=======================================================================
                    E P I C   A l e r t
=======================================================================
Volume 20.22                                         November 15, 2013
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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

  
   http://www.epic.org/alert/epic_alert_20.22.html

            "Defend Privacy. Support EPIC."
                 http://epic.org/donate


=========================================================================
Table of Contents
=========================================================================

[1] Supreme Court to Consider EPIC Challenge to NSA Program 
[2] Oversight Board Adopts EPIC's Recommendations in New FOIA Rule
[3] EPIC FOIA Suit Uncovers Student Loan Debt Collector Practices 
[4] Supreme Court Lets Stand Contested Facebook Settlement
[5]
Privacy Groups to FTC: Investigate US Firms in NSA Surveillance
[6] News in Brief 
[7] EPIC in the News 
[8] EPIC Book Review: 'The
Circle'
[9] Upcoming Conferences and Events


TAKE ACTION:  Tell Facebook: "Stop Changing Our Privacy Settings!"
- READ about the
Changes:  http://epic.org/redirect/090313-facebook.html
- LEARN More about Facebook Privacy:  http://epic.org/privacy/facebook/
- SUPPORT EPIC:  http://www.epic.org/donate/



=========================================================================
[1] Supreme Court to Consider EPIC Challenge to NSA
Program 
=========================================================================

The US Supreme Court is scheduled to consider
EPIC's challenge to the 
NSA telephone record collection program at the Court's November 15 
conference. EPIC has asked the Court
to overturn a Foreign 
Intelligence Surveillance Court order compelling Verizon to produce all 
customer telephone records, including
domestic and local calls, to the 
NSA. EPIC's petition argues that this order clearly exceeded the 
authority granted by the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act. The 
petition was distributed to the Justices October 30, along with "friend 
of the court" briefs
by former Church Committee members and prominent 
scholars in information law, federal jurisdiction, and constitutional 
law, all
of whom urged the Supreme Court to grant EPIC's petition.

EPIC's petition argues that it is "simply not possible that every 
phone
record in the possession of a telecommunications firm could be 
relevant to an authorized investigation." According to EPIC, such
an 
interpretation would "render meaningless" the "relevance" limitation 
Congress added to Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act in
2006. Many 
members of Congress, including the original authors of the USA PATRIOT 
Act, agree that the government's interpretation
is contrary to 
legislative intent. The  "friend of the court" briefs in support of 
EPIC's case similarly argue that the government's
position undermines 
the purposes of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and threatens 
Fourth Amendment rights.

The US Solicitor
General's Office filed a brief in opposition to EPIC's 
petition on October 11, arguing that the Supreme Court lacks 
jurisdiction
to hear the case. EPIC's ensuing Reply brief maintained 
that the government "simply cannot be correct" that the order of the 
Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Court, an inferior court, is not 
reviewable by the Supreme Court. EPIC also stated that the order is 
clearly unlawful. "No court has ever determined that 'relevance' 
permits the compelled production of such vast quantities of irrelevant

personal information," EPIC said, noting that Representative James 
Sensenbrenner (R-WI), co-author of the USA PATRIOT Act, has
written, 
"This expansive characterization of relevance makes a mockery of the 
legal standard."

The Supreme Court will make an
initial decision on EPIC's petition on 
November 18. The Justices can vote to hear oral argument in the case, 
request additional
briefing from the parties, or relist the case for 
consideration at a future conference. 


US Supreme Court:  Docket Page for In
re EPIC
    http://epic.org/redirect/111513-scotus-docket-in-re-epic.html

EPIC:  In re EPIC Petition to US Supreme Court (Jul. 8, 2013)
   http://epic.org/EPIC-FISC-Mandamus-Petition.pdf

EPIC:  FISA Court Order to Verizon re: Telephone Records (Apr. 23, 2013)
   http://epic.org/privacy/nsa/Section-215-Order-to-Verizon.pdf

EPIC:  In re EPIC - NSA Telephone Records Surveillance
    http://epic.org/privacy/nsa/in-re-epic/

EPIC:  Reply Brief in In re EPIC (Oct. 28, 2013)
    http://epic.org/privacy/nsa/in-re-epic/13-58-EPIC-Reply.pdf

