Viacom Makes Its Case Against Yesterday's YouTube: Via EFF.org Updates.

Today, after three years of litigation, the Viacom v. YouTube combatants finally publicly released their briefs (Viacom's; YouTube's; Class Action Plaintiffs') in what most expect to be the main event in the case, namely, cross-motions for summary judgment (for the non-lawyers: a summary judgment motion asks the court to rule that the case is such a slam dunk in your favor that no trial is necessary).

One surprise from Viacom is a concession that it basically has no beef with YouTube as it has been run since May 2008: "[W]e do not ask the Court to address potential liability for post-May 2008 infringement in this motion and, if Viacom's summary judgment motion is granted, do not intend to do so at trial." What happened in May 2008? That would be when YouTube launched its Content ID system, enabling copyright owners to "claim" their content and decide whether it will be blocked or monetized on YouTube.

In other words, this case isn't really about YouTube (at least YouTube circa 2010). It's about Viacom's effort to get the court to re-write the DMCA safe harbors to require everyone else to implement (and pay for) copyright filtering. If Viacom succeeds, it would radically change the innovation environment for all Internet companies that depend on the DMCA safe harbors.

Why are the DMCA safe harbors so important? YouTube says it best: [ Read more ... ]

Court: State Can Dump Non-Sex Offenders Into Registry: Via Threat Level.

Georgia’s Supreme Court is upholding the government’s right to put non-sex offenders on the state’s sex offender registry, highlighting a little-noticed but growing practice nationwide.

Atlanta criminal defense attorney Ann Marie Fitz estimated that perhaps thousands of convicts convicted of non-sexual crimes have been placed in sex-offender databases. Fitz represents a convict who was charged with false imprisonment when he was 18 for briefly detaining a 17-year-old girl during a soured drug deal. He unsuccessfully challenged his mandatory, lifelong sex-offender listing to the Georgia Supreme Court, which ruled against him Monday.

Under the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2007, the states are required to have statutes demanding sex-offender registration for those convicted of kidnapping or falsely imprisoning minors. The Georgia court ruled that the plain meaning of “sex offender” was overridden by the state’s law.

“Rainer’s belief that the term ’sexual offender’ may only apply to offenders who commit sexual offenses against minors does not change the fact that the definition provided in the statute, and not the definition that Rainer wishes to impose upon the statute, controls,” the court’s majority said. [ Read more ... ]

EFF to Urge True Transparency in Congressional Hearing Thursday: Via EFF.org Updates.

Washington, D.C. - On Thursday, March 18, at 2 p.m., members of the U.S. House of Representatives Oversight and Government Reform Committee will hold a public hearing on the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and the Obama administration compliance with transparency law. The hearing comes as transparency advocates celebrate Sunshine Week, the annual celebration of our nation's open government laws that features numerous events measuring the progress made in combating official secrecy.

Senior Counsel David Sobel of the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) will testify at Thursday's hearing, urging the White House to fulfill its promises for open government. Despite President Obama's order to government agencies last year to renew their commitment to FOIA, EFF and other organizations still see delays in releasing relevant documents, excuses for not releasing other records, and excessive redactions, among other needless secrecy. [ Read more ... ]

The Beginning of the End of Data Retention: Via EFF.org Updates.

Last week, the German Constitutional Court issued a much-anticipated decision, striking down its data retention law as violating human rights. It was an important victory for Europe’s Freedom Not Fear movement, which was formed to oppose the EU Data Retention Directive. But it was also a reminder of the political work which remains to be done to defeat it.

When the European Union first passed the Data Retention Directive in 2006, despite a hard-fought campaign by European activists, it seemed like the beginning of the end for Internet privacy. The directive sought to require telecommunications service providers operating in Europe to retain a detailed history of each of their customers' activity for up to 2 years for possible use by law enforcement; including phone calls made and emails sent and received.

The response from European citizens was swift and outraged. Under the banner of Freedom Not Fear, mass protests were held in cities all across Europe and beyond. [ Read more ... ]

Better U.S. Net Rules for Iran, Cuba and Syria: Via EFF.org Updates.

The Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) announced on Monday key amendments to the regulation of United States sanctions against Cuba, Iran and Sudan.

The new provisions give a blanket license for the export of "certain services and software incident to the exchange of personal communications over the Internet, such as instant messaging, chat and email, social networking, sharing of photos and movies, web browsing, and blogging, provided that such services are publicly available at no cost to the user."

This clarification is just what EFF called for last June, and will go a long way to allay concerns that online service providers based in the U.S. cannot offer their services in those countries. Previously, despite the well-known freedom-enhancing capabilities of services like Twitter and Facebook in repressive regimes like Iran, it was unclear whether those companies could even offer their services there without falling foul of the United State's broad prohibition on the export of goods and services to these regimes. [ Read more ... ]

Italy Convicts Google Execs To Protect Privacy: Via NPR.

Europeans are debating the overall reach of the Internet into their lives. An Italian court recently convicted three Google executives for privacy violations after a clip was posted on Google Video showing a disabled student being bullied by classmates in Turin. The ruling highlights a deep trans-Atlantic cultural gap: Americans see the ruling as undermining the concept of freedom of expression, while Europeans put privacy first — they consider it a fundamental human right. [ Read more ... ]

The Score on USA Patriot Act: Via Blog of Rights: Official Blog of the American Civil Liberties Union.

"We've come to love our fears more than we love our freedoms," Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) mused on the House floor just before that chamber voted 315-97 (with 20 members not voting) to reauthorize the USA Patriot Act without any changes for yet another year.

By now, you know the stakes — the tweaks that could have been made to guarantee that Patriot powers are used only against suspected terrorists or spies and to mandate continued reporting to ensure that we actually learn about current and future Patriot abuses. Many of these fixes were, in fact, included in prior iterations of Patriot reauthorization bills introduced in both the House and the Senate.

As Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.) pointed out to her colleagues, "I think we are missing an opportunity. There are good ideas in this House about how to curb the abuses with national security letters, how to clarify that roving wiretaps are limited to a single identifiable target, and how to eliminate the lone wolf provision which has never been used and for which existing title III authority can suffice. Those ideas have been the subject of hearings in the Judiciary Committee, but they're not being debated on this floor . . . I think this is a real missed opportunity." [ Read more ... ]

Unintended Consequences: 12 Years Under the DMCA: Via EFF.org Updates.

EFF today released Unintended Consequences: 12 Years Under the DMCA. This is the sixth update to the report, which aims to catalog all the reported instances where the DMCA's ban on tampering with DRM have been abused to stymie fair use, free speech, and competition, rather than to attack "piracy."

Congress enacted the DMCA's ban on bypassing DRM at the urging of entertainment industry lobbyists who argued that DRM backed by law would quell digital copyright infringement. Of course, 12 years later, that exactly hasn't worked out. Nor is it likely to ever work out. But lots of industries have recognized that these provisions of the DMCA are good for other things—like impeding scientific research and legitimate competition. The Unintended Consequences report collects these stories, including oldies like Lexmark's effort to block toner cartridge refilling and new cases like the lawsuit against RealDVD. [ Read more ... ]

Deceptively simple Patriot Act extension - a giant blow: Via LibraryLaw Blog.

By now you've heard that the Patriot Act provisions that were due to sunset Feb. 28, 2010 have been extended until Feb. 28, 2011. It sounds deceptively simple, a mild one-year extension.

But it's not. It undoes months, no years of work to add a few checks and balances to better extension bills. I will write up a longer post very soon, but the thrust of it is that we are stuck with an unchanged Sect. 215, often called "the library records" provision, a broad authority that doesn't require particularized suspicion.

Far worse, to my mind, is what's NOT included in this extension. Small but important reforms to the National Security Letter (NSL) provisions were riding on more favorable extension bills. The NSL provisions do not sunset, and the momentum to reform them vanishes with the straight-up one-year sunset extension.

Read Original Article:(Via LibraryLaw Blog.)

In Italian Google Case, American and European Ideas of Privacy Collide: Via NYTimes.com .

