Press Releases
Friday Court Hearing in YouTube Video Battle
Home Movie of Toddler Dancing to Prince Sparks Bogus Copyright Claim
San Jose - On Friday, July 18, at 9 a.m., the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) will urge a federal judge in San Jose to protect the free speech and fair use rights of mother who posted a home movie of her son dancing to Prince on YouTube.
EFF represents Stephanie Lenz, who uploaded a 29-second clip of her son dancing in the family kitchen to the Prince song, "Let's Go Crazy," which is playing on a stereo in the background. Remarkably, Universal Music Publishing Group claimed that the video infringed its copyrights, and had the video yanked from YouTube. Lenz's lawsuit against Universal seeks to hold the company accountable for misrepresenting that her fair use violated its copyrights.
In Friday's hearing, EFF will ask U.S. District Court Judge Jeremy Fogel to reject Universal's motion to dismiss the case, and allow Lenz's lawsuit to continue.
WHAT:
Lenz v. Universal
WHEN:
Friday, July 18
9 a.m.
WHERE:
United States District Court, Northern District of California
Courtroom 3, 5th Floor
280 South 1st Street
San Jose, CA 95113
Contact:
Rebecca Jeschke
Media Coordinator
Electronic Frontier Foundation
press@eff.org
Senate Joins House in Caving to White House Immunity Demands
Telecoms Let Off the Hook for Illegal Spying - For Now
Washington, D.C. - The U.S. Senate this afternoon passed the FISA Amendments Act, broadly expanding the president's warrantless surveillance authority and unconstitutionally granting retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies that participated in the president's illegal domestic wiretapping program. The House of Representatives passed the same bill last month, and President Bush is expected to sign the legislation into law shortly.
"It is an immeasurable tragedy that just after its return from the Fourth of July holiday, the Senate has chosen to pass a bill that betrays the spirit of 1776 by radically expanding the president's spying powers and granting immunity to the companies that colluded in his illegal surveillance program," said Senior Staff Attorney Kevin Bankston of the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF). "This so-called compromise bill represents a shameful capitulation to the overreaching demands of an imperial president. As Senator Leahy put it in yesterday's debate, the retroactive immunity provision of the bill upends the scales of justice and makes Congress and the courts handmaidens to the White House's cover-up of its illegal surveillance program."
The FISA Amendments Act won passage after several amendments intended to remove or modify the bill's immunity provision failed to pass. One amendment, offered by Senator Christopher Dodd, would have stripped immunity from the bill altogether. Another, introduced by Senator Jeff Bingaman, would have stayed the pending cases against the telecoms and delayed the implementation of the immunity provision until the Inspectors General of the Department of Justice and other U.S. government intelligence agencies finished their investigation into the spying program, thereby preventing Congress from granting immunity in the dark.
"We thank those senators who courageously opposed telecom immunity and vow to them, and to the American people, that the fight for accountability over the president's illegal surveillance is not over," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Kurt Opsahl. "Even though Congress has failed to protect the privacy of Americans and uphold the rule of law, we will not abandon our defense of liberty. We will fight this unconstitutional grant of immunity in the courtroom and in the Congress, requesting repeal of the immunity in the next session, while seeking justice from the Judiciary. Nor can the lawless officials who approved this massive violation of Americans' rights rest easy, for we will file a new suit against the government and challenge warrantless wiretapping, past, present and future."
EFF is representing the plaintiffs in Hepting v. AT&T, a class action lawsuit brought on behalf of millions of AT&T customers whose private domestic communications and communications records were illegally handed over to the National Security Agency (NSA). EFF has been appointed co-coordinating counsel for all 47 of the outstanding lawsuits concerning the government's warrantless surveillance program.