US Gov't:  Brief in Opposition to In re EPIC (Oct. 2013)
    https://epic.org/privacy/nsa/in-re-epic/13-58-SG-Brief.pdf  

Rep. Sensenbrenner (R-WI):  Letter to DoJ on Patriot Act (Sep. 6, 2013)
    http://epic.org/redirect/103113-sensenbrenner.html  

EPIC:  "Friend of the Court Brief" I in In re: EPIC (Aug. 9, 2013)
    http://www.law.indiana.edu/front/etc/section-215-amicus-8.pdf  

EPIC:  "Friend of the Court Brief" II in In re: EPIC (Aug. 12, 2013)
    http://epic.org/privacy/nsa/in-re-epic/Church-Committee-Amicus.pdf  

EPIC:  "Friend of the Court Brief" III in In re: EPIC (Aug. 12, 2013)
    http://epic.org/privacy/nsa/in-re-epic/Cato-Amicus.pdf  

EPIC:  "Friend of the Court Brief" IV in In re: EPIC (Aug. 2013)
    http://epic.org/redirect/103113-pfander-vladeck.html

 
========================================================================
[2] Oversight Board Adopts EPIC's Recommendations in
New FOIA Rule
========================================================================

In response to extensive comments submitted
by EPIC, the President's 
Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB) has issued a final 
rule that will govern the Board's
Freedom of Information Act, Privacy 
Act, and Sunshine Act practices. PCLOB is an independent agency created 
to analyze and review executive branch counter-terrorism
efforts for 
their impact on privacy and civil liberties. PCLOB was established by 
the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention
Act of 2004 at the 
recommendation of the 9/11 Commission Report. 

The initial draft of the Board's rule allowed PCLOB to encourage
other 
agencies to classify information, reserved the Board's right to 
terminate public participation in Board meetings "at any
time for any 
reason," and contained vague, broad definitions that would permit the 
oversight agency to withhold information and
delay document production.

EPIC's comments to the Board provided a number of recommendations for 
achieving better transparency.
These recommendations included narrowing 
the Board's definition of "confidential business information" and 
"unusual circumstances";
limiting the Board's broad language describing 
FOIA exemption (b)(5) to make it consistent with the (b)(5) exemption 
language in
the Freedom of Information Act; and employing more explicit 
language explaining the administrative appeals process. The Board 
adopted nearly all of EPIC's proposed
changes. EPIC's comments also 
encouraged PCLOB to set a better example for other government agencies 
involved in government information
practices. Overall, EPIC concluded, 
"EPIC recommends that the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board 
revise the proposed regulations,
remove the new barriers to access to 
government information, and incorporate new procedures that ease, not 
burden, the public's
efforts to learn about the activities of its 
government."

EPIC routinely comments on agency proposals that impact the rights of

FOIA requesters. For example, EPIC has submitted extensive comments to 
the Defense Logistics Agency of the Department of Defense,
warning the 
agency not to erect new obstacles for to those seeking DIA documents 
via the Freedom of Information Act.


PCLOB:  Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (May 15, 2013)
    http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-05-15/pdf/2013-11333.pdf

PCLOB:  Final Rule (Nov. 8, 2013)
    http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-11-08/pdf/2013-26373.pdf

EPIC:  Comments on PCLOB on Transparency (Jul. 15, 2013)
    http://epic.org/open_gov/EPIC-PCLOB-FOIA.pdf

Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB)
    http://www.pclob.gov/

EPIC:  EPIC Administrative Procedure Act (APA) Comments
    http://epic.org/apa/comments/

EPIC:  Open Government
    http://epic.org/open_gov/


=========================================================================
[3] EPIC FOIA Suit Uncovers Student Loan Debt Collector
Practices 
=========================================================================

Pursuant to a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the US 
Education Department, EPIC has obtained documents revealing that many 
private debt-collection agencies maintain
incomplete and insufficient 
quality control reports on delinquent student loans. As government 
contractors, debt collectors are
required by federal law to abide by 
the Privacy Act of 1974, a federal law that protects personal 
information. The Education Department
also requires student-debt 
collectors to submit quality control reports indicating whether the 
companies maintain accurate student
loan information. 