“On the Internet, the First Amendment is a local ordinance,” said Fred H. Cate, a law professor at Indiana University. He was talking about last week’s ruling from an Italian court that Google executives had violated Italian privacy law by allowing users to post a video on one of its services.

In one sense, the ruling was a nice discussion starter about how much responsibility to place on services like Google for offensive content that they passively distribute.

But in a deeper sense, it called attention to the profound European commitment to privacy, [ Read more ... ]

Open Wi-Fi 'outlawed' by Digital Economy Bill(UK)k: Via ZDNet.co.uk .

The government will not exempt universities, libraries and small businesses providing open Wi-Fi services from its Digital Economy Bill copyright crackdown, according to official advice released earlier this week.

This would leave many organisations open to the same penalties for copyright infringement as individual subscribers, potentially including disconnection from the internet, leading legal experts to say it will become impossible for small businesses and the like to offer Wi-Fi access.

Lilian Edwards, professor of internet law at Sheffield University, told ZDNet UK on Thursday that the scenario described by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) in an explanatory document would effectively "outlaw open Wi-Fi for small businesses", and would leave libraries and universities in an uncertain position. [ Read more ... ]

Epic Fail in Congress: USA PATRIOT Act Renewed Without Any New Civil Liberties Protections: Via EFF.org Updates.

Yesterday evening, the U.S. House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly to renew three expiring provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act, after the Senate abandoned the PATRIOT reform effort and approved the extension by a voice vote on Wednesday night.

Disappointingly, the government's dangerously broad authority to conduct roving wiretaps of unspecified or "John Doe" targets, to secretly wiretap of persons without any connection to terrorists or spies under the so-called "lone wolf" provision, and to secretly access a wide range of private business records without warrants under PATRIOT Section 215 were all renewed without any new checks and balances to prevent abuse. Despite months of vigorous debate, when PATRIOT renewal bills providing for greater oversight and accountability were approved by the Judiciary Committees of both the House and the Senate, Democratic leaders' push for reform fizzled in the face of staunch Republican opposition buoyed by recent hot-button events such as the attempted bombing of an airliner on Christmas Day and the shooting at Fort Hood. [ Read more ... ]

Congress Drops the Ball on Upgrading Patriot Protections: Via Blog of Rights: Official Blog of the American Civil Liberties Union.

We're sorry to say, but is anyone surprised that Congress has capitulated to post-underpants bomber fear-mongering and passed the three expiring provisions of the Patriot Act without so much as a debate?

Oh, you didn't hear about that?

Wednesday night, the Senate passed a straight one-year extension by voice vote, and last night, the House followed suit.

That’s right. No changes. Nothing. Nada. Zip, zilch, zero. (You get the picture.)

That leaves ordinary Americans like you and me without the civil liberties safeguards proposed by several bills last year. Both the House and Senate had bills that would have improved the Patriot Act. The Senate bill even had the support of the White House. But instead of passing the much-needed reforms, Congress: [ Read more ... ]

Lawmakers Punt Patriot Act to Obama: Via Threat Level.

The House and Senate are forwarding to President Barack Obama legislation reauthorizing three expiring provisions of the Patriot Act — despite heated debate among lawmakers the surveillance measure went too far.

The act, hastily adopted six weeks after the 2001 terror attacks, greatly expanded the government’s ability to spy on Americans in the name of national security. Three measures of the act were set to expire at the end of 2009, but lawmakers in December extended the deadline to the end of February in hopes of reaching a compromise.

But no deal was reached by the end of the new Feb. 28 deadline. Instead, both chambers ditched two competing measures and extended the Patriot Act for another year without any changes. The final package was sent to the president Thursday for his expected signature.

Lawmakers had taken the expiration as an opportunity to revisit a number of the act’s surveillance provisions, including elements of the Patriot Act that were not expiring. This included proposals to alter the standard by which so-called National Security Letters are issued. [ Read more ... ]

Democrats retreat on new privacy protections: Via The Washington Post .

Democrats have retreated from adding new privacy protections to the nation's primary counterterrorism law, stymied by Senate Republicans who argued the changes would weaken terror investigations.