For more information on the NSA spying:
http://www.eff.org/issues/nsa-spying
Contacts:
Kevin Bankston
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
bankston@eff.org
Kurt Opsahl
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
kurt@eff.org
Rebecca Jeschke
Media Coordinator
Electronic Frontier Foundation
press@eff.org
European Lawmaker Sues U.S. Agencies to Obtain Travel-Related and Other Personal Information
Lawsuit Tests U.S. Assurances of Access Rights for EU Citizens
Washington, D.C. - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) filed suit on behalf of a member of the European Parliament today, demanding that the U.S. government release records about her "risk assessment" score and other information gathered about her during her international travels. The lawsuit comes just days after the disclosure that the U.S. and the European Union may soon finalize an agreement authorizing the transatlantic exchange of large amounts of personal data.
Sophia In 't Veld represents the Netherlands in the European Parliament and serves on the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice, and Home Affairs. She has been actively engaged in developing policies concerning the exchange of travelers' data between the U.S. and the European Union (EU).
During the ongoing and contentious debates between the U.S. and the EU over travelers' records and the privacy rights of EU citizens, the U.S. government has repeatedly claimed that any person can obtain her records through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. To test those assurances, In 't Veld filed FOIA requests with the Homeland Security, Justice, and State Departments, asking for any information about her that is included in the various U.S. programs and systems used to track international travelers. However, the agencies have failed to comply with the requests as required by federal law.
"The question of redress is the sticking point in the current discussions about data exchanges between the United States and the EU," said In 't Veld. "That dispute underscores the importance of this case; it shows that gaining access to personal data held by U.S. agencies is very difficult, if not impossible."
Among other records, In 't Veld specifically requested data about herself that is included in the Automated Targeting System (ATS) -- a Department of Homeland Security project that creates and assigns "risk assessment" scores to travelers as they enter and leave the U.S. Once the assessment is made, there is no way to challenge it, and the government will retain the information for many years -- as well as make it available to federal, state, local, and foreign agencies in addition to contractors, grantees, consultants, and others.
"Ms. In 't Veld's experience shows the inaccuracy of U.S. assurances that EU citizens can gain easy access to personal information held in agency databases," said EFF Senior Counsel David Sobel. "The truth is that it is virtually impossible for any individuals --even U.S. citizens -- to access information about themselves that is collected and maintained by American security agencies. It's important that EU officials and citizens understand the reality of the situation before moving forward with a sweeping agreement on the exchange of sensitive personal data."
This FOIA lawsuit is part of EFF's ongoing work to protect travelers from privacy-invasive programs at the U.S. border. EFF has also filed suit against DHS for denying access to public records on the questioning and searches of travelers at U.S. borders and called on Congress to investigate the random, suspicionless searches of laptops and electronic devices.
For the full complaint:
http://www.eff.org/files/int_veld_complaint.pdf
For more on the U.S./EU data sharing agreement:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/28/washington/28privacy.html
For more on travel screening:
http://www.eff.org/issues/travel-screening
For more on FOIA:
http://www.eff.org/issues/foia
Contacts:
David Sobel
Senior Counsel
Electronic Frontier Foundation
sobel@eff.org
Marcia Hofmann
Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
marcia@eff.org
Rebecca Jeschke
Media Coordinator
Electronic Frontier Foundation
press@eff.org
EFF to Testify at Congressional Hearing on Electronic Searches at U.S. Borders
Wednesday Hearing on Laptop Searches and Other Privacy Violations
Washington, D.C. - On Wednesday, June 25, at 9 a.m., members of the U.S. Senate Judiciary hearing will hold a public hearing on laptop searches and other privacy violations faced by Americans at the U.S. border.
Senior Staff Attorney Lee Tien of the Electronic Frontier Foundation will appear at Wednesday's hearing to urge more congressional investigation and oversight of the Department of Homeland Security's border search practices and policies. While the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that customs and border agents can perform "routine" searches at the border without a warrant or even reasonable suspicion, increasingly Americans are complaining about random and invasive searches of their laptops, cell phones, and other digital devices as they come home from overseas travel. In a typical search, U.S. border officials will turn on the device and then open and review files. If agents see something of interest, they may copy data or confiscate the device -- even if the traveler is not suspected of criminal activity.