According to EPIC's lawsuit, the Education Department contracts with at 
least 23 private debt-collection agencies
that obtain sensitive 
personal information from students, including contact information, loan 
status, income, Social Security number,
and credit history.  EPIC's 
complaint states that in 2011, the Education Department held $355 
million worth of contracts with private
debt collectors. That same 
year, "the Department received 1,406 complaints about private debt 
collectors, a 41% increase from the
previous year," and that many of 
those complaints "concern[ed] invasive and harassing communications."

The FOIA documents obtained
by EPIC reveal that many companies conceal 
possible Privacy Act violations by providing small sample sizes in 
their quality control
reports. The documents also show that many 
companies do not submit required information about Privacy Act 
compliance to the Education
Department. EPIC has recently settled the 
case and obtained attorneys fees for making this information available 
to the public.


EPIC maintains one of the leading student privacy projects in the 
country. Earlier in 2013, in a letter to the US Senate and House

Committees on Education, EPIC asked Congress to restore privacy 
protections for student data. "Students and families are losing

control over sensitive information," EPIC wrote, "and private companies 
are becoming the repositories of student data and even
the data 
maintained by the schools is far more extensive than ever before." 
EPIC has also testified before the Colorado State Board
of Education 
on privacy issues concerning inBloom and other companies that acquire 
student information.


EPIC:  EPIC v. ED - Private
Debt Collector Privacy Act Compliance
    http://epic.org/foia/ed/default.html

EPIC:  Windham Professionals Quality Control Reports (2010-2013)
    http://epic.org/foia/ed/Windham.pdf

EPIC:  ConServe Quality Control Reports (Apr. 2010 - Mar. 2013)
    http://epic.org/foia/ed/ConServe.pdf

EPIC:  Coast Quality Control Reports (Apr. 2010 - July 2011)
    http://epic.org/foia/ed/Coast.pdf

EPIC:  Initial FOIA Request to ED re: Debt Collection (Sept. 20, 2012)
    http://epic.org/privacy/student/EPIC-ED-FOIA-Request.pdf

EPIC:  Letter to Senate and House Ed. Committees on (Oct. 9, 2013)
    http://epic.org/apa/ferpa/EPIC-ED-Student-Privacy-Letter.pdf

EPIC:  Testimony and Statement for the Record Re: inBloom (May 16, 2013)
    http://epic.org/privacy/student/EPIC-Stmnt-CO-Study-5-13.pdf

EPIC:  Student Privacy
    http://epic.org/privacy/student/


=========================================================================
[4] Supreme Court Lets Stand Contested Facebook Settlement
=========================================================================

The US Supreme Court has declined to hear the case Marek
v. Lane, a 
9th Circuit decision on Facebook's "Beacon" settlement. Facebook's 
Beacon advertising system, first launched in 2007,
broadcast a Facebook 
user's interaction with third-party web sites to the user's friend list 
without affirmative consent. 

A putative
class action lawsuit was settled with Facebook for $9.5 
million, but other than modest payments to the named class members, 
there
were no payments to the members of the class. Rather, under the 
doctrine of cy pres ("as near as possible") Facebook proposed funding
a 
new charitable organization that would support organizations supporting 
online privacy, but have a Facebook representative be
one of the three 
controlling Board members. The plaintiffs in the case appealed to the 
9th circuit, and then to the Supreme Court.

Chief Justice John Roberts, focusing on the "unusual" allocation of 
funds in the Beacon case, suggested that the Supreme Court
would 
eventually need to address "fundamental concerns surrounding the use of 
such remedies in class action litigation" including
"how to assess its 
fairness as a general matter . . . [and] how closely the goals of any 
enlisted organization must correspond
to the interests of the class." 
Chief Justice Roberts also noted, "In a suitable case, this Court may 
need to clarify the limits
on the use of such remedies."

EPIC expressed similar concerns about the Facebook Beacon settlement in 
2010. In a letter to the
presiding judge, EPIC argued that the proposed 
"Digital Trust Foundation" would not have been "sufficiently independent 
of Facebook
to serve as an effective tool for consumer privacy 
protection." EPIC argued that cy pres settlements should provide funds 
directly
to non-profit organizations working directly on behalf of the 
class or a "neutral, third-party trustee" should distribute the funds.