The proposed protections were cast aside when Senate Democrats lacked the necessary 60-vote supermajority to pass them. Dashing the hopes of liberals, the Senate Wednesday night instead passed - by voice vote without debate - a one-year extension of key parts of the USA Patriot Act that would have expired on Sunday.

Thrown away were restrictions and greater scrutiny on the government's authority to spy on Americans and seize their records.

The House was prepared to approve the extension Thursday, dropping even more extensive privacy protections approved by the House Judiciary Committee. [ Read more ... ]

Repealing DADT + National Security = A Match Made in Heaven: Via Blog of Rights: Official Blog of the American Civil Liberties Union.

Here in Washington, D.C., efforts to finally repeal the discriminatory and ineffective "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT) policy gather increasing momentum by the day. However, some in the Pentagon could do better by more closely listening to the views of Gen. David Petraeus, Commander of U.S. Central Command, and Joint Chiefs Chairman Michael Mullen. In appearances before two congressional committees yesterday, Gen. George Casey, the Army chief of staff, and Gen. Norton Schwartz, the Air Force chief of staff, expressed their mutual concerns about moving too swiftly in repealing DADT.

According to an article by Thom Shanker in today's New York Times, Gen. Casey told the Senate Armed Services Committee: "I do have serious concerns about the impact of repeal of the law on a force that's fully engaged in two wars and has been at war for eight-and-a-half years." [ Read more ... ]

China Widens Net Censorship; Google Exile Looms: Via Threat Level.

The Chinese government is imposing new internet restrictions demanding personal-website operators to acquire central-government permission to operate their sites.

The latest censorship measure, which covers .cn domestic domains, comes as Google is trying to convince Chinese censors to ease up. Google said 43 days ago it would undertake a self-imposed exile from China if the government does not back off from requiring it to censor search results.

The government said the latest move — which also requires site owners to submit a photograph and to show identification — was targeted at tackling pornography. Critics, though said it was based on silencing political dissent. China did not say when the rules would be enforced. [ Read more ... ]

States eye ban on public release of 911 calls: Via Seattle Times Newspaper.

Because of situations like Casey's, lawmakers in Alabama, Ohio and Wisconsin are deciding whether to bar the public release of 911 calls.

Missouri, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Wyoming already keep such recordings private. But generally, most states consider emergency calls public records available on request, with exceptions sometimes made for privacy reasons or to protect a police investigation.

"Nationally there is a growing concern about the release of audiotapes that don't involve newsworthy people or events - just things that people like to hear because of their sensational nature," said Sonny Brasfield, executive director of the Association of County Commissions of Alabama, which drafted legislation in the state to bar the release of 911 recordings. "There is a concern nationally that these kinds of things are having a chilling effect on people's willingness to call 911."

Open-government advocates disagree and say that prohibiting the release of the recordings takes away a valuable tool that has exposed botched calls. [ Read more ... ]

What you buy and where you shop may affect your credit: Via creditcards.com .

New credit card law requires probe of issuers' use of purchasing data

As credit card companies continue to tighten their lending standards on card users, some are using purchasing data -- gleaned from millions of card transactions processed daily -- to weed out who may or may not be good credit risks.

Have you used your credit card at merchants specializing in secondhand clothing, retread tires, bail bond services, massages, casino gambling or betting? Your credit card issuer may be taking note -- and making decisions about your creditworthiness based on your purchasing behavior. The reason: Buying used clothing or retread tires may be an indication of financial distress and a preamble to missed credit card payments or defaults.

Now, Congress and federal regulators will be probing the extent to which credit card issuers have used information about where a person shops or what they buy as reasons to lower credit limits or increase interest rates. [ Read more ... ]

Copyright Undercover: ACTA & the Web: Via Internet Evolution - The Big Report .

Let's pause a moment to consider the nature of copyright, the Internet, and governance. Copyright law has historically been made by and for the entertainment industry's supply chain. Copyright rules were not envisioned as an adequate or desirable regulation-set for any other realm: We don't try to shoehorn labor law, finance, education, healthcare, election campaigns, or parenting matters into copyright.

