Facebook Fights U.S. Pressure Over WikiLeaks

[Hissyspit]

http://www.allfacebook.com/facebook-fights-u-s-pressure-over-wikileaks-2011-01

Facebook Fights U.S. Pressure Over WikiLeaks

Posted by Jorge Cino on January 21st, 2011 3:20 PM

- snip -

Facebook spokesman Andrew Noyes told InfoWorld that the social network is “required to regularly push back against over-broad requests for user records. … in most cases we are able to convince the party issuing legal process to withdraw the overbroad request, but if they do not we fight the matter in court” and have a history of success in those cases.

This is exactly the kind of responsible approach Daniel Ellsberg urged a room of Silicon Valley executives to take at a Churchill Club event in Santa Clara, Calif., last Wednesday. Ellsberg, the man who in 1971 leaked the Pentagon Papers -– a top secret study about the U.S. government’s role in the Vietnam war — said companies that store our personal data have the “responsibility” to push back against the government’s pressure to release said information.

As you probably know by now, the U.S. government has been eager to shut down WikiLeaks and has in turn put pressure on private companies such as Visa, Mastercard, Amazon, and Facebook to cut ties with the controversial website, although the social network didn’t cave in like the others.

- snip -

Facebook wouldn’t comment on how many of these third-party requests it has received concerning the release of personal data, but admitted that the number has been growing. The Electronic Frontier Foundation, which recently collected copies of policy guidelines from 13 online companies -– including Facebook –- said that the social network has struggled to maintain a coherent, consistent set of policies to determine how and when to release personal data to third parties, including the government. In fact, according to the EFF, the social network’s 2010 guidelines are too vague and harm the company’s transparency.

MORE

[gateley]

1. Is it time for more Nazi references? Soviet Union? This is horrifying. nt

[snot]

2. The article is deceptive.

And in more than one way.

1. FB or the author of the post is suggesting that FB is fighting the gov to protect WL, but FB hasn't even admitted it's received any request for info, and there are no reports I'm aware of that they're fighting anysuch request, nor does the FB rep actually make that claim w.r.t. WL.

2. The author of the piece took a speech by Ellsberg praising Twitter's decision to NOTIFY the subject's of the gov's subpoena and give them a chance to object, and putting it next to a statement by a FB rep saying that FB sometimes fights to NARROW such subpoenas WITHOUT NECESSARILY NOTIFYING THE USERS AFFECTED, and implying that Ellsberg approves of FB.

But note, FB isn't saying it notifies users EVER, or ever gives them any opportunity to object.

[Luminous Animal]

3. Great points and an astute reading of teh article. Thanks.

[snot]

4. thanks!