"These ongoing baseless searches of electronic devices at America's borders are not 'routine,' they're unreasonable," said Tien. "It's hard to imagine something more invasive than a wholesale copying of private files from a personal computer. We need Congress and the courts to recognize a standard for digital searches and seizures at the border that protects the privacy, property, and free speech rights of Americans in the Information Age."
WHO:
Lee Tien
Senior Staff Attorney Electronic Frontier Foundation
WHAT:
"Laptop Searches and Other Violations of Privacy Faced by Americans Returning from Overseas Travel"
U.S. Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution
WHEN:
9 a.m.
Wednesday, June 25
WHERE:
Dirksen Senate Office Building
Room 226
Washington, D.C.
For more on the hearing:
http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearing.cfm?id=3420
Contacts:
Rebecca Jeschke
Media Coordinator
Electronic Frontier Foundation
press@eff.org
Lee Tien
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
tien@eff.org
EFF Urges Judge to Grant New Trial for Jammie Thomas
Court To Reconsider Baseless 'Making Available' Theory In File-Sharing Case
San Francisco - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and a coalition of consumer and industry groups have asked a judge to grant a new trial to Jammie Thomas, who was hit with a $222,000 judgment in a file-sharing lawsuit based in part on the recording industry's bogus "making available" theory.
Thomas' trial and the staggering financial penalty made headlines around the world. In the case, the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) sought to hold Thomas liable for unauthorized distribution of digital music over the Internet without having to prove that anyone actually downloaded songs from her. The RIAA argued that simply making the songs available in a shared folder on her computer was enough to impose penalties, and a jury found Thomas liable for $220,000 in October of 2007.
But earlier this year, the judge in the case said he was concerned that he might have made a mistake when he followed the RIAA's reasoning in his jury instructions and asked for more briefing on whether Thomas deserved a new trial. In an amicus brief filed today, EFF argues that the RIAA cannot take shortcuts when it takes music fans to court.
"The Copyright Act simply does not allow suing someone for attempted copyright infringement," said EFF Staff Attorney Corynne McSherry. "If the RIAA wants to continue with its mass litigation campaign, it's going to have to invest the time and resources to actually prove those cases -- if it can -- by showing that infringement actually occurred."
The RIAA has sued more than 20,000 individuals for allegedly sharing music over the Internet since it started its lawsuit campaign in 2003.
"The RIAA's specious 'making available' argument threatens to brand people as thieves when the evidence isn't really there," said EFF Senior Intellectual Property Attorney Michael Kwun. "We're pleased the judge is taking a second look at this critical question."
Joining EFF on the brief were Public Knowledge, the United States Internet Industry Association, and the Computer and Communications Industry Association.
For the full amicus brief:
http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/capitol_v_thomas/20080620EFFAmiciBrief...
For more on Capitol v. Thomas:
http://www.eff.org/cases/capitol-v-thomas
Contacts:
Corynne McSherry
Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
corynne@eff.org
Michael Kwun
Senior Intellectual Property Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
michael@eff.org
House Caves, Approves Fake 'Compromise' on Telecom Immunity
EFF Condemns House Vote, Looks to Senate for Leadership
Washington, D.C. - Privacy rights and the rule of law took a serious blow today when the House of Representatives passed blanket retroactive immunity for phone companies that participated in the president's warrantless surveillance program. The FISA Amendments Act, H.R. 6304, which House Leadership rushed to the floor today after its introduction yesterday, passed by a vote of 293 to 129. The Senate is expected to vote on the bill next week.
The bill was touted as a bipartisan "compromise" on the issues of electronic surveillance and immunity. But in fact it requires dismissal of lawsuits against companies like AT&T that participated in the program as long as the companies received a piece of paper from the government indicating that the surveillance had been authorized by the president and was determined to be lawful.
"Immunity for telecom giants that secretly assisted in the NSA's warrantless surveillance undermines the rule of law and the privacy of every American," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Kevin Bankston. "Congress should let the courts do their job instead of helping the administration and the phone companies avoid accountability for a half decade of illegal domestic spying. If this legislation passes the Senate and is signed into law, the American people will have lost their last best chance to discover the true scope of the president's wiretapping program and to determine whether or not the law was broken."