But once you take those activities onto the Internet, copyright becomes the first line of regulation governing everything. It's impossible to do anything on the Internet without making copies (you made between 5 and 50 copies of this article just by following a link to it). And since copyright regulates copying, any rule that affects copyright will affect all those realms, too.

That's what makes ACTA's secrecy so troubling, even if you don't care about copyright, fair use, or other wonky subjects. [ Read more ... ]

Redbox, Movie Studios, and Subversion of First Sale: Via EFF.org Updates.

As we've explained before, a number of Hollywood movie studios have been on the war path against Redbox, the kiosk-based DVD rental operation, because Redbox offers DVD new releases for rent at 99 cents per night. Thanks to the first sale doctrine in copyright law, Redbox's business is completely legal—the company buys legitimate DVDs to stock their kiosks. Great for consumers, and a great alternative for those who might otherwise opt for an unauthorized alternative online.

But Hollywood wasn't pleased, and took a number of steps to interfere with Redbox's business, which in turn led to lawsuits. [ Read more ... ]

Deadline looms for Mass. data protection law: Via Computerworld.

One year and several changes later, the law is set to go into effect March 1

After more than a year of delay and several modifications, a contentious Massachusetts data protection regulation appears set to go into effect March 1.

The law is aimed at getting companies to better protect consumer data. It affects all businesses that store personal information on Massachusetts residents, regardless of where the companies might be based.

The rules (see PDF) require businesses to encrypt sensitive personal information on Massachusetts residents that is stored on portable devices such as PDAs and laptops or on storage media such as memory sticks and DVDs. Any personal information that is transmitted over a public or wireless network will also need to be encrypted.

Companies are required to take reasonable measures to control end-user access to sensitive data and to protect authentication information that can be used to gain access to the data. Businesses will also need to limit the amount of personal data they collect and must maintain an inventory of the information, monitor its usage and have a formal security plan for protecting the data. [ Read more ... ]

EP ditches US SWIFT deal on bank data over privacy - : Via Banking : europa, europe | euronews.

An EU deal with the US has been judged not good enough for the European Parliament — the so-called SWIFT agreement on sharing bank data. This would have meant exposing ordinary Europeans’ accounts to American anti-terrorist investigators.

A nine-month interim agreement went into force provisionally at the start of this month. But Liberal, Socialist and Green euro-MPs opposed it. They said the correct balance between security and the protection of civil liberties was missing.

[...]

Washington previously had access to the data, collected by the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT), which registers money transfers among states. EU diplomats say one way to regain access could be to seek bilateral agreements.

Read Original Article:(Via Banking : europa, europe | euronews.)

Another View: Why Privacy Matters to the Swiss: Via DealBook Blog - NYTimes.com .

The United States, the European Union and its individual member countries, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, a host of nongovernmental organizations and a phalanx of other interested parties have drawn a bead on Switzerland, howling that it refuses to see the light and pin up the names of foreign bank clients on the front doors of its banks.

[...]

Swiss banks in general, and the country’s banking secrecy laws in particular, have been blamed for a lot of the world’s evils, including tax evasion, tax fraud, capital flight, Third World poverty, money-laundering and the financing of terrorism. Let’s add climate change, continental drift and lumps in mashed potato to the charge sheet for good measure. But what exactly is this fabled “banking secrecy” now being harpooned by boatloads of Captain Ahabs, and why are the Swiss so attached to it? [ Read more ... ]

Anonymous Unfurls ‘Operation Titstorm’: Via Threat Level.

Several Australian government websites were slowly recovering Wednesday hours after the online prankster group, Anonymous, unleashed a massive distributed denial-of-service attack to protest the country’s evolution toward internet censorship.

The group, which has brought down Scientology’s websites and undertaken a host of other online pranks, dubbed the attack “Operation Titstorm” to protest the government’s move to require the filtering of pornography hosting adult actors if they appeared under age. Other violent material targeting children is also to be censored.

Anonymous, whose past targets include uncool virtual worlds, an epilepsy message board and a Neo-Nazi webcaster,  sent Australian media e-mail messages warning of the attack, the Sydney Morning Herald said. [ Read more ... ]