US Supreme Court:  Decision Not to Hear Marek v. Lane (Nov. 4, 2013)
    http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/110413zor_bj37.pdf

EPIC:  Letter to 9th Circuit re: Beacon Settlement (Jan. 15, 2010)
    http://epic.org/privacy/facebook/EPIC_Beacon_Letter.pdf 

Facebook:  Beacon Program
    https://www.facebook.com/business/?beacon
 
EPIC:  Letter to 9th Circuit in Fraley v. Facebook (Jul. 12, 2013)
    http://epic.org/redirect/111513-epic-court-letter-fraley.html

EPIC:  Letter to Court re: In re Google Referrer Header (Aug. 22, 2013)
    http://epic.org/redirect/111513-epic-court-letter-referrer.html

EPIC:  In re Google Buzz
    http://epic.org/privacy/ftc/googlebuzz/default.html

EPIC:  Facebook Privacy
    http://epic.org/privacy/facebook/


========================================================================
[5] Privacy Groups to FTC: Investigate US Firms in NSA
Surveillance
========================================================================

Consumer privacy organizations in the US,
including EPIC, have asked 
the Federal Trade Commission to determine whether US companies have 
turned over private customer data
to the National Security Agency. 
"We urge you to open an investigation to determine whether any 
failure by these companies to comply
with the Commission's orders 
may have contributed to the improper disclosure of customer data," 
the groups wrote.

The organizations,
which have brought numerous privacy complaints to 
the FTC, stated that the disclosure of user data "directly implicates 
the jurisdiction
of the Federal Trade Commission." The letter 
references recent disclosures showing that the NSA attacked servers at 
Google and
Yahoo and obtained the personal information of millions of 
consumers. 

Many of the companies involved in disclosing data to the
NSA are also 
bound by the terms of previous consent orders with the Commission 
requiring "comprehensive privacy programs." Similarly,
most of these 
companies are subject to Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 
which prohibits "unfair and deceptive" trade
practices and which has 
been used to protect consumer privacy. According to the organizations, 
"it is inconceivable that when faced
with the most significant breach 
of consumer data in U.S. history, the Commission could ignore the 
consequences for consumer privacy."

EPIC previously wrote to the Federal Communications Commission 
regarding the unlawful provision of call detail records to the NSA.

EPIC urged the agency to determine whether Verizon violated the 
Communications Act when it released the call metadata. "Verizon's

disclosure of [call metadata] to the NSA was not authorized under the 
Telecommunications Act because it did not fall under any
of the Act's 
permissible disclosures. Verizon customers did not authorize these 
disclosures," EPIC's letter stated. The letter
also referred the FCC to 
EPIC's June 2013 letter to Congress, detailing the illegality of the 
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
Court order that presumably formed 
the basis for Verizon's disclosures.

EPIC has filed a petition with the US Supreme Court, asking
the Court 
to vacate an unlawful order by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance 
Court that enables the NSA's collection of all domestic
phone records. 
The government has argued that the Supreme Court lacks the power to 
hear the case. EPIC has responded to the US
government's brief, arguing 
that it "simply cannot be correct" that the order of the Foreign 
Intelligence Surveillance Court, an
inferior court, is not reviewable 
by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is scheduled to consider 
EPIC's challenge to the NSA
telephone record collection program at 
conference November 15.


EPIC et al.: Letter to FTC re: NSA (Nov. 13, 2013)
    https://epic.org/privacy/nsa/Priv-Grps-to-FTC-re-NSA.pdf

FTC:  Facebook Settlement (Nov. 29, 2013)
   http://ftc.gov/opa/2011/11/privacysettlement.shtm
 
FTC:  Google Buzz Settlement (Mar. 30, 2011)
    http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2011/03/google.shtm

EPIC:  Letter to FCC re: Verizon Order (Jun. 11, 2013)
    https://epic.org/privacy/terrorism/fisa/EPIC-FCC-re-Verizon.pdf

EPIC:  Petition to US Supreme Court re: Verizon Order (Jul. 8, 2013)
    https://epic.org/EPIC-FISC-Mandamus-Petition.pdf

EPIC:  In re EPIC 
    https://epic.org/privacy/nsa/in-re-epic/

========================================================================
[6] News in Brief
========================================================================