"We are deeply disappointed that the House Leadership, which was so courageous in its previous opposition to telecom immunity, caved to the Administration's fear-mongering and put this seriously flawed legislation on the floor for a vote," said Bankston. "We look to leaders in the Senate who value the rule of law to stand up and strongly oppose this blanket immunity for telecom lawbreakers, and in particular urge Senator Barack Obama to lead his party in rejecting this false compromise."
EFF is representing the plaintiffs in Hepting v. AT&T, a class action lawsuit brought on behalf of the millions of AT&T customers whose private domestic communications and communications records were illegally handed over to the National Security Agency (NSA). EFF has been appointed co-coordinating counsel for all 47 of the outstanding lawsuits concerning the government's warrantless surveillance program.
Contacts:
Kevin Bankston
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
bankston@eff.org
Rebecca Jeschke
Media Coordinator
Electronic Frontier Foundation
press@eff.org
EFF Urges Congress to Reject Final 'Compromise' on Telco Immunity
Secret Bill's Text Finally Available, Vote in House Likely Tomorrow
Washington, D.C. - EFF calls on members of the House of Representatives to vote "NO" on H.R.6304, the FISA Amendments Act of 2008, which the House is expected to vote on tomorrow. The text of the bill was released today, and it contains blanket retroactive immunity for telcos that broke the law by cooperating with the NSA's warrantless surveillance program.
"Whatever gloss might be put on it, the so-called 'compromise' on immunity is anything but: the current proposal is the exact same blanket immunity that the Senate passed in February and that the House rejected in March, only with a few new bells and whistles so that political spinsters can claim that it actually provides meaningful court review," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Kevin Bankston. "We call on all members of Congress to reject this sham compromise and maintain the rule of law, rather than deprive the millions of ordinary Americans whose privacy rights were violated of their day in court."
EFF is representing the plaintiffs in Hepting v. AT&T, a class action lawsuit brought on behalf of the millions of AT&T customers whose private domestic communications and communications records were illegally handed over to the National Security Agency (NSA). EFF has been appointed co-coordinating counsel for all 47 of the outstanding lawsuits concerning the government's warrantless surveillance program.
For the full text of the FISA Amendments Act:
http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/att/FISAINTRO_001_xml.pdf
For EFF's analysis of the immunity bill's provisions:
http://www.eff.org/files/AnalysisHR6304-v5.pdf
Contacts:
Kevin Bankston
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
bankston@eff.org
Rebecca Jeschke
Media Coordinator
Electronic Frontier Foundation
press@eff.org
EFF Speaks Out Against Telecom Immunity Deal
Proposal in Congress Would Let Telecoms Off the Hook for Illegal Spying
Washington, D.C. - Congress is widely reported to have struck a deal on legislation to amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that includes immunity for telecommunications companies that helped the government illegally spy on millions of ordinary Americans. Today, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) held a press conference with the ACLU to emphasize that this much-touted "compromise" is a sham aimed at letting both the government and the telecoms off the hook for violating the law and the Constitution.
"Whatever gloss might be put on it, the so-called 'compromise' on immunity is anything but: the current proposal is the exact same blanket immunity that the Senate passed in February and that the House rejected in March, only with a few new bells and whistles so that political spinsters can claim that it actually provides meaningful court review," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Kevin Bankston. "We call on all members of Congress to reject this sham compromise and maintain the rule of law, rather than deprive the millions of ordinary Americans whose privacy rights were violated of their day in court."
EFF is representing the plaintiffs in Hepting v. AT&T, a class action lawsuit brought on behalf of the millions of AT&T customers whose private domestic communications and communications records were illegally handed over to the National Security Agency (NSA). EFF has been appointed co-coordinating counsel for all 47 of the outstanding lawsuits concerning the government's warrantless surveillance program.
