent.

The magistrate judge in the case has stayed her order while TorrentSpy appeals the ruling. The case is Columbia Pictures Industries v. Bunnell, No. 06-01093 FMC, pending in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California before Judge Florence-Marie Cooper.

For the full amicus brief:
http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/torrentspy/EFF_CDT_amicus.pdf

Contacts:

Corynne McSherry
Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
corynne@eff.org

Fred von Lohmann
Senior Intellectual Property Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
fred@eff.org

Vote to Authorize Subpoenas Sets Stage for Showdown Over Illegal Surveillance

San Francisco - The Senate Judiciary Committee voted today to authorize subpoenas related to the National Security Agency (NSA)'s domestic spying program, setting the stage for a Congressional showdown over the surveillance of millions of ordinary Americans. The subpoenas demand certain legal documents that the Administration has withheld despite Congress' repeated requests.

"This subpoena authorization is a critical first step toward uncovering the full extent of the NSA's illegal spying and the role that telecommunications companies like AT&T played in it," said EFF Staff Attorney Kevin Bankston. "Considering that it's been almost six years since the NSA started spying on Americans without warrants and over a year since that spying was revealed publicly, these subpoenas are long overdue. It's high time for Congress to get to the bottom of this mess."

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is suing AT&T for illegally assisting in the NSA spying. The government has asked the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to dismiss EFF's case, claiming that the lawsuit could expose state secrets.

"Our case against AT&T includes evidence from a former employee that points to a massive spying program impacting millions of people -- a program far broader than the government has admitted to," said Bankston. "Americans deserve to know the truth about the NSA program."

For more on the class-action lawsuit against AT&T:
http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/att/

Contacts:

Derek Slater
Acting Media Coordinator
Electronic Frontier Foundation
derek@eff.org