EPIC Prevails in "Internet Kill Switch" FOIA Case  

In a Freedom of Information Act case brought by EPIC against the 
Department of Homeland Security, a federal court has ruled that DHS 
may not withhold the agency's
plan to deactivate wireless 
communications networks in a crisis. EPIC had sought "Standard 
Operating Procedure 303," also known
as the "Internet Kill Switch," 
to determine whether the agency's plan could adversely impact free 
speech or public safety. EPIC
filed the FOIA lawsuit in 2012 after 
the the technique was used by police in San Francisco to shut down 
cell service for protesters
at a BART station, who had gathered
peacefully to object to police practices. The federal court 
determined that DHS wrongly claimed
that it could withhold SOP 303 
as a "technique for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions." 
The phrase, the court explained,
"refers only to acts by law 
enforcement after or during the prevention of a crime, not crime 
prevention techniques." The court
repeatedly emphasized that FOIA 
exemptions are to be read narrowly. 


US District Court, DC:  Opinion in EPIC v. DHS (Nov. 12,
2013)
    http://epic.org/foia/EPICvDHS-SOP303-Opinion.pdf

EPIC:  EPIC v. DHS - SOP 303
    http://epic.org/foia/epic_v_dhs_-_sop_303.html

EPIC:  FOIA
    http://epic.org/privacy/litigation/



EPIC Obtains Information on Government-Corporate Cyber Practices

As a result of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the 
Department of Homeland Security, EPIC has obtained documents revealing 
that the Department of Defense required
companies to disclose 
information about Internet traffic on private networks. These documents 
contradict Homeland Security's assertions
that companies participating 
in a DOD pilot project would not be compelled to transmit information 
to federal agencies. The documents
obtained by EPIC under the FOIA also 
indicate that the National Security Agency, a branch of the Department 
of Defense, is engaging
in offensive cybersecurity measures. In a 2012 
statement to the US Senate Judiciary Committee, EPIC warned that the 
National Security
Agency has become a "black box" for public 
information about cybersecurity. 


EPIC:  EPIC v. DHS - Defense Contractor Monitoring
    http://epic.org/foia/dhs/defense-monitoring.html

EPIC:   List of FOIA Documents in Defense Contractor Monitoring Case 
    http://epic.org/foia/dhs/defense-monitoring.html#documents

EPIC:  FOIA Document on Defense Contractor Monitoring (2007)
    http://epic.org/redirect/111513-epic-FOIA-letter-2007.html

DHS:  Privacy Impact Assessment on JCSP (Jan. 13, 2012)
    http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/privacy/privacy_nppd_jcsp_pia.pdf

EPIC:  Statement to US Senate Judiciary Committee re: NSA (Mar. 12, 2012)
    http://epic.org/redirect/111513-epic-statement-cyber.html



Leahy, Sensenbrenner Introduce USA FREEDOM Act

Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Chair of the US Senate Judiciary 
Committee, and
Representative Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI), an author of 
the USA PATRIOT Act, have introduced the USA FREEDOM Act, which would 
reform
the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and limit NSA 
surveillance activities. A bi-partisan coalition, including 17 US 
senators
and 70 members of Congress, have joined as original co-
sponsors. Key provisions of the FREEDOM Act increase transparency of 
intelligence
activities, prevent end-runs around the FISA Court, and 
improve public reporting. In 2012 EPIC testified before the House 
Judiciary
Committee about the need to reform FISA and to improve 
oversight of the FISA court. The FREEDOM Act also ends the NSA's 
controversial
bulk phone records collection program. EPIC has brought a 
challenge in the US Supreme Court to the phone records program, 
explaining
that it is unlawful under current law. 


Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI):  Text of USA FREEDOM Act (Oct. 29, 2013)
    http://sensenbrenner.house.gov/uploadedfiles/usafreedomact.pdf

US House:  Judiciary Committee Hearing on FISA (May 31, 2012)
    http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/printers/112th/112-129_74415.PDF

EPIC:  NSA Order to Verizon re: Telephone Metadata (Apr. 23, 2013)
    http://epic.org/privacy/nsa/Section-215-Order-to-Verizon.pdf

EPIC:  Petition to US Supreme Court re: NSA Verizon Order (Jul. 8, 2013)
    http://epic.org/EPIC-FISC-Mandamus-Petition.pdf

EPIC:  In re EPIC - NSA Telephone Records Surveillance
    http://epic.org/privacy/nsa/in-re-epic/

