EFF, AT&T and Google all on the same side of this privacy fight

Discuss

18 Responses to “EFF, AT&T and Google all on the same side of this privacy fight”

  1. AirPillo says:

    I’d expect to see this among headlines like “China champions human rights treaty”, and “Somalian pirates establish charity to benefit wealthy vacationers”.

  2. Anonymous says:

    I’m sorry, but I am having a difficult time taking this seriously. AT+T is part of complete data mining of the WWW for the US Gov– completely illegal; if they actually want to be taken seriously, they need to stop this — first. Secondly, if they are interested in privacy, ENCRYPT all of their user’s email and traffic with an unbreakable crypto.

  3. Galadriel says:

    Google? Really? What happened to “If you have something you don’t want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn’t be doing it”?

  4. MrsBug says:

    What’s the catch? Does the EFF drop its lawsuit against AT&T if AT&T join this and get it passed?

  5. Anonymous says:

    AT&T?!?!

    Really? That’s gotta be a typo.

  6. SleighBoy says:

    “Bush-era illegal NSA wiretapping”

    Cory, are you suggesting that AT&T no longer allows the feds to tap their fiber 24/7 because Bush is out of office? I think more than one AT&T tech could correct that notion right quick.

    • Cowicide says:

      I don’t think Google and it’s Buzz bullshit has looked very good lately either. I was opted into that crap without my knowledge through my gmail accounts. I didn’t get any kind of notice because I use gmail with POP in Apple Mail. They could have at least sent me an email letting me know I was about to lose my privacy… but no.

      So I hear about Buzz through various sites talking about the class action lawsuits against it (based on privacy issues) and I go to opt out of Buzz and found that it’s a tricky process and difficult to tell if you’ve even successfully opted out or not.

      Very scummy, Google. VERY scummy.

      • Nonentity says:

        Odd, I was under the impression that the only thing you would be “opted into” in Buzz is letting people – who already have your contact email – have you show up in their list.

        There’s definitely a problem there for people who forward another email account to their gmail account, if they get emails from other gmail users, but I could see how that could honestly be missed by the developers.

    • Dewi Morgan says:

      Pretty sure “Bush-era” in that context meant “that’s what they’re suing about”. That is, the case is about the wiretapping they got caught out on, not the wiretapping they may well be doing now.

  7. phillyberg says:

    This is a big coalition and CDT is part of it as well. Digital Due Process will help connect all groups pushing to update ECPA. Check out our blog post here: http://www.cdt.org/blogs/harley-geiger/updating-privacy-protections-21st-century-communications

  8. avt_tor says:

    @SleighBoy > I think warrants and due process are part of the process now.

    • Ugly Canuck says:

      One can only hope, av_tor.

      I always hope (and I honestly feel this outcome is not beyond the realm of possibility) that anyone surveilling me and my habits becomes bored: first to tears, and then to death.
      That’d show them.

      More seriously, it would be nice to see the USA recognize some explicit rights to individual privacy in the Constitution, rather than leaving such to be inferred by the Courts – or not – from other Constitutional provisions; or to be granted – or withheld – at the whim of the Legislature.

      As a foreign citizen, I hate to butt in, but perhaps just such a full-blown Constitutional Amendment is in order to ensure that the full interests of Americans are served by the law?

      In any event, it seems that a debate about US privacy laws have begun. Good.

      The gorilla in this room, of course, is the issue of abortion.

    • straponego says:

      So you think that, now that everybody who broke the law executing warrantless wiretaps was given retroactive immunity, and it’s clear that nobody will ever be held accountable in any way for breaking such laws, nobody will break such laws again? Obama, Leahy, Pelosi… everybody who could have pushed for accountability changed their minds at about the same time. Most of the Bush appointees are still in place. But yeah, the TLAs have totally come to heel under the rule of law now. Gotcha. Awesome.

      • sirdook says:

        So you think that, now that everybody who broke the law executing warrantless wiretaps was given retroactive immunity, and it’s clear that nobody will ever be held accountable in any way for breaking such laws, nobody will break such laws again?

        Actually the same law that granted retro-active immunity also made the stuff that was ‘illegal Bush-era wiretapping’ more or less legal. So in that sense, those laws aren’t likely to be broken again.

  9. Anonymous says:

    New technology has advanced at breakneck speed while electronic privacy law remains stuck in the digital dark ages. It is confusing and inadequate and that hurts internet users and businesses alike, which is why both major companies and privacy advocate organizations agree that ECPA must be updated.

    The ACLU supports the coalition principles and _also_ believes that the law should extend probable cause protection to other types of records (like who you call, text and email), that illegally obtained digital information shouldn’t be used in court, and that there should be strict record-keeping of all law enforcement requests.

    You can read the ACLU’s position here: http://dotrights.org/ECPA

    Please tell your congressional representative that you want better online privacy protection:
    http://bit.ly/9AC49y

    Demand a privacy upgrade – Demand your dotRights!

Leave a Reply