For Kevin Bankston's complete statement on the FISA deal from today's press conference:
http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/EFF_bankston.pdf
Contacts:
Kevin Bankston
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
bankston@eff.org
Rebecca Jeschke
Media Coordinator
Electronic Frontier Foundation
press@eff.org
Anonymity Preserved for Creator of MySpace 'Spoof' Profiles
Petition Withdrawn After EFF Files Amicus Brief
Cook County, IL - The president of a Chicago suburb has dropped his attempt to obtain the identity of an anonymous MySpace user after the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) filed an amicus brief detailing how the petition violated both the First Amendment and a federal statute that protects the privacy of online users.
In May, Cicero, IL, Town President Larry Dominick asked a Cook County Circuit Court judge to order the disclosure of the identity of the author of two MySpace profiles that allegedly included defamatory comments and unnamed privacy violations. EFF stepped in and asked the judge to reject Dominick's request, arguing that any attempt to unmask the anonymous speaker would violate the author's First Amendment right to remain anonymous unless Dominick could demonstrate a viable legal claim. In addition, the federal Stored Communications Act prohibits government entities such as Dominick -- who brought the petition in his official government capacity -- from obtaining identifying customer information through the ordinary civil discovery process.
"We are grateful that Mr. Dominick has chosen to abandon his misguided attempt to unmask a critic through the use of the legal system," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Matt Zimmerman. "While litigants may pursue claims against speakers who have truly engaged in defamatory speech, it is not enough -- especially for an elected official -- to walk into court and demand the identity of an anonymous speaker supported with nothing but a vague allegation of wrongdoing."
EFF was assisted in this matter by Charles Mudd, Jr., and Sophie Dye of Mudd Law Offices in Chicago.
For the order dismissing the petition:
http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/dom_v_myspace/2008-06-13%20Order.pdf
For more on anonymity:
http://www.eff.org/issues/anonymity
Contact:
Matt Zimmerman
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
mattz@eff.org
Judges Urged to Curtail Random Searches of Travelers' Laptops
EFF Asks for Review of Flawed Appeals Court Ruling
San Francisco - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the Association of Corporate Travel Executives (ACTE) urged an appeals court today to review a flawed decision allowing random and invasive searches of travelers' computers at the U.S. border.
The news media has reported extensively on these searches as well as the surprise and anger felt by American travelers when they are singled out for inspection. In a typical search, U.S. border officials will turn on the computer and then open and review files. If agents see something of interest, they may confiscate the computer, copy its contents, and sometimes provide a copy to the Department of Justice -- even when the traveler is not suspected of criminal activity. In some cases, travelers have never gotten their computers back from the government.
In an amicus brief filed today, EFF and ACTE asked the full 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to rehear and reverse an appeals panel decision in United States v. Arnold, which upheld this blanket search and seizure power. While the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that customs and border agents can perform "routine" searches at the border without a warrant or even reasonable suspicion, these ongoing baseless searches of electronic devices at America's borders are unconstitutionally invasive.
"Searching a laptop is very different from searching a briefcase. Your computer contains a vast amount of information about your private life, including details about your family, your finances, and your health," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Lee Tien. "All that information can be easily copied, transferred, and stored in government databases, just because you were chosen for a random inspection."
These suspicionless laptop searches and data seizures violate the Fourth Amendment's prohibition against unreasonable search and seizure. The unique nature of electronic information stored on computers and other portable devices requires the courts to recognize a standard that protects the privacy of Americans in the Information Age.
"The implications of unfettered data collection are staggering," said ACTE Executive Director Susan Gurley. "Border authorities may now systematically collect all information on every laptop computer, BlackBerry, or other device carried across our border. The government can then store and search all that data without any justification or oversight by any court. This simply does not square with the Fourth Amendment."
The EFF-ACTE amicus brief was prepared by Arent Fox LLP.
For the full amicus brief:
http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/US_v_arnold/amicusjune08.pdf
For more on US v. Arnold:
http://www.eff.org/cases/us-v-arnold
Contacts:
Lee Tien
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
tien@eff.org
Susan Gurley
Executive Director
Association of Corporate Travel Executives
susan@acte.org