EPIC:  Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)
    http://epic.org/privacy/terrorism/fisa/



FAA Releases Drone Roadmap; Privacy Not Required for Test Sites

The Federal Aviation Administration has announced a "roadmap"
for 
the integration of drones into domestic airspace. After considering 
numerous public comments on the privacy impact of aerial
drones, the 
FAA proposed a regulation that requires test site operators to develop 
privacy policies but does not require any specific
baseline privacy 
protections. The FAA rulemaking came about in response to an extensive 
petition submitted by EPIC, broadly supported
by civil liberties 
organizations and the general public. In comments to the FAA, EPIC also 
urged the agency to require adherence
to the Fair Information 
Practices, disclosure of data collection and minimization practices, 
and independent audits. 


FAA:  Press
Release on Drone "Integration Roadmap"  (Nov. 7, 2013)
    http://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=15334

FAA:  Text of Drone "Integration Roadmap" (Nov. 7, 2013)
    http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/uas/media/UAS_Roadmap_2013.pdf

FAA:  Drone Privacy Regulation (Nov. 7, 2013)
     http://epic.org/redirect/111513-faa-drone-privacy.html

EPIC:  Petition to FAA re: Drone Privacy (Mar. 8, 2012)
    http://epic.org/privacy/drones/FAA-553e-Petition-03-08-12.pdf

EPIC:  Comments to FAA re: Drone Privacy (Apr. 23, 2013)
    http://epic.org/apa/comments/EPIC-Drones-Comments-2013.pdf

EPIC:  Domestic Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) and Drones
    http://epic.org/privacy/drones/

========================================================================
[7] EPIC in the News
========================================================================

"Meet the Punk Rocker Who Can Liberate Your FBI File." Mother Jones,
Nov. 13, 2013.
    http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/11/foia-ryan-shapiro-fbi-
    files-lawsuit

"The private information Facebook now makes public." CNET, Nov. 12, 
2013.
    http://howto.cnet.com/8301-11310_39-57612001-285/the-private-
    information-facebook-now-makes-public/

"San Diego quietly slips facial recognition into the hands of law 
enforcers." Naked Security, Nov. 12, 2013.
    http://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2013/11/12/san-diego-quietly-
    slips-facial-recognition-into-the-hands-of-law-enforcers/
    
"Judge: Show me Obama foreign aid order." Politico, Nov. 11, 2013.
    http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2013/11/judge-show-
    me-obama-foreign-aid-order-177173.html

"White House considers civilian for NSA chief." The Hill, Nov. 9, 2013.
    http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/189773-white-
    house-considers-civilian-for-nsa-chief
    
"FAA to Map Out Drone Rules." The Wall Street Journal, Nov. 6, 2013.
    http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/
    SB10001424052702304672404579182231865599284
    
"Senator Pushes for Protection From Drones' Prying Eyes." NextGov,
Nov. 6, 2013.
    http://www.nextgov.com/defense/2013/11/senator-pushes-protection-
    drones-prying-eyes/73340/?oref=ng-dropdown

Letter to the Editor: "Protecting Data Privacy" by EPIC President Marc
Rotenberg. The New York Times, Nov. 5, 2013.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/06/opinion/protecting-data-privacy.
    html?_r=1&
    
"NSA Files: Decoded." The Guardian, Nov. 1, 2013.
    http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/nov/01/snowden-
    nsa-files-surveillance-revelations-decoded#section/1
    
    
For More EPIC in the News: http://epic.org/news/epic_in_news.html

========================================================================
[8] EPIC Book Review: 'The Circle'
========================================================================


"The Circle," Dave Eggers

http://epic.org/redirect/111513-the-circle-eggers.html


Author Dave Eggers' new novel, "The Circle," raises a host of issues 
about privacy, transparency, and human interaction that parallels
our 
own current and growing struggle between the promise of technology, 
big data, and greater transparency, and the importance
of privacy and 
personal human interaction. 

The novel takes place at "the Circle," now the world's leading Internet 
company. Thanks
to the Circle, all Internet users now have a single, 
verified login called TruYou by which all Internet activity is 
conducted transparently,
in your own name.

