Judge's Refusal to Dismiss EFF's Spying Case Sets Stage for Congressional Showdown
July 21, 2006A federal judge has refused to dismiss the Electronic Frontier Foundation's (EFF's) case against AT&T for collaborating with the NSA in illegal spying on millions of ordinary Americans, setting the stage for a congressional showdown over proposed dramatic changes in federal surveillance law. EFF filed the class-action suit against AT&T in January, alleging that the telecommunications company has given the National Security Agency (NSA) secret, direct access to the phone calls and emails going over its network and has been handing over communications logs detailing the activities of millions of ordinary Americans. The government intervened in the case and asked that it be dismissed because the suit could expose "state secrets." But Thursday, U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker refused: "The compromise between liberty and security remains a difficult one. But dismissing this case at the outset would sacrifice liberty for no apparent enhancement of security."
Full story, For the judge's decision, Key quotes from the decision, More on the draft surveillance bill, More on the AT&T lawsuit:
July 20, 2006Today, EFF achieved a critical victory in our case against AT&T. Here are some key quotes from the decision:
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/004833.phpOnline Policy Group v. Diebold, Inc.
Diebold, Inc., manufacturer of electronic voting machines, has been sending out many cease-and-desist letters to Internet Service Providers (ISPs), after internal documents indicating flaws in their systems were published on the Internet. The company cited copyright violations under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) and demanded that the documents be taken down.
Now EFF and the Center for Internet and Society Cyberlaw Clinic at Stanford Law School are fighting back, seeking a court order on behalf of nonprofit ISP Online Policy Group (OPG) and two Swarthmore College students to prevent Diebold’s abusive copyright claims from silencing public debate about voting, the very foundation of our democratic process.
“Diebold’s blanket cease-and-desist notices are a blatant abuse of copyright law,” said EFF Staff Attorney Wendy Seltzer. “Publication of the Diebold documents is clear fair use because of their direct relevance to the debate over the accuracy of electronic voting machines.”
The documents include email messages written by Diebold employees describing security flaws in the systems, as well as email discussions about how to resolve, or in some cases, obfuscate those problems.
The DMCA contains a "safe harbor" provision as an incentive for ISPs to take down user-posted content when they receive cease-and-desist letters such as the ones sent by Diebold. By removing the content, or forcing the user to do so, an ISP can take itself out of the middle of any copyright claim. As a result, few ISPs have tested whether they would face liability for such user activity in a court of law.
http://www.eff.org/legal/ISP_liability/OPG_v_Diebold/If you search this site, you will find other victories and pending cases against Diebold.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