Protagonist Mae Holland is hired to work at the Circle after her friend 
and Circle all-star employee, Annie,
refers her for a job. The novel 
opens with Mae's first day at the Circle, including her tour of the 
Circle campus, replete with
the many perks so often associated with 
Silicon Valley companies. Somehow the tour guide seems to already know 
almost everything
about Mae, foreshadowing Mae's trajectory within the 
company and the ambitions of the Circle itself.

Mae completely embraces the
culture of the Circle--one of "passion, 
participation and transparency" as it is described by a Circle 
employee - and not unlike
today's Silicon Valley companies. As the 
leading social networking company, the Circle expects employees to 
fully incorporate constant
online social interaction, seemingly to the 
detriment of genuine human interaction.

The novel's rapid scene changes move the narrative
at an ever-
quickening pace. The fast pacing is paralleled by Mae's quick ascent 
within the company, culminating in her position
as an ambassador for 
the Circle's new "transparency" venture. Mae must wear a small device 
around her neck that provides a live
video and sound feed of every 
waking moment, to be followed by anyone in the world. "Going 
transparent," as it called, is the next
big thing the Circle expects 
everyone to eventually adopt.

With the focus on the amazing positives of "going transparent" and 
other Circle ventures, very few people within the novel to stop to 
think if society should do this. Only a mysterious Circle employee

named Kalden and Mae's boyfriend, Mercer, provide any warnings about 
the ramifications of the Circle's path for society.

There
are few dissenters against the Circle's creation of a surveillance 
society in the name of doing good. Of course, that may be the
point -- 
the allure of technology and its promises of a better world cause us to 
unwittingly trade away our privacy.

--Jeramie
D. Scott


==========================================
EPIC Bookstore
===========================================

"Litigation Under
the Federal Open Government Laws 2010," edited by
Harry A. Hammitt, Marc Rotenberg, John A. Verdi, Ginger McCall, and Mark
S. Zaid
(EPIC 2010). Price: $75.

http://epic.org/bookstore/foia2010/

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 President Obama's
2009 memo on Open Government, Attorney General Holder's
March 2009 memo
on FOIA Guidance, and the new executive order on declassification. The
standard reference work includes in-depth
analysis of litigation under:
the Freedom of Information Act, the Privacy Act, the Federal Advisory
Committee Act, and the Government in the Sunshine Act. The fully updated
2010 volume is the
25th 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.

http://www.epic.org/redirect/aspen_ipl_casebook.html

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.

http://www.epic.org/bookstore/pvsourcebook

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:
$40.

http://www.epic.org/bookstore/pls2004/

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
CAN-SPAM Act.

================================

"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.

================================

EPIC publications and other books on privacy, open government, free
expression, and constitutional values 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:
http://mailman.epic.org/mailman/listinfo/foia_notes

=======================================================================
[9] Upcoming Conferences and Events
=======================================================================

"Drones Around the Globe: Proliferation and Resistance." Speaker: EPIC
Domestic Surveillance Counsel Amie Stepanovich. Washington,
DC, 16-17
November 2013. For More Information:
http://www.codepink4peace.org/article.php?id=6457#sthash.N3ToqKjw.dpuf.

Georgetown University Law Center Presents "Surveillance and Foreign 
Intelligence Gathering in the United States: The Current State
of 
Play." Speaker: Marc Rotenberg, EPIC Executive Director. Washington,
DC, 19 November 2013. For More Information:
https://schedule.law.georgetown.edu/MasterCalendar/EventDetails.aspx?
data=hHr80o3M7J4cNBdzLmXhMPSk4uMhML0Ge4MQOWooxoMG7fBoD9vseXpXU40kWQ8f

=======================================================================
Join EPIC on Facebook and Twitter
=======================================================================

Join the Electronic Privacy Information Center on Facebook and Twitter:

http://facebook.com/epicprivacy

http://epic.org/facebook

http://twitter.com/epicprivacy

Join us on Twitter for #privchat, Tuesdays, 11:00am ET.

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
information."

=======================================================================
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:

http://www.epic.org/donate

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 and private-sector
infringement on constitutional values.

Thank you for your support.

=======================================================================
Subscription Information
=======================================================================

Subscribe/unsubscribe via web interface:
http://mailman.epic.org/mailman/listinfo/epic_news

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 20.22------------------------